Six takeaways from Switzerland’s media licence fee battle

Albert Rösti, Switzerland’s communications minister, was a member of the SBC initiative committee before he joined the federal government. Keystone / Andreas Becker

The Swiss Broadcasting Corporation (SBC), the parent company of Swissinfo, has weathered another challenge to its television and radio licence fee. On Sunday, Swiss voters clearly rejected a proposal to reduce funding for the licence fee. But the broader struggle over public broadcasting has yielded few winners — except one. Our analysis of Sunday’s vote.

The Swiss Abroad were not targeted by the campaign

Most Swiss Abroad will be satisfied with Sunday’s result: 62% of voters rejected licence fee cuts. In a recent poll ahead of the vote, 58% of citizens living abroad said they opposed the SBC initiativeExternal link, with only 37% in favour of reducing the annual fee.

The Swiss Abroad managed to avoid becoming a target in the SBC initiative campaign — a contrast to the 2024 battle over the 13th monthly state pension payment. Once again, there was a fear that Swiss citizens abroad would be portrayed as beneficiaries. They don’t pay for the licence fee but receive a service from Swissinfo tailored to their needs. Much of the content provided by Switzerland’s different language public television and radio broadcasters SRF, RTS, RSI and RTR also keeps them up to date with news from their home country.

Making information available abroad is the SBC’s contribution to keeping the more than 200,000 Swiss Abroad who are eligible to vote reliably informed when they go to the polls, an essential public service. Those who live abroad are probably more aware of this issue, given that many parts of the world are confronted with media crises. Compared to other countries, Swiss media remains diverse and strong.

In contrast to the 2015 vote on the Federal Act on Radio and Television (RTVA), which was decided by a wafer-thin margin (50.08%), this time the result was clear and no-one needs to calculate whether this initiative failed because of the Swiss Abroad vote.

Swiss public media debate reflects a global reality

The debate in Switzerland is part of a global trend towards weakening public media, with governments in many Western democracies withdrawing financial support. In France, for example, the budget for public media has been cut by €162 million (CHF147 million) in two years. The BBC in the UK is also under political and financial pressure to implement a wide-ranging austerity plan.

At the same time, these news providers have become prime targets for party political influence, accused of bias or of pursuing an ideological agenda, which increases the pressure on them. In the United States, President Donald Trump is trying to silence the federally funded international broadcaster Voice of America. Trump has called it an “unnecessary” element of federal bureaucracy.

In authoritarian regimes, meanwhile, the trend is inverted. Since the early 2000s, Russia, China and Iran have invested heavily in propaganda to control information and weaken the media. Against this backdrop, independent public media is vital in guaranteeing access to reliable information and maintaining a pluralistic democratic space.

The right failed to convince in pushing spending power

The right-wing Swiss People’s Party had made consumers’ wallets the central argument of its initiative campaign, but this failed to convince the majority. According to polls conducted ahead of the vote, the general opinion was that SBC programmes were reasonable value for money.

There was even a prevailing concern of having to pay more to watch sports or TV series if the SBC no longer offered them.

The People’s Party did not seem to genuinely believe in the success of the initiative, investing a modest CHF1.5 million ($1.9 million) in its campaign. In contrast, opponents invested almost CHF4 million ($5.1 million) and mobilised 35 organisations in support from the worlds of culture, sport and society. The campaign reflected the diversity of SBC supporters, but in some cases it also highlighted their financial dependence on the SBC.

Albert Rösti demonstrated his political skill

It is a significant, twofold victory for Albert Rösti, the communications minister. The People’s Party politician was involved in the SBC initiative campaign from the very beginning and was a member of the initiative committee before he joined the federal government.

Later, after becoming a cabinet member, Rösti had to leave the committee – and simultaneously became the architect of a government counter-project. The licence fee reduction from the current CHF335 ($429) to CHF300 ($384) from 2029, decreed by Rösti, has forced the SBC to implement an ambitious savings programme. Companies will also contribute less to the licence fee in future; overall this means a 17% drop in the SBC budget.

As communications minister, Rösti managed to retain his credibility by fighting against his own initiative, while achieving his original goal to streamline the SBC and reduce the burden for Swiss businesses. He has already announced that he will closely monitor if the SBC is fulfilling its mandate and reporting in a politically balanced way.

The minister has thus proved himself a skilful player of Swiss politics, remaining ideologically unwavering but flexible. He used every lever at his disposal across his various roles to secure the maximum.

Ongoing attacks on the SBC have left their mark

Even though most Swiss citizens have now expressed their clear support for the SBC, some still don’t like it. This isn’t new. The SBC initiative is already the sixth failed attack against the licence fee.

Although these initiatives have been unsuccessful, the attacks on the SBC have left their mark. Without the “No Billag” initiative in 2018, which was rejected by 72% of voters, and without Sunday’s initiative, the amount of the licence fee would not have fallen so quickly. In 2007, the fee was CHF462 ($591), and from 2029 it will fall to CHF300 ($384), representing a 35% drop over 20 years.

To counter this political pressure, before the vote the SBC undertook to carry out the largest restructuring exercise in its history. Saving 17% of its budget without making serious structural changes is a major challenge for an institution the size of the SBC, especially as it is subject to numerous linguistic and federal constraints.

Despite the reforms underway, the new SBC director-general, Susanne Wille, must now quickly deliver on her promise of a centralised, more efficient and user-friendly public service broadcaster. Otherwise, she risks losing the goodwill of politicians and facing even more drastic budget cuts.

The SBC must take opponents’ criticism seriously

During the vote campaign, it was often claimed that the SBC was too left-wing or too “woke”. This criticism must be taken seriously. The SBC is obliged to portray society in all its nuances and political diversity. It should not engage in activism or fight against existing structures.

On the other hand, it would be wrong to give in to pressure from the right, which, as in other countries, wants to impose its political agenda on Swiss newsrooms.

No institution in Switzerland is exposed to public scrutiny like the SBC – except perhaps the army. Journalists working for public service broadcasters are under constant scrutiny, and the demands placed on them are higher than ever. But only with truly impartial and independent reporting can the public broadcaster continue to justify its existence to the population.

Edited by Mark Livingston / Adapted from German by Katherine Price/sb