Public interest means common well-being or general welfare. An action can be declared as in public interest if it benefits every single member of society or it benefits some of the population and harms none. Good and services which take care of public interest are termed as public goods or services. Public goods are those which are neither excludable nor rivalrous in nature i.e. by nature it cannot exclude anybody (TV/Radio waves are available to everybody) and consumption by one does not reduce the availability for other (watching/listening by one does not reduce the capacity for the other).
Now, if the society feels that it needs to develop its knowledge, broaden horizons and enable people to understand the world around them, it needs a medium to exchange information. Using technology it invents powerful mediums like television and radio and through the government it demands public broadcasting systems for public welfare and common well being.
The Idea of Public Broadcasting
The idea of public broadcasting is to speak to everyone as a citizen. It should encourage access and participation in public life. It should function as a meeting place where all citizens are welcome and considered equals. It is an information and education tool, accessible to all and meant for all, whatever their social or economic status be. Its mandate should not be restricted to information and cultural development- it should also appeal to the imagination, and entertain. But it should do so with a concern for quality that distinguishes it from commercial broadcasting. Because it is not subject to the dictates of profitability, public broadcasting must be daring and innovative, and take risks. And when it succeeds in developing outstanding genres or ideas, it should impose its high standards and set the tone for other broadcasters.
Is there a threat from Private Channels?
A logical question from the above emerges as to whether there is really a competition between the public and private broadcasters. Is the content, the objective between the two types of broadcasters really the same?
Private broadcasters enter the media market with a profit motive. They design programmes in a way to attract maximum eyeballs and in-return earn revenues through advertisers or subscription. The content is mostly entertainment, which plays on the emotions of viewers and manipulates their psychology. On the other hand the public broadcasters feed-in content which is educative and informative in nature for example knowledge building on current affairs, past and present political, social & economic analysis or creative presentation of serious knowledge etc. Therefore, though the target audience or viewer is the same yet the content is significantly different not leading to any competition. It therefore becomes important to understand as to what motivates the viewer/ audience to view/ listen to broadcasts of his/her choice.
The viewer makes a judgement about the content and takes a decision on the value and the quality of the broadcast. Now the demand side i.e. viewer/ listener is highly heterogeneous and there is almost no control on the individual preference, yet we see the phenomenon of viewer taking a conscious decision as to how to balance the content. No viewer prefers a particular kind of content or repeated information for long periods of time and therefore judiciously decides what he/she wants to see or hear. In the light of this behaviour, the competition is not really between type of broadcaster but on the content, value and quality of the programmes.
Public broadcasting services like BBC, ABC, CBC, NHK are strong examples which have provided rich content of high quality and value to its viewers and therefore they had been in a position to demand a premium to their services. Broadcasters like BBC do not even allow advertisers to enter their office, as their entire financing is dependant on the tax payers money through the British Government. Add to that their operational efficiency ensures lower operating costs and therefore better margins to sustain the organization.
Profitable public broadcasters around the world have demonstrated that innovative programming is key to its sustenance. As it is advised, that to administer sour medicine, it should be mixed with something sweet, similarly innovation/ creativity may lead to serious content be enjoyed by the viewers. There is plenty to also learn from private broadcasters who deliver informative/ knowledge based content like Discovery, Nat-Geo, History and not to mention that they are not running these channels for charity and must be having attractive financing mechanisms in place.
How can we sustain public broadcasting?
BBC (UK), NHK (Japan), ABC (Australia), CBC (Canada), and DD (India) have become global big names in the public broadcasting service. However, if we see them closely, we see that all the broadcasters have a common line of problems related to financial sustenance.
For a while, if we move out of the domain of financing through advertisers and competition, we could look at alternative means of funding such organizations. Organizations like BBC, NHK have ensured creative financial systems to finance their needs.
License fee (a tax linked to the ownership of receivers) have been the historical form of financing the public broadcasting in Europe. In principle, they create a direct relationship between the broadcaster and its public, the citizens. However, not everywhere, the practice is followed and in many places, the system of subsidies is preferred than licensing. So, where BBC and NHK rely solely on licensing, CBC (Canada) and ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) is financed out of the State's general funds. There are broadcasters who also have a mix of public and commercial financing. Many of them have opened up to advertising or resorted to it more, created new subscriber services or launched wholly commercial activities to finance their main service.
Advertising income is acceptable to the extent that it does not interfere with the public-service obligations incumbent upon public broadcasting. But beyond a certain level, if the need for commercial financing becomes a dominant concern for the public broadcaster and changes the nature of the programming, it becomes problematic. For example, to ensure a competitive position and hustle for advertising revenue to ensure its survival, if the public broadcaster strays from its public service obligations and produce the same type of programming as private competitors, it becomes harmful for public broadcasting. A detailed study commissioned by the BBC on the comparative situation of public broadcasters in 20 countries on four continents showed that "the higher the advertising figure as a proportion of total revenues, the less distinctive a public broadcaster is likely to be. According to the same study, license fee financing, on the contrary, guarantees the public broadcaster the stable financial base it needs to plan, and also to take certain risks and devise more "distinctive" forms of programming.
A few pointers which are important from the point of view of financing in public broadcasters could be –
• Substantial financing so that they can counterweight private broadcasters and not be confined to a marginal role.
• Financing should be independent from commercial as well as political pressures. It should not be subject to the moods of the government or economic fluctuations.
• To ensure stability, the financing should be predictable i.e. it should have a multi-year character.
• The broadcaster should aim for operational efficiency and economizing on costs.
• Alternative ways of financing like new subscriber services or commercial activities to cross-subsidize the public oriented services
ConclusionPublic broadcasting exists to provide coverage of interests for which there are missing markets. Public broadcasting can supply those topics which have social benefit that would otherwise not be broadcast due to believed unprofitability. Society is willing to pay for such programming, but markets fail to provide it. Typically, such under-provision exists when the benefits to viewers are relatively high in comparison to the benefits to advertisers. However, we have seen that there are financially viable models existing other than advertising to serve the public interests and there is much to learn from each of these models. To run any large public broadcasting agency, it is important to maintain some basic principles of financing as elaborated in the essay.
Now, if the society feels that it needs to develop its knowledge, broaden horizons and enable people to understand the world around them, it needs a medium to exchange information. Using technology it invents powerful mediums like television and radio and through the government it demands public broadcasting systems for public welfare and common well being.
The Idea of Public Broadcasting
The idea of public broadcasting is to speak to everyone as a citizen. It should encourage access and participation in public life. It should function as a meeting place where all citizens are welcome and considered equals. It is an information and education tool, accessible to all and meant for all, whatever their social or economic status be. Its mandate should not be restricted to information and cultural development- it should also appeal to the imagination, and entertain. But it should do so with a concern for quality that distinguishes it from commercial broadcasting. Because it is not subject to the dictates of profitability, public broadcasting must be daring and innovative, and take risks. And when it succeeds in developing outstanding genres or ideas, it should impose its high standards and set the tone for other broadcasters.
Is there a threat from Private Channels?
A logical question from the above emerges as to whether there is really a competition between the public and private broadcasters. Is the content, the objective between the two types of broadcasters really the same?
Private broadcasters enter the media market with a profit motive. They design programmes in a way to attract maximum eyeballs and in-return earn revenues through advertisers or subscription. The content is mostly entertainment, which plays on the emotions of viewers and manipulates their psychology. On the other hand the public broadcasters feed-in content which is educative and informative in nature for example knowledge building on current affairs, past and present political, social & economic analysis or creative presentation of serious knowledge etc. Therefore, though the target audience or viewer is the same yet the content is significantly different not leading to any competition. It therefore becomes important to understand as to what motivates the viewer/ audience to view/ listen to broadcasts of his/her choice.
The viewer makes a judgement about the content and takes a decision on the value and the quality of the broadcast. Now the demand side i.e. viewer/ listener is highly heterogeneous and there is almost no control on the individual preference, yet we see the phenomenon of viewer taking a conscious decision as to how to balance the content. No viewer prefers a particular kind of content or repeated information for long periods of time and therefore judiciously decides what he/she wants to see or hear. In the light of this behaviour, the competition is not really between type of broadcaster but on the content, value and quality of the programmes.
Public broadcasting services like BBC, ABC, CBC, NHK are strong examples which have provided rich content of high quality and value to its viewers and therefore they had been in a position to demand a premium to their services. Broadcasters like BBC do not even allow advertisers to enter their office, as their entire financing is dependant on the tax payers money through the British Government. Add to that their operational efficiency ensures lower operating costs and therefore better margins to sustain the organization.
Profitable public broadcasters around the world have demonstrated that innovative programming is key to its sustenance. As it is advised, that to administer sour medicine, it should be mixed with something sweet, similarly innovation/ creativity may lead to serious content be enjoyed by the viewers. There is plenty to also learn from private broadcasters who deliver informative/ knowledge based content like Discovery, Nat-Geo, History and not to mention that they are not running these channels for charity and must be having attractive financing mechanisms in place.
How can we sustain public broadcasting?
BBC (UK), NHK (Japan), ABC (Australia), CBC (Canada), and DD (India) have become global big names in the public broadcasting service. However, if we see them closely, we see that all the broadcasters have a common line of problems related to financial sustenance.
For a while, if we move out of the domain of financing through advertisers and competition, we could look at alternative means of funding such organizations. Organizations like BBC, NHK have ensured creative financial systems to finance their needs.
License fee (a tax linked to the ownership of receivers) have been the historical form of financing the public broadcasting in Europe. In principle, they create a direct relationship between the broadcaster and its public, the citizens. However, not everywhere, the practice is followed and in many places, the system of subsidies is preferred than licensing. So, where BBC and NHK rely solely on licensing, CBC (Canada) and ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) is financed out of the State's general funds. There are broadcasters who also have a mix of public and commercial financing. Many of them have opened up to advertising or resorted to it more, created new subscriber services or launched wholly commercial activities to finance their main service.
Advertising income is acceptable to the extent that it does not interfere with the public-service obligations incumbent upon public broadcasting. But beyond a certain level, if the need for commercial financing becomes a dominant concern for the public broadcaster and changes the nature of the programming, it becomes problematic. For example, to ensure a competitive position and hustle for advertising revenue to ensure its survival, if the public broadcaster strays from its public service obligations and produce the same type of programming as private competitors, it becomes harmful for public broadcasting. A detailed study commissioned by the BBC on the comparative situation of public broadcasters in 20 countries on four continents showed that "the higher the advertising figure as a proportion of total revenues, the less distinctive a public broadcaster is likely to be. According to the same study, license fee financing, on the contrary, guarantees the public broadcaster the stable financial base it needs to plan, and also to take certain risks and devise more "distinctive" forms of programming.
A few pointers which are important from the point of view of financing in public broadcasters could be –
• Substantial financing so that they can counterweight private broadcasters and not be confined to a marginal role.
• Financing should be independent from commercial as well as political pressures. It should not be subject to the moods of the government or economic fluctuations.
• To ensure stability, the financing should be predictable i.e. it should have a multi-year character.
• The broadcaster should aim for operational efficiency and economizing on costs.
• Alternative ways of financing like new subscriber services or commercial activities to cross-subsidize the public oriented services
ConclusionPublic broadcasting exists to provide coverage of interests for which there are missing markets. Public broadcasting can supply those topics which have social benefit that would otherwise not be broadcast due to believed unprofitability. Society is willing to pay for such programming, but markets fail to provide it. Typically, such under-provision exists when the benefits to viewers are relatively high in comparison to the benefits to advertisers. However, we have seen that there are financially viable models existing other than advertising to serve the public interests and there is much to learn from each of these models. To run any large public broadcasting agency, it is important to maintain some basic principles of financing as elaborated in the essay.
No comments:
Post a Comment