VZCZCXYZ0003
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHGP #0654/01 0920909
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 020909Z APR 07
FM AMEMBASSY SINGAPORE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 2784
INFO RUEAWJA/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHDC
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC

UNCLAS SINGAPORE 000654 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR AMBASSADOR GROSS 
STATE PASS USTR FOR DAUSTR JJENSEN 
JUSTICE FOR SCHEMTOB 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ECPS EINT ECON ETRD EINV SN
SUBJECT: SINGAPORE UPDATING MEDIA MARKET CONDUCT CODE 
 
¶1.  Singapore's Media Development Authority (MDA) plans to 
extend its regulatory reach beyond traditional broadcasting 
and print media to encompass new and emerging technologies 
that are redefining the wider info-communications sector. 
The proposed changes are part of MDA's first triennial 
review of the Code of Practice for Market Conduct in the 
Provision of Mass Media Services, which MDA began 
implementing in 2003 in an effort to liberalize the print 
and free-to-air broadcast market.  MDA is seeking public 
comments on draft revisions to the code.  Under 
consideration are amendments to address the growing 
convergence of media and telecommunications in applications 
such as Internet protocol television (IPTV) and to 
encourage more competition. 
 
¶2.  Among its new provisions, the code would expand the 
scope of MDA's regulation to cover the entire media 
industry, including broadcasting, film, print, and other 
sectors as determined by the Ministry of Information, 
Communications, and the Arts (MICA).  The existing code 
applies to only four distinct categories:  Free-to-Air TV, 
Pay-TV, radio, and newspaper publishing services. 
 
¶3.  Competition-related enhancements include prohibitions 
against media service providers "unreasonably" using an 
affiliate's relative market power in a media or non-media 
market to engage in practices such as predatory pricing. 
These provisions largely mirror those found in Singapore's 
2005 Competition Act, which does not cover sectors like 
media where separate (and sometimes less rigorous) 
competition regulation already exists.  Some industry 
representatives have expressed concerns that the expanded 
code will result in confusing, cross-sectoral overlaps with 
areas currently covered by the Competition Act or by 
another sector's code.  One law firm that advises the GOS 
on implementation of the Competition Act has downplayed 
this potential problem, arguing that the Competition Act 
only applies to areas not otherwise covered by specific, 
standalone competition regulation. 
 
¶4.  The revised code would also use a market-based rather 
than an entities-based approach to designate dominant and 
non-dominant media service providers.  MDA proposes a 
definition similar the Competition Act's that uses 60 
percent of the respective market share as the threshold for 
dominance.  Dominance could be established below this level 
if MDA determines that other relevant media market 
participants occupy a considerably weaker position.  Among 
their obligations, dominant firms would be required to 
provide advertising capacity to other mass media service 
companies based on non-discriminatory prices, terms, and 
conditions. 
 
¶5.  MDA is seeking public comments on the proposed 
revisions through May 7, 2007; it expects to begin 
implementation before the end of the year.  Relevant 
documents may be viewed on MDA's website at www.mda.gov.sg 
under "Policies and Regulations."  Comments should be 
submitted by post or email to: 
 
Ms. Ling Pek Ling 
Director (Media Policy) 
Media Development Authority 
140 Hill Street 
#04-01 MICA Building 
Singapore 179369 
Fax: 65-6336 5560 
Email: MDA_ROMC_Comments@mda.gov.sg 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶6.  Singapore began implementing the Competition Act in 
2005 as part of its obligations under our bilateral FTA. 
Although we agreed to initial carve-outs for sectors such 
as telecommunications and energy, in addition to media, 
Singapore has committed to eventually extending the Act to 
all parts of its economy.  Singapore's efforts to update 
the media industry's competition code and to align its 
provisions more closely with those in the Competition Act 
may constitute a step in the right direction.  However, we 
remain concerned that multiple regulators may issue 
conflicting decisions that would affect firms operating in 
different sectors (e.g., media and telecommunications).  We 
will monitor how well the GOS handles this challenge and 
continue to encourage it to adopt a single, uniform 
competition code sooner rather than later. 
FERGIN