
The National Council approved the "beef of the media package", as Matthias Aebischer (SP/BE) called it, by 111 votes to 67 with 17 abstentions. The Federal Council wants to make online media eligible for funding with a new federal law. Previously, the National Council had already decided to expand support for indirect media funding and electronic media.
Last fall, the Council of States did not want to allocate any money for the promotion of online media. It did not release the spending brake, although it had spoken out in favor of the funding in principle. The matter will now go back to the Council of States.
For the SP, Greens and Green Liberals (GLP), online media are playing an increasingly important role in providing information to the general public. For the SVP and a large part of the FDP, on the other hand, online media promotion was "an unnecessary intervention in a well-functioning market". As is so often the case, the middle group tipped the scales.
60 percent of the chargeable turnover
The proportion of eligible turnover that should apply to the contributions was controversial in the National Council. A minority wanted to set this proportion at 80%, as did the Federal Council and the Council of States. However, the majority opted for 60 percent. The entry threshold for online media is a turnover of CHF 100,000.
The total annual amount for the online sector was also controversial. A minority of the National Council committee and the Council wanted to release 50 million, but the National Council left it at 30 million per year in line with the Federal Council's proposal. The new law will initially apply for five years.
The National Council also approved the so-called holding clause. It thus remained in line with the Council of States. The clause is intended to create a balance between the large publishing houses and the smaller media providers and counteract even greater concentration.
The Commission minority requested that this article be deleted. It pointed out that larger media companies with several online offerings also contributed to the diversity of offerings and that this clause was therefore not objectively justified. (SDA)