Article
Radio on the Iberian
Peninsula: Autarky,
revolution and
convergence
the International
Communication Gazette
75(2) 205–224
ª The Author(s) 2013
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1748048512465557
gaz.sagepub.com
Luis Arboledas
Universidad de Granada, Spain
Montse Bonet
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
Abstract
This article aims to compare Portuguese and Spanish radio broadcasting systems from
the mid-1970s to the present, from a political economy approach. It analyses the
regulatory framework (communication policies) and the ownership structure. It explains
how a highly similar situation has been reached despite having stemmed from a situation
defined by different principles, when both political transitions began. To do so, this work
also analyses the role of deregulation and its globalising nature. The study focuses on
three key periods: the initial period in both transitions, the years following both
countries’ admission into the European Community and the start of the new century.
Keywords
Deregulation, history, Portugal, radio, Spain
Introduction
For decades, the entrenched dictatorships on the Iberian Peninsula built up their own
radio systems based on the coexistence of public and private broadcasters. Both systems
Corresponding author:
Luis Arboledas, Department of Library Sciences. Facultad de Comunicación y Documentación, Universidad de
Granada (UGR), Colegio Máximo. Campus de Cartuja, 18071 Granada, Spain.
Email: [email protected]
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
206
the International Communication Gazette 75(2)
constituted exceptions both to the European public monopolies of the period and to the
commercial/private model adopted in the United States.
Therefore, the so-called mixed model, which spread worldwide from the 1960s
onwards as a result of deregulatory processes, had already existed on the Iberian Peninsula for four decades, introduced by authoritarian governments, though muzzled by strict
censorship control and station ownership. The nationalisation of private broadcasters in
1975, which was decreed in the Portuguese transition’s most revolutionary period, interrupted the parallel lives that Spanish and Portuguese radio systems had led up until that
point. This nationalisation created a duopoly on the Portuguese radio dial, consisting of
public radio (Emissora Nacional, EN) and the network owned by the Catholic Church
(Rádio Renascença, RR). Meanwhile, in the Spanish transition towards democracy, the
initial measures taken were aimed at liberalising and breaking up – albeit temporarily –
the oligopoly which was the dictatorship’s legacy.
Unlike the increasingly globalised television market, radio is an essentially national
industry. This has not hindered it from also being included in the deregulatory processes
in the respective countries where this occurred. In the case of the Iberian Peninsula, an
incipient internationalisation can even be noted.
The demise of both dictatorships marked the beginning of separate processes, which
were defined by conflicting measures: nationalisation in Portugal, liberalisation – with
nuances – in Spain. However, four decades on, both systems display similar features that
have enabled them to become harmonised with European Community countries. They
share similarities that cannot be understood without an appreciation of the influence
of the deregulatory measures applied by successive governments independently of their
ideological principles.
Theoretical and methodological framework
The democratisation of communications media barely awakened interest in the academic
community despite the fact that free and independent media and freedom of expression
are basic conditions in any new democracy. Such a lack of interest is evident not just
among political science researchers looking at these transitions, but also in the communications sphere itself (O’Neil, 1997; Voltmer, 2008).
However, the gradual extension of the so-called ‘third wave of democratisation’ and
the wide repercussions felt by the publication of Comparing Media Systems (Hallin and
Mancini, 2004), which in just a few years has achieved the status of a ‘classic’, have
fuelled an increasingly heated debate on relations between the communications media
and political systems, paying particular attention to a large number of the new democracies (Christians et al., 2009; Curran et al., 2009; Dobek-Ostrowska and Glowacki,
2008; Gunther and Mughan, 2000; Haniztsch, 2008; Nord, 2008; Nordenstreng, 2010;
Price et al., 2002; Terzis, 2008; Voltmer, 2006, 2008).
From the political science perspective, Spain and Portugal tend to be classified in a
unit of analysis that includes other countries such as Italy and Greece, one which is
dubbed Southern European or Mediterranean (Eisenstadt and Roniger, 1984; Sotiropoulos, 2004). In the opening years of the 21st century, this tradition has extended into the
communications field (Aguado et al., 2009; Arboledas, 2010; Hallin and Mancini, 2004;
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
Arboledas and Bonet
207
Hallin and Papathanassopoulos, 2002; Magallón Rosa et al., 2010; Magnan, 2001;
Papatheodorou and Machin, 2003).
Moreover, the processes of deregulation and media concentration have inspired a prolific amount of literature, especially from the critical approach of the political economy
of communication, the importance of which has been increasing at the same rapid pace as
did the political and economic debate on the Information Society (Fernández Quijada,
2007). Specifically, in the case of Portugal, some of the writers who have looked at these
processes are Silva (2004), Sousa (1994) and Traquina (1995). In Spain, Bustamante
(2002), Bustamante and Zallo (1988), Dı́az-Nosty (1989), Jones (2007), Miguel
(1993), Sánchez Tabernero (1993) and Zallo (1992) have all published studies, while
Moreno Domı́nguez (2005) offers an analysis of concentration in both countries.
Research into media systems, political communications and political regimes shares a
common methodological framework: the comparative approach, conceived as a constitutive element in political and sociological analysis (Badie and Hermet, 1993; Kohn,
1987; Sartori and Morlino, 1994). It is no exaggeration to assert that in recent years the
comparative approach is increasingly used, though this has not generated unanimity in
terms of defining it. Spain and Portugal are specifically discussed in the aforesaid study
by Hallin and Mancini, which has served as the basis for a prolific intellectual discussion,
centred above all on their classification of countries into three system types. Years later,
Hallin and Mancini (2010) issued a reminder that such types were not intended as a template to be applied ad hoc, to be used as a classification system. Portugal and Spain are
included in the Polarised Pluralist model, characterised, among other details, by the
degree of politicisation of the media system, an aspect which Traquina questions in the
case of current-day Portugal, specifically in the preface of the Portuguese edition of Hallin and Mancini’s book.
In addition to the intellectual polemic generated by the more or less automatic application of some typologies, the comparative approach also entails certain problems of
limitation. As Blumler, McLeod and Rosengren ably pointed out, comparative research
could be considered the field of communications whose border is ‘extended and extendible’ (Blumler et al., 1992: 3), especially, in their opinion, in terms of a state (such as in
the early 1990s) that is still in its exploratory phase. According to these writers, such
research can make three basic kinds of contribution towards knowledge. It can: make
it broader, richer or permanently question it; overcome limitations of time and space; and
finally, enable it to explore the consequences of the differences within how communications at a macro-social level are organised.
The question they attempted to answer at that time is the same one we might pose
today: what is comparative research and what is it not? Blumler et al. (1992) believe that
comparison exists when two or more geographically or historically defined media systems are analysed, going beyond mere description since we are trying to understand how
the systematic context has modelled the phenomenon under analysis, not just its spatial
aspect but also its temporal one.
In regard to types of comparative research, Kohn’s typology on cross-national
research (1989) may prove useful, even if his use of the nation as a basis for classification
was qualified by Blumler et al. (1992) and questioned by Livingstone (2003). Kohn
defined four types of cross-national research: nation as an object of study, nation as a
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
208
the International Communication Gazette 75(2)
context for study, nation as a unit of analysis and nation as a component of a larger international or transnational system. One of the main doubts raised by Blumler et al., and by
Livingstone, was precisely that the only unit that can be compared is the nation.
This present work falls within this theoretical and methodological context, with the
principal objective of analysing the evolution of the radio broadcasting system in Spain
and in Portugal, from the end of the dictatorship to the present, to verify their current
similarities – which enables them even to share media groups – in spite of having
stemmed from a situation defined by conflicting principles. To do so, we should also analyse the role of deregulation in this process and attempt to answer the question of whether
the structure of the radio broadcasting system has achieved a certain similarity in the two
countries in spite of the opposite nature that was evident when both transition processes
began, precisely due to the globalising nature of deregulation. For this, we begin by
defining two essential dichotomies: public/private and concentration/pluralism; that is,
analysing the regulatory framework (communications policies) and the ownership structure, two dimensions which Nordenstreng (2010) considers essential to explain current
media systems. On the temporal aspect, this study centres on the evolution of the radio
industry on the Iberian Peninsula from the fall of the dictatorships onwards. It aims to
compare how a highly similar situation has been reached despite the fact that in Portugal
private radio stations were nationalised while in Spain, from the very beginning, the principle of ratification with other European countries was sought. This study focuses on
three key periods: the initial period in both transitions, the years following both countries’ admission into the European Community and the start of the new century. Spain
and Portugal share their geography, the Iberian Peninsula, yet they have ignored each
other for decades. However, it is obvious that they have similar historical contexts. Their
separate transitional processes towards democracy also fed into each other in such a way
that they were seen as the two sides of the same coin (Lemus López, 2001; Sánchez
Cervelló, 1995).
Globalising deregulation and European ratification
The deregulation phenomenon is related to the neoliberal strategy aimed at overcoming
the economic collapse that buffeted the capitalist system in the 1970s. In the communications sphere, deregulation was nothing more than an adaptation of the old doctrine of
the free flow of information promoted by the United States to ensure market dominance,
in this case the international market of cultural industries (Arboledas, 2009a). As Miège
(1990) defined it, this consisted of the progressive implementation of a capitalist logic
through the media production model, emphasising profits and sales, a typically
market-based focus that ignored the social aspect of the communications media.
In Europe, deregulation occurred in the context of the fall of the public monopolies
and an increased private-sector presence. Deregulation in this setting automatically
translated into a distancing of the role of the state (Musso and Pineau, 1991). Regional,
cultural and linguistic particularities ensure that no single deregulatory model predominates on the old continent. What became clear in the final quarter of last century was that
the communications sector, especially the audiovisual industry, was a growth sector,
highly attractive to private capital. So it was unsurprising that it was that same private
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
Arboledas and Bonet
209
capital that demanded liberalisation, to guarantee its investments. This finally filtered
into the audiovisual arena.
From the 1970s onward, the sector became increasingly significant within the media
system. Yet no repercussions were felt in the radio industry; rather, on the contrary, the
starring role of television caused interest – and investments – to turn towards image.
Radio practically disappeared from the public debate, which focused on the sector’s progressive economic importance, the redefinition of the cultural industry and the new phenomena of internationalisation, concentration and privatisation. Throughout this process,
radio was once again relegated to a secondary position in comparison to television’s
magnetism (Arboledas, 2009a).
On another front, yet in an unstoppable process of convergence between audiovisual
technology and the construction of the information society, liberalisation began in the
telecommunications sector in 1987 (Green Paper on the Development of the Common
Market for Telecommunications Services and Equipment).
The pioneers of deregulation in Europe were Italy and France. Italy started in the
1970s of the previous century, but this was deregulation based on the absence of legislation, the opposite to France, which initiated its deregulation in the 1980s, based on the
promulgation of new laws with each ideological change of government. With an end to
its programming monopoly (1982) and broadcasting monopoly (1986), France was preparing the ground, and in the same year, 1986, it privatised the public television channel
(TF1), becoming the first European state to apply this measure (Musso and Pineau,
1991). So during the same years in which Spain and Portugal were beginning their journey towards democracy, liberalising currents had already begun to blow strongly; that is,
both countries were entering the democratic game as capitalism was manoeuvring it into
a serious checkmate situation.
Analysis of the evolution of radio sectors
The legacy of the dictatorships: Autarky. For decades the Iberian Peninsula suffered under
two political regimes that were in stark contrast to Western democracies and to the Eastern Communist bloc; two dictatorships which were forged in the heat of fascism and
Nazism, and strongly impregnated by their leaders’ character to the extreme degree of
becoming identified with their names: Salazarism in Portugal (1926–1974) and Francoism in Spain (1939–1975).
Within the specific sphere of radio broadcasting, both countries implemented a highly
similar system of operation, which also constituted an anomaly for decades. It was based
on the coexistence of public and private broadcasters and may be considered the forerunner of the so-called mixed model, which began to spread across Europe from the 1970s
onward.
This system displayed three features which distinguished it from the current mixed
model: (1) radio was conceived as a propaganda tool; (2) political power exercised a
strict control through censorship and station ownership; (3) the Catholic Church, ally and
ideological bastion of both dictatorships, had its own stations.
Both dictatorships awarded ownership of the private stations to persons of proven loyalty. In Portugal, the main private network, Rádio Clube Português, was fostered by a
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
210
the International Communication Gazette 75(2)
military professional who was sympathetic to Salazarism and supported Franco’s troops
right from the start of the Spanish Civil War. In Spain, the new regime instituted a harsh
political purging process after the conflict, entrusting the private radio stations to families who had fought on Franco’s side. The result was the separate establishment of oligopolies consisting of public radio stations: those owned by the Catholic Church and
private stations belonging to figures who were closely linked to both dictatorships. Both
regimes made intensive use of radio as a propaganda tool (Cristo, 2001; Timoteo Álvarez
et al., 1989). Private radio stations were conceived not so much as businesses but rather
as tools for obtaining political influence (Bonet and Arboledas, 2011).
During the four decades of Salazarism, the legal framework was underpinned by a
single piece of legislation, the law on radio of 1930 (Decree-Law 17 899), complemented
by the creation of the Emissora Nacional in 1934 (Decree-Law 22 783) and by authorising Rádio Clube Português to broadcast commercials in 1936 (Matos Maia, 2009). In
Spain, in contrast, contrary to what might have initially been expected, Francoism did
not repeal any of the previous legislation, but simply announced new laws, especially
in reference to content, while the legislation concerning broadcasters and their characteristics was amended on the basis of laws that were already in existence. Therefore, there
was no law fully covering the radio medium. On the contrary, it gradually became regulated through the superposition of unconnected legislation as a result of the balancing act
that General Franco managed among his support groups (Bonet, 2012; Franquet, 1988;
Timoteo Álvarez et al., 1989). Another difference concerned how public broadcasters
were financed, which was through a canon in Portugal, but in Spain, was through the
budget and via advertising. Private broadcasters in both countries were sustained by
income from advertising.
Both countries put an autarkic model into practice, applied to all spheres of everyday
life, media systems included, and that was abandoned only during the last years of both
dictatorships.
The transitions: Revolution versus continuism
The transitions in the Iberian Peninsula followed different paths. In Portugal, the dictatorship was overthrown in April 1974 by a military coup followed by a period of revolution. In Spain, General Franco died in November 1975 and the transition occurred
through reforms – agreed upon with the democratic opposition – which were controlled
throughout by the heirs of Francoism (Linz, 1996).
These conflicting models had effects in all spheres, including radio. In Portugal, the
laws passed by the dictatorship were repealed and the repressive apparatus of Salazarism
was dismantled in the days following the coup. The 1975 law on the press (Decree-Law
85-C/75), and the Constitution, passed in 1976, guaranteed freedom of expression and
media pluralism. However, in Spain, the law reform process advanced grudgingly away
from Francoism to the point that private channels could not broadcast their own news
programmes until after the first legislative elections in June 1977. Civil freedoms were
not fully guaranteed until the passing of the Constitution in 1978.
In the case of Portugal, during the most revolutionary period (1975–1976), the Portuguese military governments decreed nationalisation of strategic sectors, such as banks or
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
Arboledas and Bonet
211
energy and transport companies. This package included the private radio stations –
except for the Catholic Church’s network and a couple of stations with limited
influence – along with a large proportion of the press with nationwide circulation
(Mesquita, 1994).
In Spain, five years after Franco’s death, in 1980, the Radio and Television Statute
(Ley 4/1980) was passed, which reordered the four public networks in existence under
Franco into two nationwide networks, and completed two previous decrees – published
in 1978 and 1979 – through which the mixed model inherited from the dictatorship had
been ratified, the concessions granted to the owners under Franco had been maintained
and the number of private stations was increased by granting 300 new FM licences
(Bonet and Arboledas, 2011).
Portuguese nationalisation generated a duopoly made up of the Church’s network,
Rádio Renascença, and the new public radio, Radiodifusão Portuguesa (RDP). Spanish
reforms, on the other hand, enabled new voices to appear on the dial, which broke the
oligopoly inherited from Francoism, albeit only temporarily. New networks such as
Radio 80 and Antena 3 came into existence, and the so-called Rueda de Emisoras Rato
and other small, provincial or regional networks were extended. In a very short time,
Radio 80 and Antena 3 merged and the national networks began taking over the smaller
ones (Bonet, 1995).
During the same years when countries such as Italy or France began to break up their
audiovisual monopolies, following a strategy of deregulation (Musso and Pineau, 1991),
the Portuguese revolutionary governments began the inverse process: they nationalised
the most significant communications media within their proposal to build a ‘People’s
democracy’. However, from 1976 onwards, some of the ‘revolutionary conquests’ began
to be dismantled and Socialism was locked in a bottom drawer (Braga da Cruz, 1998).
Yet successive governments – Socialist and Conservative – maintained the nationalised
newspapers and broadcasters up until the 1990s because, as Sousa (1999) states, it was a
means of ensuring that the nationalised media were favourable to whoever held power.
The Spanish transition, in contrast, was fuelled by the urge to become ratified with
Europe. This was an idea shared by both the heirs of Francoism and the democratic opposition, which had spread among the political elite even before the dictator had died (Gallego, 2008). Successive Spanish governments – Francoist, reformist and social-democrat
– were inspired by neoliberal ideals (Etxezarreta, 1991), which accentuated the ratification process and facilitated audiovisual deregulation.
In both countries, journalistic enterprises were conceived, above all, as tools for
obtaining political influence. In 1960s Portugal, Prime Minister Caetano had encouraged
ownership of the press by large economic groups to ensure Portugal’s property fell into
‘safe hands’. The revolutionary governments approved the nationalisation of these
groups in order to place the main national newspapers under their control. The nationalisation of the press was never explained or justified (Mesquita, 1994), but it can be read
as further evidence of that instrumental concept so entrenched among the political elite,
which justified postponing liberalisation as long as possible (Paquete de Oliveira, 1992).
The communications media were at the heart of the struggle for power after the fall of the
dictatorship (Agee and Traquina, 1984) and such battles were reflected in the management of the nationalised media itself (Figueira, 2007).
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
212
the International Communication Gazette 75(2)
Figure 1. Timeline: the evolution of radio industry in Spain and Portugal.
Meanwhile in Spain, a liberalisation process began which culminated in the privatisation of the Francoist press and in the increase of the number of private radio networks.
The auctioning of state newspapers was justified, for example, by the fact that no publicly owned press existed in the countries of the European milieu into which Spain sought
to become assimilated (Cebrián, 1997). This selling-off process enabled the creation of
new journalistic enterprises within a crisis context and a thorough reconversion of the
sector. So the auctioning of radio licences signified an opportunity to widen its economic
activities. Entry of the printed press into the radio sector was the first inkling of the large
multimedia groups which would arise in the 1990s, ensuring definitive European ratification. Expansion towards the audiovisual sphere was begun in the radio sector, not
because the radio medium had any special strategic value beyond the fact that it was the
most consolidated audiovisual medium and already had a strong, private-sector presence,
but for the simple reason that at that time private television in Spain had still not been
legalised (Bonet, 1995). After having privatised ownership, Spanish governments took
recourse to diverse formulas to ensure they held indirect control over such media (Quintana Paz, 2007).
Portugal and Spain after European integration and deregulation
A decade after the fall of their dictatorships, Spain and Portugal became full members of
the European Community; their years of isolation ended and the process of political and
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
Arboledas and Bonet
213
economic change was reinforced in order to adapt it to the Community framework. Both
countries introduced new laws that affected radio. In Portugal, the new law meant full
regulation of the medium; in Spain, the subsidiary nature of radio was maintained while
it was regulated by a framework telecommunications law.
After European integration, liberalisation of the mass media was imposed as an inevitable circumstance in Portugal up to the point where Cavaco Silva’s government (the
centre-right PSD, or Social Democrat Party) realised that it had to introduce liberalising
reforms in order to be seen to be a true member of Europe (Sousa, 1999). For Spain, European integration meant a further commitment to those neoliberal policies, which had
been in application for some time so as to achieve ratification with surrounding countries. From that point onward, both countries had to adapt their national legislation to
Community laws, which would become a regulatory framework of reference. Such laws
are cited by European organisations when any of their members attempt to legislate without taking them into account, as was shown in the case of the new media laws (CDT,
2011) passed in Hungary which prompted intervention by the European Commission
(Kroes, 2011).
In 1987, for the first time in Portuguese democracy, the legislative elections returned
a government holding an absolute majority. Cavaco Silva initiated a policy of a neoliberal slant which introduced the most significant changes into the media system since the
revolutionary period (Sousa, 1999). An agreement with the Socialists enabled the Constitution to be reformed and the final vestiges of the revolutionary period to be abolished;
former nationalisations became privatisations through legislative changes influenced by
European Community law and in a context of economic growth in which European integration had an accelerating effect (Paquete de Oliveira, 1992).
Liberalisation began in the radio sector. In 1988, a new radio law was passed which
established that the activity of radio broadcasting could be performed by public and private entities by licence, safeguarding the entitlements acquired by the operators already
in existence. Furthermore, public radio could award the operation of any frequency
through a process of public tender. In contrast to Spain, where a separation was always
maintained between public and private networks, the 1988 reform enabled the Portuguese public network to award the operation of any of its own stations by public tender.
The new law maintained the two traditional operators – the state and the Catholic
Church – as the only national networks and the extension of licences was for regional
or local broadcasters.
The law was named for local radio precisely because it aimed to provide an answer to
the pirate radio movement, which had taken off strongly in the 1980s. The result was the
closure of many of these in a process of adaptation to the national market. So commercial
values ended up predominating in organisational or product terms (Cordeiro, 2003).
The protection afforded by the 1988 Law on Radio meant that over 300 licences were
granted to local private broadcasters. Furthermore, two licences were granted to private
broadcasters to operate at a regional level: Lusomundo, and the editorial group of the
newspaper Correio da Manhã, owned by Carlos Barbosa. On the other hand, the privatisation of Rádio Comercial was negotiated. This broadcaster had been created in the late
1970s to attract a younger audience and compete with Rádio Renascença. The public station was sold to Barbosa’s group. In a controversial process, Lusomundo also snapped up
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
214
the International Communication Gazette 75(2)
Figure 2. Public radio from the Spanish Civil War to democracy.
Source: Bonet and Arboledas (2011).
Red de Emisoras del Movimiento, REM: the ultra right-wing party Falange.
Cadena de Emisoras Sindicales, CES: the official trade unions.
Cadena Azul de Radiodifusión, CAR : the youth indoctrination organisations.
two newspapers that were privatised (Sousa, 1999), laying bare the ties between the
media group and Cavaco Silva’s government. Liberalisation was completed with the
granting of private television channels to the former prime minister of the PSD, Pinto
Balsemão, and to the Catholic Church.
The Spanish government – controlled by the Spanish Socialist Party, the PSOE, of a
social-democrat stance – introduced a new piece of legislation into the telecommunications sector, including radio and television, in late 1987 (Law 31/1987). In the radio
industry, the coexistence of public and private broadcasters was ratified, as was the formula of obtaining licences by government grant and the extension to the ownership limits of such grants (only in the case of the private broadcasters). After the 1987 reform,
private Spanish radio broadcasters could hold two FM licences in the same area of (local)
coverage, an extension that enabled them to ‘legalise’ the first mergers between commercial networks, auguring future moves towards concentration. Shortly afterwards, in
1989, the government itself approved the integration of both public networks into one,
which created RNE (Radio Nacional de España, National Spanish Radio), an entity that
controlled five different stations, some partially financed through advertising. Figure 2
gives an overview of the development of public radio since the Civil War to this period.
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
Arboledas and Bonet
215
Parallel to this, regulation was imposed on municipal broadcasters – a phenomenon
that had spread throughout national territory under the auspices of movements for freedom of expression that emerged in the dictatorship’s dying days. These broadcasters
were able to seek finance through both public funding and advertising, a model that was
criticised by private operators, alleging disloyal competition. In contrast, non-profit or
community broadcasters were not regulated and were able to continue, as they still
do, existing outside the legal framework.
Within the liberalisation process of the media system, the Spanish government agreed
to expand the private sector with 350 new licences, the adjudication process for which
was highly criticised because of the favouritism shown by the government towards politically like-minded groups and the attempt to build a national network linked to the
PSOE. This operation was destined to fail, but corroborated the generalised existence
of political clientelism, which had raised its head in previous tenders (Arboledas,
2009a; Bonet and Arboledas, 2011). The changes to the media system were completed
in 1989 through the granting of three private television channels. These concessions
were also considered highly controversial due to the favouritism of the PSOE towards
politically sympathetic groups.
The privatisations, the breaking up of the public television monopolies and the extension of private radio in both countries should be viewed, as we have seen, within the
deregulation processes inspired by neoliberalism. As had occurred in other European
states, this did not constitute simply a progressive merchandisation of the audiovisual
media, but a transformation of the system regulated by the public – and political – monopoly into another ruled by the market and business groups (see Table 1). In analysing this
process in Italy and France, Musso and Pineau (1991) speak of ‘savage deregulation’ and
‘controlled deregulation’ while Traquina (1995) situates the Portuguese liberalisation
process among the cases of ‘savage deregulation’, mainly because of how the cultural
dimension of the media was ignored. This deregulation process would facilitate moves
towards concentration into a few multimedia groups and facilitate the process of
approach to the two radio systems studied here.
Since the first measures adopted, proposals by both countries’ respective governments to control the privatised media or new companies created under the auspices of
liberalisation can be seen. Sousa (1994, 1999), for example, sustains that Cavaco Silva’s
governments, confronted with the inevitable media liberalisation, decided that the
possible damage could be minimised if the principal media remained in ‘safe’ hands,
as Caetano had done years before. In the case of Spain, the heirs of Francoism rewarded
sympathetic journalistic enterprises and punished hostile ones (Quintana Paz, 2007) –
practices of favouritism towards like-minded enterprises that PSOE governments maintained over the following decade (Hallin and Papathanassopoulos, 2002).
Concentration and multimedia groups: Convergence. Media systems on the Iberian Peninsula
launched into a new era from the 1990s onwards thanks to the confluence of diverse factors such as the economic growth derived from European integration and the consequent
increase in advertising investment, the start-up of private television, the emergence of
new agents, particularly telecommunications companies, and an international context
ruled by globalisation, concentration and market dominance.
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
216
the International Communication Gazette 75(2)
Table 1. Basic structure of the Spanish and Portuguese radio broadcasting sector.
Coverage Public
Private
Spain
National Spain
PRISA Radio: SER, 40 Principales,
Grupo RNE (Radio Nacional, Radio
Máxima, Radio 80, Radiolé, Cadena
Clásica, Radio 3, Radio 5 Todo Noticias)
Dial, Ona FM
Has not accepted advertising since 1993
COPE: COPE, Cadena 100, Rock&Gol
Portugal
Grupo RDP (Antena 1, Antena 2, Antena 3) Onda Cero Radio (OCR): OCR,
Europa FM, Onda Melodı́a
Only accepted advertising on its Rádio
ABC-Punto Radio
Comercial station, from the date of creation
Kiss FM
in 1979 until privatization in 1993
Radio Marca (the one with least
coverage)
Portugal
Grupo Renascença: Rádio Renascença,
RFM, Mega FM, Rádio Sim
Rádio Comercial
Spain
Regional Spain
For instance RAC1 and RAC105
Ràdio 4 (part of Grupo RNE, only in
(Grupo Godó), Radio Voz (Grupo La
Catalonia and in Catalan)
Voz de Galicia).
Regional radio stations in 13 of Spain’s
Portugal
17 autonomous communities
TSF (Controliveste) or M80 (Media
Regional radio stations accept advertising
Capital)
and receive public subsidies
Portugal
Grupo RDP: RDP Madeira – Antena 1,
RDP Madeira – Antena 3, RDP
Açores – Antena 1
Spain
Local
Spain
There are fewer and fewer, and they
More than 1200 frequencies
often form part of a small local
They accept advertising and receive public
network or have programming
subsidies
agreements with other radio stations
Portugal
or networks
-----------Portugal
Almost 350 frequencies
Source: Compiled by authors.
The path towards multimedia groups is similar in both countries. In Portugal, groups
began forming a decade later with the convergence of the privatisation of press and radio
nationalised during the revolution, the distribution of new radio licences and the authorisation of two private television channels. In Spain this route began in the early 1980s
when journalistic enterprises entered the radio business as a link towards private television. In fact, the Portuguese and Spanish routes in terms of the formation of so-called
multimedia groups followed what were the majority trends in Europe: the formation
of groups based on the print business (newspapers, book publishing), deploying towards
the audiovisual media as the regulations progressively allowed such an expansion.
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
Arboledas and Bonet
217
Chapignac (1989) proposed the concept ‘trade’ (métier) as a methodological contribution that would enable analysis of the diversification processes (as well as making the
most of synergies) since, based on the study of the original trade, it can be better understood how certain new arrivals in the field, who did not formerly belong to communications, could diversify towards it. The ‘métier’ is not a product but the know-how, skills
and competences necessary to produce it.
In Portugal, continuous selling-off operations were taking place in the radio industry
in a context of growing economic expansion. The communications market was seeking
new national investors and international groups favoured by European integration and
globalisation processes (Paquete de Oliveira, 1992). So Rádio Comercial was purchased
by Presslivre after being privatised by the government. It was then sold to Soci and
finally ended up in the hands of Media Capital Rádio (MCR). A similar fate awaited TSF,
which had originated as a journalists’ cooperative. Years later, it became the property of
Lusomundo, Portugal Telecom and, finally, Controlinveste. The sale of frequencies constitutes a frequent phenomenon, as Mesquita (1994) has shown, brief years after the regularisation of local broadcasting. This continued to occur a decade later (Santos, 2005).
In general terms, Cordeiro (2003) distinguishes three elements in the Portuguese radio
scenario at the beginning of the 21st century: (1) a number of small operators with a
relatively unprofessional set-up and weak content; (2) private operators that are aiming
to expand their audiences; and (3) public radio, with better resources than its private
competition, but which does not follow through into greater diversity, or higher quality.
This is a portrait of the Portuguese radio scenario that closely resembles Spain’s.
Yet Santos (2005) emphasises the existence of four groups of national dimension and
renown. Three are private: Grupo Renascença, Media Capital Rádio and TSF; the fourth
is the public radio, RDP. Likewise, private radio at a national level has ended up
becoming integrated into multimedia groups. So the Catholic Church remains a highly
significant agent in the media system thanks to its radio networks and local or regional
newspapers. Media Capital Rádio has managed to position itself among the foremost
multimedia groups with a radio presence, yet also in audiovisual production, the
distribution of music, plus film and the Internet. Lastly, TSF forms part of Controlinveste, with interests in the press, radio, television and audiovisual sports rights.
Media Capital epitomises Luso-Hispanic economic interrelationships that have
developed since European integration. After different changes to its share structure, the
Spanish group PRISA took control in 2005 and continued its expansionist policy, especially in the radio sector. Since its beginnings, Media Capital has identified radio as a
priority objective (Silva, 2004) and PRISA has played on this profile even more, if that
is possible, to which it is not hostile as can be seen from its Spanish history, where it
possesses the main radio group, the SER network. Spanish executives have even
transferred one of their successful formulas to Portugal: M-80, a specialised station
devoted to music. PRISA manages hundreds of broadcasters in America, from California
to Chile, in an unusual strategy among large groups because radio is the most ‘national’
of all media – due to economic and linguistic factors, among others. Furthermore,
PRISA’s experience in Portugal goes against the current according to which small states
with exclusive languages are less vulnerable to the entry of foreign groups (Puppis,
2009).
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
218
the International Communication Gazette 75(2)
Meanwhile, in Spain the 350 new licences granted in 1989 and the control of Antena 3
Radio by the PRISA group from 1992 onwards unleashed a reordering of the Spanish radio
map that redeployed around three, large, privately owned nuclei – COPE (Cadena de
Ondas Populares Españolas), ONCE (Onda Cero Radio) and SER (Sociedad Española
de Radioidifusión) –along with national public radio (RNE), which had been financed
without commercials since 1993. The concept that the Spanish advertising market has
capacity for only three large radio groups became entrenched during that period (Dı́azNosty, 1994). Later failures of such projects as Radio Voz (regional) or Punto Radio (now
ABC-Punto Radio, national) seem to support the notion of a narrow radio market. The data
that exemplify this are the following: from 1978 to 1994 the Spanish private sector went
from 119 to 747 FM frequencies. That year, 1994, the SER, COPE and Onda Cero networks controlled 79.77%. In terms of the 107 AM frequencies (a figure that did not waver
over the years), these three networks controlled 90.79% (Bonet, 1995).
Parallel to this, the radio industry was merged into the large multimedia groups that
were consolidated in Spain from 1990 onwards, after the advent of private television. So
the SER network formed part of the first Spanish group: PRISA; Onda Cero Radio
(ONCE) and television channel Telecinco formed the basis of the group created by a
non-profit entity controlled indirectly by the government – the National Organisation for
the Blind (ONCE) – in partnership with Silvio Berlusconi’s Italian conglomerate; lastly,
the Cadena de Ondas Populares (COPE), controlled by the Catholic Church, was kept
independent, but its shares controlled by multimedia groups such as Vocento or Planeta.
In turn, public radio continued to grow through hundreds of municipal broadcasters plus
a dozen broadcasters at a regional level, promoted by the governments of the autonomous communities. Features that characterise Spanish public radio – whatever its territorial scope – are its progressive tendency towards commercialisation and the political
instrumentalisation at the service of the party in power (Bonet and Arboledas, 2011).
Neither of these countries has a specific law that regulates ownership of communications media or establishes safeguards for guaranteeing media pluralism. The latest
revision of Portugal’s Constitution establishes that the state ensures the freedom and
independence of the media, especially avoiding concentration through multiple or cross
shareholding. Furthermore, among the powers wielded by its Entidade Reguladora para a
Comunicação Social (ERC, Social Communications Regulatory Body) is that of ensuring the non-concentration of ownership in entities that participate in social communications activities for the purpose of safeguarding pluralism and diversity.
In 2009, the then president of the Republic, Cavaco Silva, vetoed a law passed by the
parliament (Decree 265/X) that sought to regulate concentration and pluralism in
the communications media. The president considered that no motive existed to justify
the ‘urgency’ of a law of that ‘nature and scope’ and, furthermore, he claimed that the
European Commission was in the process of defining ‘reliable criteria’ and ‘objective
indicators’ on pluralism (Público, 2009).
Nothing similar exists in Spain. The Constitution does not refer to corporate concentrations. Neither does any specific legislation exist to limit media conglomerates. Meanwhile the Consejo Estatal de Medios Audiovisuales (State Council on Audiovisual
Media), foreseen under the Ley General de Comunicación Audiovisual (LGCA, General
Law on Audiovisual Communications, Ley 7/2010), remains unformed. Its functions are
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
Arboledas and Bonet
219
to act as watchdog and guarantee pluralism, but it can only create reports in the cases of
concentration operations since the authorisation for such commercial agreements falls to
another body: the Comisión Nacional de la Competencia (National Competition Commission or CNC), related to all markets and sectors of the economy.
However, in the specific sphere of radio, both countries ensure certain limits on concentration. In Portugal, the latest radio law (Law 54/2010) establishes that no operator
may hold over 10% of the number of national licences. Nobody may operate half or over
half of the FM programmes authorised for that same area of coverage. Lastly, no operator
may hold more than 50% of the licences in the local sphere. In Spain, the LGCA (Law 7/
2010) establishes that no operator may control over 50% of the licences in a single area
of coverage and, in any case, the maximum is five licences. Furthermore, nobody may
control more than a third of licences with total or partial coverage over the entirety of
Spanish territory.
While the Portuguese government justified the new law on radio through the need to
ensure the transparency of and set restrictions on licence ownership, just one year earlier,
the ERC had published a report on local radio. Its conclusions recommended consolidation
of groups to achieve economies of scale and to develop strategies that were multiregional
(one shareholder with several local radios) or multimedia (press, radio, the Internet, advertising, etc.) as a means of diversifying risks and sharing costs (ERC, 2009).
In the professional and business spheres, it is considered that the regulations to preserve the specificity of local broadcasters and avoid concentration have a negative
impact on the dynamism and free initiative of the sector (Bonixe, 2010; Figueiredo
et al., 2003; Silva, 2004). The reality is that there is room for manoeuvre in terms of the
action of groups in the radio sector and that concentration processes are being permitted
despite the limits established by law (Silva, 2004). Meanwhile in Spain, it can be seen
that all political parties, regardless of their ideological principles, have favoured the large
networks through the granting of radio licences, and have applied extremely lax policies
when controlling concentration processes (Arboledas, 2009b).
Conclusions
Deregulation and European integration have been decisive in the convergence of the
radio industry on the Iberian Peninsula. Spain and Portugal have ended up sharing a
model characterised by market dominance, the redeployment of public radio and the
absence of specific regulations against concentration and in favour of pluralism.
Since the fall of the dictatorships, and from a very similar context (the autarky and
isolation period), two quite distinct phases are apparent. The first shows a clear divergence since the Portuguese revolutionary governments designed a duopoly formed by
the Catholic Church and public radio networks. Meanwhile, Spanish reformist governments ratified the regulatory framework inherited from Francoism and implemented liberalising measures with the aim of achieving ratification with Europe.
The second phase can be identified as starting from the accession of both countries to
the European Community and is defined by the accelerated approach of both radio models as both countries became fully integrated into the Community framework. Portuguese
governments privatised the nationalised media and reformed the regulatory framework
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
220
the International Communication Gazette 75(2)
to adjust it to the European model. In Spain, despite the temporary emergence of new
voices on the radio dial, the deregulatory process perpetuated the deep structure inherited
from Francoism, but with the formal changes needed to adapt it to the European context.
So, it can be affirmed that deregulation process had an effect of homogenisation, and
the influence of deregulation on the set-up of radio systems in Spain and Portugal has
been demonstrated, especially during the last 25 years. The final convergence towards
a model based on private ownership and market logic cannot be understood without
this process of reforms which, on the Iberian Peninsula, adopted its most radical formula:
so-called ‘savage deregulation’, specially in Portugal, among other reasons due to its
relinquishment of culture. Yet this savage deregulation has not affected the Catholic
Church’s market share, which has managed to maintain its space on the dial in both
countries.
The deregulation phenomenon is inseparable from the larger objective that the
democratic governments of both countries had set: an end to international isolation and
entry into European organisations. To achieve the status of a true European partner, Portuguese and Spanish leaders assumed that they need to ratify their media systems with
those prevailing in the other member states.
So joining the European Union meant accepting the liberalisation process in the
telecommunications sector. It also demanded that members plump wholeheartedly for
the political project of the information society which, though more strongly influencing
the television sector, finally incorporated another medium – radio – that the European
Union itself had labelled ‘local’.
As a consequence of the reform process, journalistic enterprises – conceived more as
tools for political influence than as businesses, poorly organised and of a family, singlemedium nature – evolved into professionalised multimedia groups, with foreign
shareholders, whose ultimate objective is profit. In both countries, private radio was
merged into large conglomerates, the origin of which tended to be the print media.
In the concentration processes seen in both countries, factors such as the lack of
anti-monopoly legislation, the international deregulation context and globalisation, as
well as the policies implemented by governments have all been influential, which have
favoured or even encouraged concentration. This context has furthermore facilitated the
entry of Spanish groups into Portuguese companies.
This is part of a wider phenomenon that is also related to European integration. Since
then, a kind of convergence has been noted between both countries that manifests itself,
for example, in an accelerated regulatory homogenisation and in growing intensification
of reciprocal economic relations (López Martı́nez, 2003). All of this is reflected in the
media system and even in the radio industry, one of the most reactionary to internationalisation. Furthermore, joint accession to the European Economic Community (EEC)
has encouraged new Luso-Hispanic relations, focused on trust and cooperation as
opposed to decades of suspicion (Fernández Sánchez, 2001).
In view of these conclusions, the door to future research remains open to explore whether
the same has occurred in other countries joining the European Union after abandoning
authoritarian regimes, such as Greece and, more recently, the countries of the former Communist bloc, countries which Hallin and Mancini have recently subjected to analysis in their
latest book as editors (Hallin and Mancini, 2012) and to verify whether deregulation and
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
Arboledas and Bonet
221
Community integration have also caused changes to their radio industries. The polemic
between Community authorities and the government of Hungary regarding its new media
laws shows that the European Union intervenes directly when a member state introduces any
regulation that is not in accordance with European legislation.
Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or
not-for-profit sectors.
References
Agee WK and Traquina N (1987) O Quarto Poder Frustrado – Os Meios de Comunicação Social
no Portugal Pós-Revoluciona´rio. Lisboa: Vega.
Aguado G, Sanmartı́ JM and Magallón Rosa R (2009) España, Francia, Italia y Portugal: cuatro
modelos diferenciados de prensa euromediterránea. Observatorio (OBS) 3(2): 63–84.
Arboledas L (2009a) La industria radiofónica en Andalucı´a: dependencia económica y control y
control polı´tico (1982–1998). Doctoral thesis, Facultad de Comunicación, Universidad de
Granada.
Arboledas L (2009b) Clientelismo y concentración en la radio española. Revista Latina de
Comunicación Social 64: 909–925.
Arboledas L (2010) Transición democrática y modelo comunicativo: la divergencia Ibérica.
Observatorio (OBS) 4(3): 143–167. Available at: obs.obercom.pt/index.php/obs/article/viewArticle/339.
Badie B and Hermet G (1993) Polı´tica comparada. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Blumler JG, McLeod JM and Rosengren KE (1992) An introduction to comparative communication research. In: Blumler JG, McLeod JM and Rosengren KE (eds) Comparatively Speaking:
Communication and Culture Across Space and Time. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp. 3–18.
Bonet M (1995) La radio española en el contexto de los grupos de comunicación. Evolución de la
industria radiofónica española 1924–1994. Doctoral thesis, Facultat de Ciències de la
Comunicació, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra.
Bonet M (2012) Spanish radio: When digitalization meets an analog business model. In: Hendricks
JA (ed.) The Palgrave Handbook of Global Radio. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.
17–192.
Bonet M and Arboledas L (2011) The European exception: Historical evolution of Spanish radio as
a cultural industry. Media International Australia, incorporating Culture and Policy Journal
141: 38–48.
Bonixe L (2010) Legalizaçao, concentraçao e multimédia: Os desafı́os da rádios locais Portuguesas. Rádio-Leituras 1: 187–202.
Braga da Cruz M (1998) Los estados democráticos (1974/1975–1998). Portugal. In: de la Torre
Gómez H (ed.) España y Portugal (s. IX-XX). Madrid: Editorial Sı́ntesis, pp. 304–318.
Bustamante E (corded.) (2002) Comunicación y cultura en la era digital. Industrias, mercados y
diversidad en España. Barcelona: Gedisa.
Bustamante E and Zallo R (eds) (1988) Las industrias culturales en España: grupos multimedia y
transnacionales. Madrid: Akal.
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
222
the International Communication Gazette 75(2)
CDT (Centre for Democracy and Technology) (2011) Legal analysis of the 2010 Hungarian media
laws. Available at: www.cdt.org/files/CDT_Legal_analysis_of_the_Hungarian_Media_Laws_
020911-1.pdf.
Cebrián JL (1997) Cartas a un joven periodista. Barcelona: Ariel/Planeta.
Chapignac P (1989) Diversification dans la communication: existe-t-il une régle du jeu?
Médiaspouvoirs 15: 152–160.
Christians C, Glasser T McQuail D, et al. (2009) Normative Theories of the Media: Journalism in
Democratic Societies. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press. Available at: www.
press.uillinois.edu/books/catalog/76tgc9dc9780252034237.html.
Cordeiro P (2003) A rádio em Portugal: um pouco de história e perspectivas de evoluçao. Available at: www.bocc.ubi.pt.
Cristo D (2001) A rádio ao tempo de Salazar e Caetano: censura, propaganda e resitência. Observatorio (OBS) 4: 9–32.
Curran J, Iyengar S, Lund AB and Salovaara-Moring I (2009) Media system, public knowledge
and democracy. European Journal of Communication 24(1): 5–26.
Dı́az-Nosty B (1989) La proyección multimedia en España. In: Timoteo Álvarez J, et al. (eds)
Historia de los medios de comunicación en España. Madrid: Ariel Comunicación, pp. 408–418.
Dı́az-Nosty B (1994) Radio: crisis relativa del negocio, no del medio. In: Comunicación Social
1994/Tendencias. Informes anuales de Fundesco. Madrid: Fundesco, pp. 9–112.
Dobek-Ostrowska B and Glowacki M (eds) (2008) Comparing Media Systems in Central Europe:
Between Commercialization and Politicization. Wroclaw: Wydawnictwo, Uniwersytetu
Wroclawskiego.
Eisenstadt SN and Roniger L (1984) Patrons, Clients and Friends. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
ERC (Entidade Reguladora para a Comunicaçao Social) (2009) Caracterizaçao do sector da
radiodifusao local. Lisboa: ERC. Available at: www.erc.pt/pt/estudos-e-publicacoes/
publicacoes.
Etxezarreta M (ed.) (1991) La reestructuración del capitalismo en España, 1970–1990. Barcelona:
Icaria.
Fernández Quijada D (2007) Industrias culturales en el entorno digital: una reformulación desde la
praxis comunicativa. Zer 22: 119–140.
Fernández Sánchez PA (2001) El papel de Portugal en el contexto internacional. Afers Internacionals 51: 150–170.
Figueira J (2007) Os jornais como actores polı´ticos. Coimbra: Minerva Coimbra.
Figueiredo A, Rui Cádima F and Martins Z (2003) Os media regionais em Portugal. In: Anuário
Internacional de Comunicaçao Lusófona 2003, pp. 77–90.
Franquet R (1988) La radio, un oligopolio en trasformación. In: Bustamante E and Zallo R (eds)
Las industrias culturales en España. Grupos multimedia y transnacionales. Madrid: Akal, pp.
77–107.
Gallego F (2008) El mito de la transición. Barcelona: Crı́tica.
Garitaonandı́a C (1988) La radio en España: 1923–1939. Bilbao: Siglo XXI.
Gunther R and Mughan A (eds) (2000) Democracy and the Media: A Comparative Perspective.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hallin DC and Mancini P (2004) Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
Arboledas and Bonet
223
Hallin D and Mancini P (2010) Comparing media systems: A response to critics. Media and
Journalismo 9(2): 55–69.
Hallin DC and Mancini P (eds) (2012) Comparing Media Systems Beyond the Western World.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hallin DC and Papathanassopoulos S (2002) Political clientelism and the media: Southern Europe
and Latin America in comparative perspective. Media, Culture and Society 24(2): 175–195.
Hanitzsch T (ed.) (2008) Comparing media systems reconsidered: Recent development and directions for future research (special issue). Journal of Global Mass Communication 1(3/4):
111–117.
Jones DE (2007) Grupos mediáticos y culturales en España. Zer 22: 183–214.
Kohn ML (1987) Cross-national research as an analytic strategy. American Sociological Review
52: 713–731.
Kohn ML (1989) Introduction. In: Kohn ML (ed.) Cross-National Research in Sociology.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp. 17–31.
Kroes N (2011) Hungary’s new media law. Brussels: European Parliament. Available at: europa.
eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference¼SPEECH/11/6.
Lemus López E (2001) En Hamelin: la transición española más allá de la frontera. Oviedo:
Septem.
Linz JJ (1996) La transición española en perspectiva comparada. In: Tusell J and Soto A (eds)
Historia de la transición. Madrid: Alianza Universidad, pp. 21–45.
Livingstone S (2003) On the challenges of cross-national comparative media research. European
Journal of Communication 18(4): 477–500.
López Martı́nez I (2003) Las relaciones comerciales entre España y Portugal en el contexto de la
integración europea. Doctoral thesis, Universidade da Coruña.
Magallón Rosa R, Aguado G and Sanmartı́ JM (2010) Press–state relations: A comparative
analysis of Euro-Mediterranean and British models. Arts and Social Sciences Journal 1:
1–16.
Magnan V (2001) Transitions démocratiques et télévision de service public. Parı́s: L’Harmattan.
Matos Maia J (2009) A Telefonia. Lisboa: Áncora editores.
Mesquita M (1994) Os meios de comunicação social. In: Reis A (ed.) Portugal 20 anos de democracia. Lisboa: Cı́rculo de Leitores, pp. 360–405.
Miège B (ed.) (1990) Médias et communication en Europe. Grenoble: PUG.
Miguel JC (1993) Los grupos multimedia. Estructura y estrategias en los medios europeos.
Barcelona: Bosch.
Moreno Domı́nguez JM (2005) La concentración de medios de comunicación en Españay
Portugal. Anales del V Encontro Latino de Economia Politica da Informação, Comunicação
e Cultura (Enlepicc) 5: 112–134.
Musso P and Pineau G (1991) El audiovisual entre el Estado y el mercado. Telos 27: 47–56.
Nord L (2008) Comparing Nordic media systems: North between West and East? Central
European Journal of Communication 1(1): 95–110.
Nordenstreng K (2010) Searching for the constituents of media systems. In: Panel IAMCR:
Comparative Global Media Research: Issues and Case Studies, ECREA conference in Hamburg, 14 October 2010. Available at: www.uta.fi/cmt/en/contact/staff/kaarlenordenstreng/publications.html.
O’Neil PH (eds) (1997) Post-Communism and the Media in Eastern Europe. London: Frank Cass.
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016
224
the International Communication Gazette 75(2)
Papatheodorou F and Machin D (2003) The umbilical cord that was never cut: The post-dictatorial
intimacy between the political elite and the mass media in Greece and Spain. European Journal
of Communication 18(1): 31–54.
Paquete de Oliveira JM (1992) A intregraçao Europeia e os meios de comunicaçao social. Análise
Social 118–119: 995–1024.
Price ME, Rozumilowicz B and Verhulst S (2002) Media Reform: Democratizing the Media,
Democratizing the State. London: Routledge.
Público (2009) Cavaco Silva veta lei do pluralismo e da não concentração dos meios de
comunicação. 2 March.
Puppis M (2009) Media regulation in small states. International Communication Gazette 71(1–2):
7–17.
Quintana Paz N (2007) Televisión y prensa durante la UCD. Madrid: Fragua.
Sánchez Cervelló J (1995) La revolución portuguesa y su influencia en la transición española
(1961–1976). Madrid: Nerea.
Sánchez Tabernero A (1993) Media Concentration in Europe: Industrial Needs and the Public
Interest. Manchester: The European Institute for the Media.
Santos R (2005) Rádio em Portugal: tendências e grupos de comunicaçao na actualidade.
Comunicaçao e Sociedade 7: 137–152.
Sartori G and Morlino L (eds) (1994) La comparación en las ciencias sociales. Madrid: Alianza.
Silva EC (2004) Os donos da notı´cia. Concentraçao da propiedade dos media. Porto: Porto
Editora.
Sotiropoulos DA (2004) Democratization, administrative reform and the state in Greece, Italy,
Portugal and Spain: Is there a ‘model’ of South European bureaucracy?. Available at:
eprints.lse.ac.uk/5682/1/Sotiropoulos17.pdf.
Sousa H (1994) Os media em Portugal: Novas formas de concentraçao. Intercom – Revista Brasileira de Comunicaçao 17(2): 50–65.
Sousa H (1999) The liberalisation of media and communications in Portugal. Available at: www.
bocc.ubi.pt/pag/_texto.php?html2¼sousa-helena-liberalisation.html.
Terzis G (ed.) (2008) European Media Governance: National and Regional Dimensions. Bristol:
Intellect.
Timoteo Álvarez J, et al. (eds) (1989) Historia de los medios de comunicación en España: periodismo, imagen y publicidad (1900–1990). Barcelona: Ariel.
Traquina N (1995) Portuguese television: The politics of savage deregulation. Media, Culture and
Society 22(2): 223–238.
Voltmer K (ed.) (2006) Mass Media and Political Communication in New Democracies. London:
Routledge.
Voltmer K (2008) Comparing media systems in new democracies: East meets South meets West.
Central European Journal of Communication 1(1): 23–40.
Zallo R (1992) El mercado de la cultura. Estructura económica y polı´tica de la comunicación.
Donostia: Tercera Prensa-Hirugarren Prentsa.
Downloaded from gaz.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 12, 2016