Public Service Media in Europe

Law, Theory and Practice

Karen Donders

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• Print ISBN: 9781138477056
• eBook ISBN: 9781351105545
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Law Theory & Practice
• Index: Business

Contributing to a rethink of Public Service Media, this book combines theoretical insights and legal frameworks with practice, examining theory and policy development in a bottom-up manner.

It explores the practices of Public Service Media across Europe, assessing the rules that govern Public Service Media at both the EU and the National Member State level, identifying common trends, initiated by both the European Commission and individual countries, illustrating the context-dependent development of Public Service Media and challenging the theories of Public Service Broadcasting which have developed an ideal-type public broadcaster based on the well-funded BBC in an atypical media market. Seeking to further explore the actual practices of Public Service Media and make recommendations for the development of more sustainable policies, this book offers case studies of rules and practices from across a variety of EU Member States to consider the extent to which public broadcasters are making the transition to public media organisations, and how public broadcasters and governments are shaping Public Service Media together.

This book is a must-read for all scholars who take an interest in Public Service Media, media policy and media systems literature at large. It will also be of interest to practitioners working in government, Public Service Media and commercial media.

1Introduction

A mismatch between Public Service Media theory, law and practice

Should Public Service Broadcasting/Media be part of our societies?

For many decades, proponents of Public Service Broadcasting have argued it is not there to address market failure, but to further a societal project that prioritises citizen needs over consumer preferences (Garnham, 2000). It is there to contribute to the ‘good society’ (Galbraith, 1996). While this view has indeed suffered from the neoliberal upsurge in the 1980s, it remains at the core of most scholarly work on Public Service Broadcasting and its more modern version, Public Service Media. And, admittedly, most Western and Northern European governments cling to the idea of an informing, educating and entertaining public broadcaster (Donders, 2012). Public Service Broadcasting as well as the institutions traditionally entrusted with its delivery have proven to be resilient. Public broadcasters are an essential, if not in many countries the main, part of ‘cultural policy toolkits’ (Gibbons and Humphreys, 2012: 1‒17). Nevertheless, quite some research on this issue has forecasted the ‘decline and fall of Public Service Broadcasting’ (see Tracey, 1998; see also Jakubowicz, 2007a; Bardoel and Lowe, 2007). While such a scenario has not become a reality so far, pessimist views on the future of Public Service Broadcasting often reign in scholarly debates (for an evaluation see Collins et al., 2001). They take away attention from a necessary and to some extent basic re-evaluation of Public Service Broadcasting in the 21st century. Equally tricky has been the huge attention for public broadcasters’ presence online and the shift from Public Service Broadcasting to, what is commonly referred to as, Public Service Media. Alternative concepts to describe the transition for public broadcasters offering radio, television and – on top – online services are public service content and public service communication. Contributions on specific Internet services (Steemers, 2003), public value tests (Donders and Moe, 2011), radio and television versus online offers (Ramsey, 2018), public service algorithms (Bonini, 2019), and so on, have their merit. The digital ‘turn’ presents significant challenges for public broadcasters. However, theoretical, political, and strategic reflections on the future of Public Service Broadcasting deal also with other profound choices made in, for and by society.

As proclaimed by Bauer (2012), communication policy research should not stick to a reactive, descriptive approach, but engage more in normative, prescriptive endeavours (see also Puppis and Just, 2012). Focus should thus be on fundamental questions. Specifically, we should ask ourselves what type of society we want and whether Public Service Broadcasting is part of that society. In his provocative, much celebrated, but also fiercely criticised and disputed essay, ‘Ill Fares the Land’, Tony Judt (2010) essentially asks very similar questions. Obviously the subject of Judt’s work is not the media. Rather, Judt is concerned with trends in capitalist societies at large and the mounting inequality therein. His work, moreover, makes apparent he sets out from a conflict theoretical vision on society, assuming that the exploitation of one class really and effectively serves the interests of the ruling class. I would argue such a view runs the risk of being overly reductionist, as are several political economy studies, whether concerned with the research of the media, be it from critical leftist or rather neoliberal and right-wing perspective (Curran, 2014: 28). Nevertheless, Judt points at very pertinent trends such as the increasing reliance on the, supposedly, optimal functioning of markets, our unceasing over-focus on efficiency and an upsetting ignorance of inequality at the macro, meso, micro and personal levels of society. Whereas these are ‘big’ questions about life and the way we collectively organise it, the answer to the questions Tony Judt asks are directly related to the manifold questions that are raised in academic, policy and practitioner debates on Public Service Broadcasting.

Something is profoundly wrong with the way we live today. For thirty years we have made a virtue out of the pursuit of material self-interest: indeed, this very pursuit now constitutes whatever remains of our sense of collective purpose. We know what things cost but have no idea what they are worth. We no longer ask of a judicial ruling or a legislative act: Is it good? Is it fair? Is it just? Is it right? Will it help bring about a better society or a better world? Those used to be the political questions, even if they invited no easy answers. We must learn once again to pose them. The materialistic and selfish quality of contemporary life is not inherent in the human condition. Much of what appears ‘natural’ today dates from the 1980s: the obsession with wealth creation, the cult of privatisation and the private sector, the growing disparities of rich and poor. And above all, the rhetoric that accompanies these: uncritical admiration for unfettered markets, disdain for the public sector, the delusion of endless growth.

(Judt, 2010: 1‒2)

‘Disdain for the public sector’ (cf. quote above) is apparent in discussions on Public Service Broadcasting and, more recently, similar concepts to talk about it such as Public Service Media. There is still audience support though, albeit that varies significantly across countries and regions. While over 70 per cent of citizens voted for the Swiss public broadcaster in the No Bilag referendum in 2018, inhabitants of Valencia in Spain hardly protested against the government’s decision to abolish the regional public broadcaster where 1,800 people worked and replace it with a much smaller organisation of about 350 employees later on. While massive outcry followed the abolition of Greek public broadcaster ERT in 2013 (Donders, 2013), much less noise is being made in Poland where the PiS government effectively and legally turned the public into a state broadcaster. This mixed stance of audiences has to do with the extent to which the public broadcaster actually represents their interest, but also the hope that the public interest is or could be at the heart of what the public broadcaster will do in the future. In other words: does the practice of Public Service Broadcasting match with the theory? And is the law the glue to ensure that match or the opposite?

For each argument against the evolution from Public Service Broadcasting to a policy project that is more future-proof, there is an argument in favour. Several disruptions, notably those linked to digitisation and internationalisation of media, have put pressure on the existing theory supporting Public Service Broadcasting. Even those scholars setting out from a social responsibility view on ‒ as it is now most often referred to ‒ Public Service Media, call for a fundamental rethinking of the policy idea, project and responsible institutions that are so ‘near and dear’ to many European citizens’ hearts.

Aim of the book

This book aims to contribute to the rethinking of Public Service Media, confronting theoretical with insights on Public Service Media laws and practices. Its main aim is to contribute to theory development in a bottom-up manner, looking at the laws governing and the actual practices of Public Service Media across Europe. Largely, I set out from the observation that most work on Public Service Broadcasting and, in extension, Public Service Media has developed theories that depict an ideal-type of public broadcaster instead of explanatory theories. These theories offer guidance as to what we want Public Service Media to be. However, they do not tell a lot about why the law and practice deviate from that. Moreover, the main inspiration for this ideal-type public broadcaster remains the BBC (Enli, 2008). It is legitimate to argue that the BBC and the media market of the United Kingdom is admittedly one of the most atypical in Europe. The resources of the BBC are outnumbered only by the German public broadcasters; the UK media market is the biggest in Europe and much more export-oriented than all others; the political traditions are more similar to the US than to mainland Europe, and so on (Hallin and Mancini, 2004). Because of these reasons, I consider most theories on Public Service Broadcasting and also Public Service Media valuable, but essentially in need of an update. A specific point of attention is the suitability of theory development for Public Service Media regimes in South, Central and Eastern Europe.

In case we want to further explanatory theories on Public Service Broadcasting and Public Service Media, it is necessary to ask whether the Public Service Media concept is a useful elaboration of the Public Service Broadcasting notion at all. We need to relate it more explicitly to notions of citizenship and democracy, especially to capture worrying trends in several European countries that see an erosion of the rule of law and thus the basics of democracy. Moreover, we should start looking at actual practices, and this across a variety of European Member States. Such an endeavour is far from easy as Public Service Media is, in practice, a highly contextual phenomenon – its status impacted by a complex interaction between economic, social, political, cultural and historical factors. This book can, of course, only partially meet the challenge sketched above. It will provide a theoretical value-based framework for Public Service Media, it will study changing Public Service Media laws across Europe as well as engage in in-depth case study research. On that basis, I will define explanatory factors for diverging Public Service Media regimes in Europe. But more work will still be needed afterwards.

Where do grand theories and day-to-day practice meet?

The first question I seek to answer in this book is whether a shared set of theoretical values is still necessary and feasible for Public Service Media. With ‘theoretical’ I do not refer to a systematic, ‘true’, ‘grand theory’ or explanation of human conduct and the functioning of society. Indeed, as pointed out by Sibeon (1996, 13ff), social sciences have somewhat shifted away from grand theories such as Parsonian structural-functionalism and Marxism, largely because ‘they produce large, sweeping generalisations that bear little relation to concrete empirical happenings in particular times and particular places’ (1996, 13‒14). Rather, I see this first research question as the quest for an explanatory (as is) and normative (should be) appreciation of human conduct (related to the functioning of public broadcasters and policy-making) and the functioning of society (related to the values underpinning Public Service Media). Important therein is the necessity and possibility of identifying sufficient communality at the level of values should one seek to evolve from the as is to the should be situation. The first part of the book (see later) will devote attention mainly to the should be situation, whereas the second and third parts of the book zoom in on the as is situation as a basis for further theory development.

Setting out from some major disruptions, being the, in several ways, problematic framework Public Service Media ‘has to work with’, the aim is to identify the main values underlying Public Service Media and the goals institutions and people in charge of public broadcasters have to strive after. Related, I subsequently ask how and whether such a vision can be transposed into reality. In other words, and referring again to Galbraith’s ‘good society’, I seek to identify ‘what might be perfect and what is achievable’ (Galbraith, 1996: 2). I will focus on both legal/policy answers and concrete public broadcasters’ strategies in the digital age. The challenge, as I will point out, is to find a ‘match’ between theory, the law and practice. Seeking such an alignment is a shared responsibility of scholars, politicians, public broadcasters and even citizens. Indeed, as I will illustrate in this book, while public broadcasters might still be the most effective and efficient solution for delivering Public Service Media or, better, for serving the public interest in media, that might not be the case in each and every European country. The notions Public Service Broadcasting and Public Service Media concern the contribution made by a public broadcaster, but potentially also by other actors, to the public interest. Are public broadcasters, in charge of Public Service Media, contributing to informed citizenship, challenging post-truth politics and disinformation? Is a radio show, television programme or an app strengthening social cohesion in society or adding to further polarisation? Are on-demand services reinforcing the filter bubble or stimulating dive...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Endorsements
• Half Title
• Series Information
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• List of illustrations
• Preface
• 1 Introduction: A mismatch between Public Service Media theory, law and practice
• Part I Theory
• Part II Law
• Part III Practice
• Index