Report on
the First INCD U.S. Meeting
New York
City
March 11th,
2004
James Early: Introductory remarks
Despite the global discourse on cultural policy, the Unites States lacks a coherent cultural policy. There is no culture minister and these issues are addressed on a sectoral basis. This meeting will focus on; the intersection between trade regimes and culture – the INCD believes these areas should be approached from a cultural vantage point, finding common interests across the cultural sector and developing a national strategy – such as the proposal to hold a conference hosted by the Smithsonian in the fall which would bring together multiple sectors to work on common interests.
One of the areas of discussion for today will be UNESCO and the implications of its decision to move forward with the creation of a legally binding instrument on cultural diversity. We need to raise awareness of the instrument and the role the U.S. will play in its development in order to ensure it meets our needs.
It was suggested that the fall conference could be used to help the community to understand the proposed instrument and to develop advisory points for the United States representatives to UNESCO.
Background to the INCD:
Presentation by
Canadian Conference of the Arts (CCA) was formed in the 1950s at the initiative of leading Canadian artists in an effort to persuade the government to implement cultural policies. Today, the CCA brings together the full spectrum of the arts and culture from across Canada. The CCA and the Swedish organization KLYS were directed by international meetings of NGOs to organize the INCD. To this time, the INCD has been officially a “project” of the CCA, but it is now moving towards independence.
The INCD embraces principles which are designed to encourage diversity, strong policy support for the arts, the critical role of cultural activity in developing healthy societies and democratic participation in the development of cultural communities. INCD principles are found on the INCD website - www.incd.net.
Developments in trade agreements were threatening Canada’s cultural policies and, in response, Canada’s former culture minister Sheila Copps , launched a network for culture ministers, the International Network on Cultural Policy (INCP) which today includes 58 countries.
The International Network for Cultural Diversity (INCD) works in parallel with the ministers network. The publication of the first draft of a potential Convention for Cultural Diversity, to assist people to understand the concept, was a major project for the INCD.
The organization holds its annual meeting parallel to the INCP. The founding meeting was in Santorini, Greece in 2000. Subsequent meetings have taken place in Lucerne, Switzerland; Cape Town, South Africa; and Opatija, Croatia.
The organization is presently formalizing new By-laws and
will hold an electronic election for an expanded Steering Committee in the next
few months. There are three North American
representatives on the Steering Committee: James Early, Mireille Gagné from
Montreal and
Some INCD activities include:
· The Artists Letter, urging support for the proposed Convention and demanding that WTO negotiators do nothing that would negatively affect culture, was signed by leading artists and released at the WTO meeting in Cancun.
· Working to find a way of assessing the cultural impact of development projects.
In working in diverse countries, we find that the understanding of ‘cultural diversity’ is not uniform. In South Africa, the term was used by the Apartheid government to justify racial segregation. In countries like Brazil and India, the term means diversity within the nation.
The INCD receives funds from governments (Canada, France, Greece, Croatia and the Swedish International Development Agency) and foundations (European Cultural Foundation, Open Society Institute, Ford Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation).
There was some discussion about how the language of diversity is being used by the conservatives to forward an education agenda which is changing the meaning of the word “diversity” in the U.S.
It was noted that issues surrounding intellectual property rights and piracy were contentious within the artistic community, which is divided between artists who generally support creators’ rights and copy-left advocates.
Finally, there was a desire to use this meeting as an opportunity to facilitate the involvement of American organizations in the discussions and meetings INCD.
Culture and
Trade/Development of the Convention on Cultural Diversity
Presentation by Garry Neil
The INCD considers that culture includes everything from the individual artist to the entertainment industry, a different perspective from the mainstream U.S. view.
Some cultural producers enjoy a competitive advantage due to larger domestic markets, protection of language or protection of distance. Cultural policies are a way to level the playing field. Many governments intervene in the market to support domestic artists, producers, distributors, exhibitors and the heritage sector. These policies are designed to promote choice and counter the imbalance in global cultural trade.
Examples of cultural policies include: controls on ownership of cultural industry firms; subsidies of domestic artists and cultural producers; content regulations to provide shelf space for domestic products; preferential treatment of domestic products; preferential treatment of domestic rights holders in copyright laws, etc...
The intersection between trade and culture has a long history, one of the only exemptions from the 1947 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade was for cinema screen quotas.
Garry argued that culture is also covered by the 1994 General Agreement on Trade in Services. The GATS – Sectoral Classification List includes “motion picture and video-tape production and distribution services; and motion picture projection services,” “radio and television services; “sound recording” “entertainment and cultural services”. Since the GATS is a Bottom-Up Agreement, it applies only to those services that each country agrees to “list.” There is thus no cultural exemption.
Garry reviewed the leading cultural case dealt with by the WTO – The Canadian Periodicals Case. A split-run magazine is one that recycles editorial content, adds a small “Canadian” section and sells space to advertisers as a “Canadian magazine”. Canadian Magazines were supported in several ways. The United States challenged these measures at the WTO in 1995. The panel and appellate body ruled that magazines are a “good,” that Canadian and foreign magazines are “like goods,” and thus struck down all of the support measures. Canada reorganized its subsidy program and tried to introduce new measures aimed at the advertising in split-run magazines, but was forced to withdraw these measures since advertising in covered by NAFTA.
Garry gave a brief overview of the countries which have committed cultural services under the GATS and reviewed the case of broadcasting in
New Zealand. The previous government deregulated broadcasting, removed ownership restrictions and content quotas and listed the sector under the GATS. The New Zealand television system now has the lowest domestic content of any western nation. A new government came to power promising to re-introduce content regulations, but it discovered it cannot get out of the GATS commitment without “compensating all foreign services providers.”
Garry discussed how the various bilateral agreements being negotiated by the United States are also affecting cultural policies, including NAFTA, and the new agreements with Chile, Australia and Morocco. He noted that the point of contention in the negotiations for a
Bilateral Investment Treaty with Korea is U.S. insistence on eliminating
the screen quota system.
Finally, Garry
briefly reviewed the potential impact on culture of the ongoing WTO talks.
Some argued that some of the quota systems are deeply flawed, such as the European Union model. In Spain, films from Germany, France and the U.K. count as domestic content under the European quota system, but films from the U.S. do not. Thus, to some, this is not a “cultural” matter at all, since the quota is not designed to protect Spanish films. They also argued that subsidizing foreign producers, as is done by Canada, is also not a “cultural” matter, since the people who provide the money for the movie will control its content. In their view, hiring Canadian stars or filming in a Canadian location does not transform such a movie into a “Canadian” one.
Cultural exemptions cannot protect cultural diversity. They have permanent and defined limits, frequently are subject to the principles of “stand-still” and “roll-back,” generally cover only existing technology, and do not permit definitions to change over time.
The new international Convention on Cultural Diversity will provide a permanent legal foundation for government measures that support diversity of content. The Convention will:
· encourage more balanced trade in cultural goods and services
· allow definitions of culture to changes as artists create in newer media
· allow new measures to be implemented as required
· ensure that disputes about the trade in cultural goods and services will be adjudicated by cultural experts under its terms rather than by trade experts under trade treaties.
The INCP decided to take the proposal to UNESCO and in October 2003 the General Conference agreed to elaborate the terms of such a Convention. In theory, the draft should be in the hands of governments in July 2004, in order for it to be adopted in 2005.
Garry reviewed the potential content of the Treaty and the areas where civil society has raised concerns, including a clause that could subordinate the new Convention to the trade treaties. He also pointed out that the INCD believes there is need for stronger provisions on promoting the development of cultural capacity, support for public service institutions, the rights of artists and the rights of indigenous peoples
Discussion
It was noted there
is some overlap between the content for the proposed Convention on Cultural
Diversity and the existing Convention on Intangible Heritage, particularly with
respect to indigenous peoples. There
were also discussions of the difficulties working with UNESCO and conflicts
that sometimes occur between the perceived national interests of states and the
goals of diversity.
It is important to
recognize that many believe the cultural diversity agenda is about protecting
the cultural industries of developed nations and this misconception must be
addressed. It is necessary to
acknowledge internal diversity as a component of this debate and to dissuade
people from the notion that countries have a single identity. The audio-visual
sector remains a driving force but other issues will be connected as well.
France has been a leader in the cultural diversity debate, it was primarily the French government that demanded UNESCO take on the Convention on Cultural Diversity. But civil society is uneasy with France being so closely identified with the initiative because of the perceived conflict between its strong support of cultural diversity globally, and its action internally in banning headscarves and other religious symbols.
In reference to the fight against the Federal Communications Commission’s decision to remove cross-media ownership restrictions, it was noted that the rights of states to regulate to ensure media diversity would be an important element of the Convention. This is important because it speaks to principles of democracy.
U.S. Developments:
Media Ownership and the FCC
Presentation by Russell Newman
Russell reported in detail about the battle with the FCC about media ownership rules. He noted that the massive display of public opinion had an impact on Congress which proposed to re-impose the ownership rules. There is bi-partisan campaign to try to turn around the FCC, not only to re-impose the previous rules, but to implement even greater controls, to ensure access for traditionally marginalized communities and smaller independent producers to the broadcasting system.
He also discussed digital broadcasting which will bring many more channels, and thus create more room for advertising and paid programming and even larger profits for the media giants.
Activists are working to make room for creative space, public space and for community broadcasting. A lack of broadcasting space for marginalized communities to participate in mainstream radio, film and television means that those voices are not heard.
Presentation by James Early
The global debate needs to shift its focus to also discuss the challenge of achieving diversity within states. The national negotiators are not representative of the country as a whole and artists have to become engaged since they are an important source of information. Creative productions of all sizes and scales must be promoted; everything from entertainment industry to artist-run centres. Trade agreements must recognize the need for this diversity.
While there is a dichotomy between a local artist working within a community and a ‘star’ artist in the entertainment industries, there are still communities of interest.
The Ford Foundation
report entitled Investing in Creativity found that most artists move between
independent and industry jobs.
Frequently, the artist in the community and the industry artist are the
same person at different points in the year.
There was discussion
about whether media owners were also seeking to buy performing arts
venues. There are examples of this
(Clear Channel) and some people own multiple venues, but there are still many
small, artist-run venues. There is
frequently a disconnect between the two types of spaces. Some of the larger venues, such as the
Kennedy Center, have stopped making space available for community-based groups.
The phenomenon of
gentrification (whereby artists go into low-income neighbourhoods and, though
their artistic contributions to the community transform it into a desirable
neighbourhood, resulting in increased rents which artists can no longer afford)
was discussed. The suggestion was made
that real-estate developers and city-planners should be made to engage with
artists.
Next Steps:
There was consensus
that the group wanted to work together to build the network in the United
States. The importance of the UNESCO convention was re-iterated as was the
necessity to consider it’s implications for artists outside the cultural
industries – what are the implications for performing arts, for example?
Historically,
foreign government grants have been beneficial to American artists as they have
toured regions like Europe and Asia. As
local artist communities are developing, there is a backlash against American
artists and this practice. The possible
connection between artists markets and cultural policy development was
discussed as an area worth further exploration.
Programs such as the French Cultural Export Bureau working to bring
World Music artists to the U.S., is an example of how cultural and commercial
interests can intersect.
In order to ensure
that the diversity of experience of artists is reflected in the Conference, it
was suggested that representational groups be formed to put position papers
together prior to the Conference.
The challenges of
the U.S. public broadcasting system were discussed. The central problem is the lack of government
resources for the stations. Thus, some
public broadcasters will sell a portion of their digital space to create
funding for productions.
On occasion, local
leaders have been able to preserve a space for public broadcasting on the local
cable systems. But they are stymied by
the inadequacy of the resources provided to public broadcasters. It was agreed that a strong lobby in favour
of independent, financially secure, public broadcasters must be part of the
conference discussions and the UNESCO agenda.
It was agreed that cultural policy must be the responsibility of civil society as well as the state. We must work together, as a group to move forward on UNESCO and other issues of concern. It was decided that we would participate in an on-going e-mail discussion about an agenda for the fall meeting. The INCD will share its draft of the convention with the list and the group will work to encourage arts group to urge governments to implement supportive and positive cultural policies. It is largely due to the inactivity of the arts community that cultural policy is being written by conservatives in the U.S.
It was agreed that key topics of the fall meeting would be the UNESCO Convention and discussion of a 3 -5 year strategic plan for engaging artists and cultural organisations in the policy-making process. The value of culture is not merely economic/political and this needs to be addressed by the worker in the field who can bring this message to the public, the funding institutions and the government. This will be difficult for some given the bureaucratic language used in government.
The importance of the State Department having a professional staff devoted to culture was noted, the previous experts have been dispersed throughout a variety of departments.
Artists will need to work to diversify their knowledge so they can fully participate in the discussions about cultural policy, if they don’t engage, no one will. Culture is more than a tool to expand development.
The decision to work together on a fall meeting in Washington has the support of the following organizations and individuals:
Alicia Adams – Director of Special Programming, Kennedy Center
Sarah Anderson – Fellow, Institute for Policy Studies
Mark Camp – Director, Cultural Survival
Kim Chan – Vice-President of Programs, Association of Performing Arts Presenters; Nancy Fox – Associate Director of External Relations, Screen Actor’s Guild
Claire Fronville – Senior Advisor, Center for Arts and Culture
Brett Harvey – Executive Director, American Society of Journalists and Authors
Jerry Mander – President, International Forum on Globalization
Mona Mangan – Executive Director, Writers Guild of America East
Stephen McDowell – Associate Professor, Florida State University
Thomas McPhail – Professor, Univeristy of Missouri
Sondra Meyers – Consultant
Russell Newman – Research Coordinator, Free Press
Renata Petroni – Director of Projects and Partnerships, Arts International
Leslie Prosterman – Senior Fellow, New School, Center for Arts and Politics
Rebecca Ramirez Haskell – Administrator, Association of Hispanic Arts
Jack Santino, American Folkore Society
Sharan Sklar – Executive Director, Media Rights
Ethan Sing – Producer, Pacific Rim Media
Josh Silver – Managing Director, Media Reform Netowrk
Jerold Starr – Executive Director, Citizens for Independent Public Broadcasting
Jonathan Tasini – Writer, consultant
Laurie Wallach – Global Trade Watch
Chris Zic – Executive Director, National Writer’s Union
June Zietlin – Executive Director; Women’s Environment and Development Organization
Johann Zietsman – Executive Director, International Society for the Performing Arts