Search Results

During the inter-war years, BBC officers sought to encourage the spread overseas of the British approach to broadcasting, and prevent the American model of commercial network broadcasting from being adopted around the British world. This chapter examines the nature of those two models, and how hybrid versions were devised in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa. The chapter also looks at how the BBC sought to apply key ideas about public-service broadcasting, first developed for use at home, to its overseas operations. The role of John Reith, the BBC's first director-general, is discussed. The chapter surveys how broadcasting was organized around the British Empire during the 1920s. It analyses in detail the BBC's plans of 1929 for an empire broadcasting service, and the reasons why the Imperial Conference of 1930 refused to provide funding.

The passage of the 1934 Communications Act was a decisive but qualified defeat for the radio reformers who favored alternatives to commercial radio (and often admired the BBC). Public interest regulation had effects, and there was far more high cultural, educational and civic programming on American radio after 1934 than the commercial broadcasters left alone would have provided. In a comparative broadcasting history perspective, the American network broadcasters (NBC, CBS) can be seen as struggling to combine public service broadcasting functions with the profitable sale of entertainment. James Rowland Angell's public service broadcasting work at NBC exemplified these tensions. The broadcasters portrayed national choices about broadcasting policy as between two stark alternatives – free radio or complete state control. That obscured the many effective hybrids and compromises that other nations found satisfactory, but also the distinguished history of government broadcasting in the US – exemplified by the Department of Agriculture's radio activities.

The regulation of the EU internal market is nothing short of an unremitting balancing exercise between conflicting interests. On the one hand lies the principle of free movement, i.e., the cornerstone of the entire internal market construct, whereby service providers lawfully operating in one Member State must enjoy unrestricted access to the markets of all the other Member States; on the other hand, there are certain aims in the general interest that simply cannot be overlooked, as they often embody politically sensitive issues of particular concern for national authorities and their constituencies. The regulation of audiovisual media services, and in particular of public service media, is no exception. Whilst market integration is the foremost concern in the framework of the Union rules applying to audiovisual media services in general, public interest considerations seem to take precedence in respect of public service media. This chapter examines how this prevalence is enshrined in legislation and is affirmed in the case law of the European Courts. The first part of the chapter examines the legal framework applying to audiovisual media services, and in particular to public service media. The second part focuses on public service media, with a view to emphasizing the specificities in the application of the rules of state aids in the field of public service media.

This chapter summarizes the origin and importance of the Amsterdam Protocol, and the content and influence of the Communication on the application of the State aid rules to public service broadcasting. The Amsterdam Protocol discerns that public service broadcasting meets certain social, cultural, and democratic needs of society and plays a crucial role in maintaining pluralism in the media. The Communication lists the legal and policy instruments considered with the role of public service broadcasting. Discussion on the State aid character of State financing, applicability of the derogations in Article 87(2–3) EC and applicability of the derogations in Article 86(2) EC is provided. The European Commission has applied the guidelines of its Communication on two occasions. Both of the occasions were quite straightforward and presented no real challenge to the practical applicability of the guidelines set out in the Communication.

This chapter considers principled arguments regarding the regulation of the media and justifications for regulation. It begins by looking into some practical realities associated with the future of the institution at the heart of the UK's public service broadcasting (PSB) tradition — the BBC. It discusses the BBC Charter Review, which may offer an insight into future policy on PSB. It draws some preliminary conclusions based on the four rationales for media regulation: effective communication, diversity, economy, and public service.

This chapter argues that the continued usefulness of public service television as a policy tool must be assessed within the broader perspective of the contributions of the broader broadcasting and digital sectors to national life and should not consider public service television in isolation. For the debate about public service television to contribute to an effective policy solution, bigger questions will need to be addressed. Among them are the following: What functions should television serve in social and public life? What does UK society need from it? What roles will broadcasting — public service and commercial — play in the growing environment of streamed linear and non-linear programming? What functions and needs does public service television fulfil that are not adequately performed or met by commercial broadcasting and digital streaming?

In this lecture, the author, former chief executive at ITV, predicts the imminent demise of public service television in Britain for three reasons. First, public service broadcasting relies on regulators who are increasingly overwhelmed by the expansive sources of broadcast information: this will result in inequities. Second, it relies on an active broadcaster and a passive viewer, but ‘at the end of a tiring day viewers don't always choose what's good for them’. Third, public service broadcasting lacks any agreed definition. The author insists that public service broadcasting must give way to public interest broadcasting, which will provide salvation for the BBC. ITV must be a public interest broadcaster if it is to draw large audiences. So must the BBC, S4C, Channel 4, and Channel 5. The difference between public-interest broadcasting at the BBC and ITV is that the former must try to achieve maximum weekly reach while commercial common sense will sustain an ITV that is unequivocally in the public interest by generating diverse and high-quality television programming.

This chapter contextualizes the 2016 report A Future for Public Service Television: Content and Platforms in a Digital World through a review of relevant research on public broadcasting in Europe as well as studies of public service broadcasting in the Nordic region. The observations are structured around five key points that condense research as well as challenges, debates, and prospects: (1) the crisis discourse; (2) innovation and public service media; (3) distinctiveness; (4) editorial independence; (5) national differences and politics. Studies from other European countries have observed that an overall narrative of decline dominates the debate on public service. However, they also note that public broadcasters, in particular publicly funded institutions with long traditions, are managing better than the overall narrative describes.

This chapter illustrates how ‘most of the Holyrood political class has been reluctant to explore the boundaries between the devolved and the reserved’, even on less life-and-death issues such as broadcasting. Conversely, it also tells of at least one post-devolution success story for classic informal pre-devolution-style ‘Scottish lobbying’ in Westminster. Scotland is presently one of the UK's leading audiovisual production centres, with Glasgow as the linchpin. The capacity of the Scottish Parliament to debate questions of media concentration but also its incapacity to act legislatively has been observed. There are both political and economic calculations behind the refusal to devolve powers over the media via the Communications Act 2003. Ofcom now has a key role in policing the terms of trade for regional production that falls within a public service broadcaster's target across the UK. The BBC's position as the principal vehicle of public service broadcasting has come increasingly under question. The Gaelic Media Service set up under the Communications Act 2003 has a line of responsibility to Ofcom in London. Scottish Advisory Committee on Telecommunications (SACOT) determined four key regulatory issues needing future attention by Ofcom.

This chapter considers the need for traditional broadcasters to essentially invent public service media. Although broadcasting will continue to play a role in the public service media project, continuing to think only in terms of public service broadcasting is to ignore a situation of great opportunity. There have never been public service media — in the UK or elsewhere — despite a century of public service broadcasting experience. The arrival of Internet distribution technology with different affordances and limitations has left those in both public service and commercial television feeling unmoored and uncertain of the present and future. It is argued that instead of a regular reappraisal of public service broadcasting, the context of the development of a new mechanism of video distribution requires the more exhaustive task of identifying the ways in which the affordances of Internet-distributed video require the abandonment of the broadcast paradigm and creation of a public service paradigm that embraces the opportunities and characteristics of Internet distribution.

In this lecture, the author, chief executive of News International, offers a highly contentious and critical assessment of public service broadcasting, denouncing it as an ideology deployed by ‘propagandists’ to protect the interests of a narrow broadcasting elite, but with debilitating consequences for broadcasting in Britain. Most significantly, public service broadcasting and its ‘guardians’ militate against the prospects for viewer freedom and choice. The author's argument rests on a ‘simple principle’: ‘in every area of economic activity in which competition is attainable, it is much to be preferred to monopoly’. By contrast, public service broadcasting is nowhere clearly defined, although the author redresses this problem by suggesting that ‘anybody who, within the law of the land, provides a service which the public wants at a price it can afford is providing a public service’. He argues that the success of Sky Television will be as much a public service as ITV.

The Egyptian Radio and Television Union (ERTU) functions as a state broadcaster under the strict supervision of the Ministry of Information. To transform ERTU into a public broadcaster, Egypt should first abolish its Ministry of Information. ERTU’s Board of Trustees needs to be restructured to include reputed professionals with a vision to transform ERTU into a public broadcaster. The Board should abolish the current ERTU Charter and Code of Ethics and establish new ones. ERTU needs to operate with the interests of the public rather than the regime in mind. The new Charter should guarantee ERTU independence and establish criteria whereby ERTU should focus on non-commercial political, social, and cultural content that caters to all sectors of society. The new Charter should abolish the designation of ERTU as the sole broadcaster in the country and allow for the establishment of private terrestrial channels. ERTU should become financially independent from the state, with the public providing funding through subscriptions or taxes. The number of channels operated by ERTU should be decreased to one or two, and the staff provided with training and an efficient media strategy to follow. Research should be constantly utilized to study audiences and viewership habits.

This introduction begins with a brief discussion on the staying power of television, given the fact that it is no longer supposed to exist with the rise of the Internet and digital platforms. In fact, the Internet has not killed television but actually extended its appeal — liberating it from the confines of the living room where it sat unchallenged for half a century and propelling it, via new screens, into our bedrooms, kitchens, offices, buses, trains and streets. The chapter then describes the Puttnam Inquiry into the Future of Public Service Television and sets out the book's purpose, which is to contribute to the discussion about what kind of public service media people want and to provide some blueprints for future policy action. An overview of the subsequent chapters is also presented.

This chapter identifies three key pressures experienced by contemporary public service media. The first is funding, which pertains to debates about whether public service media should continue receiving public funds, and if so, how much and through what means they should receive it. The second is oversight, which details legal and administrative measures that threaten the independence of public service media or make it difficult for them to fulfil their civic obligations. The third is audiences, which highlights competitive pressures on public service media to cater to audiences, especially socio-demographically elite ones, rather than serve the needs of a broad, diverse population. In each domain, the public service media best equipped to deal with these pressures are those that deepen, rather than depart from, long-standing public service principles.

This chapter considers public service content outside of television. In recent years, there has been a major shift in viewing habits, with more and more people watching material on demand, not just through catch-up services such as the BBC iPlayer but also online. Greater broadband speeds have facilitated the viewing of audiovisual material through an internet connection, and the technical and financial barriers to making such content have fallen. Every newspaper, advertiser, campaigning group, agency, corporation, and brand is now in the content creation game. So too are the UK's many and diverse cultural institutions, ranging from national organisations established in statute to diverse local, regional, and charitable establishments; they could prove to be key contributors to a more plural, diverse and dynamic public service media landscape in the future.

This chapter calls for the need to begin the debate on the requirements of national public service media in the new discursive scopes of public ‘civic’ communication. In other words, it is necessary to begin to assess public service as no longer being only in the normative national parameter of territorial ‘boundedness’, but as a much needed civic space within today's sphere of globalised public communication. The BBC's public remit is still embedded in a bounded conception of the nation. For example, one aim of the BBC's remit is to sustain citizenship and civil society. However, given today's networked structures of communication, citizenship is also perceived as global citizenship, and relates not only to national responsibilities but rather to new responsibilities in a global civil society.

This chapter argues that there is still a need for public service television. Public service broadcasters fulfil a role that neither the independent young creators nor the big media corporations can really fill. There is a sweet spot there in the middle that is so important. This is also the time for young people to get behind the BBC and Channel 4, and re-appropriate young people's vision of public service broadcasting. There are so many ways in which public service broadcasters do well for under-25-year-olds: from incredibly high production values, well thought out dramas and documentaries on Channel 4 to the BBC 6 Music, 1Xtra, the World Service, Radio 4. The news is another area where there has been a big change for a lot of the young people, given their active presence in social media.

This chapter examines a partnership project in the West Midlands region which developed prison radio beyond Radio Feltham. It particularly analyses the role of the BBC in the process and the impact of the activity on establishing and formalising the Prison Radio Association (PRA). Developed through the combined influence of national broadcaster and independent prison radio activity, the chapter argues that the PRA is representative of new forms of Public Service Broadcasting (PSB) within changing media and institutional environments, achieved in partnership, and demonstrating the enduring importance of PSB values. It is evident that the partnerships and relationships forged during this period played a major role in the establishment and ongoing development of the PRA.

In this lecture, the author, former chief executive of BSkyB, cites a National Opinion Poll survey indicating that the BBC licence fee no longer represents good value for money. With BSkyB, at the time of writing, reaching seven million homes offering viewers an ‘explosion of choice’, the author argues that it is time to reassess the relationship between broadcasters and government, as well as the character of public service broadcasting. He underpins his argument by insisting that public funding offers no ‘sure-fire guarantee of quality’, and that publicly funded television must work harder than ever to justify its subsidy. The author calls for a limit to be imposed on television programmes which ‘clearly fall outside any reasonable remit for a publicly funded broadcaster’. He also proposes a system of ‘programme syndication’ in which commercial broadcasters would be given an opportunity annually to bid in a competitive auction for the programme rights to ‘half a dozen or so’ established BBC programmes.