Alemania

2.1. Introduction

This chapter drills down to the theoretical core of the European PSB model in a historical context. It briefly looks at the origins of the concept and identifies some of its key influences, whose legacy can still be found in the 21^st century PSB institutions.

The chapter will then analyse the characteristics of PSB, as theorised by academic scholars and political institutions, and contrasts the model with the commercial agenda in broadcasting. Finally, the chapter examines the concept of neo-liberal marketisation and its ideological influence on the public service paradigm. It analyses the technological, political and economic factors that facilitated the rise of the liberal discourse that challenged the public service orthodoxy. The theory of neo-liberal marketisation, together with the different processes associated with it, will be presented. The chapter then presents a discussion about neo-liberal marketisation and transformations in the public service discourse. The chapter argues that these transformations have been mainly caused by the neo-liberal sentiments in media and communications policies and discourses. The impact of competition on programme diversity will also be examined in the light of the theory of ‘ruinous competition’ by van der Wurff and van Cuilenburg (2001). Thus, the chapter provides a theoretical foundation for analysing changes in broadcasting paradigms: as broadcasting systems of both the UK and Finland have historically been based on the public service ideology, understanding the theoretical roots of the concept is essential in order to identify marketisation-driven institutional changes.

2.2. History and characteristics of the European public service broadcasting model

2.2.1. Origins and characteristics of the European public service broadcasting model

In broadest terms, PSB can be considered a sociological solution to a technical problem (Wheeler 1997: 87). Its historical justification was based on technological

grounds – the scarcity of the broadcasting spectrum – and on normative values associated with Western-style democracies, such as diversity, pluralism, universal service, and the maintenance of cultural identity (Steemers 2003: 125). As each European country was allocated just a limited number of frequencies, the spectrum was seen as ‘a valuable form of public property’ by national governments, as the British Sykes Committee on broadcasting put it in 1923 (Seymour-Ure 1996: 61).

Thus, treating broadcasting as a public service was a ‘natural’ solution to avoid broadcasting becoming a private monopoly, and most European countries adopted this position.

Many European public broadcasters emerging in the inter-war period shared similar characteristics, and this has led observers to believe that smaller European countries, such as Finland and Norway, consciously adopted the institutional model of another broadcasting company, such as the BBC. While many ideological features of the early public service broadcasters were borrowed from the BBC, the concept of PSB came to be associated with a set of ad hoc practical arrangements concerning broadcasting in Europe. As might be expected, many organisational arrangements resulted from practical, not ideological reasoning (Hellman 1999: 58). The policy-makers of the day operated predominantly within a national context, and the similarity in the institutional characteristics of the early public broadcasters is more likely to be a result of the forces which helped bring about public broadcasting companies, taking a similar configuration in different countries (Syvertsen 1992). Factors such as market size, language community, socio-political structure, policy style, cultural characteristics, economic circumstances and ‘the lessons of history’ (e.g. in Germany’s case) have all played a key role in shaping the European countries’ broadcasting systems (Humphreys 1996: 117). Thus, each country adopted a unique application of PSB, reflecting characteristics of national political systems and the aforementioned national socio-cultural factors (Humphreys 1996: 2). Hallin and Mancini (2004: 27-33) refer to this symmetry between the structures of national political institutions systems and broadcasting policies as ‘political parallelism’. They argue that owing to their nature as public bodies, public broadcasting systems and the regulatory agencies

responsible for supervising commercial broadcasting in particular reflect various degrees of this parallelism.

While PSB arrangements were subject to national configurations, the vision of John Reith, the first Director-General of the BBC, became the most influential in the European PSB perspective. Reith cultivated this mission of broadcasting as a tool of national enlightenment, relying heavily on his personal views, which he presented to be representing those of the BBC. Reith believed that PSB was founded on four principles: monopoly, non-commercialism, universality and quality (McDonnell 1991;

Franklin 2001). Referred to as ‘Reithianism’, the essence of this philosophy could be summed up with paternalism with high moral and cultural values. He strongly believed that broadcasting should give a lead to public taste rather than to pander it since ‘few know what they want, and very few what they need’ (cited in McDonnell 1991: 12).

Broadcasting should act as an educational force for the improvement of knowledge, taste and manners. As McDonnell (1991: 11) notes, Reith considered himself to be best able to give define such values, and what constituted quality in broadcasting.

This self-constructed authoritative certainty pertaining to virtuous norms and values in society was characteristic for early PSB organisations. Above all, broadcasting should contribute in creation of informed and enlightened democracy by enabling citizens to take interest in matters from which they had previously been excluded, thus enabling them to form informed and reasoned public opinion (Scannell 1990: 14; Price 1995).

This paternalist tradition coupled with the post-war project of construction of the democratic European welfare state (Tracey 1998: 18-9; Brants and De Bens 2000:

16). The policy focus was on socio-political rather than economic or national strategic concerns reflecting the spirit of progressive change and belief in social planning in all spheres of life (van Cuilenburg and McQuail 2003: 191-2). Broadcasting was considered an important tool in maintaining democracy, and its operations were subordinate to this duty (see figure 2.1). Thus, the traditional public service media paradigm was ‘primarily shaped by normative concerns deriving from the needs of democratic (thus representative and participatory) politics’. It was ‘largely bounded by the limits of the national territory’ and focused on ‘national interests’. It also

‘legitimised government intervention in communication markets for social purposes’

(van Cuilenburg and McQuail 2003: 194).

Figure 2.1: The post-war (1945-1980/90) paradigm of public service media policy

(Source: van Cuilenburg and McQuail 2003: 194)

Reith’s conception of the missions of the BBC; to inform, educate and entertain, was adopted as the universal mission statement for PSB, and is commonly featured in broadcasting licences and legislations around the world. Within this trilogy, the informative mission can be interpreted as a duty to provide a comprehensive news service, world news, current affairs programmes and documentaries. The educational mission is not limited to the provision of schools and adult educational programmes, but can be interpreted as a broader mission to enlighten and ‘improve’ the audience.

It is noteworthy that the duty to entertain is commonly placed last, reflecting its less significant status in PSB, preferably as a vehicle to promote the two other missions without sacrificing the ‘quality’ aspect. In short, PSB should be conceived as an interventionist institutional practice: it should contribute to construction of ‘quality’

Ultimate goal/Public interest