There is a delicate balance to strike for Europe’s leaders: can the single market flourish together with the cultural diversity that is at the heart of our identity? A question often revisited over the years. In 2017 Netopia’s cartoonist Rodrigo interpreted the discussion with the phrase “So… now what do we watch?” As the European Commission starts a consultation on the Geo-Blocking Regulation, the topic is brought back once again.
The 2018 EU Geo-Blocking Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2018/302) was crafted to remove friction of trade and equalise the buying process for consumers, in particular those trying to buy physical goods cross-border.
For example, a French consumer might have wished to purchase from a German website but was redirected to a local language version or found their French physical address blocked. They might have been blocked entirely based on their IP – which was all in breach of Article 9 of the EU Geo-Blocking Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2018/302).
Once the regulation passed into law, it removed some of the freedom to work with geoblocking. The EU decided to force retailers to accept customers regardless of geography or regardless of local laws on certain products (e.g., age-based restrictions or the like). Retailers were no longer permitted to charge local rates (even if local storage of the goods meant selling in Germany might be more expensive than in France, for that matter).
So consumers in France could purchase a product in Germany without a price premium, compared to the same product in France, (regardless of the running costs faced by the German business!)
However, the seller isn’t required to offer delivery to France or other countries, meaning the customer is tasked with arranging carriage.
The obligation to deliver was excluded from the geo-blocking rules on account of a diverse set of national consumer rights laws (consumer guarantees, after-sales services, different language requirements, labelling rules and safety rules), not to mention tax laws.
The regulation doesn’t apply to services delivering copyright content such as films, tv content or sport – an exception which has been backed by various studies on maintaining a healthy market place for consumer choice both in terms of content produced (where territoriality plays a key role in raising financing) and in terms of distribution channels offered (cinema, broadcasting, online services) and price points.
Not only sport, film and TV, but financial services, transport, health and telecommunications industries are alsoexempt. Each can then choose to provide local, tailored and individual geo-blocked services.
These exemptions are subject to regular review, on a five yearly basis. In 2020 the EU Commission saw fit to maintain the exemptions. In 2025 there’s a fresh opportunity for review.
The EU market is unlike any other market in the world with 27 member states and 24 main languages.
Geo-Blocking: A Threat to Local Languages?
The European Union’s plan to assess the exemptions from the ban on unjustified geo-blocking, including for film and television services, might seem like a victory for digital freedom and consumer choice, but at what cost to cultural diversity and local languages? By eroding the bespoke local marketing of content, , the EU risks homogenizingculture, creative content, films and television and thereby stifling creativity, destroying jobs and undermining the very linguistic and cultural diversity it claims to champion
Determining the exact percentage of films released in local languages for each EU country is challenging due to varying data collection methods and the dynamic nature of film production. However, a study analysing European cinema from 2004 to 2014 provided some insights:
Top 6 Languages: Approximately 62% of European films during this period were produced in five major languages:
-
- English: 18.3%
- French: 17.3%
- German: 10.0%
- Italian: 8.6%
- Spanish: 8.1%
Growth Languages: The remaining 38% of films were produced in various other languages, with notable contributions from:
-
- Swedish: 3.3%
- Dutch: 3.2%
- Polish: 2.5%
- Czech: 2.5%
Driving European Cultural Diversity
These figures represent production languages and not the percentage of films released in local languages within each individual EU country. These figures don’t count co-productions, distribution practices, and how audience preferences differ from country to country, driving demand (such as the keen interest for Nordic Noir across Europe or French film in Sweden) which drives the prevalence of non-national films across borders.
In total, European films were produced in 164 different languages during this decade. The smaller languages like Swedish or Finnish over-index, often featuring as over indexing when counted in the cross-border release figures (termed: non-national works). In fact, Works: a report from the European Audiovisual Observatory –- part of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg – reports that 51 per cent of all works broadcast in the EU in 2023 are of European origin, surpassing US works (40 per cent).
Geo-enabling not only protects local language, it encourages European output!
Mono-Market Bad for Consumers
Film and television and even sports are more than just entertainment; they are a reflection of cultural identity. Floorball in Scandinavia, Hurling or Shinty in Gaelic countries or Polo in Southern Europe – each generates a local demand.
Each European country has its own rich history, traditions, and storytelling styles, shaped by its unique language, sport and experiences. Geo-enabling allows national industries to thrive around these differences. With highly defined audiences, filmmakers can that tell stories that matter. Without it, the industry will face immense pressure to produce and distribute only for a pan-European audience, a one-size fits all, mono-culture resulting in bland, lowest-common-denominator productions that fail to capture the nuances ofeach country, culture, and languages. Instead of supporting bold, original storytelling, the industry will contract, jobs will be lost and audiences left with less – not more choice.
The Danger to Linguistic Diversity
Where smaller language groups must punch above their weight to maintain their presence in mainstream media, they will face even greater marginalisation and become a casualty of a geoblocking ban if not protected bya continued exemption. What incentive will distribution platforms have to support the smaller European languages – could film and TV soon be predominantly in English, with dubbing? Audiences in smaller nations would miss out on linguistic diversity or simply film and TV content in their own language. Without geo-enabling, the EU would ironically be creating an environment where small-language cinema becomes an endangered species.
Maintaining geo-blocking for copyrighted works and protected subject matter is one of the major tools for guaranteeing cultural diversity.”
Free-Flow Favours Bigger Players
Without geo-enabling, only bigger players would have the resources to create a pan-European market demand
Beyond cultural concerns, there are economics which create the conditions for investment in films that sustain European cinema. Currently film distributors negotiate region- or country-specific future distribution rights which in turn contribute to funding productions – release schedules for a film may depend on a range of factors, based on local demand, events or national holidays. Without geo-enabling, only bigger players would have the resources to create a pan-European market demand. Against such pan-European distribution platforms, national film industries will struggle to be included and to reach both national and non-national audiences. Ultimately the EU economy would suffer the losses.
“The inclusion of audio-visual services in the scope of the Geo-blocking Regulation would result in a significant loss of revenue, putting investment in new content at risk, while eroding contractual freedom and reducing cultural diversity in content production, distribution promotion and exhibition; emphasises that such an inclusion would result in fewer distribution channels, ultimately driving up prices for consumers.”
Digital Rights Should Strengthen Culture, Not Undermine It
Instead of dismantling a system that allows for localised storytelling and bespoke localized marketing/creation of demand for non-national films and tv content, the EU should invest in infrastructure that expands access while preserving market structures that sustain diverse content.
If the EU is serious about growth, it should be strengthening national film industries.
Revisiting the exemption from the ban on unjustified geo-enabling will create a cultural blandness, vanilla content and undermine creativity with a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach production, marketing and distribution.
It would create a monopolised media landscape dominated by a handful of large players focused on shareholders return and not the audience.
If the EU is serious about growth, it should be strengthening national film industries, not paving the way for their demise!
Rodrigo’s brilliant cartoon with the hollow TV and the viewers as national stereotypes is a cautionary tale. Perhaps this can also be an answer to the consultation?
