Achieving Viability for Public Service Media in Challenging Settings: A Holistic Approach

"There is widespread consensus among institutions and individuals across much of the globe about the benefits of public service media (PSM) - the online and offline media provided by what have traditionally been called public service broadcasters (PSBs)."

This policy brief, published by the Communication and Media Research Institute (CAMRI) at the University of Westminster, looks at the issue of the viability of public service media (PSM) in settings where public funding and regulatory models are absent. Based on research evidence, it offers a number of possibilities that support a holistic and incremental approach to addressing the viability of PSM and offers recommendations for the way forward.

The report explains that in the face of challenges posed by a shifting digital media landscape, many international bodies - from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the 47-member Council of Europe to the Pan-African Parliament and an array of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) - continue to endorse PSM as an essential component of democratisation. They see PSM values of universality, diversity, and independence as more relevant than ever now that giant social media companies are facilitating unmoderated and non-transparent influence on public debates. However, viability for PSM is often seen as unachievable in settings where models of media independence and credibility are unfamiliar or rejected by political leaders.

This policy brief seeks to provide evidence that shows that achieving viability for PSM in restricted settings is indeed possible. It outlines wide-ranging research from media NGOs and academics with examples from countries such as Tanzania, Iraq, Libya, and Nepal. For example, James Deane from BBC Media Action suggests a number of options available for supporting subsidised public interest media systems. He presents a typology of six project-based approaches (as opposed to system-based approaches) to supporting public interest media systems. Drawing on checklists contained in the UNESCO Media Development Indicators template, Naomi Sakr considers the potential of openings that have occurred in regulatory bodies and journalism unions for changes to be implemented. Other research highlights the potential of audiences, advocacy groups, or social media platforms as content producers in providing options to ensure public interest media.

Overall, the research discussed demonstrates the need to take a holistic approach, which in this brief refers to a set of policies that recognise not only the central importance of PSM to the health of media systems and politics but also the importance of a whole range of institutions other than media outlets in achieving viability for PSM. The research also points to the potential of diverse, incremental approaches to embedding the values and mechanisms of PSM. "Success in this context may not mean transformative change but simply recognition that media are part of an institutional and socio-political fabric that can be affected by small steps. The viability of PSM depends not on individual media entities but on an entire ecosystem encompassing bodies involved in media regulation and licensing, or representation of journalists and media practitioners, along with laws underpinning civil society advocacy on behalf of media users."

The following additional observations are drawn from the research evidence:

• The diversity of potential incremental approaches deserves more serious attention than they currently receive in policy debates.
• PSM viability can be furthered by actions taken in different parts of an interlocking system of licensing, professional representation, capacity-building, and advocacy.
• Since the need for public subsidy for public interest media is increasingly acknowledged internationally, it can be emphasised locally, where awareness of alternatives to market models is limited.
• If dominant social media actors are to defend and promote PSM values of pluralism and diversity, this action calls for an independent, accountable and transparent multi-stakeholder mechanism for moderating social media content on the basis of international human rights standards.
• Audiences have a vital, but too often neglected, role to play in PSM initiatives; ultimately, they judge these initiatives' credibility and thus determine their viability and long-term sustainability.

The policy brief concludes with six recommendations geared toward policymakers, practitioners, and media studies specialists. With a holistic approach in mind, the policy document recommends deploying keys within the system as a whole:

• Keys to achieving viability for PSM exist within complex political and social systems that extend beyond media to encompass a range of supporting functions. Policy should be devised with the existence of these keys in mind.
• That means being aware of, reinforcing, or promoting various types of opening - for example, in entities that deal with regulation and licensing, in organisations that represent the interests of journalists and other media practitioners, and in civil society bodies advocating on behalf of media users and media producers.
• PSM viability depends on audience attitudes. Policies aimed at achieving viability should include qualitative audience research.
• The principles of PSM, or media in the public interest, need to be unpacked as part of public consultations informed by local concepts and experience. As such, media initiatives should be designed with the public, not just for them, and their relevance needs to be readily apparent to potential users.

Looking at the potential of ordinary people to be able to tap into, or amplify, public media characteristics of privately owned media, the policy brief recommends considering social media as part of a push for PSM:

• Any PSM initiative should have the availability of relevant PSM content on social media at its core, because the way younger audiences use social media will be decisive in the way they view initiatives in favour of PSM.
• Collective learning is needed regarding how to place public service responsibilities on social media giants. ARTICLE 19 has proposed a multi-stakeholder forum to resolve problems of content moderation that affect social media platforms' influence on public debates.