Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end?

Transcription

1 Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? Dr. Karol Jakubowicz With a foreword by Andrew Gwynne MP KnowledgePolitics

2 Contents About the authors and Acknowledgements 3 Foreword 4 Andrew Gwynne MP Introduction: public service first, broadcasting second 5 Richard Berry Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, 7 or the beginning of the end? Dr. Karol Jakubowicz 1 What is legitimate for public service broadcasting 7 today? 2 Where is public service broadcasting headed? 10 3 Public service broadcasting and the public: a new 18 partnership 4 Directions from Europe 22 5 References 25 Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 2

3 About the authors Richard Berry is Head of Research at Knowledge Politics. Andrew Gwynne is the Labour Member of Parliament for Denton & Reddish, Parliamentary Private Secretary for Baroness Scotland of Asthal (Home Office), and a member of the All-Party Parliamentary BBC Group. Dr. Karol Jakubowicz is Director of Strategy and Analysis at the National Broadcasting Council of Poland and previously the Chair of the Steering Committee on the Mass Media at the Council of Europe. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Tom Hunt for editorial assistance, Gemma Lowe for publication design and Vivek Bhardwaj for technical support. Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 3

4 Foreword Andrew Gwynne MP Broadcasting is changing. Rarely a day goes by without more news of an innovative way to access audiovisual content over the internet, mobile phone networks or other new media. In television, meanwhile, we have moved rapidly from four main stations to hundreds of competing channels, and will soon move to a digital-only television environment. In this context, recent months have seen a heightened level of debate regarding the future of public service broadcasting in Britain. This has coincided with negotiations between the Government and our main public service broadcaster, the BBC, regarding the level of the television license fee, the BBC s primary source of revenue. Since 1997, the BBC has been revived as a creative powerhouse. From groundbreaking documentaries such as Planet Earth and globally successful comedy like The Office, through to the BBC s innovative and world-famous website, the BBC has re-established its status as one of Britain s foremost national brands. In this paper, Karol Jakubowicz widens the policy debate beyond these more immediate concerns, discussing the long-term future of public service broadcasting in the context of a rapidly changing media landscape and outlining the benefits that public service broadcasting can provide for our economy, our culture and our democracy. He offers an intriguing perspective, arguing that public service broadcasting must in the future both retain its basic characteristics and change very significantly. Such an insight echoes the reforms that the Government has pursued across the public services in general. For broadcasters, the key message will be that they can and should aim to develop a new relationship with their audiences: this will be vital as expectations as well as the technology are fundamentally changed. Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 4

5 Introduction: public service first, broadcasting second Richard Berry It seems strange that, in Britain at least, the future of public service broadcasting is coming under threat at the very time when our main public service broadcaster, the BBC, is being applauded like never before for achieving new levels of excellence in terms of its output across a variety of media platforms. Naturally, it is not the excellence that causes concern for some, but the allegedly unfair advantage the BBC is granted in order to produce output of such breadth and quality. The main accusers here are the BBC s private sector competitors who complain about one broadcaster receiving state funding to offer services they also provide privately. Of course, such a situation has been the norm throughout the history of radio and television, without causing an existential crisis for either public or private provision. It is with the development of new media platforms that this conflict has deepened. We no longer have an environment with a small number of providers the internet and digital television/radio represent near-limitless forums for broadcasting content, whether news, entertainment, sport, or anything else, and competition for audiences is much more intense. In this context, some believe it inappropriate that the BBC can attract viewers, listeners and visitors with free content, when private companies face much tougher financial constraints. Leader of the Opposition David Cameron has been the most prominent politician making this argument. While few think public service broadcasting has no role in the contemporary media, many have argued forcefully that state-funded broadcasters should not replicate services that the market can already provide. An oft-cited example is BBC News 24 other news stations can provide identical services, and thus there is no need for taxpayers money to be spent in these areas. Although these arguments are legitimate, we are right to be somewhat sceptical of them. Private and public sector have co-existed peacefully since the emergence of modern broadcasting even providing similar services and there seems no reason a priori why this should not continue in an expanded media environment. One has to suspect that the repeated emphasis on the newness of the new media suggesting that wholly reformed approaches to policy are needed is perhaps a little exaggerated. Furthermore, there is much evidence to suggest that the BBC actually stimulates private investment in new media. Last year, for example, Radio One launched a music concert in the Second Life virtual world on the internet. The event attracted 6,000 people and is credited with tripling the number of Second Life participants, substantially increasing the profitability of the company. The television license fee settlement announced recently by the Government only fuelled this ongoing debate. It was decided that the license fee the BBC s main source of revenue would be increased but only at a below-inflation rate for the next decade. Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 5

6 Many were unsure about how the deal should be interpreted. On the one hand, there is a guarantee that the state will be investing in public service broadcasting for another decade. This outcome was by no means certain and in a decade when the broadcasting market is likely to undergo substantial transformation, this is important. It's unlikely, for instance, that this deal will mean the BBC is forced to give up its (controversial) new media presence this will please its supporters as much as it frustrates its opponents. On the other hand, funding has been cut in real terms, and something will have to give. It will not be the digital switchover, or the relocation of staff to Salford, as the money for these has been ring-fenced in the deal. Of course, some of the BBC s private sector competitors complained that this cut was not large enough. Advertising revenues across the media, they say, are predicted to fall by an even greater amount, meaning the BBC s revenue will actually increase relative to the rest of the industry. The certainty of such predictions is, however, less than complete. It is clear, therefore, that Karol Jakubowicz enters contested terrain with this pamphlet. Crucially, Dr. Jakubowicz provides us with an international perspective to the debate. This is important because the international level either regional or global will be far more influential in determining the shape of policy than it has been in the past in this area. Private companies have already complained to European Union regulators that the funding of public service broadcasting breaches rules on state aid. Such complaints have so far largely been resisted as governments seek to defend their national broadcasters, but this resolve may weaken in the future. It will be on the plane of ideas as much as anywhere else that the battle is fought, and Dr, Jakubowicz argues that the ideas behind public service broadcasting remain strong. He argues that the underlying aims of public service broadcasting such as enhancing culture, promoting education, maintaining social cohesion and strengthening democracy are vital ones, and warrant public intervention. This holds true even in a transformed media environment while audiences and engagement patterns change, so must the broadcaster. Dr. Jakubowicz s approach even includes a name-change, with his use of the term public service media. His argument has a great deal to recommend it, and goes right to the heart of our approach to the information society. With changing technologies, patterns of work, and culture, we have a wealth of new opportunities to build a progressive society. Ultimately, the content of our communication networks in whatever form they take will be vital for determining how progressive the information society can be. If we give up this opportunity to take a collective, proactive choice to advance the goals we value, we may live to regret it. Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 6

7 Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? Dr. Karol Jakubowicz 1 1 What is legitimate for public service broadcasting today? According to some views, any consideration of a future for public service broadcasting is almost a contradiction in terms. As we will see below, some people want public service broadcasting (PSB) to have no future. Others have already concluded that it will not have one: Neither domestic democracy groups nor foreign donors have prioritized PSB as an option for Africa. PSB has not been assessed as a challenge, but rather as an institution belonging to the past (Kivikuru, 2006: 7). There are also those who are prepared to consider only past scenarios. Still others want PSB to have a future, but are not sure that it can be guaranteed. One thing is certain: if PSB is to have a future, it must both retain its basic characteristics and change very significantly (see Jakubowicz, 2006a). This change is absolutely necessary to allow PSB to catch up with contemporary reality in many of its aspects. This is the only way to ensure the viability and relevance of PSB and the genuine support of the public for its continued existence. Supporters of the attrition model of PSB (see below) are now on the offensive and may be very persuasive in convincing governments and policy-makers that PSB is no longer needed or should at least be significantly reduced in its scale of operation and impact on the market. According to Siune and Hulten (1998: 36), Public service broadcasting will continue as long as there is a dual system at the national or European level with enough support from the political system as well as the audience for its services. One of the pillars on which PSB rests support from the political system is beginning to waver. Therefore, there is need to strengthen the other pillar: support from the public. Strong support from this quarter may prompt a reconsideration of official policy in this area. Change must encompass practically every area of PSB activity. This obviously applies both to technology and programming. A solution will one day have to be found as concerns financing, since licence fees cannot go on forever. However, the key and, in my view, decisive change must concern the public service broadcaster s relationship with the audience. Without fundamental change in this area, PSB can hardly look forward to a long future. There is not one, but at least three answers to the question of what is legitimate for public service broadcasting today. The first is that nothing is legitimate. This is the answer given by supporters of the neo-liberal approach to PSB. According to them, the proper mechanism for the satisfaction of individual and social needs is the market where 1 This pamphlet is an amended version of a presentation delivered at the Re-visionary Interpretations of the Public Enterprise (RIPE@2006) conference, Public Service Broadcasting in the Multimedia Environment: Programmes and Platforms, November 2006 Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 7

8 required goods or services can be purchased. The law of supply and demand, together with the profit motive, will ensure provision of these goods and services. State or public sector involvement in meeting these needs is unnecessary and unwelcome. Therefore, nothing is legitimate for PSB, as it should simply be dismantled. The second answer is that only a narrow range of the services traditionally associated with PSB are legitimate for it. According to this view, the market should indeed predominate, but since it does not meet every need, there is room for the public sector to supplement what the market has to offer. Nonetheless, public institutions should under no circumstances compete with private enterprise, nor engage in any kind of activity that private entrepreneurs might wish to pursue. So, according to this marketfailure rationale for PSB, what is needed is pure PSB as a niche broadcaster, offering only broadcast content and services which private broadcasters find commercially unrewarding. This approach is reflected in the long-standing campaign of commercial broadcasters visà-vis national and European Union (EU) policy-makers (ACT, EPC, AER, 2004; VPRT, 2003). The campaign, which could be described as seeking to implement the attrition model of PSB, seeks to pursue three main strategies: 1. An arrested PSB evolution strategy (ultimately leading to the marginalization and obsolescence of PSB, culminating in its disappearance), comprising: a. A semantic strategy, arguing that public service broadcasting should remain precisely that, broadcasting, and PSB organizations should not be allowed to move into the new technologies (seen by commercial broadcasters as their next frontier and growth area, where they would like to see as little competition as possible); b. A clear and precise definition of the remit strategy, designed to obtain a detailed legal definition of PSB in its traditional form (generalist, universally accessible broadcast channels) which could then be used to block any change of the remit and means of delivering it (e.g. move into thematic channels, use of new technologies which may not be immediately accessible to all, and would in any case be used only by a part of the audience); 2. A harmless PSB strategy, comprising: a. Demands that PSB be reduced to redressing market failure by providing programming commercial broadcasters find unattractive, and thus turn into a niche broadcaster; b. Demands that PSB be prevented from running advertising; c. Demands that production of PSB content be financed by a special fund and commissioned from all comers, so PSB organizations do not monopolize funds or production capacity; 3. And a PSB no longer needed strategy, following on from the previous one, based on the argument that so much PSB content can be found in the programming of commercial broadcasters, or is/can be produced by others, that PSB organizations as such are no longer necessary for the audience to have access to it. The clearest manifestation of this approach is the approximately 30 complaints lodged with the European Commission by the private sector (Mortensen, 2005, 2006; Ward, 2002, 2003). The complaints question any new development in PSB, whether in terms of programme profiles of particular services or of technology: anything beyond the 1960s model of one-size-fits-all traditional generalist channels addressed to the entire population of a country. In short, this approach which may be called (economic) liberalism with a human face would result in a process of marginalization and the slow death of PSB. And then there is the third answer: that everything is legitimate if it serves the execution of the remit in ways that are effective and relevant to the public. This Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 8

9 approach proceeds from the view that whatever the market may offer, the community still has a duty to guarantee both provision of electronic media services free from the effect of the profit motive offering the individual both a basic supply of what he/she needs as a member of a particular society and culture, and of a particular polity and democratic system and provision of content adjusted to special needs and interests. Proponents of this approach cherish more values than just those related to the market and more motivations than just the profit motive. From this point of view, the marketfailure argument in favour of PSB is insufficient, precisely because that argument should turn on the vision of society we want to live in and the kind of service PSB provides to that society. Supporters of this approach also emphasise the need to modernise PSB and adjust it to new technological realities. Hence, they also tend to support a proposed change of name: no longer public service broadcasting, but public service (electronic) media (PSM), encompassing a much wider range of platforms than just plain old radiodiffusion. They also point to changing social realities and the need to extend the range of content provided by PSB. The present paper will explore this third approach. Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 9

10 2 Where is public service broadcasting headed? Though a great deal has to change also in the area of PSB content, let us begin with technology as here the need for change is overpowering. On the assumption that PSB should at least keep pace with changes in patterns of social communication, we need briefly to trace these processes of change. Galperin and Bar (2002) offer this view of the general pattern of electronic media development (see also Noam, 1995): Table 1. Evolution of Distribution Platforms Distribution Platform Services Business Model Competitive and Policy Issues Regulatory Model Consumer Choice/ Control Terrestrial Broadcast One-way broadcast channels Advertising/ license fees Access to and property rights over spectrum, negative and positive externalities, and economies of scale Public trustee.ex ante structural and behavioural regulation to influence content Very limited Cable/ Satellite Mostly one-way multiple video channels, and limited interactivity including video on demand, pay-per-view Some targeted advertising, license fees and subscriptions Vertically integrated distribution and content production, negative externalities, control access to consumer, and economies of size and scope Mixed public trustee and limited utility regulation. Content regulation using ex ante structural and behavioural regulations Limited IP based (Video over DSL/Broadband) Two-way interactive multiple video channels Targeted advertising, subscription and transaction fees Access control Yet to be determined High Source: Adapted from Galperin and Bar (2002). What the digital revolution means for the overall electronic media landscape is shown in Figure 1. It is clear that it is multiplying platforms of content delivery and by the same token intensifying competition on the market: Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 10

11 Figure 1. The new system of content- and service delivery New operators New systems Broadcaster Independent content provider Advertiser Cable Satellite Terrestrial Telecoms Mobile operators (A-)DSL operators Software providers Subscription management Electronic Programme Guide Pay-systems New services - PVR - Games - Mobile - Information services. Viewers, listeners, users Proprietary technical standards Source: Nissen, 2006 (after Andreas Weis, ARD). However, that is by no means the end of the story. Digitization promotes convergence, that is, the take-over of all forms of media by one technology: digital computers, capable of handling multimedia content. This changes or eliminates constraints which until now have limited communication, leading to the ability of different network platforms to carry essentially similar kinds of services, as telecommunication networks provide distant people with connectibility and access to content anywhere. The main features of fully developed convergent digital communication which most likely will be the prevalent (though not the only) mode of communication in the information society include: Multimedia communication; Interactivity: interchangeable sender/receive roles; Pull technology (non-linear, on-demand communication and access to content, i.e. take what you want, when you want it ) gradually replaces push technology (linear communication: take what you are given, when it is available ); Asynchronous communication: content can be stored and await the user s decision to access it, ultimately doing away with traditional linear-time delivery of content in electronic media (unless it is wanted or needed); Individualization/personalization (customisation): both the sender and the user are able to guide communication flows in such a way that the sender can address individual users with content selected according to different criteria, or users can select content from what is on offer; Portability of terminals and mobility: the ability to receive content while on the move, as well as the ability to receive specific, time-sensitive and often location-sensitive information; Disintermediation (elimination of intermediaries, e.g. media organizations, as anyone can offer information and other content to be directly accessed by users and receivers) and neo-intermediation (emergence of new intermediaries, especially on the Internet, capable of offering new services or packaging content in new ways); Anyone, Anything, Anytime, Anywhere the ultimate goal of access to anyone from any place and at any time, and to all existing content stored in electronic memory. Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 11

12 These features of convergent digital communication are profoundly changing patterns of societal communication, especially mediated communication, as shown in Figure 2: Figure 2. Bordejwik, van Kaam: Typology of Information Traffic Control of information/content store Central Individual Control of time and choice of subject Central ALLOCUTION (push) REGISTRATION Individual Adapted from McQuail, 2005: 146. CONSULTATION CONVERSATION (pull) ( semiotic democracy ) - redistribution of information traffic due to new technologies. Traditional mass media (including PSB) naturally fell squarely within the allocution model. Now, allocution is, to some degree, being complemented (or gradually replaced?) by consultation and conversation. This is aided by a new stage in the development of the internet, known as Web 2.0, based on an implicit "architecture of participation", a built-in ethic of cooperation, in which the service acts primarily as an intelligent broker, connecting the edges to each other and harnessing the power of the users themselves (O Reilly, 2005; see also Sifry, 2006). All this, says Stark (2006), amounts to a revolution based on a simple concept: semiotic democracy, or the ability of users to produce and disseminate new creations and to take part in public cultural discourse. Users are by and large developing and posting their own original creations. Anyone can now become a creator, a publisher, an author via this new form of cultural discourse, a platform to publish to the world at large that grants near instant publication and access. The publisher-centric business models of the 20th century will not last, says Stark. We will see massive disintermediation in the next decade or so. More artists, creators, citizen journalists (see Kim, Hamilton, 2006, on OhmyNews ) and others will self-publish, and they will find ways to do so in a sustainable way, perhaps by selling mp3s on their website, opportunities for production work, or touring to a greater number of fans. What is emerging is a digital commons, also known under other names, e.g. "information commons (Kranich, 2004). This is also confirmed by the use of social networking websites in the United Kingdom: The high growth in social networking sites - and in other areas of user-generated internet content - does not seem to be merely an ephemeral phenomenon. Many industry observers believe that this could signal the next stage in the democratization of the internet - meaning that consumers are no longer merely end users of information and services provided by a smaller number of hosts/content generators, but instead are increasingly becoming both consumers and generators themselves. (OFCOM, 2006: 110) The emergence of conversation in mediated electronic communication marks a new stage of social communication. Of course, we should not get carried away. Historically, media development has been cumulative, rather than substitutive, so allocution (broadcasting) is unlikely to disappear in the information society: Internet TV will not substitute for traditional TV for a considerable period of time. The different forms and transmission and media will complement each other (Henten, Tadayoni, 2002: 19). As The Economist has put it, Certainly, digital media will create new stars and new businesses, but making high-quality video content will always be a daunting and expensive task. Music or a blog can be composed from a bedroom, but not an episode of Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 12

13 Friends ( Don't write off Hollywood and the big media groups just yet, The Economist, Jan. 19th 2006). In another article The Economist drives the point home. Commenting on News Corporation s move into the internet and other new media, it concludes: Nevertheless, it is News Corporation's big legacy businesses (that is, the old media) that will mostly determine whether the company can adapt to a new era for the media industry. That is why Mr. Murdoch will need to keep focusing on making money from television, films and newspapers as well as his trendy new web communities ( Old mogul, new media: Can Rupert Murdoch adapt News Corporation to the digital age? The Economist, Jan. 19th 2006). Nevertheless, the digital revolution will mean significant changes in the media. Future trends may include the inability of free-to-air channels to survive, or the inability of electronic media to provide much local content. Furthermore, we are seeing what has been called the mediatization of the Internet and internetization of the mass media (Fortunati, 2005; see also Henten, Tadayoni, 2002). This will have a profound effect on the content, user experience (for example, interactivity) and on the production process: Starting to work on the Internet to produce television programmes and being able to include users as agents in the project right from the start is a way of creating a useful synergy, by making use of the interactivity offered by the internet in an original way, that is not a posteriori on an already made product, but a priori, in planning the product itself (Fortunati, 2005: 41-42). These changes will have implications for the development of PSB. Suter (2005) has depicted the evolution of PSB in Britain in the following way: Figure 3. Stages of PSB Evolution in the UK Monopoly Managed economy Multichannel Multimedia Fully Digital However, in view of the attrition model of PSB described above, the exact consequences of reaching the multimedia and fully digital stages of development are in dispute. Can PSB use multimedia in order to treat the internet as another, standalone platform for delivery of PSB content and for the performance of the remit, or should the internet be used only in an auxiliary capacity, to support on-air programming? And what does fully digital mean? Can PSB fully use the opportunities offered by digital ICTs, or should it confine itself to migrating its unchanged generalist channels to digital television? (see Aslama, Syvertsen, forthcoming). These are no idle questions. In fact, the future of PSB hangs in the balance. Wiio (2004) has identified a wide range of service packages which digital television can provide. If fully digital means no more than PSB migration to digital television, then PSB will be incapable of providing the great majority of those service packages, as shown in Table 5: Table 5. Digital television service packages offered by PSB and commercial operators according to the attrition model of PSB Service packages Who will be able to offer them Basic programmes (channels) that are more diverse than the current analogue television world Both PSB and commercial broadcasters Compilation programmes (channels) targeted at a special audience that is more diverse than the current analogue television world Individual programme services Interactive programme services Online programme services of standard Commercial broadcasters alone programmes Online services of archives etc. A pay-tv environment More advanced device management (including time transfer capability) Adapted from Wiio, Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 13

14 If that were to be the case, then PSB would certainly have no future. This view of PSB in the 21 st century is obviously rejected by the public service broadcasters themselves (see Digital Strategy Group, 2002). When the BBC recently announced its Creative Future programme, Director-General Mark Thompson said among other things: The BBC should no longer think of itself as a broadcaster of TV and radio and some new media on the side. We should aim to deliver public service content to our audiences in whatever media and on whatever device makes sense for them, whether they are at home or on the move. We can deliver much more public value when we think across all platforms and consider how audiences can find our best content, content that's more relevant, more useful and more valuable to them. I see a unique creative opportunity. This new digital world is a better world for public service content than the old one. ( Creative Future - BBC addresses creative challenges of on-demand.) (emphasis added) As is clear from this quotation, the use of new technologies is primarily driven by the programming opportunities they offer in creating additional ways of more effectively delivering the public service remit. This is also underlined by Nissen (2006), as he identifies new challenges facing PSB and ways of responding to them: Figure 4. Public Service Media obligations their background and consequences Challenge/ background: Public service obligation Consequences for the PSM remit and services: Mainstream, mass market offering not meeting individual needs Internationalization, globalisation Disintermediation, fragmentation, individualisation. Serving the individual citizen Sustaining, defending national culture and cultural diversity. Fostering democratic process. Enhancing social, political and cultural cohesion. Serving as the civic market place of modern society. Providing content and services to small groups with specific needs; citizens as individual consumers. Distinctive content and services for large audiences PSM being used regularly by all citizens (high reach ) Source: Nissen, Nissen thus clearly agrees with Wiio (2004) who noted that PSB needs to operate three types and levels of services: Traditional linear programme services for the general public. In all probability, these services will remain the core of public service television services in the foreseeable future. The services for large audiences can include programme-specific interactivity or items whose reception calls for active involvement by the recipient. Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 14

15 However, the nature of basic services for large audiences ought to also include the fact that they can be received as intact entities also without value added services Linear services targeted at special audiences. The core of these consists of special channels without generalist audience objectives but which seek to reach certain target groups. Typical channels of this kind include channels specialising in news and current affairs production, cultural channels and language-based channels. The level of interactivity of services for special audiences ought to be higher than it is in the case of services targeted at the general public. As their name would suggest, the audiences gained by these channels are smaller than the audiences for the traditional basic channels. Personal services, performing what is known as personalized public service. These services include all those services which each recipient can as an individual choose to use. Central to these services is strong interactivity; they can be "ordered" either from the public service operator's own service garden or through digital television from the network. The public service operator can be responsible for the contents of these services only in so far as they are included in that public service operator's own range of products. The level of interactivity is higher the closer one moves towards personal services. These personalized public services can be programme-linked, or programmeindependent, providing value-added services. Some examples of programme-linked services are provided in Figure 5. Figure 5. Extending public service TV and radio with new media. Public service task TV & Radio Extending with New Media (examples) Inform the public of events of significance to their daily lives Broadcast extra news programmes Alert-services on mobile phones (text, image) Providing extra information (on demand) Encourage participation in public debate Invite listeners and viewers to take part in TV and radio programmes WEB and SMS-services as an integral part of TVprogrammes (e.g. voting and comments) Provide forums and communities on web sites Provide value for money by moving towards the Anything, Anytime, Anywhere paradigm Re-running radio and TV programmes Electronic programme guide and metadata to make time-shift easier on personal video recorders Provide archive material on-demand via the Internet Streaming radio (and later TV) TV and radio on handheld devices, e.g. news and sports Provide quality entertainment Entertainment shows Online games on the web Interaction with entertainment shows Educate Educational broadcasts Offer archive materials of educational value and interactive applications (with individual options) Source: Nissen, There are, however, also other examples of the creating use of new technologies by public service broadcasters. The BBC will allow audiences to create personal radio stations from its content. The planned service - provisionally called MyBBCRadio will use a BBC iplayer that will combine existing online radio services, along with TV on demand, to allow the audience greater flexibility and choice over when it can view or listen to shows. MyBBCRadio would use peer-to-peer technology to provide thousands or millions of individual radio services created by audiences themselves. Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 15

16 All of this raises important issues concerning the fundamental features of PSB as traditionally understood. The use of thematic services, and even more so of personalized ones, can be seen as undercutting what has always been regarded as a distinguishing element of PSB, that is, the universality of content and access. Universality in this sense was a requirement of the early phase of PSB development, a time of an economy of scarcity in broadcasting, when universal service provision via the PSB was the only appropriate solution at the time. Today, audiences are signalling by their user behaviour that in addition to generalist services, they also want more and more thematic and personalized/individualized content. This is why, in its 2002 report Media with a purpose: Public Service Broadcasting in the digital era, the European Broadcasting Union s (EBU) Digital Strategy Group called for a redefinition of basic concepts relating to public service broadcasting, including universality of access and universality of content: Universality of content can no longer be understood as one-size-fits-all programming on one or more broadcast channels, but as both universality of basic supply on generalist channels (including mass-appeal, entertainment programming), which will be central to what public service broadcasters offer to the public, and universality across the full portfolio of services, some of them specialized or tailored for specific audiences, adding up to a more extended and comprehensive range of services. Universality of access can no longer be understood as a couple of terrestrial channels available to the entire population, but as presence on all relevant media and platforms with significant penetration, but also the ability to deliver a personalized public service in the pull, online and on-demand environment. (see EBU, 2002) The question arising from this, of course, is what is meant by relevant media platforms? Relevance should no longer be tied to the ability to perform a universal service or to the size of the audience, rather to the ability to perform the service needed by the audience, in ways it expects to be served. All this, of course, richly justifies the proposed change of name for PSB (see Nissen, 2006): if broadcasting is to be only one of many means of delivery for public service content, then we should drop the B from the name and speak about public service (electronic) media, or PSM. Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 16

17 3 Public service broadcasting and the public: a new partnership There are multiple possible scenarios for the future of PSB/PSM programming. Hujanen (2002) believes that in order to survive in the digital media ecology, PSB must retain and indeed concentrate on its role as a content producer and provider. That is certainly true, especially given doubts as to the future of local content on television, but the moot question concerns the nature of that content. The model of PSB/PSM for the future can most appropriately be called one of full portfolio distinctiveness. This is needed also in order for PSB/PSM to retain its role as an effective tool of structural regulation of the electronic media market in general. Full portfolio refers both to the full range of platforms and forms of delivery that PSM institutions should be able to use, and to the full range of content that they should offer. As noted by Collins (2003), the public service character and obligations are of the essence and must inform the very fabric and texture of the broadcaster It also follows that the public character is reflected in the overall schedule and is not something which inheres in individual programmes which are then distributed across a schedule, somewhat like sultanas in a fruitcake. Also the BBC (2004) notes that today the public, both in the BBC s research and in a recent large-scale survey conducted by Ofcom, continue to define public service broadcasting (PSB) not as a narrow set of particular programme categories which the market may fail to provide, but as a broad and integrated system of programmes and services. To them, PSB includes soaps, drama, sport, comedy and natural history just as much as (and in some cases, even more than) the traditional public service categories of current affairs, arts and religion. Let us also note, that speaking during the European Audiovisual Conference in 2005, Mark Thompson. BBC Director General, noted Guaranteed, large-scale European investment in many categories of content will continue to require active public intervention. There's a big difference between simple variety and genuine choice. Many genres will be underrepresented not just current affairs, the arts and religion, but also the rather less obviously public service genre of comedy. The digital space is a public space, an increasingly important part of the wider public realm. It will need active civic intervention and significant public investment if it is deliver its full potential to the people of Europe. Distinctiveness, on the other hand, refers primarily to content. The rationale for PSM existence is that it offers content different from that of commercial broadcasters (see Bardoel, d Haenens, Peeters, 2004). This is why, for example, Mark Thompson said in his already quoted speech that it will be hard for PSB to continue to justify their historic levels of acquisition of US imports when this is available elsewhere. It is customary to say that the traditional public service remit fully retains its relevance and importance in the 21 st century. This is no doubt true. Yet, at the same time, nothing is the same as it was 80 years ago when that remit was first formulated. Social, cultural, technological and economic change has been so profound that the traditional remit can by no means respond to the needs of the public today. Changing circumstances require its thorough redefinition and extension, by adding new elements to those from the past. In the tables below, I will present ways of extending the PSB remit in response to new circumstances, in the four key areas of political citizenship and democracy, culture, education, and finally social cohesion: Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 17

18 Table 6. New PSB/PSM tasks in relation to political citizenship and democracy Traditional tasks of PSB Additional Tasks of PSM Serve democracy at local, regional, national level; Inform citizens of the work of international organizations Represent civil society vis-a-vis the authorities Contribute to creating a public sphere and elements of Provide a forum of public debate a civil society at the regional, continental and global Serve as a watchdog of the government levels Serve as a watchdog of international and global organizations Develop social capital and a sense of community and co-responsibility for the nation-state at a time when cyberspace allows individuals to participate in virtual communities and become detached from their own societies and nations Table 7. New PSB/PSM tasks in relation to culture 2 Traditional tasks of PSB Development and protection of national culture and identity (as well as of those of minorities), including: providing universal access to culture, raising the cultural competence of the audience, creating new audiovisual works, supporting and promoting creative talent, investment into domestic audiovisual production, facilitating cultural events, promoting the national culture(s) abroad Additional Tasks of PSM Serving minorities and immigrant communities in a way which satisfies their cultural and linguistic needs, but does not prevent their integration with the rest of the population; Creating a sense of affinity and understanding with the people of other countries in the region, especially if the country in question is involved in some international integration scheme; Promoting intercultural and inter-religious dialogue at home and internationally; Promoting acceptance of, and respect for, cultural diversity, while at the same time introducing the audience to the cultures of other peoples around the world; Striving to prevent, or reduce, the digital divide, so that no-one is prevented from access to culture via the new technologies. Table 8. New PSB/PSM tasks in relation to education Traditional tasks of PSB Broadcast school and educational programming Launch projects like the Open University Additional tasks of PSM Contribute to life-long learning systems Contribute to e-learning Adjust educational content to the requirements of the 21 st century (see e.g. Varis, n.d.) Table 9. Tasks of PSB in terms of social cohesion Traditional tasks of PSB Create a reference point in programming for society as a whole as a way of promoting social cohesion and integrating all members of the audience; Reject any discrimination in programming (or employment) Additional tasks of PSM Public service media should contribute to removing the digital divide and exclusion by: developing strong and recognizable programme and institutional brands, serving as a beacon for people among the multitude of new content providers; being available on all digital platforms, and thus attracting people to gain access to them; supporting traditional broadcasting content with Internet and interactive resources; providing multimedia interactive services, independent and complimentary web services; serving as a trusted third party, a reliable and trustworthy guide to content in the online world; actively promoting digital media literacy and awareness of the tools of the information society, in particular the use of Internet; providing content in local and minority languages in order to encourage minorities to use the tools of the information society, as well as for groups neglected by commercial content providers; promoting open standards in API, CA/CI. etc. Public service broadcasting has come a long way since its paternalistic beginnings. One thing, however, has remained basically unchanged, and that is the asymmetrical 2 For more on this, see Jakubowicz, 2006b. Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 18

19 relationship between PSB organizations and their audience. In this new era, it will be vital to develop a new partnership between the public and PSB. Scannell (1989: ) noted that PSB despite its fundamentally democratic thrust (in that it made available to all virtually the whole spectrum of public life and extended the universe of discourse), and the original purpose was to introduce social equality in access to information and all other content) has been a system based on unequal and asymmetrical relations between broadcasters and the audience. In this system of representative communicative democracy, power accrued to the representatives, not those whom they represent. According to Ytreberg (2002), there are four ideal types of self-presentation of PSB: paternalists, bureaucrats, charismatics and avant-gardists. Not one of these ideal types assumes anything else than an institution apart, aloof from the audience to which it speaks and seeking legitimation in terms of the content it delivers to the audience. Not one of these ideal types assumes the renunciation of PSB power. Not only that. Scannell s (n.d.: 27) comment The sense that the BBC is part of the world of them rather than us a world that is somewhere else than where listeners and viewers are has persisted until this day can apply to many other PSB organizations, as well. This, quite clearly, cannot continue. The original model of PSB was based, as noted above, on unequal, asymmetrical relations between the audience on the one hand, and broadcasters, cultural elite and the state on the other. That was legitimated by social divisions and stratification. Since then, the levelling of living and educational standards as well as democratization have led to the rejection of such asymmetrical relations. Now, the process has gone further: as Kűng (2002) puts it, we are at the end of the era when experts dictate and the journalist is always right. More than that, at the time of semiotic democracy Many [ ] barriers are already breaking down the lines between "amateur" and "professional", and "user" and "creator" are becoming increasingly blurred (Stark, 2006). Of course, we must not fall prey to the naïve belief, prevalent at one time in the democratization of communication discourse (see Jakubowicz, 1993), that people badly served by existing radio systems (including women, trade unionists, the minorities, the blind, the housebound) "given half a chance, might also become broadcasters in their own right" (Partridge, 1982: 2). Not by any means will everyone become a professional. Yet, as Stark (2006) points out, the age of the superstar is set to decline. As more people have more access to culture that interests them, coupled with the proper tools to get them there, it is highly likely she continues that they will not all gravitate toward the same megastars. Throughout the last fifty years, culture in the western world has primarily been filtered by a few major corporate entities, sometimes looking for the next best thing, and increasingly trying just to recreate it. The digital cultural revolution, if it materialises, will enable us to forgo those filters and seek out more of what we like, or perhaps enable us to discover something we love, but would have never known it otherwise. Unless PSB organizations grasp this and reorient their approach to the public accordingly, they will indeed be doomed, Collins, Finn, McFadyen and Hopkins (2001: 11) similarly point to the important role of the PSB broadcasters themselves in safeguarding their own future: People should be able to feel that public service broadcasting is theirs [ ] New media, as several public service broadcasters have recognized, provide striking opportunities to break out of [the] take what you are given mode. But organizational changes also offer public service broadcasters to build new relationships of partnership, identification, and sense of shared ownership which involve viewers, listeners and Web surfers indeed, which make receivers into senders (see also Kearns, 2003). This issue, however, has wider ramifications. John Keane (1991, 1993) has called for a fundamental revision of the public service model, so that it would aim to facilitate a genuine commonwealth of forms of life, tastes and opinions, to empower a plurality of Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 19

20 citizens who are governed neither by despotic states nor by market forces. It would circulate to them a wide variety of opinions (Keane, 1993: 6). This would serve the purpose of decommodifying and maximizing freedom and equality of communication, and would require in Keane s view massive public intervention into the media system in order to develop a plurality of non-state media and, among other things, to guarantee rights of access to air time for individuals, groups and independent programme makers. In short, Keane s legal, institutional and financial proposals concerning practical ways and means of implementing this concept harked back to the ideas of the 1960s and 1970s. If, however, one fast-forwards to the 21 st century, it becomes obvious that all this is in the process of emergence thanks to the information and communication technologies. Thus, Keane s vision which has a great deal to commend it can largely be achieved simply by opening up PSM media to the world of semiotic democracy and encouraging them to keep abreast of trends in societal communication. One modest example of his is a weblog written by editors from across BBC News outlets on television, radio and online. It aims to make the corporation's editorial decisionmaking process more transparent. The idea is to institute direct dialogue between the editors and the audience, as that the editors may obtain immediate feedback regarding their programmes and engage in discussion with interested viewers and listeners. However, the main avenue to explore is how to introduce user-generated content into the PSM programme offer naturally without compromising its quality. This would serve a number of purposes: it would allow PSM to acknowledge the role of the public as an active partner, and no longer just passive receiver; to reconnect with the public in ways suited to the 21 st century and to make public media truly public. While practical ways of achieving this goal would require thorough consideration, this would fundamentally democratize PSM and bring it into line with trends in society and social communication. Public service broadcasting: a new beginning, or the beginning of the end? 20