| |
The convergence of broadcasting, telecommunications and Internet
brought about by digitalization will in no way ease this situation,
quite the contrary. In the field of telecommunications as on the
Internet, we are instead seeing deregulation for the former and
a reluctance to regulate the latter. If, as one might think, it
is becoming increasingly difficult to regulate digital broadcasting
services, the best way to ensure that public-service objectives
are maintained will be the existence of a public body responsible
for carrying out these missions.
The real questions that need to be asked, therefore, are the
following: Does digitalization raise questions about the need
for a universal service addressing people as citizens rather than
consumers? Does digitalization eliminate the possibility of having
broadcasting services different from the myriad commercial services
on the market? Will it supersede the need for a public forum in
which all are invited to take part, regardless of social status
or purchasing power? Will the individualization of audiovisual
consumption that digitalization permits and the fragmentation
it causes result in individuals losing interest in services that
enable them to maintain a sense of belonging to a political community,
to perceive themselves as citizens?
Unless we answer yes to all these questions, it is quite obvious
that digitalization will not be an impediment to the maintenance
of public broadcasting, quite the opposite. The democratic and
egalitarian objectives inherent in it can still be invoked as
justification. Thus, to the question of the future usefulness
of public broadcasting, we can repeat Werner Rumphorst's answer:
[...] the future of public service broadcasting follows on from
its mission, from its role within and for civil society. The more
diversification and individualization of information sources there
is, the more audiences become fragmented, the more important it
will be to maintain at least one strong service which performs
the function of a national point of reference and of national
identification, and the role of the market place for opinion.11
The challenge of the years to come, for public broadcasting,
is to evolve and to adapt to the digital era the principles underlying
its existence. Thus, the vast majority of public broadcasters
already have a foothold in the world of specialty channels and
Internet. What they need to do is to use these new technologies
to improve and complement their public-service mission. They must
proceed with caution, choosing sectors that follow logically from
their raison d'être. In Germany, for example, public stations
have created two theme channels to complement their basic offering:
a news and documentary channel and a children's channel. These
channels are fully consistent with a public-service mission.
On the other hand, the public broadcaster must not forget, as
the French Senate Report points out, quoting sociologist Dominique
Wolton, that its calling is really to create "social links."
"Tomorrow," Wolton writes, "general-interest media,
in a multimedia universe, interactive and cluttered with networks,
will have an even more important role than yesterday, because
they will be one of the few links in the individualist mass society.
The objective of general-interest television is to continue to
share something in a strongly hierarchical, individualist society."12
Anthony Smith, quoted by Graham Murdock and Peter Golding, "Common
Markets: Corporate Ambitions and Communication Trends in the UK
and Europe." The Journal of Media Economics, Vol. 12, No.
2, 1999, p. 122.
Mark Starowicz, The Great Media Shift. Television, Radio and
Print In the 21st Century ; Speculations on the Impact of New
Technologies, First Annual Kesterton Lecture, School of Journalism
and Communication, Carleton University, February 10th, 2000, p.
19.
Carole Tongue, The Future of Public Service Television in a
Multi-Channel Digital Age, European Parliament Committee of Culture,
Youth, Education, Sports and the Media, (adopted by the European
Parliament, September 19, 1996), 1996, p. 9.
4André Lange, "Diversité et divergences dans
le financement des organismes de radio-télévision
de service public dans l'Union européenne" [Diversity
and differences in the financing of public service broadcasters
in the European Union], in Communications & stratégies,
n° 35, 3e trimestre, 1999, p. 183-196.
Sénat (France), L'audiovisuel public en danger. Rapport
d'information fait au nom de la commission des Finances, du contrôle
budgétaire et des comptes économiques de la Nation
sur le financement de l'audiovisuel public [Public broadcasting
at risk. Report on financing of public broadcasting] ; par Claude
Belot, Paris, (Les rapports du Sénat, no 162), 1999-2000,
p. 33, 36 et 37.
McKinsey & Company, Public Service Broadcasters Around The
World. A McKinsey Report for the BBC, janvier 1999, p. 5.
Jacques Rigaud, Libre culture, Paris, Gallimard (Le débat),
1990.
Michel Souchon, " Télévision et culture.
Jalons et anecdotes pour servir à l'histoire d'un malentendu
" [Television and culture. Some landmarks and anecdotes about
a misunderstanding], in Revue de l'Institut de sociologie, Brussels,
Université libre de Bruxelles, 1995/1-2, p. 165.
8 Willard D. Rowland Jr. and Michael Tracey, Lessons from Abroad:
A Preliminary Report on the Condition of Public Broadcasting in
the United States and Elsewhere, Joint meeting of the International
Communication Association and the American Forum of the American
University, Washington, D.C., May 27, 1993, p. 23.
Nicolas Garnham, quoted in UNESCO, Public Service Broadcasting
: The Challenge of the Twenty-first Century, Paris, UNESCO (Reports
and Papers on Mass Communication, No. 111), 1997,
p. 64.
Werner Rumphorst, Model Public Service Broadcasting Law with
Introductory Note and Explanatory Comment, 1998, p. 6, (unpublished).
Dominique Wolton, quoted in Sénat (France), L'audiovisuel
public en danger. Rapport d'information fait au nom de la commission
des Finances, du contrôle budgétaire et des comptes
économiques de la Nation sur le financement de l'audiovisuel
public public [Public broadcasting at risk. Report on financing
of public broadcasting]; par Claude Belot, Paris, (Les rapports
du Sénat, no 162), 1999-2000, p. 31.
|
|
