Federal popular initiative "Yes to the abolition of radio and television fees (abolition of Billag fees)"

Olivier Kessler , one of the initiators, is interviewed after the vote was lost.

The federal popular initiative "Yes to the abolition of radio and television fees (abolition of Billag fees)" (also known as the No-Billag initiative for short ) is a popular initiative in Switzerland that will be submitted to the people and the cantons on March 4, 2018 and approved at 71 , 6% no votes and was rejected by all cantons.

Starting position

The reception fees for radio and television sets have been collected by the Billag company on behalf of the federal government since 1998 , and Serafe will continue to do this from 2019 . Up to 2018, the fees per household were 451 francs per year or 165 francs for radio reception only. As of 2019, the total amount will be reduced to 365 francs as a result of the referendum adopted by the people in 2015 on the amendment of 26 September 2014 to the Federal Act on Radio and Television (RTVG) , coupled with the innovation that the fee must be paid regardless of whether Classic receivers are available in the household . The Swiss Radio and Television Company (SRG-SSR) receives the largest share of around CHF 1.2 billion from the fees it receives for its government mandate. The remainder goes to other radio and television providers.

According to its initiators, the initiative aimed at the abolition of reception fees, called radio and television fees in the initiative . According to the initiative committee, no one should be forced to pay "compulsory fees" for services that they do not use. Likewise, companies should no longer be forced to pay contributions. According to the initiative committee, the SRG-SSR would have been free to continue offering programs, but the SRG-SSR would have had to finance itself in future and the state mandate would have been deleted: the passage in the constitution according to which radio and television should contribute to education or to take into account the needs of the cantons would have been deleted without replacement. According to the initiators' idea, SRG-SSR should have tried to obtain a license like its competitors. The elimination of the state privileges granted to the SRG-SSR would have led to fairer competition and greater media diversity.

The Neue Zürcher Zeitung noted in November 2017 that after the 2015 revision of the RTVG there was no debate about the SRG-SSR's mandate, but in January 2018 the top of the SRG-SSR also spoke of a change even after the initiative was rejected, while Federal Councilor Doris Leuthard mentioned the new media law and the immediate cap on the amount earmarked for the SRG-SSR. For the WOZ , the initiative went beyond criticism of the SRG-SSR; rather, its aim was the “total deregulation of today's media system”. In a documentary, the program Panorama pointed to the Europe-wide resistance to public service media . Efforts by right-wing parties in Europe to restrict public service media were shown. «Panorama» placed the «uniformity» statement of the head of the argumentation of the No Billag initiative next to the quote about «distorted images and distortions of truth in the system media» by Marine Le Pen or the statement by Geert Wilders that journalists generally spread «nonsense». The moderator Anja Reschke put up for discussion whether information is a commodity "for which you only pay if you like it".

In December 2017, the law professor Urs Saxer pointed out that the initiative was based on an outdated media system and that several points in the initiative remained legally unclear. The professor of information science at HTW Chur , Edzard Schade, pointed out that the entire press had been funded since the federal government was established in 1848. During the development during the First World War and during the class struggle in the general strike of 1918 , however, the lack of integration function of the fragmented and polarizing opinion press would have become apparent. This fresh memory was decisive in 1922 for the decision to put radio in the service of society as a whole. Schade said that this dual media system worked, while the development of digital, consumer-oriented forms of payment for public service services was not yet fully developed.

Natalie Rickli , National Councilor of the SVP and former executive at Goldbach Media , does not rule out the possibility that a new initiative to halve the SRG fees will be started if this initiative is rejected. Together with media politician Gregor Rutz , also a member of the National Council of the SVP, both of them submitted parliamentary proposals before the vote to reduce budget charges to CHF 300 at the beginning of 2019 and also to abolish fees for companies.

The initiators already offered cause for criticism during the referendum campaign when they "freely reinterpreted" the constitutional text with their proposals for possible state support; Daniel Gerny called this in the NZZ a "foggy petarde", namely a volte that undermines the seriousness of the initiative or the referendum.

A study by the University of Applied Sciences Northwestern Switzerland revealed that half of all Twitter messages were generated by so-called bots during the voting campaign , which were only controlled by 50 users. One danger of such manipulative activities is a possible expanding spiral of silence .

text

If the initiative had been accepted by the people and the cantons , the following article of the Swiss Federal Constitution would have been changed:

Art. 93 paras. 2-6

² Previous paragraph 3

³ The federal government regularly auctions licenses for radio and television.

⁴ It does not subsidize radio and television stations. He can make payments for the broadcast of urgent official communications.

⁵ The Confederation or third parties commissioned by it may not charge reception fees.

⁶ The federal government does not operate its own radio and television stations in times of peace.

Art. 197 no. 12

12. Transitional provision to Art. 93 Para. 3–6

¹ If the statutory provisions come into force after January 1, 2018, the Federal Council shall issue the necessary implementing provisions by January 1, 2018.

² If Article 93 paragraphs 3–6 are accepted after January 1, 2018, the necessary implementing provisions will come into force on January 1, 2018.

³ When the statutory provisions come into force, the licenses with a share of fees are canceled without compensation. Claims for compensation for vested rights that have the character of property remain reserved.

History of origin

Collection of signatures in October 2015 at Zurich main station

The collection of signatures began on June 11, 2014 after an idea had been worked out by young liberals . The initiative came about on January 13, 2016.

The Federal Council requested the Parliament in autumn 2016 in its message to recommend the initiative be rejected. The Federal Assembly followed the Federal Council in autumn 2017. In the final vote, the National Council rejected the initiative by 129 votes to 33 with 32 abstentions, the Council of States by 41 votes to 2 with 1 abstention. The two opposing votes in the Council of States came from SVP representatives Peter Föhn and Alex Kuprecht , the latter saying that he pressed the wrong button. An SVP counter-proposal to halve the fees was rejected by 108:70 votes.

Opinions

Advocates

Initiators

Olivier Kessler , Co-President of the Initiative Committee and Vice Director of the Liberal Institute , was interviewed by Blick . According to Kessler, politicians today decide which media are funded through fees, which restricts freedom of choice. A media landscape detached from the political system after the initiative was accepted could comment on the political processes more critically. If the obligation to pay fees were no longer paid, low-wage earners would have the option of spending the money saved elsewhere. Media products such as newspapers or online media offers could be obtained individually as required. In order to continue Rhaeto-Romanic broadcasts after the Billag fees have been canceled, the canton of Graubünden may have to step in with the financing. (The government of the canton of Graubünden stated in an extraordinary statement that it would recommend the initiative for rejection.)
On January 25, 2018, the initiative committee presented three hypothetical scenarios for the financing of a privatized SRG after a YES to the initiative. All three scenarios envisage a subscription model as the most important source of income. This would be introduced by the previous network operators such as Swisscom and UPC Switzerland as pay TV for SRG channels that are still being operated. The TV advertising revenues would decrease due to the reduced range compared to today due to the specific fees and the reduced SRG broadcast offer. The initiators assume that TV advertising revenues would drop by about half. Instead, a privatized SRG could introduce advertising in radio broadcasts and online offers as an innovation. Scenarios 2 and 3 anticipate significant federal and cantonal contributions. How this can be reconciled with the initiative text was not explained. In total, income of 590 (scenario 1), 731 (scenario 2) and 929 million francs (scenario 3) is expected. With regard to the three scenarios, NZZ editor Rainer Stadler pointed out the “gap between the desire for diverse audiovisual background information and market economy reality”. As a concession to the political situation in Switzerland, the initiators are now ready to grant a transition period of around three years for the conversion of the SRG, which is not provided for in the initiative text.

Organizations

The Swiss Chamber of Commerce approved the initiative for the Swiss Trade Association . In October 2017, its president Hans-Ulrich Bigler had two thirds of the association behind him for his advocacy of the initiative, although most SMEs would be exempt from this fee from 2019. The goals are the abolition of the arbitrary and unjustified double taxation of companies, as well as a comprehensive reform of the previous SRG. Acceptance of the initiative would lead to a previously hindered discussion of the content and scope of the public service and prevent the increasing nationalization of the Swiss media landscape. There was resistance to Bigler's actions within the trade association. So was Alois Gmür (National Council of the canton of Schwyz ) that this inroads of the President not only opponents like him have in your own organization, but also not a core concern of the association is. Hans-Ulrich Bigler presented a plan B for the trade association when the initiative was accepted. The corresponding estimates for new SRG income (pay TV, new radio and online advertising, state support from the Confederation and the cantons) instead of the currently mandatory fees were largely published elsewhere in November 2017. It was pointed out that the implementation of such a Plan B would not be feasible until the beginning of 2019.

opponent

Federal Council

The Federal Council rejected the initiative for the following reasons:

the public service mandate would be canceled
many television and radio stations would be existentially threatened
the dependence on foreign corporations and private donors would increase
media diversity and opinion-forming in Switzerland would suffer.

Parliamentarians

As part of the NO to No Billag committee , 160 parliamentarians from all 8 parties presented their arguments as opponents of the initiative at their press conference on January 9, 2018. The tenor was that the initiative to abolish radio and television fees was too extreme. The submission attacks the existence of the SRG and the regional and local radio and television broadcasters head-on. The committee argued that these are now providing the whole of Switzerland with a diverse and balanced range. A functioning democracy depends on informed citizens. If the answer was yes, proper reporting would no longer be guaranteed.

Media professionals

Michael Schoenenberger, head of the domestic editorial office of the Neue Zürcher Zeitung , mentioned the great emotionality in the voting campaign. Despite his reservations, he rejected the initiative. He advocated the continued existence of public radio and television in Switzerland. In the event of a rejection, however, both politicians and the SRG would have to have the books.

Daniel Binswanger named the initiative as one of the examples of “primitive land of plenty promises” with previously “unknown audacity”: The alleged alternative financing options for the SRG-SSR are “chatter”, there is no information pay TV anywhere in the world.

Christian Dorer , editor-in-chief of the Blick Group , believed that if the initiative were accepted, no sensible plan B with a reorganized SRG-SSR would work. After a yes to No Billag , SRG-SSR would be liquidated. It is the wrong template to set an example. That is why he chose the title Playing with Fire .

Diego Yanez , director of the Swiss journalism school MAZ, former editor-in-chief of SRF television and member of the No to No Billag committee , feared that accepting the initiative would lead to less diversity and more dependency in the Swiss media market. This vote is about the smashing of the SRG-SSR and 34 private television and radio stations, which would be deprived of their financial basis. Popular programs such as the Tagesschau cannot be financed without fee income. There is not a single pay model for information broadcasts across Europe. Yanez saw a need for reform at SRG-SSR. However, he said that one could only reform an SRG-SSR that was still alive, which in his opinion would no longer be the case if the initiative were accepted.

Speaking of a market for media is problematic , according to Guido Keel, head of the Institute for Applied Media Studies (IAM) in Winterthur. Journalism is a public good. “Its use cannot be limited to those who pay for it. The media inform society so that it can take part in democratic and thus state-building processes. In this way, the media enable democracy, and those who pay nothing for media use also benefit from it. "

Roger Schawinski , pioneer of private radio and television broadcasters in Switzerland ( Radio 24 and Tele24 ) and moderator of a SRG talk show, published the book No Billag? The reasons and the consequences. with the following dangers:

In small Switzerland, a comprehensive range of information could not even begin to be financed. Pay TV only works in the areas of sports, film and porn.
Many small sports would disappear from the screen without SRG-SSR.
The market share of foreign TV stations in Switzerland is already over 60 percent. This colonial situation would become even more pronounced after the SRG-SSR was broken up, because mainly foreign broadcasters would jump into the gap.
National private radio stations would displace regional ones. Schawinski names the Ringier media group and a group around billionaire Christoph Blocher , who has already participated in Swiss media and finances his own television programs, as possible actors .

Mike Müller , known from the SRG programs Giacobbo / Müller and Der Bestatter , found the initiative too extreme. Regarding competitors of SRG-SSR, not only television stations from neighboring countries should be considered, but also internet companies such as Google, Facebook and Netflix.

Although, in the opinion of Rolf Probala, the SRG could not survive in its current form, he said “No” to the No-Billag initiative. He is convinced that in the age of social networks and global Internet companies we need a fee-financed service provider to provide us with relevant information.

Advertising specialist François Besençon, Vice President of the Swiss Communication Association (and formerly a member of the management of the SRG advertising subsidiary Publisuisse), was skeptical about the financial possibilities in the TV information sector. As an example, he cited the French news channel BFMTV, whose annual costs are at least CHF 100 million. In France, this station only achieved a market share of two percent. In German-speaking Switzerland, however, an audience share of 10 percent would be necessary for the budget to come about.

Scientist

According to Thomas Maissen , historian of recent Swiss history, every democracy needs a public space in which things can be negotiated and communicated through information, discussion, disputes and proposed solutions. A willing nation must learn and know what it wants. She can only do that in the media of public space. Without SRG-SSR there is a risk that the minority regions would be degraded to the appendages of the neighboring countries where the same language is spoken.
Martin Kolmar and Ulrich M. Schmid , professors at the University of St. Gallen , compared in particular the role of internet giants with that of the SRG as information providers. The economic infiltration of the actual information providers by the internet giants Google and Facebook makes the media crisis structurally so huge and politically so dangerous. The SRG and its jointly financed information offer will not create a market failure, rather an existing market failure will be reduced. The authors speak of emerging private media oligopolies . In contrast to Google and Facebook, SRG assumes responsibility for the content it distributes on its channels.
Media studies professor Jean Seaton explained that many people saw public broadcasters as a given and consumed them so naturally that they did not even realize their value. In 2015, the BBC carried out a 9-day experiment in which representative households were not allowed to watch BBC channels. Two thirds of those involved had changed their initial opinion that they could do without the BBC after the experiment.

Laura Zimmermann, Co-President of Operation Libero

Organizations

According to the President of the French-speaking Swiss Intergovernmental Conference , François Longchamp , the initiators are far from maintaining the idée suisse of an equivalent radio and television service in three official languages. The audiovisual Swiss mirror, as multifaceted as the country, would no longer exist in all its diversity once the fees were removed.
The Eastern Switzerland Intergovernmental Conference also drew attention to the constitutional article, which would lapse if adopted, and was convinced that the initiative would damage the media landscape in the small-scale areas of Eastern Switzerland.
The opposition pointed out that without the now existing fee redistribution, linguistic minorities could be neglected. The market for regionally produced programs for Latin Switzerland is too small.
The Evangelical Church Federation announced its rejection of the initiative. Radio and television should be supported by the entire population in solidarity. The game of market forces cut off minorities and the weak.
The Roman Catholic Central Conference of Switzerland drew attention to the fact that the contribution of the SRG to the spiritual and religious dialogue was considerable and that it was about issues of society as a whole and of national policy. With the planned deletion of important provisions from the Federal Constitution, the importance of these aspects is no longer guaranteed.
The Swiss Bishops' Conference saw national cohesion in danger if the initiative was accepted.
Organizations for the hearing impaired feared a reduction in the number of subtitles and sign languages on offer. The agreement between these organizations and SRG-SSR, according to which up to 80 percent of programs must be broadcast with subtitles by 2022, was at risk according to the national deaf association SGB-FSS.
A group of cultural workers argued under the slogan No Billag, No Culture that cultural traditions as well as film projects and performances by singers, music groups, cabaret artists and writers were at risk. Today, purely advertising-financed broadcasters have a massively smaller share of Swiss music than SRG and the fee-financed private radio stations. This applies not only to folk music, but also to classical music, jazz and rock.
The Verein Musikschaffende Schweiz ( Sonart ) published its arguments as opponents of the initiative.
Amnesty International stressed that the implementation of the “No Billag” initiative would endanger the right to freedom of expression and information, especially for linguistic minorities.
The New Helvetic Society traditionally does not comment on everyday political affairs. An extraordinary assembly of delegates decided to comment and recommended no to the initiative. Solidarity is part of the Swiss understanding of the state. The statement complains about the fact that both the legal obligation to objectively report and the possibility of complaint are no longer applicable.
The operation Libero , a political movement in Switzerland, acceptance of the initiative was a means of crowdfunding prevent funded campaign.
Emilia Pasquier, managing director of the think tank Foraus and member of the No to No Billag committee , emphasized that the SRG, with over 20 correspondents in all parts of the country and regions, is contributing to understanding between the parts of the country and to cohesion in Switzerland.
Radio Bern . According to a collection of arguments from Radio Bern, the loss of SRG-SSR as an independent state medium would also mean the loss of an independent source of information in Switzerland. As the only medium in Switzerland, it is not dependent on investors who each represent their own interests. The free formation of opinions in Switzerland, independent of economic and political interests, depends to a large extent on the information mandate of the state media.
TeleSuisse , the association of Swiss regional television , spoke out against the No-Billag initiative. Its president, André Moesch, commented on the arguments of the trade association in the SRG broadcast 10vor10 on January 9, 2018. It is an illusion that after the initiative has been accepted, higher advertising revenues can be expected from a royalty-free SRG, because the program offering would have to be greatly reduced due to the lack of fee income.

Comments

Media professionals

Eric Gujer , editor-in-chief of the Neue Zürcher Zeitung , called for a significant correction of course for the SRG against its superiority and mentioned the possibility of a “creative solution” by parliament in the specific regulation (so that the SRG does not perish) if the initiative is accepted. He described the assertion that only a public broadcaster can connect social classes, regions and languages as presumptuous and totalitarian. Political knowledge is essential in a democracy. This includes, however, that the individual can decide where to get information and how much he wants to shell out for it. The public service is becoming a fiction because it only occupies a niche in a market with lots of niche offers. For example, the average age of viewers on the first TV channel SRF 1 is 62, so it only reaches relatively few young viewers. There are specialized offers from other, mostly foreign media companies for sport, entertainment and information. In a video podcast from Weltwoche , Gujer finally stated that he still rejects the initiative because it goes too far.

The Tages-Anzeiger editor Fabian Renz explained that it was about “a good that the libertarians cannot offer with their vision: trust, the feeling of reliability, predictability, security”. He compared it to the reliability of public transport ; Even those who do not plan to take the post bus to Cumpadials GR know that they could do it at any time - and Renz added that he was also happy that the residents of Cumpadials could do it.

Matthias Daum led in time this reliable solidarity further and wrote the initiators wanted "a Switzerland without an institutionalized solidarity without collective, wearing a the when you need it a try."

The German magazine ZAPP saw the Swiss media system at a crossroads due to the initiative and the outcome was uncertain.

Maurice Thiriet, editor-in-chief of Watson , called in an open letter on both parties to a real weighing of interests, instead of “limiting themselves to giving the left at SRG or the right at SVP once again a blow”. It is about a "somewhat relevant institution" that requires a factual discussion, namely the question of how the "population is informed" is to be achieved.

In his film The Fourth Power , the filmmaker Dieter Driver visited media workers in four organizations ( Der Bund , Watson , Republik and the editorial team from the SRG's Echo der Zeit ) and filmed them at work. In connection with Watson, Driver explains: Nobody in this industry can afford to be inconspicuous and differentiated. In the Echo der Zeit der SRG, driver finds: Very committed people work there: I found it extremely exciting to listen to their discussions. In addition, they (still) have enough resources and a network of correspondents like hardly anyone else. In contrast to the Echo der Zeit , he states in general: Journalism should help to better classify facts. But unfortunately the opposite often happens.

Gilles Marchand , Director General of SRG-SSR since October 2017, countered the various plans B by various supporters of the initiative that if the initiative were to be "yes", SRG-SSR would lose its raison d'etre and liquidation would be necessary. He promised that the SRG-SSR would undertake reforms even if the answer was “no” and that an austerity program would be part of it.

Pietro Supino , President of Tamedia , did not give a clear statement on the initiative. However, it is known that the Association of Swiss Media (VSM) was unable to agree on a clear statement on the initiative because a dispute between Ringier and Tamedia over Admeira prevented this. Tamedia's intention in December 2017 to take over the Goldbach Group would at most make it possible to profit commercially from an SRG grounding after the acceptance of the No Billag initiative. Jacqueline Badran , National Councilor , presented the connection with the initiative as follows: The only one who would profit commercially from the SRG grounding after the No Billag initiative was accepted is the new Tamedia Goldbach Group.

Philipp Cueni, founder of the media magazine Edito , referred to the emotionality and contradiction of the proponents; On the one hand, it was said that the complete liquidation of the public media corporations was the order of the day, while at the same time it was asserted that the initiative is not directed against the SRG and is not its end. The increasing aggressiveness of the supporters exposes their only supposedly liberal political background.

Positions of the political parties

Yes	No
SVP EDU	SP FDP CVP Green glp BDP EPP

Among the national parties, the initiative was rejected by the Greens , the SP , the FDP , the BDP , the CVP , the glp and the EPP . At its delegate assembly on January 13, 2018, the FDP adopted a position paper on the Swiss media landscape with proposals for reforming the media regulation at the time, in addition to the no slogan for the No Billag vote . The initiative was recommended for adoption by the SVP and the EDU . The Young Liberals decided on January 20, 2018 - in contrast to their mother party - the YES slogan. The remaining young parties - Young Greens , JUSO , JCVP , JBDP , JGLP , JEVP (all no) and JSVP (yes) - had the same slogans as their mother parties.

As an exception in the regions of linguistic minorities, groups advocated the initiative, although today these regions benefit from cross-subsidization within the SRG-SSR. The young freemen of the canton of Geneva and a majority of the Lega dei Ticinesi supported the initiative. So far it has been assumed that western Switzerland is clearly in favor of retaining the previous SRG, as there are 19 public and subsidized private television and radio stations in this language area.

Opinion polls

Institute	Client	date	Yes	Rather yes	Tie No answer	Rather no	No
LeeWas GmbH	Tamedia	15th February 2018	37	2	1	2	58
GfS Bern	SRG SSR	February 11, 2018	22nd	11	2	9	56
LeeWas GmbH	Tamedia	1st February 2018	36	2	1	2	59
Marketagent.com ¹	?	17th January 2018	40.9		7.7		51.4
LeeWas GmbH	Tamedia	15th January 2018	36	4th	1	3	56
GfS Bern	SRG SSR	January 12, 2018	26th	12	2	12	48
LeeWas GmbH	20 minutes	December 14, 2017	51		4th		45
Marketagent.com ¹	?	December 12, 2017	44	12	5	10	28
Marketagent.com ²	?	22nd November 2017	42	15th	8th	13	22nd
DemoSCOPE	Swiss Media Association	4th September 2017	47		16		37

¹ The survey did not take Ticino or people over 75 into account, which is why it is not representative of all eligible voters. ² The survey did not take Ticino or people over 65 into account, which is why it is not representative of all eligible voters.

Comments: Figures in percent. The date indicates the middle point in time of the survey, not the point in time when the survey was published.

Referendum

Cartographic representation of the voting result

According to the official final result, the initiative was rejected by the people (833,837 yes, 2,098,302 no) and the stands (0 yes, 23 no).

Yes (0 stands)

No (20 ⁶ / ₂ Scores)

Canton	Yes (%)	No (%)	Participation (%)
Kanton Aargau Aargau	32.2	67.8	51.8
Canton of Appenzell Ausserrhoden Appenzell Ausserrhoden	32.1	67.9	53.7
Canton of Appenzell Innerrhoden Appenzell Innerrhoden	33.4	66.6	46.5
Canton of Basel-Country Basel-Country	27.5	72.5	52.8
Canton of Basel-Stadt Basel city	26.5	73.5	58.6
Canton Bern Bern	24.9	75.1	52.8
Canton of Friborg Freiburg	22.4	77.6	50.6
Canton of Geneva Geneva	25.2	74.8	53.6
Canton of Glarus Glarus	33.2	66.8	49.6
canton of Grisons Grisons	22.8	77.2	52.7
Canton of Jura law	21.9	78.1	46.9
Canton lucerne Lucerne	28.4	71.6	55.2
Canton of Neuchâtel Neuchâtel	21.7	78.3	51.3
Canton of Nidwalden Nidwalden	32.5	67.5	62.6
Canton of Obwalden Obwalden	31.0	69.0	61.9
Canton of Schaffhausen Schaffhausen	37.3	62.7	68.4
Canton of Schwyz Schwyz	37.9	62.1	56.6
Canton of Solothurn Solothurn	30.7	69.3	52.0
Canton of St. Gallen St. Gallen	34.4	65.6	52.5
Canton of Ticino Ticino	34.5	65.5	64.8
Canton of Thurgau Thurgau	34.4	65.6	50.3
Canton of Uri Uri	30.4	69.6	48.4
Canton of Vaud Vaud	23.5	76.5	55.1
Canton of Valais Valais	28.8	71.2	56.1
Canton of Zug train	32.1	67.9	61.4
Canton Zurich Zurich	28.4	71.6	56.7
Swiss Confederation	28.4	71.6	54.4