Proposed Online Broadcasting Rules Spark Debate Over Media Regulation

The Belize Broadcasting Authority’s proposed expansion of the country’s broadcasting laws to include certain online media services is generating debate over regulation, accountability and freedom of expression.  The issue was discussed during a public consultation held last week, where the BBA presented its proposed Broadcasting Bill and accompanying regulations. The Authority says the reforms are necessary because Belize’s existing framework was developed primarily for traditional radio and television, while news, entertainment and other programming are now increasingly delivered through streaming and online platforms.  The proposed legislation would establish a new category known as a “National Online Broadcaster” and create a framework for licensing and exemptions. The BBA insists the proposal is not intended to regulate the everyday use of Facebook, TikTok, YouTube or other platforms by ordinary Belizeans. It says the provisions would apply specifically to services operating as broadcasters.  During last week’s consultation, BBA’s Consultant Marisa Longsworth explained the purpose and intended scope of the proposed changes.

Marissa Longsworth, Legal Advisor, BBA: “Exemptions are to be prescribed for national online broadcasters to consider that licensees should only be those that meet criteria such as commercial benefits of the broadcast, audience size, availability and accessibility to the broadcast and frequency. So, the way this act will work is that once you broadcast online you will fall within this act. The question becomes whether you should be licensed for that purpose and how does the BBA decide who should be licensed or not? Now, let’s say for example, I have something to say to the public. I go on Facebook and I go live but if I have I don’t know maybe 900 friends, I have never gone further than that on Facebook, right? So when I have my live and I could go live to my 900 friends maybe 20 of them will watch my live It’s limited. The public can’t view my page. The public can’t view my live. So if you report me to the BBA, the BBA will look at that and say, well how many people did Marissa really reach during that live? How many times did Marissa do a broadcast? Does she do a weekly podcast show? She has sponsors ?  BTL is sponsoring her credits or you know ? Is there a commercial benefit being derived from her online broadcast ? That’s a consideration. How frequent does she broadcast? That’s a consideration. Who has access to her broadcast? Is it the general public? Is it a special group? Is it a very small group? That’s a consideration. And so if the BBA were to come to me after I do my live my role is to apply for an exemption to say to BBA, listen, I know you want to collect some license fees from people like me however this is what my broadcast is and I don’t think that I qualify under your criteria. The criteria is listed in the legislation so the BBA cannot just go by how they feel, right? It has to be based on what the legislation requires.”

The proposal, however, has raised concerns among some members of the media. A former member of the mainstream media fraternity Brent Toombs argues that the BBA’s authority originates from its responsibility to regulate the use of publicly owned radio frequencies. In his view, that authority should not automatically extend to the internet, which does not operate as a limited public resource in the same way as the broadcast spectrum.  Others believe regulation can be justified, but only if the law clearly distinguishes traditional broadcasting from online communication and includes safeguards for journalism and free expression. Former journalist and news anchor Daedra Haylock argues that broadcast media has a special responsibility because of its widespread reach and its use of public frequencies. She says freedom of expression is fundamental but, like other constitutional rights, is not unlimited and must be balanced against the public interest.  Haylock noted that broadcasters already make editorial decisions concerning profanity, obscenity, advertising, callers and content suitable for children. She cautioned, however, that vague or poorly drafted regulations could be applied arbitrarily and used to suppress legitimate journalism, political criticism or artistic expression.  The debate is therefore not limited to whether Belize’s decades-old broadcasting framework should be modernized. It also centres on how an online broadcaster will be legally defined, which operators will require licenses, who will qualify for exemptions and whether the proposed safeguards are strong enough to prevent political interference or censorship.