Silly names for EU mechanisms

The mechanism for Rapid Border Intervention Teams (RABIT), assisting MS's under circumstances of a sudden influx of asylum seekers, have been ridiculed given its rather silly name. There is, however, another mechanism with a far more unfortunate name.

Repost from Kosmopolito: Short guide to lazy EU journalism

Just found this on Kosmopolito. Great Laugh!

Short guide to lazy EU journalism

The unofficial rulebook for lazy EU journalism. 20 invaluable tips for your career in EU journalism.

1. Not sure how the EU works or what institutions are involved? –> Just write “Brussels”.

2. Germany is generally seen as important in EU politics and journalists know how to frame it: If Germany is active in a certain policy domain just write something about  “German dominance” and if you work for British newspaper add  some subtle references to the war. If  Germany is passive in a given policy area just write that Germany abandons the EU and it clearly adopted a unilateral strategy, if you work for a British newspaper you could add something about the war.

3. Found a short reference in a paper which talks about your country? –> Is is an evil plan to undermine democracy

4. General rule: No need to distinguish between different European institutions and organisations. Who cares whether it is the Council of Europe, the European Council, the Council of the EU, the European Commission, the Court of Justice of the European Union or the European Court of Human Rights . –> Just write something about eurocrats and unelected foreign European judges interfering with your beloved country. [thanks Andrew!]

5. You are in Brussels and there are several events happening at the same time?  –> Well, this is a clear sign that the EU does not address the important issues! (Important issue = event you attend)

6. Unsure what is happening in the EU? –> Don’t bother ringing someone in Brussels. Just make something up about bananas or recycle a story you read half a year ago. If you are ambitious call the press department of one of the parties in your capital or use a recent party pamphlet.

7. Did you come across a controversial statement or an opinion of an MEP or any national MP? –> Start your article with “EU plans to…” or “Country X wants to…” Any MEP or committee must be prefaced by “senior,” “influential” or “key” as long as he/she/it says something confrontational. [thanks Tim Jones]

8. Facts are overrated. Don’t bother checking the original EU policy documents. There is no need to understand differences between white or green papers, a report or a regulation or a directive. It is much easier to write about ‘crazy ideas of EU bureaucrats’.  If you have an idea for a good EU story don’t let facts ruin it. Plus, nobody will check if a EU story is true. Everyone knows that the EU is boring and evil. Moreover, the single aim of the EU is to produce unnessary regulation (generally known as ‘red tape”).

9. Use “EU bureaucrats” or “Brussels bureaucrats” as often as possible. A more experienced lazy journalist would simply refer to ‘Eurocrats‘. (Thanks Gawain) Useful adjectives in this context include “unelected”, “unaccountable”, “corrupt”, “highly-paid”, “highly-pensioned”, “lazy”. This list is not exhaustive and be adapted to your journalistic needs. You may also use “EU official” or “EU representative” especially if you follow rule 4.

10. Don’t mention that ministers might have a veto over EU policy –> Just write about how the EU destroys national sovereignty.

11. You think that the EU is a bit too complex and everything takes a bit too long? –> Well just focus on zero sum games especially during summits.  One country wins, one country looses. That is life. That’s the EU. Simples.

12. A good headline is key. So always go for the pun or the the odd ‘eurocrats’, ‘empire’ reference. And the fight is always between europhiles and eurosceptics. Keep that in mind.

13. Symbols are more important than substance. Stories about what people had for breakfast or dinner, something about flags or anthems are great examples. Always mix personal stories about EU leaders with national prejudices. You will be surprised:  it always works.

14. EU funding is always a great story. There is corruption, waste and funny projects. However, do not mention that projects need co-financing. Also do not try to look at the positive examples, it would just spoil the story. Anyway, EU money is by definition a bad thing. So, don’t try to explain why EU funding exists in the first place.

15. The EU budget as well as the budget negotiations provide many interesting options for lazy journalists. You could write that the EU books have not been signed off for years – without mentioning the auditing rules. Or you could write something about how much money your country pays to be in the EU -  without mentioning that it may get something back. Don’t make the mistake to link to any official cost-benefit calculation. Because if they exist they are must be wrong, if they don’t exist it is generally a conspiracy.  Rather use a statement from another newspaper or dodgy think tank. Just don’t ask any questions. Never think about what the EU could do with the money, just assume that “Brussels wastes all the money it gets”.  Budget negotiations are zero sum games, so rule 11 applies. There is no such thing as the “European interest”.

16. The single market means competition which might include foreign companies winning tenders in your country. If that happens just focus on the foreign element of that company. Make some claims about corruption.  Write about how many jobs will be lost. No need to mention that new jobs will be created. If you are an ambitious lazy journalist write about how EU competition laws are made to destroy your local economy.

17. Don’t bother learning a foreign language. It is not useful in EU journalism. You can always rely on international news agencies.

18. Subscribe to all ‘think tanks’ and ‘business associations’ which are highly regarded among your collegues. From time to time, just ‘write’ (copy/paste) short articles. Don’t include links to your sources.

19. Context is overrated. Headlines are more important. Just go for the best quotes – no context needed. If you have a great quote from last week, you can still use it. No need to check whether current events have moved on.

20. A beginners mistake is to engage with the opposite side or with critics of your work. So, just don’t do it.

The RIO Trip - Part 3: Brussels, the (unofficial) capital of Europe

Finally on wednesday evening we arrived in the city of Brussels, a city well suited for housing the core of the EU executive and legislature considering its diversity. Four visits were on the agenda in brussels: the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Netherlands permanent representation and the Council of Ministers and Eurocontrol. Adding to the visit at the CJEU the previous day, we would thereby tick off four out of five of the Unions main institutions. In light of the course that we all took at Leiden University, the visits would give an interesting insight into the institutional balance between these bodies.

Pfleiderer II? - New GWB may prohibit private access to leniency applications

The overhaul of the German GWB (Law against Restriction of Competition) may also react to the CJEU's recent judgement in Pfleiderer. The draft proposes a new section that would prohibit the access to leniency applications of the German Competition Authority. The reason for this is that the effectiveness of the leniency programme may be endangered if these files may later be opened for private parties, who the bring actions for damages against parties to a cartel.
If such a solution proves to be effective remains to be seen. Also, is there a Pfleiderer II case at the horizon for the CJEU?

Interesting note on the current patent system [Follow-up on the Smartphone Wars]

In this article by James Temple, a lawyer representing Google gives his view on the problems with contemporary software patent protection. Very interesting reading about how undertakings use their patent portfolios to maintain market dominance.

The RIO Trip - Part 2: The Imperial Palace of the EU Judiciary

 

On tuesday evening we moved on from Strasbourg, leaving the Council of Europe behind, and travelled to the center of the EU judiciary: the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU, formerly and still popularly referred to as the ECJ) in the city of Luxembourg. We only had one evening to spend in Luxembourg, but luckily we got a quick look at the city before it started becoming too late. The city is built in and around a valley so it provides for some spectacular scenery and indeed the city is beautiful. My former professor in EU constitutional law, however, had a theory that they put the CJEU in Luxembourg because of the city state being so dull that the only thing that the judges could occupy themselves with was solving cases. I stayed way to short in Luxembourg to give a reasoned opinion on the city itself, so this post will focus more on the Court itself.

"Solvay" - Violation of Rights of Defense in Competition Case

The Court of Justice (CJEU) has decided on Tuesday that the Commission's decision to fine Solvay for violations of Art. 101 TFEU is invalid, because Solvay's rights of defense were violated. This story dates back to 1990 when the first decision was adopted. This decision was later declared invalid by the CJEU because of procedural errors. In 2000 the Commission basically adopted the same decision again, which was again contested by Solvay. This time, they alleged that their rights of defense had been breached because the Commission had not provided access to all files that their decision was based on.

The slightly funny part of this story is that the Commission was apparently willing to give Solvay access to all files to prepare their defense - but could not because parts of the file had been lost. The Commission was not even able to produce a table of contents of the lost file.