Media Policy and Globalization - Blogs Unpad

BROADCASTING POLICY 97
European countries present additional difficulties in the definition and
function of PSB systems (Gross 2004). Importantly, although these differences
may be problematic to the neat categorization of PSBs among
the Western ‘family’, the variety of visions and professional cultures may
offer the potential of enrichment of PSBs in the West.
Despite the shortcomings of partisan media cultures in these countries,
it is hardly the case that Western media, whether in the form of PSBs or
private companies have maintained an impeccable record of impartiality
or objectivity in their coverage and representation of world affairs and
minority social groups. Similarly, the de facto and de jure acceptance of
the EU norms and standards for acceding countries leads to the import
and enforcement of particular visions and ideas about social relations
and of course the role and function of the media and communicative
spaces (Sarikakis 2005). In that respect, it seems that the opportunity for
a democratic organization of PSBs in East European countries, but also
for their Western counterparts as a breath of fresh air entering the EU
sphere, has probably been defeated by the dominance of authoritarian
politics coupled with the politics of the market.
The pressure for the redefinition of the role and function of PSBs has
expressed not only the interests of industrialists but also the intentions of
governments to reshape the media landscape in favour of market driven
communications industries. This discourse is not as novel an idea as it is
often argued to be nor is it a need that arose because of the availability
of communication technologies that offer access to media other than
those controlled by PSBs. In one form or another, especially in Britain,
the redefinition of the role of the public service broadcasting system
has resurfaced almost every time a broadcasting committee met to make
recommendations. The debate over the role of the BBC, for example, is a
continuing pressure item on the policy agenda. In Britain, public opinion
is split in half between supporters and non-supporters of the licence fee
according to the Lord Burn’s report (DMCS 2004). It is understandable
that given a choice most people would not choose to pay for services,
which could explain the split ‘vote’. However, in context, the opinion that
there is 75 per cent satisfaction with the BBC offering value for money
should indicate that despite criticisms the broadcaster is perceived as a
valuable and integral part of British society (The Guardian 21 July 2004).
Despite this surprising support for a public broadcaster, the British
state has repeatedly attempted to ‘reevaluate’ the role of the BBC. The
latest decision to bring the quality of the BBC under the microscope of
a national survey is another action in the series of evaluating exercises,
committees and reports with the task to find the best formula for a responsive
public institution. Since the establishment of the BBC in the 1920s,