The image of Broadcasting Authority employees regulating the TV exposure of political parties by stopwatch is not entirely misplaced but chairman Anthony Tabone tells Kurt Sansone the authority does much more than that

Anthony Tabone’s calm demeanour has served him well at times of controversy when political parties complain of imbalance in news coverage.

As he sits behind his desk at the Broadcasting Authority’s offices, Mr Tabone is aware of the general perception that the constitutional body he chairs is only concerned with timekeeping.

“Unfortunately, political controversy tends to grab people’s attention but the monitoring department does a lot of work that is unrelated to political issues,” he says.

There are two offices at the authority’s premises in Blata l-Bajda, which is a stone’s throw away from the headquarters of the two major parties, where programme monitors carry out their laborious job.

The authority’s remit is to ensure impartiality and balance in matters of political and current affairs controversy but it also has to ensure that all provisions of the Broadcasting Act are followed, Mr Tabone says.

With television you do not know who your audience out there is and children are vulnerable

Mr Tabone occupied the hot seat at the authority for three years and in December last year his term was extended for another two along with the other board members.

He holds two consultation documents in his hand: one concerns the correct use of the Maltese language and the other speaks about the protection of minors. Both documents are out for public consultation.

These two documents, which contain a detailed update of regulations that are already in place, are an example of the other work the authority does that is unrelated to regulating partisan politics, he argues.

Mr Tabone says regulations protecting minors will now include provisions against stereotyping, in favour of diversity and encouraging personal development.

This goes beyond the simple 9pm threshold for broadcasting adult content that most people associate with the protection of minors on TV.

Mr Tabone highlights some aspects, which he believes are important elements in the new regulations that will emphasise programme ratings.

Stations and producers will have to ensure programmes targeting children should not include gratuitous violence. It will also not be possible for children’s programmes to encourage the use of social media when minors under the age of 16 are not authorised to hold social media accounts.

Children will only be able to attend as part of a live audience if the programme has content that is suitable for them. If the programme is rated PG (parental guidance), children will have to be accompanied by a parent or guardian, Mr Tabone says.

Any programme with children in the audience should not deal with adult themes, including topics relating to physical, psychological and emotional distress.

But Mr Tabone says the regulations also touch on the sensitive subject of using children in fundraising programmes.

“We want to do away with the exploitation of children, including in fundraising events. We want to dissuade producers from exploiting these situations,” he says.

The rules will also bar the appearance and participation of minors in programmes involving party politics, including political advertisements.

“With television you do not know who your audience out there is and children are vulnerable. This is why we want to adopt a pre-emptive approach and I believe stations will appreciate these rules,” Mr Tabone says.

Programmes also have to keep in mind the diverse family models present in society. We have children from single-parent households and others with same-sex partners

He does not flinch when asked whether this attempt at regulation makes sense in an age when most children have unhindered access to all type of content on the internet.

“The responsibility of what children see on the internet lies with the parents but there is no reason why TV should join the bandwagon just because minors can be exposed to unsuitable content on the internet,” Mr Tabone says.

But the rules will also tackle social development, touching on subjects such as stereotypes and diversity.

Mr Tabone argues TV programmes should not emphasise stereotypes such as mothers always standing behind the kitchen sink and fathers being the sole breadwinners.

“Programmes also have to keep in mind the diverse family models present in society. We have children from single-parent households and others with same-sex partners,” he says.

Although the authority will be able to dish out fines for breach of the regulations, Mr Tabone says the authority is in constant dialogue with producers and stations.

In October the authority is expected to open a new digital monitoring and capturing station that will give it real time access to TV and radio programmes. It will catapult the authority into the 21st century.

But Mr Tabone acknowledges that technological advancement is not the only change the authority requires more than 50 years after being set up.

The debate over the authority’s composition, which today is formed from representatives selected by the two parties in Parliament, is pertinent given that both parties also have their own media outlets.

“An authority that was set up in 1961 during a colonial government when there was only one station does merit being looked at to determine whether its remit and composition should change,” he says.

Various solutions have been posited over the years on the authority’s composition but Mr Tabone is more inclined towards the model floated during the President’s forum that discussed constitutional change last year.

The Broadcasting Authority board should be composed of people conversant in broadcasting and appointed by the President on advice of Parliament, he says.

“But this would require a change in the Constitution and it will not happen unless both parties in Parliament agree,” he says.

The Broadcasting Act that introduced pluralism in 1991 meant that the work of the authority became more difficult, especially when the political parties obtained their own stations, he adds.

It has been argued that the content of one political station automatically balances out the content of the opposing party’s station.

But Mr Tabone believes this formula has not worked and agrees it is a disservice to the viewer.

“Audiences are simply getting one side of the story and both political stations would do better to reduce the partisan dose.

“This will help them attract viewers who do not necessarily subscribe to the party that owns the station.”

This is as far as Mr Tabone will be drawn into the debate on constitutional change. Whether politicians will be listening is another matter altogether.

ksansone@timesofmalta.com