edition-dw-akademie-in-the-service-of-the-public-functions-and-transformation-of-media-in-developing-countries-pdf

Part I Definitions and ConceptsTransitions and Transformations – Developing Media forthe PublicIn this study we focus on media landscapes in developingcountries and emerging economies which are very differentfrom those in Western Europe where PSM was first developed.The societies in the countries in question are undergoingtransformations on political, social, and economic levels. Asfar as their media sectors are concerned, there is usually a coexistenceof private media and (former) state-owned media.The idea of public service is mostly one that was brought upand advanced by Western politicians and media developmentorganizations. As discussed in chapter 1, the attempts to establishPSM have in many cases not been successful.To understand why and when this is the case, as a first step,we need to better analyze the individual media landscapes andthe changes they undergo. According to Raboy there are threeprincipal types of broadcasting systems in the world: 18Public service core systems, in which PSBs have historicallyoccupied the center of the system (WesternEurope, Canada, Australia, Japan). These countries have“mixed ownership systems” today.Private enterprise core systems, where the wholebroadcasting system is built around commercial broadcastingpractices, as in the US.State core systems, where media which are owned andcontrolled by the state are dominant.For this study we focus on the latter. Raboy here differentiatesbetweenresidual state core system (a monolithic state-ownedbroadcaster still plays the key role);emergent state core system (a system in which privateand community radios play an increasingly importantrole), andtransitional state core system (where pluralistic modelsare established on the old foundations of the statemedia).Media development can take different paths, according to thesituation, to advance a transformation process in the sense ofthe public service ethos. Depending on the particular situationof a media system and the capacities and interests of the differentactors involved, one may, for example, choose to changelegislation and reform the state broadcaster towards more independence.Or one may strengthen private and communitymedia in their service to the public. Or one may choose tostrengthen selected areas such as the capacity of regional reportingor program formats that allow for public participation.In this context the question arises as to what transformation,especially in the media sector, actually means. Unfortunatelythere is a substantial backlog in the field of communicationscience as far as the link between media and transformationis concerned. So far there is no serious theoretical draft thatcan encompass the complexity of the issue. Hafez and Thomaßbemoan that there is as yet no answer to the question whatrole the media play in the political and societal transformationprocess towards democracy. 19 Ritter recommends pragmaticapproaches and pleads for a focus on empirical country casestudies instead of waiting for an overall theory. 20In the practice of media development, however, there is acommon understanding of what is meant by the terms transitionand transformation:“Transition in the context of media functions in two ways:media practitioners are working in political situations thathave been defined as ‘transitional’ by the international community,and they are tasked with transforming the mediasphere from one that supported the old, authoritarian regimeto one that upholds the new principles of democracy.” 21Taking a closer look at what the key players in media developmentthink about transforming state broadcasters into PSM,it is evident that there is no clear-cut course. On the one handthere are those who plead in favour of PSM and on the otherhand there are the critics who think it is a waste of time andmoney to transform giant state broadcasters and would ratherpromote smaller private media. Hadamik, for example, observedin the Eastern and Central European context that establishinga public service broadcaster in developing countries ismore an issue for the European media development actors thanfor the US-led media development actors, since they all tend toact based on their experience with their own media systems. 22Within this melange of different paradigms in media developmentwe can observe that there seems to be a broadconsensus on at least two points: State-owned media servingas a mouthpiece for those in power is not compatible with ademocracy. And secondly, a society in transformation needsmedia that have an obligation to the public.But beyond this there is in the practice of media assistance aneed for the careful development of strategies of media-relatedinterventions – based on assessments of the state of transitionin a particular country and its media system. Also a culture ofevaluation and learning is needed in order to assure that positivechange is advanced. This study is an attempt to contributeto this: It should lead to a better understanding of transformationprocesses and help the efforts of media development.14Nissen 2006, 22.15Ibid.16Barnett & Docherty 1991.17Barnett & Docherty 1991, 24.18Raboy 1995.19Hafez 2002; Thomaß 2001.20Ritter 2008.21Hartenberg 2005, 6f.22Hadamik 2003.Edition DW Akademie In the Service of the Public 27