The present German media structures are subject to a fundamental process of self-transformation due to technological as well as societal dynamics. This is especially the case for public service broadcasting. In the post-war era, the public service networks were one of the central intermediary institutions of organized pluralism, serving both the state and society at large. It is not only the growing competition between public and private broadcasters that has led to dramatic changes to the role of public sector broadcasters. The public sector is also being challenged by the rise of the entertainment economy and a shift in focus from public to private affairs. This paper describes the hitherto established role of public service broadcasting and its present crisis. The paper then proposes a proactive legal and political regulatory strategy, which might help find a new role for public broadcasters in a much more fragmented society. The proposed strategy follows the paradigm of proceduralization, which is also prevailing in many other parts of the institutional structures of postmodern society.

[Editors’ Note: This short note concerns the most recent acquittals in the Mannesmann criminal trial against former Mannesmann CEO, Klaus Esser; Deutsche Bank's CEO (Vorstandssprecher) and then Member of Mannesmann's supervisory board, Josef Ackermann, and other members of the Supervisory Board. The Landgericht [Regional Court] Düsseldorf acquitted all six defendants on 22 July 2004, and this timely note provides but for a first rendition of the circumstances, the reactions and the thrust of the judgment. For more extensive background to the criminal proceedings against Esser, Ackermann et al. and the importance that domestic and international observers have regularly been assigning to this case in the context of a worldwide corporate governance debate, see already Peter Kolla's article in the 1 July 2004 Issue of German Law Journal. German Law Journal will publish a more extensive case commentary in the coming months. Meanwhile, the Mannesmann proceedings have, once more, highlighted to German, European and International observers the particular features of law and politics in “Germany Inc.”, “Rhenish Capitalism”, or “Rhineland Capitalism”. As begun in the aftermath of Josef Ackermann's inthronization at the head of Deutsche Bank and Ackermann's subsequent transformation of the Board's control structure, German Law Journal has published several contributions to the ongoing changes in German corporate governance and its embeddedness within the specific German economic and legal system. In this issue, we are publishing a fine piece by Jürgen Hoffmann, Professor of Sociology in Hamburg, on the current interdisciplinary debate over the future fate of so-called Rhineland Capitalism. In the next issue, to be published on 1 September 2004, Professor Christopher Allen of the University of Georgia will further deepen this inquiry and place the contemporary debate over the possible end of Rhineland capitalism in the historical context of Germany's development in the 20th Century. The Editors of German Law Journal are very pleased and honored to be able to provide for a further forum for this important debate, bringing together lawyers, economists, political scientists and sociologists, for a much needed exploration of the historical and political origins as well as of the legal framework of Germany's much critizised and, at the same time, ardently praised system of corporate governance and industrial relations. We invite our readers to contribute to this debate, which has so far found too little resonance in Germany itself. The Editors.]

The European Union takes on a new look. The Constitutional Treaty, which was agreed by the heads of State or Government on 18 June 2004, will, admittedly, not reinvent Europe, but it will establish a new foundation for Europe. It is true that originally the Constitutional Treaty was only supposed to improve Europe's legal bases and to make the European idea and the institutions of the European Union more accessible to the citizens. However, through the concept of a Constitution alone, the Constitutional Treaty has created a vigorous political impulse, and has marked a new level of Europe's identity. The use of the term “Constitution,” however, also gives rise to ideas, hopes and fears that in some cases need to be corrected.

In April 2003 I commented on the European Commission's Action Plan on a More Coherent European Contract Law [COM(2003) 68 final] and the Green Paper on the Modernisation of the 1980 Rome Convention [COM(2002) 654 final]. While the main argument of that paper, i.e. the common neglect of the inherent interrelation between both the further harmonisation of substantive contract law by directives or through an optional European Civil Code on the one hand and the modernisation of conflict rules for consumer contracts in Art. 5 Rome Convention on the other hand, remain pressing issues, and as the German Law Journal continues its efforts in offering timely and critical analysis on consumer law issues, there is a variety of recent developments worth noting.

[Editors’ Note: The 22 July 2004 acquittals of all six defendants in the criminal proceedings against former Mannesmann CEO, Klaus Esser; Deutsche Bank's CEO (Vorstandssprecher) and then Member of Mannesmann's supervisory board, Josef Ackermann, and other members of Mannesmann's Supervisory Board have, once more, highlighted to German, European and International observers the particular features of law and politics in “Germany Inc.”, “Rhenish Capitalism”, or “Rhineland Capitalism”. As begun in the aftermath of Josef Ackermann's inthronization at the head of Deutsche Bank and Ackermann's subsequent transformation of the Board's control structure, German Law Journal has published several contributions to the ongoing changes in German corporate governance and its embeddedness within the specific German economic and legal system. In his fine piece, Jürgen Hoffmann, Professor of Sociology in Hamburg, surveys the current interdisciplinary debate over the future fate of so-called Rhineland Capitalism and reconstructs Germany's recent history in an international context. In the next issue, to be published on 1 September 2004, Professor Christopher Allen of the University of Georgia will further deepen this inquiry and place the contemporary debate over the possible end of Rhineland capitalism in the historical context of Germany's development in the 20th Century. The Editors of German Law Journal are very pleased and honored to be able to provide for a further forum for this important debate, bringing together lawyers, economists, political scientists and sociologists, for a much needed exploration of the historical and political origins as well as of the legal framework of Germany's much critizised and, at the same time, ardently praised system of corporate governance and industrial relations. We invite our readers to contribute to this debate, which has so far found too little resonance in Germany itself. The Editors.]