.

5.1.1. Production Sector

In 2000, when Spanish film production entered the new century, professionally prepared after 15 years of more expensive productions in which cinematic quality was the main focus pursued by government policies (Monteverde, 1993, p.98), it reached, for the first time in more than 25 years, the 100 productions boundary. For producer Jose Vicuña, such “positive” figure poses a paradox for production. On the one hand many of those films are “bad”, that is, no success at the box office probably due to low quality production values, with many of them not even reaching the screens. The trade-off is then between producing fewer films with higher production values (in some way safer projects) or producing more films from which new talent and unexpected hits might emerge (that is, a larger portfolio of smaller budget films). Vicuña admits that the trial and error process is necessary in filmmaking but points at the difficulty for producers when the Spanish market, which is the strategic market for any local production, is saturated with too much product [Vicuña, 2006].

Between 2000 and 2004 Spanish film production has averaged 117 films per year with a stable average of co-productions of 39 films per year (33% of total production). 55% of co-productions are developed with European countries, 35% with Latin-America and 10% involve Spanish, European and Latin-American production companies. Films by “first-time directors” are very relevant in today’s Spanish market with 37 films or 32% of the year’s production (Aguinaga, 2005, p. 90-91). Jose Vicuña sees the trend towards co-production, especially with Latin-America “as a strategy to cut production costs given cheaper labor costs in Latin-American countries”. Co-production with European countries is not about costs but about diminishing risks and having access to other European markets [Vicuña, 2006].

The average budget for each Spanish film from 2000 to 2005 was Euro 2.3 Million. 35% of the films cost less that Euro 1 million and only 3.7% cost more than Euro 6 Million. In average, Spanish total production investment for the first half of the decade is Euro 269 Million per year. But at the national box-office, for the same period, only 83.3 Million were made by Spanish movies per year (in 2004 only 6% of films made more than Euro 1.3 million at the B.O. and 67% got less than Euro 330,000). Of the total box-office figure only 33% (27.8 Million or 10.5% of an average year’s production investment) might reach the producers, with 67% divided between exhibitors and distributors (Aguinaga, 2005, p. 94; Film Interactive, 2005, p.56; Film Interactive, 2003, p. 29; Ferrada, 2005, p. 25). This means that in the Spanish market 89.5% of the production investment has to be financed and recouped outside the box office window.

For the period 2001 – 2004, film production investment in Spain was financed by four main sources (Aguinaga, 2005, p. 92, 96; Alvarez & Lopez, 2003, p. 52). In average 33% of production budgets came in from the producers/production companies behind the projects; 28% came from the sale of TV rights to open (22.3%), cable (14,4%), and regional (24%) channels; 17% comes from public support, showing that Spanish cinema is not strongly subsidized as many neo-liberal critics would argue, but it is a cinema were public support allows projects to get off the ground by giving producers and investors an initial platform to develop their projects or a lower risk-reward ratio when the investment is assigned; 11.5% comes from bank credits, showing an initial soft involvement from the financial sector into the industry although with potential to grow as stronger companies develop; 5.6% came from other financing sources; and distribution advancements were 4.8% showing the lack of commitment of a distribution sector dominated by the US majors, fully stocked with Hollywood product, and by nature not interested in national cinemas except for obligation/regulation.

The players behind this financial model have different ways to recoup their investments. Producers expect the films to make it to the last national window and to be successful enough to recoup the 33% they invested, to pay back the 11.5% credit to the banks, to get some profits and to be able to make a new film and keep their careers in the industry. A Spanish film is expected to be exploited in Spanish territory. Producers do not really count on international sales, unless the film is supported by a big name like Almodovar. Producer Jose Vicuña, for example, does not include international sales in his business model, although they are welcome if a film becomes an international hit in Europe or Latin-America. He also confirms that when he is producing a film, 70% of its production costs must come from two main sources: a pre-distribution deal on the basis of script, cast, and director attached to the project, and a pre-sale of the project’s TV rights to a TV Channel. If the additional production money (that his company has to add) is more than 30% of the budget, the film will not see the green light [Vicuña, 2006].

TV channels will include the 28% they invested buying a film’s TV rights into their big programming portfolios. If the film is successful it will bring additional advertising revenues in different showings. If it is not, it will be part of peripheral program schedules. Distributors have a weak incentive to push for Spanish movies since their participation is marginal at only 4.8% (Aguinaga, 2005, p. 92, 96). Distributors will consider Spanish films just a tactical element in their film portfolios, expecting strategic revenues to come from the big products they manage. The majors know they are backed by the Hollywood machine of advertising, marketing and the most powerful star system on earth, no Spanish star or film can compete against that [Vicuña, 2006].

Finally, public investment in film production at 17% is paid by the Spanish people in the form of taxes and then transferred to the Spanish film sector. The cultural argument to legitimate state support for films is still there: National films are windows of the Spanish reality to the world; a good way of showing what Spain is or has been (Felez, 2005, 19). In the past, public policies had a central role in the development of Spanish film production. Today, such policies are just complements of the inner workings of the breathing industry that generates the Spanish film output.

Beyond the production results of 2004, there have been two major developments in the film sector. Positive news came linked to the change of government in 2004, the mentioned increase in the state film support funds (ICAA funds) to Euro 63 Million for 2005. This 90% increment works as an update of the production/protection fund which was reduced 25% in 1996 (when the Popular Party came to power) and was kept at nominal prices until 2004, in spite of the expansion of production costs in the same time period. Other state norms related to film stayed the same.

Some very important additional elements that offer important support to Spain’s production sector is the set of professional associations that lobby to represent the interests and improve the conditions and rights of audiovisual professionals. The most important one is FAPAE, the entity that gathers the production companies and lobbies for policy making and private commitments, mainly with open and cable TV channels, to finance and guarantee production investment year after year. There are 9 associations, with a regional focus, congregating Actors, Directors and Writers, and 2 associations of audiovisual technicians. There are 2 associations concerned with the protection of copyrights for audiovisual producers and writers and for accounting for the international sales of their works and for anti-piracy efforts [Vicuña, 2006]. Finally, there is the Academy of Arts and Cinematographic Science of Spain, an echo of the Hollywood academy that delivers awards every year to the best Spanish films in different categories, offering, at the same time, a big media event for the industry.

Producer Jose Vicuña sees positive efforts in the activities of these associations. FAPAE is pushing for a relevant increase on the current tax excisions for film production companies. The tax benefits are currently at a negligible 5%. FAPAE’s push is for a ‘hard to get’ 20% tax excision [Vicuña, 2006]. The aim of such benefit, given the professional film infrastructure that Spain has built in the last decades, is to start attracting more and more international projects and to transform the industry into a production hub like London, but with better weather (Hopewell, 2006).

The clearest example pointing at a Spanish “collaborative strategy” with big budget productions is the “Ciudad de la Luz Studios” project, inaugurated in October 2005, in south-east Spain. Located near Alicante and right on the Mediterranean coast, the studios (which include 9 sound-stages and a water-tank) cost Euro 270 Mill (US$324 Mill), all financed by the Valencia regional government. Designed by Gary Bastien, a Hollywood studio specialist architect, the Ciudad de la Luz studios are the most advanced in Europe, and show the strong Spanish drive to compete against giants like UK’s Pinewood Studios to attract big projects to Spain [Vicuña, 2006]. The Studio will need to build its professional cluster of talent, technicians and extras (scarce in the Valencia region) but it constitutes a clear symbol of how the Spanish film Industry is entering big film production leagues (Hopewell, 2005).



5.1.2. Distribution/Exhibition

During 2005, 142 films were produced (37% co-productions). That’s the highest amount of films produced in the last two decades (Ministerio de Cultura de España, 2006). However, that positive figure arrives at a moment in which theatrical exhibition is feeling the pressure of vanishing audiences and consolidation of the biggest pay-TV companies is taking place. Producer Jose Vicuña sees the trends as threatening for the possibilities of Spanish cinema: “Audiences dropped, exhibitors are worried, and again it is the Hollywood product what seems more profitable for them”.

Spanish productions are polarizing in terms of budgets and in terms of success potential. On the one hand very expensive productions are being produced (passing the US$15 Million mark) and at the same time many film projects are getting into a fast paced TV rhythm in order to lower costs, clusters of films/scripts produced for Euro 500,000 and under 5 weeks of shooting. On the other hand, mid level budget films are difficult to finance, money goes to low or big budget films and success is also at the extremes. The hits are as big as never before, but the flops are as bad as never before: “Films are now condemned to success” [Vicuña, 2006].

Of the 1122 films exhibited in Spanish theaters between January and August 2005, 20.2% were Spanish films and 35.6% were from the US. However, the Spanish market-revenue share was only 13.3% and the US market share was 65.5%, with 18% going to films of other EU countries, and 3% for films of other nationalities year. At the end of 2005 the Spanish market share reached 16.74% (Ministerio de Cultura de España, 2005b, 2006). An even more problematic figure is that of Video distribution, the most important window for US majors but not for Spanish film companies. Of the 4098 titles commercialized in VHS or DVD format in 2003, Spain originated 16.5% of the titles while the US generated 40%. But of all video copies commercialized in the first semester of 2003 Spain only had a 2.8% share (ICAA, 2004, p. 31). The video window is completely on the open, with US video copies flooding the market and with no regulation touching the issue, protecting the market or enhancing the Spanish presence in this window.

Spanish films face the oligopolic conditions of the film industry: the few distribution and exhibition companies operating in a national market do not need national films to survive. They can make money solely with Hollywood films. However, given a long history of regulations to support production and to guarantee exhibition and distribution in Spain, the exhibitors and the Majors have learned to include some amount of Spanish films in their product sets. However, Spanish films are still at a disadvantage when trying to be part of an Exhibitors schedule. For Producer Jose Vicuña, the long time package-booking practice sustained between exhibitors and Hollywood majors is the practical result of reciprocity between two links of the film supply chain.

Exhibitors know that the Majors will bring the best products in terms of sales potential and marketing and they don’t want to get into a tension situation with such powerful providers by rejecting less attractive films from their packages. On the other hand, when a Hollywood major picks up a Spanish film because of the film’s commercial potential the distributor still will have tenths of other film distribution priorities (e.g. a Tom Cruise blockbuster), and a marketing support for the Spanish film that will be marginal [Vicuña, 2006]. Such reciprocity and exhibitor’s aversion to business tensions with “good” business partners allows the Majors to saturate the screens even easier, making it more difficult to compete for Spanish films, while keeping audiences permanently trained in the Hollywood film form. As will be shown below, the ownership association between big Spanish production companies and Hollywood majors is the safest way to guarantee production values and market access.

Distribution efforts of Spanish companies are obviously directed at European countries (through co-productions) and to the Hispanic market in the United States through collaboration deals with key audiovisual players from Mexico and from the US to develop content for the increasingly rich Spanish-language market in key US markets and in Latin-America. For example, Plural Entertainment, created in 2001, is the film and TV production arm of Spanish media conglomerate Prisa. Plural is the first Spanish production company to have offices in Spain and in New York, and has already developed production deals with Mexican TV giant Televisa and US based and Latino focused Univision (Hopewell, 2005).

For producer Jose Vicuña, Plural’s first president, the Latino market in the US is a big opportunity but not as clear-cut as many people think. It is a fragmented although growing market, with strong differences between Latino cultures in cities as diverse as New York, Miami, or Dallas; with second generations of Colombian-Americans or Argentinean-Americans being completely different. These characteristics impose strong marketing challenges. Film content has to be created with talent already based in the United States and about stories related to the audiences’ own experiences as migrants or latinos in the US. They will not be interested in a drama taking place in Valladolid. On the other hand, Latin-American markets, in spite of their population, are not as attractive as in the past, back to Franco, when legendary production and distribution companies like Spain’s Cifesa had offices in Argentina or Mexico, when the Latin-American market was dominated by Mexican distributors. Now those markets’ value has become relatively marginal [Vicuña, 2006].

In the private sector a major change for the structure of the audiovisual industry took place. Within the usual trends of concentration and consolidation found in the age of monopoly capitalism, the two biggest Spanish pay-TV concerns merged, in a deal approved by the government and its “competition” authorities. Prisa-Canal Plus’ Sogecable acquired Telefonica’s Via Digital with its subscribers, its library and its production commitments. Such development will mean a reduction of demand for audiovisual content since there will be less channels, and a reduction of acquisition prices of new products, since there will be less competition (Felez, 2005, p. 16-17). Andres Vicente Gomez, founder and head of Lola Films (now also owned by Telefonica) and one of the most successful Spanish producers of all times, sees the government green-light of this merger as a very negative development for the industry and asks the government to regulate the new monopoly by establishing minimal prices and purchase quotas of Spanish productions (Gomez, 2003, p. 10).

For producer Jose Vicuña the merger between Canal Plus and Telefonica’s cable interest meant an immediate drop in prices and purchases for TV rights of new film projects. Canal Plus also acquires the film library of Via Digital including the new titles they had just bought [Vicuña, 2006]. Canal Plus will have plenty of product to show and no incentive to acquire more films than before, actually, an incentive to acquire and produce less. Without government intervention, the foreseeable impact of this change will be a relevant reduction of Spanish private resources (via TV rights payments) into Spanish film production, an alarming consequence for the production sector in a period in which it needs resources to find new markets.

5.1.3. Current Spanish film policy

On July 9, 2001, the king Juan Carlos I signed the law that regulates the Spanish film industry today. Law 15 / 2001 modified some regulations of the past, removed others and added new ones. In the law Film is considered an outstanding element of culture with a decisive importance in the maintenance of cultural diversity. It projects society inside and outside the country; it expresses the nation personality, its histories, and its living identity (Ministerio de Cultura de España, 2005).

The law is designed to regulate, with adequate range, the obligations of the agents that operate in the film market, within an integral structure of norms for support and promotion of the sector. The text explicitly states that freedom of distribution of films is compatible with measures of protection for the film and audiovisual industry. Its ultimate objective is to give equal access to audience and creators to the film forms in order to enrich the Cultural Capital of the audiovisual sector.

The Law covers several strategic areas about the film sector and its relation with other media industries (Ministerio de Cultura de España, 2005a). Each law will be described according to the legislation and explicative comments will be added for each measure if necessary.

- Nationality of films: a film is Spanish if it complies with three conditions. The production company has to be established in Spain; 75% of the above and below the line human labor involved in the production has to be European (that is from the EU); the film language has to be “preferably” Spanish or any of the regional languages of Spain’s territory; the shooting, except for screenplay needs, and post-production and development of the film have to be done within the territory of the EU. This norm basically says that any EU film can receive a Spanish nationality certificate as long as a production office is registered somewhere in Spain. This is an important issue since the certificate gives the right to participate of state subsidies and other types of support. This point also includes participation percentages for the regulation of co-production agreements with other countries.

- Financial Co-productions: the regulation operates on international co-financing. If a Spanish company finances a project of Euro1.2 Million or more, the film can get the Spanish nationality, even if the participation does not include talent, resources or locations. With the nationality, the project can access the state subsidies (automatic and selective) for Spanish ‘productions’ (see below). To classify as a Financial Co-Production the participation has to cover between 10 to 25 percent of the projects budget (minority share); the projects also have to receive the nationality of the company with the ‘majority’ financial share (to comply with the other country co-production legislation); clear contractual dispositions have to be established regarding revenue shares between the participating companies; and the co-production deal has to be planed with reciprocity, both countries have to be ‘majority’ shareholders in a project at some point in the future. This regulation works as an incentive for foreign companies to search for Spanish partners and money and to alternatively exchange knowledge and financial resources. Co-productions help to achieve two main objectives: budget financing to get a project rolling, and penetration of other territories which could not be accessed without help from local producers or distributors.

- Support for Production and Promotion: Spanish productions will receive up to 50% of the production cost through objective-automatic subsidies of 15% of the box-office for a year of exploitation; special attention is given to experimental, animation, shorts and first films, which will have access to selective subsidies that can amount to more than 50% of the production cost; additional selective support is available for screenplay development; finally, selective support is given for promotion and distribution costs with an emphasis on experimental-innovative films. Funds for these activities are controlled by the ICAA and assigned by the government with every year’s public budget. The funds vary according to the expected economic conditions, the lobby of film professionals to state bureaucrats, and the interest of the government in film.

- Screen Quota and dubbing licenses: this restrictive quota operates for exhibitors and aims to guarantee 25% of exhibition time for EU films. One day of EU films for every three days on non-EU films “dubbed” into an official Spanish language. This means that Hollywood films in English are not part of the quota. Since audiences are used to dubbed films, an “original version” film in English might not be as competitive, but on the other hand it allows Hollywood to start a process of habituation with Spanish audiences to subtitled films, with the potential result of not having to invest anymore in dubbing if the habit catches up. On the other hand, exhibitors can program OV subtitled films reducing the amount of exhibition days for EU films, without breaking the quota. This is an important opening in the regulation setting a potential organic trend for the disappearance of the quota.

- Free Distribution: the Law states that Distribution companies can freely distribute films in any language or any origin. The ICCA has to watch that free competition operates in the film market. The objective of this point, and the interests to which it is related, are obvious. While the exhibition sector still has some obligation to show Spanish films, the distributors don’t have any obligation to acquire them, distribute them, and promoting them. Since marketing is such a key factor in driving audiences to films (good or bad) a consequent policy should be to assign an acquisition and marketing spending quota on Spanish films to distributors, in the same way distributors make Exhibitors (in any window) to acquire blocks of films.

- Box-Office Control: rules for theatrical exhibitors and their reporting on film tickets results, in order to efficiently inform movies performance for management of subsidies and industry data. This point shows one of the main policy holes in Spanish film history: the fact that the video window has never been touched or measured, nor approached as a potential provider of additional funds for national films support or as an additional market in which an obligatory quota could be applied in order to push Spanish product through such window. An important share of Spanish Film policy is still completely focused on the cinema Box Office.

- Television Financing: with its origins in the EU Directive 89/552/CEE, incorporated to Spanish jurisdiction in 1999 and made official by Law 15 / 2001, the regulation connects Film Production and financing with the Television window and its resources. Every Television operator with editorial responsibility, programming films as part of its TV schedules (open or pay TV), is obliged to invest a minimum of 5% of total revenue per year in financing the production of European films (for theaters or TV exploitation). 60% of this investment has to be destined to films in an official Spanish language. Additionally, part of the production has to be developed hiring independent production companies from the TV channel behind the project. This is a key element of the law, not only for the amount of investment that flows into film production, but for the recognition of the TV window’s role as one of the most important element of the industry supply chain and consumption. It allows to guarantee exhibition space for films, plus additional marketing exposure for Spanish film products so the channels can recoup their investments.

- Fiscal Incentives: a 1998 complementary law increases the fiscal incentive for production companies (and for financial co-producers). Taxes on profits will be 20% lower for production firms. In the same way, any company from any sector that invests part of its annual profits in a film production will pay 20% less tax on the invested amount (ICCA, 2004, p. 20). If the film is successful the investor will earn new money on the investment plus the tax savings, but if the movie fails the investment will be a loss except for the reduced tax payment which is basically marginal. This policy has the potential to trigger the creation of specialized Film Funds that manage investors’ money and allocate it in different film projects (portfolios) with careful analysis of the commercial viability of each production. Due to the mix of a moderate tax incentive with the high risk of films as products, the fiscal incentives law will tend to benefit safer projects with backing of established production companies and talent.

- State Credit: a film fund is assigned by the government to the ICAA on the basis of each year’s public spending budget. The fund is used to finance the production support strategies described above and also to provide credits and financial costs backing to producers that get credits from banks. During the last years, in average, the ICAA fund (through an alliance with the Official Institute of Credit – ICO) has transferred funds to banks for Euro 30 million per year which are then transferred to production companies in the form of credits with reduced financial costs for the producers (ICAA, 2004, p. 20). The fund also covers part of the financial costs of the credits. Banks get used to deal with production companies and the stronger companies, in terms of their financial structure and business plans and projections, will end up networked into the financial system. The policy also tends to support established producers and media companies as opposed to early stage firms and talent, which usually get some ICAA support for their projects on the “selection” categories for new filmmakers and especial projects. Total ICAA funds for 2005 were duplicated to Euro 63 Million by the new PSOE (socialist) administration, a development greeted with hope by film producers after 8 years of the Partido Popular more austere film strategies (Felez, 2005, p. 16-17).

- International Support Programs and Agreements: especial attention has to be given to how the Spanish film industry, especially the production sector, participates in three key international support programs.

a) The Media Programme emerged in 1988 as a set of measures to encourage cross-border synergies in the European audiovisual sector by establishing networks of cooperation among professionals. Its budget was Euro62 Million per year between 1996 and 2000. It has concentrated its efforts in three action lines: training, development and theatrical distribution (Jackel, 1998, p. 146). It has two mechanisms for distribution of funds: a selective scheme (based on qualitative criteria) in which produced films are chosen to get additional funding for their distribution activities; and an automatic scheme which supports companies taking the risk to distribute European non-national films, receiving a remuneration according to the admissions obtained at the box-office (Closs, 2001). In 2002, Spain received selective support of Euro1.8 Million from the Media Programme and an average of Euro1.8 Million in automatic remuneration for the period 1996-2000. In 2002, 19 Spanish projects were selected to receive ‘development’ support (ICAA, 2004, p. 25).

b) Founded in 1989 Euroimages is a fund for the support of European co-productions, distribution and exhibition on a Committee selection basis. It has been focused on supporting low-medium budget films that uphold the values that are part of the European identity like diversity and common cultural heritages (Jackel, 1998, p. 147). It has a yearly budget of Euro19 Million. Projects with at least two co-producers are supported up to 15% of the production budget – 20% if the project’s budget is below Euro1.5 Million – and never more than Euro700,000. It complements distribution and exhibition aid for EU countries that are not part of the Media Programme (for example, Europa Cinemas, an initiative of Media and Euroimages, is a network of theaters committed to the exhibition of European films, receiving subsidies from these funds). During the period 1996-2003 Spanish co-producers received Euro11 Million to finance 78 co-productions (36 of them with the Spanish company as majority co-producer). In the same period 64 Spanish films have received distribution support from Euroimages to be exhibited outside Spain (ICAA, 2004, p. 23).

c) As an initiative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the ICAA, the Ibermedia Programme was created in 1998. This Spanish initiative is focused on increasing cooperation and co-productions between Spain and Latin-America and their professionals. Ibermedia has supported between 15 and 30 co-production projects each year since 1998. Additional support is destined to Projects Development (an average of 24 projects per year), Distribution (22 projects per year in average), and Professional Formation (29 half-scholarships per year). In 2003 Spanish co-production with Latin-American countries reached 23 projects, 6 more than in 2004 (ICAA, 2004, p. 7, 28; Aguinaga, 2005, p. 91).

d) Regional Policies: each Spanish province or autonomic region has certain maneuverability to support its regional film industry. Catalonia for example is the region with more state financial support with up to 3 million euro for 2004 (Fapae, 2005. p. 12); Valencia developed a Eur170 Million Hollywood type studio facility in the Alicante region, on the Mediterranean as a way to bring foreign investment and expand its film professionals base [Vicuña, 2006].

- Memory: a strong audiovisual memory function is given to Spain’s Film Board (the Institute of Cinematography and Audiovisual Arts - ICCA). The remit is to save and protect all material related to audiovisual production with a budget for conservation of original copies and negatives and for production of films composed of archive material to diffuse the film patrimony.

- Other Norms are related to the age groups classification for new films to be shown in theaters (local or foreign) and the sanctions when any of the rules just described are broken. Sanctions are up to Euro 60,000 depending on the magnitude of the offense.



As Figure 5.1. shows, current Spanish film policy covers different segments of the Industry value chain. This new set of policies interact with the new economic conditions of the country in general and of the new Spanish media industry in particular, a country which is now wealthier than before, generating a society with more leisure time than before and with more resources to spend during that available time than before.

In general, the policy has not been about creating national theaters and national distribution companies, although a hybridization of such types of firms has already started with the mixed ownership of national and international media companies. In general the Spanish State policy for film has been the support of production, that is, to have some amount of production available, and to guarantee some kind of exhibition for those films. Without speculation of the political intentions of these policies, the result is that the Spanish public can have the choice to see products from their national film industry flowing on Spanish cinema and TV screens. The policies so far have complied with the normative ideas of offering diversity of content and national and international film choices to Spanish citizens.

At a continental level, and for Spanish film professionals, the standard in terms of film policy is the French model. Producer Jose Vicuña sees Spanish government officers, independently of their political party (the right PP or the left PSOE), somehow disinterested of the film industry, not considering it as a strategic sector. Instead, he sees French policymakers, independently of their parties, always pushing for protection and support of their film industry (one of the few countries in the world with consistent domestic Film market shares of 35% or more – “Press Release: European Cinema Attendance,” 2006). However, the French only push hard for their own films, not for the films of other European countries. This shows a contradiction in the search for a European identity: “What unites Europe today is Tom Cruise, McDonald’s, and Blue-Jeans. Here in Spain, a TV project about leisure activities of young people in different European countries was rejected on the basis of poor ratings potential. It didn’t find a place on Public TV. I don’t see a real policy to build common themes between Europeans. It will take 100 years to get Europe to have these common themes, when today’s countries have become European Union provinces” [Vicuña, 2006].



Follow to the Next Section