In an audacious statement last week, the French President announced an abrupt end to advertising on the five publicly funded channels, and has decided that the head of the channels should be apppointed by him.

The President stated that he wished to raise the quality of programming on French television and that the channels should 'cease to be a slave to audience figures'. To anyone who has sat through an evening of television in France, it would be difficult to argue with such a laudable objective.

An increase in the licence fee was clearly a tax too far for a politician like Sarkozy, who has opted to upset just about everyone by the hoops he seems now prepared to jump through in order to find alternative sources of funding.

Many commentators consider the plan is not adequately funded as the President is proposing to replace only the existing revenues earned from advertising. However, as the abolition of advertising will create about 3 additional hours of television a day, new programmes will need to be made, for which funding will be required.

The new dramas and documentaries he would like to see broadcast are also going to cost a great deal more to produce than the imported American soaps that regularly feature as the staple diet of most French TV channels.

The result is that there is likely to be a shortfall in cash, with the prospect that there will be some rationalisation of the public television channels. Many believe that this is the intent of the President, who considers that some rationalisaiton of the public channels is required. Most viewers would not miss a reduction in the number of public channels and some greater collaboration between them would be no bad thing.

Many are also concerned about the haste with which the plan is to be introduced. All advertising after 2000 hours each day is scheduled to end 1st January 2009, and will be totally phased out by 1st December 2011.

At the present time this appointment is made by the independent regulatory body for television and radio in France, the Conseil supérieur de l'audiovisuel (CSA).

The French newspaper Le Monde stated that, 'Contrary to the Italian President Silvio Berlusconi, Sarkozy does not have the means to buy the channels he dreams about. Instead, he has decided to take control of them.' This was an allusion to a comment President Sarkozy is alleged to have made to media journalists last year, when he stated his dream was to be Director of Programmes for a television channel.

However, few doubt that even now the CSA would make an appointment that did not meet with the approval of an incumbent President in power, so to a large extent Sarkozy may well be merely making formal and open a process that previously took place behind closed doors. Nevertheless, if the President was really interested in making the process more democratic he could have chosen to reinforce the powers of the CSA in the appointment process.

At the present time, the public television channels (France 2, 3, 4, 5 and 0) receive around €800 million in advertising revenues, a large proportion of which is inevitably going to transfer to the private television channels. Whilst the amount of advertising on these channels is controlled, the rates on the remaining channels are bound to increase.

Needless to say, there is a lot of water yet to pass under the bridge concerning these changes, including a new law that will need to be passed in Parliament. As has been amply demonstrated so far this year, President Sarkozy cannot necessarily be assured that he will get a majority of Parliamentarians behind him for his ideas. He can also expect protests from the employees on the television channels, who fear that there will be staffing cutbacks and a reduction in the independence of the public television service.

It may well be that the President will also face a legal challenge from the telecoms and internet companies to his proposal. They have already stated that they consider it unconstitutional, and that they will mount a legal challenge to it.

The head of the public television channels, Patrick de Carolis, has stated that the comments of the President were 'wrong, stupid and deeply unfair'. We can probably expect his replacement fairly soon!