A FUTURE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE TELEVISION CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL WORLD

Recommendations

Info

A FUTURE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE TELEVISION One such intervention, for example, might consist of the development of what the media scholar James Bennett describes as public service recommendation algorithms. 72 The idea rests on the PSM norm of universality of genre or mixed programming. Current recommendation engines, including iPlayer, follow a logic of similarity – ‘if you liked that, you might also like this’ – bringing us more of the same. But is that really what a PSM institution should do? In the broadcast era, the art of scheduling took audiences through different genres, exposing them to a mixed diet that opened up new experiences and perspectives: from comedy, to news, to drama, to current affairs. In the digital age, in contrast, recommendation engines play safe, enclosing audience tastes. Bennett asks: What if a public service algorithm made… recommendations from left field, [opening] our horizons? If you liked Top Gear, here’s an environmental documentary, or Woman’s Hour. If you liked a music documentary, here’s a sitcom. Choice will remain [key]: but it should be genuine choice – to watch more of the same or to explore something new. 73 Explore, he says, should be the new principle. A PSM algorithm would expose viewers to a greater breadth of content, a diversity of voices, viewpoints and genres, taking them beyond what they currently know – a core principle of PSB. Principles for the funding of public service media It seems to us unarguable that funding mechanisms for PSM must follow on from institutional purposes, values and objectives. It is therefore imperative that the normative principles of PSM, as well as wider good governance principles, should also inform funding. Universality and citizenship As the Broadcasting Research Unit argued back in 1986, it is vital that “one main instrument of broadcasting [and we would argue now of PSM] should be directly funded by the corpus of users.” The BRU insisted on the need for “a contract between the citizen and the broadcasters that an equally good service… shall be made available to all for the fee paid.” 74 Ideally, access to PSM services – including those to be delivered via the internet in the future – should be free at the point of use in order to maximize this commitment their universality for citizens. Independence Independence is vital in the process of decision-making about setting and distributing the licence fee and other sources of PSM funding so as to retain a significant measure of autonomy from vested interests. According to the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), funding must not be “reliant on political favour, thereby promoting public trust in PSM and its role as a truly indispensable service.” 75 72 James Bennett, ‘Create public service algorithms’, openDemocracy, September 14, 2015. Making a similar point in his submission to the Inquiry, Professor Graham Murdock of Loughborough University in London proposed that the BBC “should take the lead in developing a public search engine as an alternative to commercial search engines, allowing users to locate material according to its veracity and social value rather than its popularity.” 73 Ibid. 74 BRU, 1986, p. 12. 75 Richard Burnley, Public Funding Principles for Public Service Media, European Broadcasting Union, 2016, p. 3. 36
CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL WORLD Transparency Public services ought to be fully accountable to the public; the funding of public service media, equally, ought to have a commitment, as the EBU puts it, to an “open and clear funding mechanism holding PSM accountable to its audience.” 76 Redistribution We propose that, in accord with the principles of universality and citizenship, new funding mechanisms should exist to address structural inequalities and economic disparities both between providers in media markets (for example as in the original funding relationship between ITV and Channel 4 that we refer to in Chapter 5) and, crucially, between citizens themselves. Plurality We believe that a healthy public service ecology is served by multiple funding sources (and public service providers) in order to minimize, wherever possible, competition for revenue. Britain is fortunate to have a television landscape financed by the licence fee, advertising, subscription and even some elements of general taxation (as in the government’s small contribution to S4C). However, we would also wish to note specific problems with existing mechanisms in the light of the normative principles: Subscription favours the better off, discourages universality of genre (mixed programming) and, by fragmenting audiences, damages social and cultural universality. Advertising and sponsorship carry risks of commercial influence and of the skewing of provision towards more desirable demographics thus providing a disincentive to invest in particular kinds of content to represent particular social groups. A flat licence fee is a regressive payment mechanism in that it is a ‘poll tax’ that, at least in relation to the BBC, currently criminalises some of the poorest sections of the population. We propose several possible improvements for PSM funding going forward, some of which we explore in more detail in Chapter 4 in relation to the BBC. Rather than a flat fee, in order to mitigate criminalization and improve distributive justice, wealthrelated payments should be implemented, whether through a revamped and platformneutral BBC licence fee, general taxation or a household fee following the German model but based on different tiers, and with substantial exemptions for the low-waged, the unemployed and so on. In addition, we suggest exploring the use of levies on the profits of the largest digital intermediaries, ISPs and phone/tablet manufacturers in order to fund, in particular, new sources of public service content or to stimulate key genres that are currently under-funded (such as children’s television and education). Whatever our particular preferences, we urge government to ensure that the normative principles discussed in this chapter guide legislation and policies in relation to funding, that greater attention is given to curbing inequality and that pluralism of funding remains at the heart of the PSM ecology in the digital age. 76 Ibid. 37
Page 1 and 2: A FUTURE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE TELEVIS
Page 3 and 4: Contents Foreword by David Puttnam
Page 5 and 6: To instruct democracy, if possible
Page 7 and 8: Welcome Television is leading a cha
Page 9 and 10: CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL
Page 11 and 12: PSB channels 71.9% All other channe
Page 15 and 16: Why television matters Television i
Page 19 and 20: 1982 1990s 2012 The BBC-ITV duopoly
Page 23 and 24: Time for action Today’s policymak
Page 29 and 30: Basic principles At the core of pre
Page 35: CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL
Page 39 and 40: The multichannel revolution Perhaps
Page 51 and 52: The BBC For most people, the BBC is
Page 67 and 68: Channel 4 If the BBC is the most im
Page 71 and 72: Only 8% of Channel 4’s total spen
Page 79 and 80: ITV and Channel 5 The focus of atte
Page 85 and 86: The changing face of ITV 1993-2002
Page 87 and 88:
CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
New sources of public service conte
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Television and diversity We have ea
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
THE PEOPLE SHOULD BE TELEVISED If t
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Nations and Regions Public service
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Content diversity One of the key wa
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Sports content now accounts for som
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Talent development and training In
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Conclusion Television is changing.
Page 155 and 156:
Recommendations General The UK’s
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Appointing the BBC board Sir David
Page 163 and 164:
APPLICATION OF THE NOLAN PRINCIPLES
Page 165 and 166:
BAFTA members’ survey delivered i
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Public service broadcasting, public
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Inquiry events Do we still need pub
Page 179 and 180:
Acknowledgements Inquiry Report Con
show all

A FUTURE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE TELEVISION CONTENT AND PLATFORMS IN A DIGITAL WORLD

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?