In the Service of Young People? Studies and Reflections on Media ...

Public <strong>Service</strong> on Digital MediaLetting <strong>Young</strong> <strong>People</strong>’s SituationDetermine <strong>the</strong> Timing <strong>and</strong> Format?Divina Frau-MeigsCompared to <strong>the</strong> utopian years <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> early 1990s, digital media have turned fromvirtuality to <strong>the</strong> reality principle, partly spurred by <strong>the</strong> need to localize <strong>the</strong> global,partly spurred by <strong>the</strong> explosion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> dot.com bubble. This trend has givennation-states <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir public broadcasting services a new occasion to evaluate<strong>the</strong>ir missions, after <strong>the</strong> strong criticism <strong>the</strong>y underwent in <strong>the</strong> 1980s as deregulation<strong>and</strong> privatization extended worldwide (Frau-Meigs 2005a). The technocratictrap that seemed to capture most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> thinking <strong>the</strong>n has phased away as governments<strong>and</strong> industry try to find <strong>the</strong> proper scale for human interaction <strong>and</strong>engagement.This move from virtuality to reality is confirmed by some current trends on<strong>In</strong>ternet, as regulation by nation-states re-enters <strong>the</strong> stage: <strong>In</strong>ternet governanceis increasingly government-driven, in spite <strong>of</strong> advocacy movements to make itglobal; <strong>In</strong>ternet is being turned into a medium, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>re are signs <strong>of</strong> its partial“broadcastization”, as it is being normalized by commercial <strong>and</strong> societal uses <strong>and</strong>services that anchor it in territorial grounds; <strong>In</strong>ternet is perceived as having unacceptablereal world effects on people, because it is a vehicle for terrorism, cybercrime, spam <strong>and</strong> harmful content (Frau-Meigs 2005b).What is at stake, for national <strong>and</strong> local communities, is <strong>the</strong> status <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> publicvalue in its relation to dominant commercial media whose role is not <strong>the</strong> protection<strong>of</strong> privacy or <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> integrity <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> person, especially <strong>the</strong> child. The old debatesreappear in a new garb, as media are being criticized for <strong>the</strong>ir perceived failurein promoting public debate: How to set a regulatory model to counterbalancemarket forces whose priority is not youth protection <strong>and</strong> education? How to avoid<strong>the</strong> stalemate arguments that equate popular broadcasting with commercial media<strong>and</strong> public service with unpopular production? How to dispel <strong>the</strong> ambient moodthat posits that publics built by commercial media are less coerced <strong>and</strong> moreparticipatory than those built by public broadcasting?13