Multilingualism in the European Union

Transcrição

Multilingualism in the European Union,
the Core of the European Model of Values
PANA ANDRA-DINA 1
Ph D Candidate
The National School of Political Studies and Public Administration
Bucharest, Romania
[email protected]
ABSTRACT
The core of the community culture is its language, the language that is both spoken and written by
the members of the community. One becomes a member of a community by birth and by self-identifying
with the features and the values of the community culture. It is argued that the culture of the European
Union is neither the mixture nor the totality of the cultures of the peoples in the member states. This paper
plans to prove that a new European culture is born, as a result of the fact that there are already European
values which are able to found the basis of the European culture. The model of values is transmitted by the
language. But the European Union has 23 official languages. What is the impact of multilingualism on the
model of values? For Habermas (2001b), language is an important factor in creating and strengthening the
European Union by destroying the intercultural communication barriers. I consider there are several types of
multilingualism, which I present in the second section of this paper.
While in the 18th-19th century, the language used to define nations, lately, in the European Union, the
language has been creating linguistic communities. In the current situation of the continual enlargement of
the European Union, there are several social realities, such as migration of the work force, the opening of
the labour market to citizens of the new member states of the UE, the individual mobility, the epitome of
which is the multilingualism which is supported by the European policies and institutions.
1
Beneficiary of the project “Doctoral scholarships supporting research: Competitiveness, quality, and
cooperation in the European Higher Education Area”, co-funded by the European Union through the European
Social Fund, Sectorial Operational Programme Human Resources Development 2007-2013
1
Multilingualism is the medium of cultural exchanges, phenomena of multiculturalism. People from
different cultures living together cannot communicate without a common language. There are 23 official
languages in the EU, though only three of them (English, French and German) benefit from the status of a
working language of the EU institutions. The social competence depends on the linguistic competence,
according to Chomsky (1986). We can live in a multicultural society and community as long as we master
the language(s) of that society or community.
The paper intends to depict the social reality of multilingualism supported by the policies of the
European institutions in order to define it as the core of the system of values of the newly-born European
culture. A culture is born within a community when the members of that community share several values.
The research I am doing is based on the hypothesis that the citizens of the member states of the European
Union share a model of values whose core and medium is the multilingualism. My paper is based on a
secondary analysis of information in the Eurobarometers which reveal the statistical situation of
multilingualism, multiculturalism, European identity in UE 27. In order to understand the EU, I also
compare it to the USA, starting from the argument that the EU is not intended as a federal state, as it is the
case of the USA. To study the process of Europeanization, I introduce the two-layer Europeanization model.
The abstract layer consists of collective identity formation reflected in the existence of a newly-born
European public sphere. I use the Brüggemann & Kleinen-von Königslöw (2009) model to do research on
the media as the pillar of a newly-born European public-sphere, the evidence that the EU27 culture exists.
INTRODUCTION
Europeanization is a process of intensified interaction across borders of the member states of the
European Union. (Brüggemann& Kleinen-von Königslöw 2009). I conceive Europeanization as a two-layer
process. The first layer is a formal one, consisting of the harmonization of the institutions, the policies, the
acquis, the legal pluralism (De Ruijter 1995). The deeper, abstract layer of Europeanization is the creation
of the European culture characterized by the existence of the European identity, shared values,
multilingualism, multiculturalism. Having in view a culturally competent practice and an ethnic-sensitive
approach to Europeanization, the relationship between the two layers can be exemplified by comparing the
notions in table 1:
Table1. Two-layer Europeanization
2
Formal Layer of Europeanization
Abstract Layer of Europeanization
European citizenship
European (self)-identity
90% of the Europeans are aware of their 77.4% of the Europeans feel it is
European
citizenship,
according
to important to feel European, but fewer
Eurobarometer 213. 2
than half claim they belong to the EU. 3
Linguistic competence in the national Multilingualism
language and the right to address the EU
in all 23 national languages
All
national
cultures
are
equally Multiculturalism
cherished and diversity is encouraged
65% of respondents in the 27 EU
Member States were able to recall any
interaction with at least one person either
of a different religion, ethnic background
or nationality (either EU or non-EU) than
their own in the seven days prior to being
questioned. 4
The compatibility of the nations’ values
European Shared Values
Nationalism, national identity as member Europeanism, European identity
of EU27
My interest lies in observing the role of multilingualism in the construction of the European culture.
CE (2005) considers multilingualism from two perspectives: at the personal level (a person has the ability to
speak two or more languages) and at the community level (a community speak two languages, e.g. Belgium
with two official languages, border areas, multi-ethic communities, immigrant communities). Linguistic
diversity is encouraged by the EU. “Our policy of official multilingualism as a deliberate tool of
government is unique in the world. The EU sees the use of its citizens’ languages as one of the factors
which make it more transparent, more legitimate and more efficient. At the level of culture and of enhancing
the quality of life, too, the EU works actively to promote the wider knowledge and use of all its official
2
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_213_en.pdf
3
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_189a_en.pdf
4
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_217_sum_en.pdf
3
languages throughout the Union.” 5 “Together with respect for individuals, openness towards other cultures,
tolerance for others, respect for linguistic diversity is a core EU value. This principle applies not only to the
23 official EU languages but also to the many regional and minority languages spoken by segments of its
population. It is this that makes the EU what it is - not a ‘melting pot’ that reduces difference, but a place
where diversity can be celebrated as an asset.”
6
I quoted these official statements because they contain the
explicit idea of multilingualism as the core of the European culture. The cultural pattern includes cultural
environment, cultural institutions and cultural facts (Gavriluţă 2009). Once the institution of multilingualism
is formed and the cultural environment exists, the citizens of the EU can easily become actors of cultural
facts and the result is the European cultural pattern. There are mechanisms of the cultural Europeanization
created and supported by the EU institutions 7 .
The purpose of this paper is to understand the relationship between national identity and European
identity. Schifirneţ (2008) defines national identity as a set of unique features of a nation: language, culture,
religion and the preservation of customs, traditions, habits of the national communities. National identities
and the European identity are not incompatible. The Europeanization is not uniform across the EU, as there
are different levels of Europeanization in different member states, based on the traditions in respect to the
view to federalism of each country (Schifirneţ 2008) and the moment of the accession of each country to the
EU. This is a strong argument to prove that the cultures of EU 15, EU 25, EU 27 are different from each
other. The accession of a new member state to the EU does not mean that the new member has to adopt an
already founded EU culture, but it changes the culture of the EU in some degree: it may add cultural
elements or it may adhere to the culture of the former EU stage, but it surely enriches the panel of
multilingualism. In order to support this view, I interpret the change in the Europeans’ attitude towards the
European identity in different stages of the construction of the EU (EU 15, EU 25, EU27).
There is no functioning community without a public sphere defined by
Habermas
(2001a, p. 102) as “a realm of our social life in which something approaching public opinion can be formed.
Access is guaranteed to all citizens. A portion of the public sphere comes into being in every conversation in
which private individuals assemble to form a public body.” The creation of the European public sphere is
debated along with the European identity formation in the first section of this paper.
5
http://europa.eu/languages/en/home
6
http://europa.eu/languages/en/chapter/5
7
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/culture/index_en.htm
4
Another concept I use in this paper is multiculturalism which may refer to a demographic description, a
broad political ideology, a set of specific public policies, a goal of institutional restructuring, a mode of
resourcing cultural expression, a general moral challenge, a set of new political struggles, and as a kind of
feature of postmodernism. (Vertovec 2001, p.3). The complexity of the phenomenon is explicit in the
concept of cosmopolitism which is used in the Eurobarometers. Multiculturalism, seen as the living together
of several cultures, leads to cultural hybridization defined as the mixture of de-territorialized cultural
practices that produces new, hybrid, complex forms of culture (Tomlinson 1999). Multiculturalism is a
consequence of the transnational flow of migrant workers whose citizenship is irrelevant (Charusheela
2007). National cultures join migrant workers and the forming of immigrants’ communities is the first
condition of multiculturalism and interculturality. The medium of multiculturalism is multilingualism, as
debated in the second section of this paper.
The third section of the paper depicts the model of values of the culture of EU27 both from a historical
point of view and in the perspective of the enlargement of the EU. The model of values is seen from the
officials’ point of view and deduced from the Eurobarometers.
1. NATIONAL IDENTITY AND EUROPEAN IDENTITY
As said in the introduction above, the national identity is a set of characteristics and values that the
members of a nation share. In the Europeanization and globalization process, “ties to the state are replaced
by a new kind of postnational citizenship centred on human rights rather than place or community”
(Bellamy& Warleigh 2005, p. 4). I support the view that there is no conflict between Europeanism and
nationalism as Europeanism is being constructed on national characteristics. No one can become European
unless he/she is a national of a member state or a candidate country. Georgiu (2001) proves that
Europeanism and nationalism are not disjunctive, but conjunctive aspects of a cultural life of a people.
There is still the unsolved issue of the collective identity formation (McKiernan 2008, Brüggemann&
Kleinen-von Königslöw 2009). Habermas (2001b, p.17) speaks about “the voluntaristic character of a
contractual nation with collective identity”, which supports my model of two-layer Europenization
presented in the introduction of this paper. There are two steps in Europeanization. Firstly, a nation decides
to adhere to the EU. In fact, it is a political decision made by the elites of a nation. The accession of the
country to the EU implies creating the European-like institutions and the adoption of the acquis. Secondly,
5
the national citizens should feel European. This second step needs mechanisms of deeper Europeanization.
Habermas (2001b) suggests business elites’ newspapers and magazines as the pillars of a European public
sphere to be born. These mechanisms “could smooth the transition to a postnational democracy that is
rooted in the mutual recognition of the differences between proud national cultures. Neither <assimilation>,
nor simple <co-existence> (in the sense of the shaky modus vivendi) are models that are suited to this
history; a history that has taught us that we can create ever more abstract forms of <solidarity with
strangers>.” (Habermas 2001b, p.23) Cultural exchanges are mechanisms of deeper Europeanization as they
assume inter-ethnical and intercultural communication supporting the transfer of cultural values between
nations and national cultures. (Oprea 2008, p. 24) This transfer is a means of cultural hybridization in
Tomlinson (1999)’s terms. Technically speaking, cultural exchanges happen due to a linguistic medium.
Multiculturalism cannot be conceptualized without multilingualism.
Researchers do not agree on the balance of national and European identities. Bellamy& Warleigh (2005,
p. 5) consider that Europeanization competes with and dilutes any sense of a purely national identity.
Another perspective belongs to Imre (2009, p.220): “The nation-state and nationalism continue to be
relevant factors in an otherwise increasingly deterritorialized and transnational virtual public space.”
Interpreting the information in the barometers, I search for the correlation between the collective identity
formation and the EU stages (EU 15, EU 25, EU 27) The Eurobarometer 52.0 (fieldwork: OctomberNovember 1999) (CE 2001a, p.12) is significant for the EU 15 stage.
Table 2.There is a common cultural identity shared by all the Europeans (source
Eurobarometer 52.0)
Strongly or somehow agree
Strongly or somehow disagree
EU15
38%
49%
Table3.European and National Identity (source: Eurobarometer 52.0)
Only
European
(National)
Only
Net
European
(and
and
National
European
National)
European
(without
“only
national”)
6
EU 15
4%
6%
42%
45%
7%
The findings of this survey shows that the European cultural identity is not yet formed in EU15.
(only 7% are net Europeans and 38% agree there is a shared cultural identity.)
Two years later, in January-February 2001, the Eurobarometer 92. Governance. UE15 and 9
Candidate Countries 8 finds the following reality:
Table4. The feeling of belonging in EU15 and CC9 (source Eurobarometer 92)
EU 15
CC9
33%
37%
I somehow belong to Europe 81%
82%
I belong to the world
38%
31%
It is essential to
85%
67%
51%
55%
I strongly belong to Europe
preserve the
traditions and the
traditional
life style
The other Europeans show
a little interest in
what happens
in our country
The results of the survey prove that there is no significant difference between member states and
candidate countries from the perspectives of the feeling of belonging to Europe and the horizontal
Europeanization. Tough, from the point of view of multiculturalism, the non-citizens of the EU are more
willing to accept it (67%) than the citizens of the EU 15 (85%).
A third Eurobarometer which gives details on the collective identity formation in EU is 189a. EU
Communication and citizens. General Public Survey 9 (fieldwork: September 2006)
8
9
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl92_eu_fr.pdf
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_189a_en.pdf
7
Table5. It is important to feel involved in the building of Europe/feel European (source
Eurobarometer 189a)
Country
It is important to feel involved in the
building of Europe / feel European
(% yes)
UE 25
77,4
UE 15
76,9
New Member States 10
80,4
It is interesting to notice that NMS citizens feel a slight deeper need to feel European than the
citizens of the older member states. It is important to note that there is a significant change in the
awarness of the EU identity between 2001 and 2006.
The French’s view on the European identity is reflected in the recent Eurobarometer 230.
Quelle Europe? Les français et la construction européenne 10
Table6. In your opinion, what best defines the European identity nowadays? (source
Eurobarometer 230)
Democracy and the Human Rights
57%
Geography
56%
Market Economy
55%
Common History
38%
Common Culture
34%
Very strong social protection
28%
Religious and spiritual heritage
19%
Others
1%
None of the Above
2%
There is no European Identity
0,2&
Don’t Know
2%
Table7. Nowadays, would you rather say you feel (source: Eurobarometer 230)
Both French and European
60%
French and not really European
31%
10
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_230_first.pdf
8
Neither French, nor European
5%
European and not really French
3%
Don’t Know
1%
Table8. The EU is a danger to our identity. (source: Eurobarometer 230)
Strongly
or
somehow Somehow disagree
Not at all
agree
26%
30%
42%
An interesting approach to the two-layer Europeanization model is to be found in some
Eurobarometers 11 : the euro is considered an ingredient of the European identity. More than half of the
population in all the surveys on the euro issue agree that the introduction of the euro currency will make
them feel more European and more than 50% disagree that the introduction of the euro currency will lead to
loss of their national identity, although there are large variations between countries.
According to Schifirneţ (2008), Trenz(2004), Codrescu& Oprea (2009), Brüggemann& Kleinen-von
Königslöw (2009),
Europeanization is reflected in the media. Brüggemann& Kleinen-von Königslöw
(2009) find 4 patterns of Europeanization reflected in the media: comprehensive Europeanization,
segmented Europeanization, Europeanization aloof from the EU and a parochial public sphere.
Europeanization has a vertical dimension when it focuses on the EU institutions, the process of decisionmaking in Brussels or Strasbourg and a horizontal dimension when it focuses on what is happening in other
member states of the EU. Applying this model, I did research on the Romanian quality newspapers, as
Romania is one of the newest EU members. I considered the same indicators and I can conclude that:

National newspapers mix horizontal Europeanization (cultural topics, tourism, history,
geography of the EU member states) with vertical Europeanization (what the CE said and
decided, how the acquis is implemented at the national level) while local newspapers
regularly publish the press releases of the EU institutions and call for proposals of EU–
funded projects.
11
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl191_en.pdf
9

There are permanent “Culture” pages in the majority of the national newspapers with
cultural events at European level; if these papers were in English, they would be interesting
to readers all over the EU.

There is everyday coverage on Romanian migrant workers in Spain, Italy, Ireland in the
central newspapers.
I also did content analysis on English-language newspapers in CEE countries, such as The Prague Post
(The Czech Republic English-language newspaper) and Nine o’clock (Daily English Language Newspaper
in Romania). The Prague Post supports vertical Europeanization in the economic and political news
sections and horizontal Europeanization in cultural news (festivals in different European countries, tours of
European singers and bands, theatre plays in foreign languages in Prague). Nine o’clock has both a vertical
and horizontal Europeanization approach in all sections (Home News, Press Watch, Editorials, Companies,
World) except the Culture section which has only a horizontal Europeanization approach.
I started the above mentioned research and I plan to expand it on all traditional and new media across
the EU in order to answer the following research question:

Is there news with European value in the media across the EU?
I define news with European value as the information in the media which is interesting to read for
any European citizen disregarding the reader’s national citizenship. For example, an article published in The
Prague Post about the president of the European Parliament visiting the Czech Republic (vertical
Europeanization; worth reading for people in all EU member states) or a French band touring in Bucharest
published in a newspaper in Romania (horizontal Europeanization; worth reading for the Romanians, the
French and any other fans of the band in all EU countries). According to Eurobarometer 203. Attitudes
towards the EU in the UK 12 (fieldwork: January-February 2007), half of the UK citizens are interested in
European news broadcast on television more objectively than in the printed press while roughly one-third
feel that British TV and radio services are objective about the EU as more people feel (38%) the British
press is too negative about the EU. Nearly half (48%) of all UK citizens feel that it is the British
government’s role to disseminate information about the EU and nearly 30 percentage points higher than
those who feel newspapers and TV should be responsible.
Brüggemann & Kleinen-von Königslöw (2009) distinguish between European media and
transnational media. In these terms, Nine o’clock and The Prague Post are transnational newspapers.
www.europa.eu is the only example of European media so far.
12
10
The results of my research show that there is news with European value already in the printed press
in Romania and some English-language European newspapers. Horizontal Europeanization and cultural
issues prevail in the news with European value and this phenomenon can be counted when debating on the
existence of the European public sphere which is seen as the precondition of the formation of the collective
European identity. The European public sphere is born (Brüggemann&Kleinen-von Königslöw 2009,
Volkmer 2008, Risse &Van de Steeg 2003, Trenz 2004) as a structural transformation of national public
debates. (Brüggemann&Kleinen-von Königslöw 2009, p.27).
The Eurobarometer 189a.EU Communication and citizens. General Public Survey 13 (fieldwork:
September 2006) uses the term and concept of shared European public sphere. Some important findings of
this survey are:
-In Europe, television is the ultimate source of information for just about anything, including the EU;
-only 7% of the Europeans watch TV programmes from another country on daily basis;
-three-quarters of Europeans say they would watch "European content" in their national language on TV;
- only 37% of Europeans say they normally watch a non-national television channel.
Still, Barometer 189a contains 12 European public sphere-relevant issues. It asked whether citizens
would like to know the opinions of citizens from other Member States of EU25 on these issues. Those
topics that were mentioned by the most citizens are the most likely to effectively facilitate a joint debate
involving as many citizens from a large number of Member States.
Are you interested to know if other EU citizens share your opinion on ...
-protecting the environment- 89% (said yes)
-fight against terrorism and organized crime-89%
-secure energy supply-84%
-how to create jobs in Europe-84%
-tolerance of religious expression /protection of human rights-84%
-European currency, the euro-76%
-immigration from non-EU countries-72%
-Constitution under discussion for the EU-71%
-danger of avian flu to Europe-67%
-ethical issues (stem cell research, abortion, homosexual marriage)-65%
-possibility that Turkey joins the EU in the future-60%
-how to compete with China or India-60%
13
11
The personal motivations for being informed about European politics and affairs are:

To better know my rights or possibilities as a European citizen 71%

To better know what EU Institutions do for citizens 70%

To know about Europe’s role in the world 69%

To feel concerned by what is going on in the other countries of Europe 63%

To be able to check what actual EU policies are in certain areas 62%

To feel involved in the building of Europe / feel European 59%

Have all the information to take part in European debates, elections 54%

To be able to have some influence over the development of European
cooperation
53%
Eurobarometer 189b.EU Communication and citizens. Decision Makers 14 concludes that:

37% of top decision makers say they watch TV channels from other European countries;

the ration of elites who normally watch TV programmes from other countries depends on the
linguistic barriers, not on the state barriers;
A more recent survey on media and communication is Eurobarometer 199.Audio-visual
Communication 15 (fieldwork: February 2007). It presents realities of EU27 and the main findings are:

there are 3 divisions across EU27 in terms of availability of and preference for audiovisual and new media: the Northern countries of the EU15, the Southern countries of
the EU15 , together with Cyprus and Malta, the CEE countries.

As for the types of information that EU27 citizens would most like to receive, there is
interest in all areas (e.g., EU citizens’ rights, health & social policies, the role of the
EU in the world and the enlargement policy). There are interest rates of above 50% in
all such topics.
I can conclude that the European public sphere is born and it depends on traditional
media, especially the printed press. There are multilingual newspapers across EU 27, even in
the new member states. The European citizens are interested in news with European value
which they encounter in the national media, both in horizontal cultural and political and
economic vertical approaches. The EU27 citizens are aware of their European identity
14
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_189b_en.pdf
15
12
especially after 2006. The newer member a state is, the deeper the need of its citizens to feel
European.
2. THE EU POLICY OF MULTILINGUALISM, DIVERSITY AND
MULTICULTURALISM
The language issue reappears in the discussion, as the possibility for the news with European value
to reach the audience depends on the language(s) the media use. A Romanian-language newspaper cannot
equal the impact of an English-language Romanian newspaper on European readers.
It is not to say that English is lingua franca of the EU. Neither is any other European language. The
CE (2008)’s statement is clear: “linguistic diversity can indeed boost European integration, promote
citizenship and the feeling of belonging to the European Union”. (CE 2008, p. 29). In this section of the
paper, I intend to present the EU policy on multilingualism, linguistic diversity and multiculturalism.
As cited in the introduction of the paper, multilingualism has a dual meaning: a personal ability and
a reality of the community (CE 2005). Multilingualism is institutionalized in the EU. CE has a portfolio for
multilingualism. The policy of the EU is to preserve linguistic diversity. There are 23 official languages of
the EU comprising all official languages of the member states. There are three working languages: English,
French and German.
I consider there are several types of multilingualism. At the individual level, multilingualism means
the ability of speaking several languages: the mother tongue and one or more foreign languages. In the case
of mixed families, there are children who speak two native languages. It is important to note the relationship
between these languages: the mother tongue can be the official language of the country where a person lives
and the second language is learnt in school as a tool or the mother tongue is the language of the ethnic
minority and the second language is the official language of the country of residence. There are also cases of
multilingual speakers at the border areas of the countries. Their multilingualism is based on historical
reasons, family reasons etc. A fourth type of multilingualism is found in the countries which have two
official languages, Belgium, for example. What is the relationship between the program-language and the
tool-language (Ciocea 2009)? The program-language belongs to the model of values of a national culture.
A nation cannot preserve its culture without supporting its program-language. In the same time, the EU
integration asks for multilingualism. CE (2008) advocates the existence of personal adoptive language
policy, a personal adoptive language different from mother tongue and foreign language, either European or
non-European.
13
The Eurobarometer The Europeans and their languages 16 (fieldwork in November-December 2005)
concludes: “A <multilingual> European is likely to be young, well-educated or still studying, born in a
country other than the country of residence, who uses foreign languages for professional reasons and is
motivated to learn. Consequently, it seems that a large part of European society is not enjoying the
advantages of multilingualism.” Individual multilingualism is a tool for mediation. Officially encouraged,
the phenomenon of social multilingualism allows multiculturalism. (Archer 1995). “More and more
countries have become multicultural” (Healy 2007, p. 11) worldwide and especially in the EU. One of the
reasons is the work force migration as a result of the mobility of persons which is encouraged by the EU
policy. In this context, multiculturalism starts as a conflict between home cultural identity of the immigrants
and the host cultural identity. The conflict turns to adaptation. “Empirical evidence shows that immigrants
adapt best in relation to their ability to negotiate between the cultural entities they confront. Factors such as
cultural knowledge, length of stay in the new culture, and linguistic competence strongly influence this
process. Length of stay and linguistic competence may be essential for cultural knowledge acquisition that,
in turn, may be enhanced by mass media consumption.” (Miglietta&Tartaglia 2009, p. 46) The same
researchers prove that the language plays a central role in the acculturation process and assume that length
of stay influences acculturation mostly through linguistic competence and mass media consumption. The
reality of living in a multicultural community implies a cultural competence defined as the ability of
understanding and integrating in another culture (Marais& Marais 2007). I use the term multiculturalism
with the meaning of recognition of diversity and of gradual apparition of hybridized cultural identities.
(Vertovec 2001). “Multiculturalism is about recognizing identity in its own terms.” (Vertovec 2001, p.18), it
is about solidarity, about respecting and cherishing diversity and about the feeling of belonging to a
diversified community. These values belong not only to multicultural communities, but to multicultural
individuals, too. (König 2009) A model of multicultural individual identity was developed by Jameson
(2007). Multiculturalism is both a social issue integrating both personal and community aspects.
To understand multiculturalism in Europe, we should compare it to the same reality in the USA:
“The definitions of diversity may be summarised as thus: the American desire is to accept and assimilate
every ethnicity and culture from all parts of the world, thereby creating a <diversity>culture which may or
may not address fundamental difficulties, whereas in Europe, the desire is to be able to find the delicate
16
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_243_sum_en.pdf
14
balance between different cultures through careful consideration and cultural sensitivities.” (Corvi,
Bigi&NG, 2003, p. 15)
Eurobarometer 199. Audio-visual Communication 17 (fieldwork: February 2007) comprises a
comparison between EU27 and USA. In order to compare the understanding of media as pillars of the public
sphere, I quote the following main findings of the Eurobarometer 199:

both EU and US citizens tend to agree that the news presentation is too sensational, that there
is insufficient quality on TV and that political programmes are not creative or original
enough;

almost 50% of Americans would like more EU-related news and just less than
one- third
would participate in interactive programmes (about the subject);
• overall, interest in EU-related news is high: 63% in the EU and 54% for US citizens;

in general, national TV and newspapers are the preferred media outlets for receiving news
about the EU, although US citizens put greater reliance on their local TV and press;
• although Americans spend more time watching television than Europeans, people in the EU
watch more daily news programmes;
• in terms of preferred viewing, news programmes are the most popular: 48% of EU citizens mention
these programmes, and there are similar numbers in the US;
• access to news websites is popular, especially in the US (67%). The EU figure is 45%, and the
most likely users of such a facility are the young, the highly-educated and those in metropolitan
areas; however, 73% of Americans have high-speed Internet access, while the EU figure stands at
58%;

One fifth of European residents tend to avoid or skip European news in the media (between
18% and 22%), while a third of Americans do this (between 28% and 36%). NMS12 (almost
20%) tend to avoid EU-related news less often than the citizens in EU15 (25%).
In conclusion, the EU policy on multilingualism, multiculturalism and diversity is different from the
USA policy. The same conclusion appears in the case of the pillars of the public spheres in EU 27 and the
USA.
17
15
3. THE MODEL OF VALUES OF THE EU27 CULTURE
The vast diversity of the European cultures involved in the EU 27 cultural pattern makes scientists
and researchers consider the EU a dead ground whose temporal, spatial and ontological features are
impossible to determine. (Salovaara-Moring 2009). Touraine (2007/2009) calls the present European society
a blind society which is born on the ruins of communist totalitarian regimes and industrial societies. EU27
comprises two types of countries: those which have never experienced communism (…) whose feature is
the substantive democracy and those in the post-communism (…) whose feature is a formal democracy.
(Hermoso& Luca, 2006) Romania, one of the newest members of the EU, for example, experiences
tendentious modernity (Schifirneţ 2008, 2009). It is true that EU 27 was born in post-modernity, postcommunist era, knowledge
post-industrial society, but, as Habermas (2006, p.28) argues “the rapid
economic growth was the basis of a welfare state that provided the framework for the regeneration of
postwar European societies. But the most important outcome of this regeneration has been the production of
ways of life that have allowed the wealth and national diversity of a multisecular culture to become
attractively renewed. ” Due to this diversity, pluralism and the policy of continual enlargement and good
neighbouring, the UE disregards the “differences across countries in attitudes towards diversity issues
reflect differences in overall ideologies that are influenced by varying historical, social, political and
economic processes”. (Kohli&Faul, 2005, p. 818) It is a fact that the process of Europeanization was a result
of the war experience and that the idea of the EU enlargement appeared when communism collapsed in the
CEE countries. Imre&Verstraete (2009) consider the role of global media when explaining the events of the
latest 20 years in post-communist countries.
as a new political space.
Stone Sweet, Sandholtz&Fligstein (2001) describe Europe
De-territorialization (Tomlinson 1999, Ciocea 2009, Andraş 2008) is
the result of mobility and multiculturalism. The mechanisms of enhancing European mobility are the EUfunded projects: Youth in Action, LLL framework, trans-European networks (Verstraete 2009) as they are
the bases for interaction and points of influence for a nascent transnational society. (Bellamy& Warleigh
2005, p. 7) Verstraete (2009) claims that the development of trans-European corridors of mobility to the east
of Europe relying on the European Union's infrastructures is intent upon erasing the past and integrating the
new places with as little tension as possible, for economic purposes only, offering a possible paradigm for
rethinking what Europe could mean in an age of EU enlargement to the east.
Formal Europeanization has been supported by the active civil society. Touraine (2007/2009, p.15)
considers France is the EU leader in supporting the civil society. Tismăneanu (2001) discusses the
importance of the NGOs forming the civil society in post-communist members of the EU. The policy of the
EU on the partnership of the EU institutions and the civil society is stated in the White Paper of
16
Governance: “The debate on European governance, launched by the Commission in its White Paper of July
2001, concerns all the rules, procedures and practices affecting how powers are exercised within the
European Union. The aim is to adopt new forms of governance that bring the Union closer to European
citizens, make it more effective, reinforce democracy in Europe and consolidate the legitimacy of the
institutions. The Union must reform itself in order to fill the democratic deficit of its institutions. This
governance should lie in the framing and implementation of better and more consistent policies associating
civil society organisations and the European institutions. It also entails improving the quality of European
legislation, making it clearer and more effective. Moreover, the European Union must contribute to the
debate on world governance and play an important role in improving the operation of international
institutions.”(CE 2001b) The EU official website provides two micro websites dedicated to NGOs and the
civil society. 18 This is evidence for the importance officially given by the EU to the organizations activating
in the civil society as the recognition of their role in the process of abstract Europeanization.
The above debate in this section is implicit in the official documents released by the EU institutions
which contain information about the values of the Europeans. CE (2008) mentions three categories of
European shared values. First of all, the values on which the European Union was built: “The European
Union came into being against the devastation of war, against totalitarian ventures, against racism and antiSemitism. The first steps in the construction of Europe also coincided with the end of the colonial era and
heralded a change in the nature of relations between Europe and the rest of the world.” (CE 2008, p. 7).
Then, the fundamental values of the human being: “Upholding the dignity of human beings, men, women
and children, sticking up for one's physical and moral integrity, halting the deterioration of our natural
environment, rejecting all forms of humiliation and unjustified discrimination on the grounds of colour,
religion, language, ethnic origin, gender, age, disability, etc. — are values on which there must be no
compromise in the name of any specific cultural feature.” (CE 2008, p. 8). The third category mentioned by
the CE (2008) is diversity.
The Treaty of Lisbon provides the values of the Union. The Union is founded on the values of
respect for human dignity, liberty, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights,
including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values, which are set out in Article I-2, are
common to the Member States. Moreover, the societies of the Member States are characterised by pluralism,
non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men. These values play
an important role, especially in two specific cases. Firstly, under the procedure for accession set out in
Article I-58, any European State wishing to become a member of the Union must respect these values in
18
http://ec.europa.eu/civil_society/ngo/index_en.htm http://ec.europa.eu/civil_society/index_en.htm
17
order to be considered eligible for admission. (Article I-59) The Union contributes to the preservation and to
the development of these common values while respecting the diversity of the cultures and traditions of the
peoples of Europe as well as the national identities of the Member States and the organisation of their public
authorities at national, regional and local levels. (Part II)
In comparison with the existing Treaties, the Constitution has included new values, notably human
dignity, equality, the rights of minorities and the characterization of the values upheld by the Member
States. The following articles in the Treaty of Lisbon are relevant to this paper:

Article II-81 (Non-discrimination)
1. Any discrimination based on any ground such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin,
genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a
national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation shall be prohibited.
2. Within the scope of application of the Constitution and without prejudice to any of its
specific provisions, any discrimination on grounds of nationality shall be prohibited.

Article II-82 (Cultural, religious and linguistic diversity)
The Union shall respect cultural, religious and linguistic diversity.
In the following pages of this paper, I present the European values as they are seen by the citizens of
the EU with the view of comparing the official statements and policies to the model of values deriving from
the relevant Eurobarometers.
I am starting the secondary analysis with the survey 97.8 (fieldwork: August-September
1997) (CE 2001, p.8). The citizens of the EU15 indicated the following values of the
Europeans and in these percentages:
Table9. The Values of the Europeans (source: Survey 97.8)
Help the others
95%
Respect for the human being
92%
Work for a better society
84%
Spend more time and effort on personal 79%
development
Success in life
75%
Discover new things about themselves
68%
Respect for the traditional values
68%
Life will be better if people return to 51%
traditional ways of doing things.
18
Earning more money
49%
A man’s duty is to earn money and a 25%
woman’s duty is to do the housework.
As the above table states, solidarity and respect for the human being are almost unanimous values.
Gender equality is 75% value in EU15.
There is another survey done in EU15 and 9 candidate countries in January-February 2001/
and published in March 2001, 92. Governance. EU15.Candidate Countries 19
Table10. Views on the future of multilingualism, mobility and multiculturalism in EU 15 and CC9
(source: Eurobarometer 92)
In the future, you and
your children will speak
more languages than you
do now
(% said yes)
CC 9 53
EU15 66
In the future, your
mobility for
studying, tourist ,
work reasons will
be as you wish
(% said yes)
63
79
There will be no
inter-ethnic
conflicts in the
future EU
(% said yes)
34
34
This table presents information on multilingualism, mobility as values of EU15 and peaceful
multiculturalism as an unsolved issue in EU15.
More details on the Europeans’ view on cultural diversity can be deduced from the findings of the
Eurobarometer 217. Intercultural Dialogue in Europe 20 (fieldwork: November 2007):

Almost three-quarters of EU citizens believe that people with a different background (ethnic,
religious or national) enrich the cultural life of their country; 49% stated that representatives of
non-mainstream cultures rather enrich their own country; and 23% indicated that such cultural
diversity even highly enriched their country’s cultural life;

Day-to-day interaction among people belonging to different cultures is a reality in Europe. Twothirds (65%) of respondents in the 27 EU Member States were able to recall any interaction with
19
20
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_217_sum_en.pdf
19
at least one person either of a different religion, ethnic background or nationality (either EU or
non-EU) than their own in the seven days prior to being questioned;

Europeans attribute a variety of meanings to the expression “Intercultural dialogue in Europe”
most of these being closely related to the core concept, and positive. Among the meanings
frequently expressed by respondents, one finds: “conversation”, “cooperation”, “exchange” and
“mutual understanding” across all nations, religions and cultures. In response to the survey's
opening question that searched for a reaction to the phrase “Intercultural dialogue in Europe”, a
large minority (36%) could not attribute any particular meaning.
Table11. Attitudes towards intercultural dialogue by country (source: Eurobarometer 217)
Country
Cosmopolitan
Pro and keep roots
DK
SE
IE
LU
PT
HU
FR
FI
CZ
EE
ES
DE
SI
PL
UK
EU27
CY
IT
SK
EL
LV
LT
NL
AT
MT
BE
RO
BG
56
48
31
26
20
25
34
25
9
9
39
28
16
9
30
25
10
7
16
13
9
4
47
29
13
30
30
3
33
39
55
59
67
61
47
60
73
73
44
56
69
76
50
55
74
73
63
69
68
68
22
48
55
39
32
66
20
Not in favour of
diversity
6
6
7
7
8
9
10
10
10
10
11
12
12
12
13
13
14
15
16
16
16
16
18
19
20
22
22
27
It is interesting to notice that the newest members of the EU (Romania and Bulgaria) and Belgium
have the higher rates of not being in favour of diversity, though in the same time BE and Romania have
higher rates of cosmopolitan views than EU27, while Bulgaria has the lowest rate of cosmopolitanism in all
the EU27.
Discrimination is the counter part of multiculturalism. The levels of discrimination are measured by
Eurobarometer 232. Discrimination in the EU 21 .
Discrimination on the grounds of race or ethnic origin
Racial or ethnic discrimination is the type most frequently mentioned as being personally
experienced by EU citizens (and their families, friends or acquaintances). Overall, 19% stated that they had
experienced this type of discrimination.
Discrimination based on a combination of several grounds (“multiple discrimination)
Discrimination based on a combination of a number of factors (religion or belief, disability, age,
sexual orientation, gender, and race or ethnic origin) has been personally experienced by a relatively high
proportion of EU citizens. At 16%, this is the second highest percentage (following “age”) of the grounds
for discrimination covered by this survey.
Citizens from the old Member States are more likely than those from the new ones to say that they
(or their family, friends or acquaintances) have experienced discrimination based on a combination of
personal characteristics (18% in the EU15 compared to 8% in the NMS12).
It is interesting to note that the discrimination rate in EU27 is 16% while the discrimination rate in
RO (5%) and BG (5%). Here I have to take into account what Touraine (2007/2009) claims, that the
majority tolerate the minorities only in non-turbulent times. EU27 is a non-turbulent time in history. Having
in view the global economic crisis and the lack of jobs, the situation can change.
In April 2008, another survey presents new attitudes on the future of EU: Eurobarometer 227.
Expectations of the European citizens regarding the social reality in 20 years’ time 22 .
Table12. There will be more harmonious relations in [OUR COUNTRY] between people
from different cultural or religious backgrounds and nationalities (source: Eurobarometer
227)
21
22
21
Strongly
Agree
Disagree
Agree
EU27
11%
Strongly
DK/DA
Disagree
44%
28%
11%
6%
The EU is a knowledge-based society. In terms of technology, computers and the Internet access are
indicators for the knowledge society. New media are potential pillars of the European public sphere.
Eurobarometer 241.Information Society as Seen by the EU citizens 23 (fieldwork September 2008).
Table13. Internet availability in EU 27 (source: Eurobarometer 241)
Internet users Internet
Never or
No access to
almost never
the Internet
in EU27
non-users
in
used the
EU27
Internet
68%
32%
14%
18%
I interpret that the EU citizens live in an information society.
Other findings of this survey are:
-86% of Internet users agreed that it had improved their capability of being informed about current
issues (86%) and their opportunity to learn (72%).
-Seven out of 10 thought that it had improved their opportunity to share views with other people and
to learn about other cultures.
-The 25-39 year-old Internet users were the most likely to see the positive effects of the Internet in
the way they shopped, managed their finances, did a job and dealt with public authorities.
The model of values of EU 27 is to be shared with the cultures of the candidate countries. The
Europeans’ views on EU enlargement are depicted in Eurobarometer 257 24 (fieldwork: February 2009). I
interpret the information in this survey from the perspective of the values that the European citizens
consider stable in the model of values as a basis for the future enlargements of the EU: freedom and
democracy to all parts of Europe (79% agreed), good business opportunities and a better quality of life (80%
agreed), free movement of people within Europe (86% agreed), the EU’s global role (73% agreed).
23
24
22
Although non-discrimination on religious reasons is a value of the Europeans, religion does not
appear in the model of values. Gane (2008), Milbank (2008), Turner (2008) debate the position of religion
in the post-Weberian capitalism which characterizes the global society and reality we live nowadays.
In conclusion, the official model of values of the EU27 coincides with the model of values accepted
by the general public. Multilingualism and multiculturalism are the core of EU27 identity.
CONCLUSIONS
The majority of the EU27 citizens are recently aware of their European identity. New members of
the EU feel a slight deeper need to feel European. There is a European public sphere whose pillars are the
traditional media, especially newspapers. The model of values of the European culture include the
multilingualism and the multiculturalism (non-discrimination, mobility, intercultural dialogue and the
preservation of tradition and diversity), democracy, quality life, knowledge society, respect for the
fundamental human rights. The two-layer Europeanization resulted in a strong Europeanization as the EU
27 citizens’ opinion on the values they share is similar to the model of values in the official documents of
the EU. Multiculturalism in EU 27 is different from the similar phenomenon in the USA.
REFERENCES
1. Andraş, C. 2008, Geografiile simbolice ale diferentei ideologice, Ed. Institutul European, Iaşi
2. Archer, M. 1995, Realist social theory: the morphogenetic approach, Cambridge University Press
3. Bellamy, R.&Warleigh, A. 2005, Citizenship and governance in the European Union, Continuum
International Publishing Group
4.Brüggemann, M. & Kleinen-von Königslöw, K. 2009, “Let's Talk about Europe: Why Europeanization
Shows a Different Face in Different Newspapers”, European Journal of Communication; 24; pp. 27-48
5. CE 2001a, Les Europeens vus par eux-memes. Les enseignements des sondages d’opinion., Office des
publications officielles des Communautés européennes, Luxembourg
6.
CE
2001b,
The
White
Paper
of
the
Commission,
http://ec.europa.eu/governance/white_paper/index_en.htm
7. CE 2005, Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee the Regions. A New Framework Strategy for
Multilingualism, http://europa.eu/languages/servlets/Doc?id=913
23
8. CE 2008, Group of Intellectuals for Intercultural Dialogue. A Rewarding Challenge How the Multiplicity
of
Languages
Could
Strengthen
Europe,
Brussels
accessed
on
http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/lang/doc/maalouf/report_en.pdf , July, 1st 2009
9. Charusheela, S. 2007, “The Diaspora at Home”, Cultural Dynamics 2007; 19; pp. 279-299
10. Chomsky, N. 1986, Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin and Use, Praeger, New York
Ciocea, M. 2009, Securitatea culturală. Dilema identităţii în lumea globală, Ed. Tritonic, Bucureşti
11. Corvi, E., Bigi, A., NG, G. 2003, “The European Millennials versus the US Millennials: similarities and
differences”
accessed
on
http://scholar.google.ro/scholar?q=Elisabetta+CORVI%2C+Professore+Associato%2C++Dipartimento+di+
Economia+aziendale%2C+Universit%C3%A0+degli+Studi+di+Brescia++Email%3A+corvi%40eco.unibs.it++Alessandro+BIGI%2C+consulente+di+marketing%2C++Marketing+con
cept+S.r.l.+Email%3A+alessandrobigi%40gmail.com++Gabrielle+NG%2C+&hl=ro&lr=&btnG=C%C4%83utare
on
July 1st 2009
12. Codrescu, A.M & Oprea, D.A. 2009, Communication interculturelle et discourse mediatiques, Ed.
comunicare.ro, Bucureşti
13. De Ruijter, A. 1995, “Cultural Pluralism and Citizenship”, Cultural Dynamics, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 215231
14. Gane, N. 2008, “Religion, Theology and Culture: Introduction”, Theory Culture Society; 25; pp. 119123
15. Gavriluţă, N. 2009, Antropologie socială şi culturală, Polirom, Iaşi
16. Georgiu, G. 2001, Filosofia culturii, Ed. Comunicare.ro, Bucureşti
17. Habermas, J. 2001a, Public Sphere, an Encyclopedia Article in Durham, M.G.& Kellner, D. (ed.) 2001,
Media and Cultural Studies. Keywords, Blackwell Publishers
18. Habermas, J. 2001b, So, why does Europe need a Constitution?, Public lecture held in Hamburg, on 26
June 2001, first published in The Zeit, 29 June 2001, translated by Michelle Everson
19.Habermas, J. 2006, Why Europe Needs a Constitution in Rogowsky, R. & Turner,C. (ed.) 2006,
The Shape of the New Europe, Cambridge University Press
20. Healy, L. 2007, “Universalism and cultural relativism in social work ethics”, International Social Work
2007; 50; pp. 11-26
21. Hermoso, J.C. & Luca, C.G. 2006, “Civil society’s role in promoting local development in countries in
transition: A comparative study of the Philippines and Romania”, International Social Work; 49; pp. 319332
24
22. Imre, A. 2009, “National intimacy and post-socialist networking”, European Journal of Cultural Studies
; 12; pp. 219-233
23. Imre, A. &Verstraete,G. 2009, Media globalization and post- socialist identities, European Journal of
Cultural Studies, 12, pp.131-135
24. Jameson, D. 2007, “Reconceptualizing Cultural Identity and Its Role in Intercultural Business
Communication”, Journal of Business Communication; 44; pp.199-235
25. Kohli, H.K. & Faul, A.C. 2005, “Cross-cultural differences towards diversity issues in attitudes of
graduating social work students in India and the United States”, International Social Work; 48; pp. 809-822
26. König, J. (2009), “Moving Experience: Dialogues between Personal Cultural Positions”, Culture &
Psychology, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 97-119
27. Marais, L.&Marais, L. 2007, “Walking between worlds: An exploration of the interface between
indigenous and first-world industrialized culture”, International Social Work; 50; pp. 809-820
28. McKiernan, D.W . 2008, Cinema and Community, Basingstoke: Palgrave, McMillan
29. Miglietta, A. & Tartaglia, S. 2009, “The Influence of Length of Stay, Linguistic Competence, and Media
Exposure in Immigrants' Adaptation”, Cross-Cultural Research, Vol. 43, No. 1, pp.46-61
30. Milbank, J. 2008, “Paul against Biopolitics”, Theory Culture Society, 25; pp.125-172
31 .Oprea, I. (2008), Comunicare culturală şi comunicare lingvistică în spaţiul european, Institutul
European , Iaşi
32. Risse, T. &Van de Steeg, M., 2003, “An Emerging European Public Sphere? Empirical Evidence and
Theoretical Clarifications”, Paper presented to the conference on the “Europeanisation of Public Spheres,
Political Mobilisation, Public Communication and the European Union,” Science Center Berlin, June 20-22.
2003
33. Salovaara-Moring, I. 2009, “Dead Ground: Media Studies and Hidden Geographies of Knowledge”,
Television New Media 2009; 10; pp. 144-146
34. Schifirneţ, C. 2008, “The Mass Media and Tendentious Modernity in the Transition Process from
National Society to European Community”, paper presented at First ISA Forum of Sociology. Sociological
Research and Public Debate. Barcelona, September 5 – 8, 2008. Published in Civitas - Revista de Ciências
Sociaisa, volume 9, nr.1, 2009
35. Schifirneţ, C. 2009, “Identitatea românească în contextul modernităţii tendenţiale”, Revista Română de
Sociologie, nr. 5-6 (forthcoming)
36. Stone Sweet, A., Sandholtz, W.& Fligstein, N. (eds.) 2001, The Institutionalization of Europe, Oxford
University Press
25
37. Tismăneanu, V. (2001) ‘Civil Society, Pluralism, and the Future of East and Central Europe’, Social
Research 68(4): pp. 977- 991
38. Tomlinson, J. 1999, Globalization and Culture, Polity Press& Blackwell Publishers
39. Touraine, A. (2007/2009), Thinking Differently, translated by David Macey, Polity Press
40. Trenz, J.-G. 2004, “Media Coverage on European Governance. Exploring the European Public Sphere in
National Quality Newspapers”, European Journal of Communication, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp.291-319
41. Turner, B. 2008, “Religious Speech: The Ineffable Nature of Religious Communication in the
Information Age”, Theory Culture Society ; 25; pp. 219-235
42. Verstraete, G. (2009), “Timescapes. An artistic challenge to the European Union paradigm”, European
Journal
of
Cultural
Studies,
Vol.
12,
No.
2,
pp.
157-172
43. Vertovec, S. 2001, “Transnational Challenges to the ‘New’ Multiculturalism”, paper presented to the
ASA Conference held at the University of Sussex, 30 March-2 April 2001
44. Volkmer, I., 2008 Satellite cultures in Europe : Between national spheres and a globalized space,
Global Media and Communication ; 4; pp. 231-244
45. www.europa.eu
26
27