Public broadcasting: old models & new challenges

“Without a truly informed public, I think one should not talk about democracy”
– Werner Rumphorst, European Broadcasting Union (EBU), Switzerland

While the broadcasting world has changed, key objectives of public service broadcasting remain the same – high quality and impartial programming free from commercial or political interest.
The new technological environment, commercial realities and in some cases political interference have forced every public broadcaster to examine how these core values can be upheld.
To answer questions such as where and how is public service broadcasting under threat and the relevancy of the aims of public service broadcasting (PSB) today, a panel with representatives from Asia, Central Asia and Europe was assembled.

Yoshinori Imai, Executive Editor and Programme Host, NHK, Japan, said: “NHK (Nippon Hoso Kyokai) is the oldest public station in Asia. It was formed in 1925, two years after the Great Kanto earthquake. Before and during the war NHK was a propaganda arm of government. But afterwards, with occupation forces, it decided on financial and political independence.”
“PSB is a broadcasting system that does not look after the profits of shareholders… You need to have independence financially and politically. A firewall should also be kept between management and editorial to stop any outside pressure.”

Dr Werner Rumphorst, Director of the Legal Department of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), Switzerland, said: “Public broadcasting is different from one country to another. There are common features of public broadcasting that are easy to define but difficult to implement in practice.
“The ideal is television and radio for the public. It is not made for governments, presidents or shareholders. It is financed by the public and controlled by the public’s representatives, such as members of parliament.

“The democratic needs of each society means having informed citizens who will know who to choose in elections. Without a truly informed public, I think one should not talk about democracy.” Other aims are assisting national culture, social needs and young and old folk with different educational backgrounds.
Jumat Engson, Regional Director, RTM (Radio and Television Malaysia), Malaysia, said: “RTM (Radio and Television Malaysia) is a public and state broadcaster. We are a state owned organisation fully funded by government. At the same time, we would like to consider ourselves a public broadcaster. Our programmes are for public consumption. Malaysia is a multi-racial society.”

Raymond Wong, member of the Committee on Review of Public Service Broadcasting, Hong Kong, said: “The so-called public broadcaster RHK (Radio Hong Kong) started as a propaganda machine for Britain in 1927. In 1972 it changed from a quasi-public broadcaster but did not go far enough. It is now under a government department.

“The committee is looking at how to change RHK into a genuine public broadcaster… This is considered a risk in Hong Kong where you have half a democracy, not true democracy. Under such circumstances the committee should look at how you change the fundamental structure to reflect what the public wants.”
Sergey Brilev, Presenter, “Russia” TV channel, Russia, said: “We are part of the European Broadcasting Union. Licence fees are something Westerners assume automatically. It is, in reality, a tax. In Russia, we made calculations that the lowest licence fee we could charge was $120 per household per year. You can’t hope to get anything like that in most parts of the country.

“Let us use the word ‘State TV’ for both public and state TV. If you want public broadcasting in Russia or Kazakhstan you have to have a government-owned television service. The government was not exactly happy… to cover our budget but did in part and let us have commercials, which is quite profitable,” Brilev said.

Miklos Haraszti, representative of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe on freedom of the media, Austria, said: “The concept of public television is something that is a core part of democracy. It gives true information for all citizens, access of major players to all players and is important for minority and majority people in countries.”

“Public TV is a core concept of democracy that it is unavoidable.”
Conference chairman Jim Laurie, who led the session, turned to the development of public TV in Kazakhstan after Dr Dariga Nazarbayeva, chair of the Eurasia Media Forum’s organising committee, highlighted some of the key issues for its development in the country.
Laurie, a journalist, broadcaster and Executive Producer of Focus Asia Productions and Director of Broadcasting at the University of Hong Kong, said a key PBS element was the need for objective and unbiased information not managed by government.

He said this raised questions such as who was going to finance it, would Kazakhstan be able to collect licence fees from each family? Also, there had to be some government funding of the TV channel. Who was going to manage it? “A separate law should be needed for a public service,” he added.
Asked if it was possible to have unbiased information on Kazakhstan’s state channels, a representative of the country’s Khabar Agency said: “Some people do not really trust the TV because they do not trust the authorities. A key factor is public trust, regardless of how (the broadcasting system) is financed.”
Asked if public broadcasting had outlived its usefulness, RTM’s Jumat Engson said: “We have to compete with commercial channels. We have produced a rebranding of RTM. This has worked. We have increased viewers and listeners. We have a reach all over the country.

“… We have to regenerate ourselves to catch up with technology. People want trustworthy information and we believe we can provide it. You must have good editors and talented producers to produce balanced, non-partisan stuff for the public,” Engson added.

Werner Rumphorst said public broadcasting in Europe was supported by parliaments and governments. “If a government or parliament does not believe in it any more, then you can close it… Public broadcasting is between state and commercial broadcasting. It is still strongly supported in Europe.
“We can only go where governments and parliaments want us to go. In the countries of Central and East Europe, where public broadcasting is not well established, parliamentarians should be informed of the need for public broadcasting. If a large majority of people get ‘information’ from sources that give no information, then something is wrong…

“For public broadcasting, it is not the vehicle but the content that matters. It must be on a platform, such as mobile phones, where young people are looking for what they want. Public broadcasting must go where people are looking for content – and that is the new media technologies,” Rumphorst added.