Times of Malta has become the first newspaper to openly support Lovin Malta’s court action against TV propaganda, through an editorial which augurs that the historic move would trigger “long overdue” holistic reform in the broadcasting sector.

“A long-standing legal provision that, at least prima facie, appears to be in direct contrast with the spirit of the Constitution, is finally destined to be settled by the court,” today’s leading article states.

The article details how the Constitution demands the Broadcasting Authority ensure “due impartiality” in matters of political or industrial controversy and even specifies that this function “shall be without prejudice to such other functions and duties as may be conferred upon it by any law for the time being in force in Malta”.

The newspaper then explains how in 1991 Parliament introduced “a very specific and convenient caveat in this regard”.

Lovin Malta earlier this month gave formal notice of its intention to contest this section in the Broadcasting Act that allows the broadcasting watchdog to close a blind eye to TV stations owned by the political parties.

Times of Malta reminded its readers that in early 2004, Chief Justice Emeritus Joseph Said Pullicino, as chairman of the Broadcasting Authority at the time, had said it was “a pity that pluralism in Malta has amplified political polarisation.”

“TV stations owned by political parties were, and still are, considered to be propaganda machines. They still fail to understand that it is only in their interest to give a balanced and objective service to people,” he had said.

The newspaper also quotes the doctoral thesis of 2014 by the current Broadcasting Authority’s CEO Joanna Spiteri, who found there was “consensus that broadcasting regulations should be the same for all the broadcasting stations” and that in its present form, the regulatory system is not assisting in providing a fair and accurate news media service mainly because it is allowing the political stations to continue to produce news reporting which is very often economical with the truth.

Times of Malta concludes with this message: “A court decision on the matter will, therefore, be welcome, even more so if it sparks a thorough reform within both the Broadcasting Authority and Public Broadcasting Services. The composition and function of the broadcasting watchdog require urgent attention.”

“Partisan interests and influence continue to prevail when what the country needs and deserves is a regulator that is fit for purpose in a post-truth and fake-news world that increasingly lays stress on freedom of expression and hates censorship. That may be quite a challenge but the real tough nut to crack is PBS, which, rather than a balanced state broadcaster, retains the label of ‘its master’s voice’, the master being the political party in power.”

“There are regulatory but also practical issues affecting broadcasting. dissecting the problem, dealing with the different aspects and then adopting a holistic approach is long overdue. One hopes the court decision on the ‘exemption’ clause will set the ball rolling.”

Today’s newspaper also carries a cartoon by Sebastian Tanti Burlo which depicts One TV and Net TV finally agreeing on something: that Lovin Malta is fake news.