The battle for culture

February 8, 2005
Flourishing French industry: from the film <i>Lisa.</i>

Flourishing French industry: from the film Lisa.
Photo: Supplied

Should national culture be protected? Alan Riding reports.

The idea of promoting cultural diversity around the world seems reasonable enough. It recognises that everyone profits from the free flow of ideas, words and images. It encourages preservation of indigenous traditions and minority languages. It treats the cultures of rich and poor countries as equal. And most topically, it offers an antidote to cultural homogeneity.

Try turning this idea into an international treaty, though, and things soon become complicated. Since October 2003, UNESCO's 190 members have been working on what is provisionally called the Convention on the Protection of the Diversity of Cultural Contents and Artistic Expression. It is intended to be approved by consensus this year, but don't count on it. There is still no agreement on its final name.

But that is a minor issue compared with more fundamental differences. Led by France and Canada, most countries are asserting the right of governments to safeguard, promote and even protect their cultures from outside competition. Opposing them, a smaller group, led by the United States, argues that cultural diversity can best flourish in the freedom of the globalised economy.

A bid to break the deadlock is now under way at the Paris headquarters of UNESCO, where delegates and experts are wrestling with hundreds of proposed amendments to the first draft. Yet the more they advance toward concrete definitions, some delegates say, the less likely they are to reach consensus. The reason is simple: Behind the idealistic screen of cultural diversity, weighty economic and political issues are at stake.

The story began with the last global trade liberalisation around a decade ago when France obtained what became known as the cultural exception, which in effect authorised the protection of culture. Now, France and Canada want to go further: By enshrining cultural diversity in a legally binding convention, they hope to shield culture from the free-trade rules of the World Trade Organisation.

The Motion Picture Association of America, Hollywood's main lobby group, has long complained about the protection of the French film industry. But because of that help, France has Europe's only thriving movie industry: Hollywood accounts for about 65 percent of the French box office, compared with 90 percent elsewhere in Europe. Now Denmark, Germany, Britain and Spain are also looking to help their film businesses.

Certainly, as the world's largest exporter of movies, television programs and other audio-visual products, the US believes it will suffer from further restrictions on cultural exchanges. When the US ended a 19-year boycott of UNESCO in late 2003, however, plans for a convention were already advanced. Rather than announcing its return to the organisation by being obstructionist, it decided to defend its position in negotiations.

The first draft of the convention, presented by 15 cultural experts last summer, tried to please everyone by endorsing "the free flow of ideas by word and image" and by noting that cultural goods and services "must not be treated as ordinary merchandise or consumer goods." The battle was then joined when governments presented their responses, many of which are now proposed amendments to the draft.

The American response was unambiguous. While supporting the principle of cultural diversity, it warned that "controlling cultural or artistic expressions is not consistent with respect for human rights or the free flow of information". It further noted, "Mounting trade barriers, including efforts to prevent the free flow of investment and knowledge, is not a valid way to promote cultural liberty or diversity since such measures reduce choices."

Supporters of the convention focused instead on the word "freedom," arguing that freedom of choice means availability of choice, which in turn requires active promotion - and protection - of cultural diversity. Canada suggested that the red-flag word "globalisation" be described as a "challenge" rather than as a "threat". But it firmly reasserted its right to preserve and promote any cultural activity that it defined as domestic.

The French position was backed by the European Commission, which negotiates on behalf of the European Union on trade matters. Just as it supported the "cultural exception" a decade ago, the commission endorsed the view that trade disputes involving culture should be ruled by the UNESCO convention, not the WTO.

France and Canada have the support of China and African countries and much of Latin America, although Mexico, Brazil and Venezuela want freedom to export their TV soap operas. Support for the American free trade view comes from other countries with commercial interests to defend: Japan because of its animated-movie industry and India because of Bollywood, its film powerhouse.

- New York Times