In cooperation with the organizers – the research group for media‑, ICT- and cultural policy at the Department of Information Science and Media Studies, University of Bergen. Vox Publica documents the seminar on these web pages. The documentation contains text summaries of each lecture, supplemented in most cases by audio recordings and slide shows for downloading. Links to additional online resources are included as well.

The lectures speak for themselves, but a few preliminary conclusions can still be suggested from the talks. None of the researchers fundamentally questioned that public service broadcasting has a role to play in today’s media society. A direct threat to its existence does not seem to be on the researchers’ radar. But most or even all of them conceded with varying enthusiasm that the broadcasters must redefine themselves in face of the changed media landscape brought about by the web and the emergence of the active user.

Mobilizing the audience

Hence, participation was a central topic touched on by several of the researchers, from different perspectives. Graham Murdock placed the mobilization of the audience as active participants at the heart of his proposal for a commons-based strategy for public service broadcasters. Brian McNair discussed Tony Blair’s central role in shaping participatory formats in British broadcasting – especially on the commercial publice service broadcaster ITV. Further, Georgina Born reported from recent research into the BBC’s experiences with substantial audience participation. And Espen Ytreberg supplemented the discussion with results from a Norwegian research project about the media industry’s – including public service broadcasters’ – strategic use of the new participating audiences.

This seems to be a central point: Can increased user participation strengthen the legitimacy of public service broadcasting, or are users just being instrumentalized by media groups engaged in tough competition? The question caused some discussion at the seminar, and Brian McNair remarked that both answers are possible – increased user participation can be good for media as companies and good for democracy at the same time.

A new media policy

As the broadcasters expand onto new media platforms to test such participatory forms, they face some technical and regulatory problems: those related to net neutrality may be of the most pertinent. Tanja Storsul’s introduction laid out the current situation, and showed the dilemmas for both broadcasting institutions and regulators. The following discussion centred on the potential for political intervention: how much power does national cultural policy have on this issue? And where to start to work towards a reasonable compromise?

Another pressing issue is the growing importance of the European policy level. As the power of the EU increases, other institutions deemed necessary for a well-functioning democracy lag behind: as Barbara Thomass underlined, the promise of European public spheres may seem bleak. In her talk, Thomass outlined a suggestion for thinking about the existing public service broadcasting instutions as tools to improve this democratic deficit. From the same starting point, Jackie Harrison laid out a rationale for Europe-wide public service communications grounded in the EU’s social purpose. Though explicitly normative in form, such suggestions serve to envision alternative ways forward for public service broadcasting policy.

We hope that this documentation will be a constructive contribution to the ongoing debate about the future of European public service broadcasting. Indeed, the debate may continue here – we encourage comments and lively debate on this and all the other articles.

The Professor of Sociology, Anthropology and Music at the University of Cambridge presented findings from her BBC research in a lecture titled “Post-impartiality: Transformations in BBC journalism in response to the Internet” at a seminar on public service broadcasting and the Internet at the University of Bergen on April 26–27, 2007.

Born identified four political dynamics bringing change to the BBC news and current affairs journalism starting in the 1980s. First, political pressure from the Thatcher governments to discipline and control BBC journalism continued under New Labour. Second, political journalists were faced with an intensification of political marketing and news management. Third, “neo-liberal” broadcasting policies were pursued. And finally, the BBC’s director-general from 1992 to 2000, John Birt, implemented internal policies based on new public management principles.

From the middle of the 1990s, the BBC turned to branding, formatting and marketing their news and current affairs offerings in a more aggressive way. New, “commercial” formats and channels were introduced, such as the BBC World and News24 news channels, Radio Five Live and the BBC News Online website. The aim was to increase audience reach. For some journalists, this often meant having to contribute to many different programmes and channels during the day. According to Born, one foreign correspondent had to appear in 18 different settings throughout one day, hence reducing the time available for on the spot reporting.

Birt introduced strict vetting of scripts and strong hierachical editorial control. But at the same time, major cultural changes emerged from “below” among journalists, Born said. Journalists have previously been called “naive empiricists”. This is clearly no longer adequate. Journalists are well informed about media critical research and literature, and they now embrace the notion that journalism is inherently interpretive. Born called this a “new reflexive realism”.

In Greg Dyke’s period as director-general (2000–2004), the BBC’s journalism was braver, more original and provocative, Born said. Dyke hired journalists from the press and strengthened investigative journalism. But there was an uananticipated effect that Born called “volatile derepression”. The BBC clashed more frequently with New Labour, and then came the Kelly affair followed by Dyke’s resignation. In the period after Dyke the BBC can be described as a “buttoned-down disciplined machine”, Born argued.

Born presented findings from research she has done inside the BBC recently, focusing on how the Internet is used and influences journalism. Born identified four “interactivity effects”:

• “I‑witness” newsgathering: People contribute images, information and experiences. When the July 7 2005 bombings happened in London, the BBC received 300 photos from the public. When the Hertfordshire Oil Storage Terminal burned half a year later, 15.000 photos were submitted. These citizen contributions are subject to the usual editorial verification.
• Interactive audience feedback: The BBC receives 10.000–20.000 e‑mails every day. They have an online panel of 15.000 giving their views. Overall this paints a rich picture of audience response.
• Online comment: Giving users the possibility to comment online increases diversity of voice, and also includes illiberal and extreme views. The BBC sees this as contributing to “audience autonomy and empowerment.”
• Audience response: People contribute testimony and experiential material. This “enriches the news agenda and diversifies the tone,” again according to the BBC.

Altogether the increased contact with users/audience expands and energizes the agenda and tone of the news, the BBC argues according to Born. These developments go hand in hand with increased reliance on “cross-platform” synergies between TV, radio and online.

Where the BBC calls its own journalism “radically impartial”, Born prefers “post-impartial”.

Overall, the developments of recent years leads the BBC to two types of universality, Born concluded. Additive universality means diversifying into different formats. Integrative universality means to expose people to shared experience of increased diversity. So far, the BBC has done more of the first, but the strategy is to do both.

See also:

• Book description: Uncertain Vision: Birt, Dyke and the Reinvention of the BBC.
• Working paper: Uncertain Futures: Public Service Television and the Transition to Digital.

With a lecture titled “European social purpose and public service communication”, Harrison contributed to a seminar on public service broadcasting and the Internet at the University of Bergen on April 26–27, 2007.

Harrison placed her discussion of public service communication (PSC) in the context of the communication problems of the EU. EU citizens’ disenchantment with the Union reached its climax with the “no” against the constitution treaty in France and the Netherlands in 2005. Since, the EU has attempted a more open communication policy, but this is extremely limited in scope, Harrison said.

• Listen to the lecture:[audio:Jackie_Harrison.mp3|autostart=no|bgcolor=#eff5f2] (Download a recording of Harrison’s lecture (mp3, 14,9 MB).
• Read the presentation: Download Harrison’s presentation (pdf, 68 KB)

Public service communication should be based on a set of values, Harrison argued: Truthfulness, trust, independence and respect for human dignity and diversity. These values could underpin a EU-wide PSC multiplatform network.

Following the traditions of public service broadcasting, PSC should deal with these issues, Harrison suggested:

• Public purpose and public service: PSC institutions should have specific obligations.
• Governance: PSC should be independent from government and commercial interests. Internal accountability of producers, consumers and participants.
• Content: Diverse range of content and information available to all.

In today’s situation, such ideas might seem quite unrealistic. The chance for political endorsement of an expanded idea of public service which includes new media platforms, and simultaneously is located on the European level may admittedly appear as quite slim. Still, considered as a framework for thinking about the potential of communication policy, PCS serves its purpose.

Harrison did not set out to specify how PSC could be organized, but did suggest the option of a public service communicator funded by the EU. However, she said that publishers of individual blogs also conceivably could contribute to PSC, although PSC could not be entirely based on spontaneous communities.

See also:

• Presentation of Jackie Harrison at Sheffield University.

With a lecture titled “Public service broadcasting and Euopean public spheres – reasons and possibilities for public service online media,” Thomass contributed to a seminar on public service broadcasting and the Internet at the University of Bergen on April 26–27, 2007.

Cross-border communication in Europe faces many problems, not least created by language barriers, Thomass noted. Commercial media seeking to report more on European issues will often encounter limited market interest. Thus, public service broadcasters could play a vital part since they are insulated from market forces via public funding.

• Listen to the lecture:[audio:Barbara_Thomass.mp3|autostart=no|bgcolor=#eff5f2] (Download a recording of Thomass’s lecture (mp3, 9,4 MB).

How can European public spheres emerge, Thomass asked. By national media discussing European questions, or the aggregation of national public spheres at the European level? After many unsuccessful attempts at creating pan-European media, this option seems unlikely. However, there is a tendency towards a Europeanization of public spheres as European issues are becoming more visible.

Thomass suggested to address the issue with the concept of in each other nested communicative spaces, instead of the well-known public sphere concept. This would make it easier to locate the potential of cross-border communication, especially where diverse language communities are involved.

On the practical level, cooperation beyond national borders could be encouraged. Thomass cited the example of the regional public service broadcaster RBB in Germany, which has cooperated with Polish TV on several projects. This should be encouraged on the European level, Thomass argued. What is needed is political will to strengthen the European dimension in national public service remits.

It is obvious that public service broadcasting must be redefined to incorporate online media and platforms, Thomass said. Online media could be better suited to facilitate European communication spaces than the traditional linear flow of programmes from national broadcasters.

See also:

• Barbara Thomass: Public Service Broadcasting in a Multimedia Environment: Programmes and Platforms (pdf, 86 KB).
• Presentation of Thomass, Ruhr-Universität Bochum.
• RBB: Deutsche und Polen, website about the relationship between Germany and Poland.
• Thierry Chervel: Let’s Talk European, article in Norwegian about the European website signandsight.com.

“A strategy for public service broadcasters on the Internet” was the title of Murdock’s opening lecture at a seminar on that issue at the University of Bergen on April 26–27, 2007.

Central to Murdock’s case for a new digital strategy for public service broadcasters is the concept of the commons. Originally the word described land areas which local people had access to and could use for defined purposes such as hunting and fishing. The concept has evolved, and is today used to describe public institutions such as libraries, museums, education and public service broadcasting, Murdock noted. All these institutions are open to all and free at the point of use.

• Listen to the lecture:[audio:Graham_Murdock.mp3|autostart=no|bgcolor=#eff5f2] (Download a recording of Murdock’s lecture (mp3, 17,3 MB).
• Read the presentation: Download Murdock’s presentation (pdf, 21 KB)

Both public service broadcasting and mass democracy emerged at the same time, in the 1920s. The BBC was given a central role in managing the new mass participation, Murdock noted. An important part of the BBC’s mandate was to supply people with the information they needed to take control of their own lives. At the same time the professions dominating the BBC carried with them a strong skepticism towards popular culture. This conflict grew only more important in the context of the commercial breakthrough of American popular culture. In many countries public service broadcasting was supposed to be the bulwark against this “invasion”. The friction between mass and high culture has been a feature of public broadcasting as an institution until today.

Public service broadcasters are under pressure from many sides, Murdock said. Commercial interests seek to enclose the commons and secure it for themselves. It is claimed that the market can take care of the BBC’s traditional mandate. In the EU there is an ongoing struggle about the future financing of public service. The BBC recently was granted a renewal of its mandate for another ten years, but Murdocks still thought we might be in for a serious debate about licence funding. Many public service broadcasters are forced to look for new revenue supplementing the licence fee, and hence develop two faces, one commercial and one non-commercial.

The concept of the commons is useful because it can help us understand developments on the Internet and how public service broadcasters might position themselves, Murdock believed. He pointed out that there are three different economies connected to the production and consumption of culture:

• Market: Commercial, offered to consumers, based on the price mechanism.
• Public good: Culture offered to citizens, based on taxes.
• Gift economy: Produced and made available for free by and for users/the audience.

Murdock suggested the concept of “communards” to describe those who create works on the Internet and happily give away the results of their effort to others. When enough people join a gift economy project, results such as the web encyclopedia Wikipedia might be achieved.

All three economies exist simultaneously on the Internet. Commercial interests are able to extend the reach of the market, for example by prolonging the time a work is protected by copyright. In this way, the size of the commons is reduced. But at the same time the gift economy is growing rapidly, as shown by the success of Wikipedia and other projects. And for public institutions such as museums, the Internet means that much more of the collections, usually stowed away in basements and archives, kan be made available, Murdock said.

Public service broadcasting was always meant to be like a “museum without walls”, where all public initiatives should get mass distribution. There is a need to rethink this: public broadcasting is no longer about programmes, but about all the resources the public can get access to for free, Murdock argued.

But public service broadcasters must also encourage participation from the audience, he emphasized. Here the BBC has had several initiatives, among them the Creative Archive, where the audience could get access to parts of the BBC’s historical archive and use those clips to make their own works. This way public broadcasters finally can negotiate the relationship between the professions and popular culture.

The result could be a new coalition between broadcasting as a public good and the gift economy that is flourishing on the web. Public service broadcasting can achieve this, but time is short, Murdock concluded.

See also:

• Building the Digital Commons: Public Broadcasting in the Age of the Internet: lecture by Murdock from 2004. (pdf)
• Creative Archive Licence Group.
• Stor sjanse, dårlig tid for NRK på nettet: Interview with Murdock in Norwegian.

With a lecture titled “The democratic potential of media participation”, McNair contributed to a seminar on public service broadcasting and the Internet at the University of Bergen on April 26–27, 2007.

McNair focused his lecture on the different roles ascribed to participation in debates about democracy. Participation in elections is essential to democracy, and the media have always had a central role in informing and motivating the electorate. For voters, media participation has usually taken place once removed, by following and reflecting on debate programmes on TV and radio. But voters now prefer to take part more directly, for example through live question and answer sessions with leading politicians. In Britain, Blair pioneered this format.

• Listen to the lecture:[audio:Brian_McNair.mp3|autostart=no|bgcolor=#eff5f2]
  (Download a recording of McNair’s lecture (mp3, 16,8 MB).
• Read the presentation: Download McNair’s presentation (pdf, 333 KB).

In the late 1990s, political talkshows inspired by US formats were introduced in the UK, McNair noted. The commercial channel Sky contributed strongly to this. The new forums were less ordered, more volatile and provocative. People called in with questions and the producers acted as gatekeepers.

Early in his first period as prime minister, Tony Blair started appearing in live TV debates where ordinary people could ask questions. One such programme was “Ask the Prime Minister”, broadcast by ITV. Blair has also appeared in programmes such as BBC Newsnight where he has answered the public’s often strongly critical questions on issues like tuition fees and the Iraq war.

This innovative approach is in line with the perceptions of broadcasters: people have grown tired of traditional political coverage and expect a more personal style. Blair has contributed to more communication between ordinary people and the political elite than existed before, McNair argued. Has that had a positive effect on the legitimacy of the political process? Yes and no, according to McNair. The strategy has one the one hand worked for Blair — he won three elections. But despite the openness, many see him as slick and manipulative. The new transparency has not stopped the downward trend in voter turnout in the UK. But people have grown accustomed to the possibility to communicate with the prime minister and the elite. To return to an aloof style is no longer an option for leading politicians, McNair said.

Broadcasters have also tried to apply the popular reality TV genre to political topics. But one such attempt, the show “Vote for me”, was not a success. Still, the idea to use the enthusiasm generated by entertaining TV formats to create more interest for politics remains an interesting one.

In recent years, broadcasters have woken up to the phenomenon of growing participation online, especially by young people. They now try to embrace the emerging digital formats, not least the BBC with its Creative Future project.

When broadcasters adopt the online formats, will that strengthen democracy, McNair asked. That’s too early to answer, he reasoned. And if it turns out to be a success, how will we know? Increased voter turnout isn’t the only way we can measure the effects of more media participation. Many political issues aren’t party issues, many are global, and we have experienced a growth in issue-specific politics. You might choose not to vote in elections but still be a fully informed citizen working for a charity, McNair pointed out.

See also:

• BBC: Creative Future project press release.