Contextsnot driven up to ever- higher levels. products can be mutually compared in terms of
quality.
it goes without saying that markets do not, by definition, tend towards a neat level
playing field. it is always possible that a certain party in the markets, for whatever
reason, will grow so strong that it becomes dominant. For neoliberals this occurrence
has not been, and is not, a problem. on the contrary, when market dominant forces
appeared, they have let them be.
my purpose is to put a stop to this philosophy, and to re- establish a fair level playing
field in which many cultural entrepreneurs – artists, producers and commissioners
- can have risk- bearing opportunities. diversity of content and ownership will then
flourish again, and this huge body of cultural entrepreneurs can make a good living
from their work.
it is actually a misunderstanding to believe that markets and regulation are a
contradiction in terms. The idea that completely free markets exist, or can exist, is not
realistic. ‘Regulation and markets, in effect, grew up together’ (polanyi 1957: 68). Karl
polanyi accentuates that never in history, or the present, have self- regulating markets
existed. We must realize that the philosophy of self- regulating market is a smoke screen
to hide the tough fact that markets have been, and are, regulated day after day – mostly
under WTo (World Trade organization) rules – in favour of ‘winner takes all’, i.e.
under neo liberal conditions.
The difficult task we have is to turn this philosophy upside down. Yes, markets
have always been regulated, but now, let us regulate not in favour of winner takes all,
but towards the development of the diversity of enterprises. let us regulate towards
the growth of markets that are not overwhelmingly dominated by just a few cultural
conglomerates. let us regulate towards giving audiences, buyers and the public the
chance to choose from a plethora of different content, without having their attention
directed, almost inevitably, towards a few stars.
a level playing fieldit is not an exaggeration to say that this is a difficult task. my objective is to completely
redesign cultural market relations. This goes far beyond merely critiquing the neoliberal
distortion of our cultural landscape. The task is difficult because we have to imagine the
conditions under which a level playing field might emerge. The task is difficult because
it is not easy to imagine how markets might develop during the implementation of
our proposals and the results of our analyses. The task is difficult because we have to
convince others that what we propose is feasible. nevertheless, i will try and give it my
all.
if we as citizens of a country want the market to be organized in such a way that it is
open to a wide diversity of cultural expression; if we as citizens insist that no party in the
market dominates the production, distribution and promotion of cultural expression;
and if we as citizens aspire that no one can call him or herself the ‘owner’ of cultural
expression, then we have to force our governments to commit to a cultural policy that
establishes these conditions. This also means that the free trade ideas in which the
WTo is fully immersed have to be revised. This should be part of our cultural policy.
in concrete terms, this calls for two simultaneous actions.