Safeguarding Public Service Broadcasting Safeguarding public service broadcasting is diminishing in value, and if not protected, will be a thing

of the past. In a bid to solve such problems as lack of frequencies, sustainability of PSB, there is a growing interest favoring the idea of distributed public service (Fourie, 2010). Iosifidis, (2010) refers to this as de-institutionalization of PSB; it includes directly funding content producers for content that is consistent with those of PSB. Nonetheless, little has been found to support these alternatives compared to PSB firms. In addition, supporters of PSB uphold that PSBs are beneficial to the public and true PSBs have the potential of transforming the public perceptions of the universe (Iosifidis, 2010). True PSB firms have the capacity to fulfill literacy with responsibility while helping in curbing digital divide and exclusion (Barnett, 2004). Therefore, getting a critical perception of the broadcasters audiences is essential in initiating arguments supporting and disproving PSB; Ang supports this in his article by upholding that broadcasters should view the audience as market (Ang, 1991) since according to commercial broadcasters, their audiences are numerous and it is insensitive to view them as public or humans. As opposed to PSM, PSB ascertains that its audience is made up of human beings, with a wide array of needs and interests and such, the broadcasters role is to broaden their horizons and enrich their lives (Jackubowicz, 2006b). Additionally, there are several arguments prohibiting PSB while supporting commercial broadcasters; PSBs are restricted from ruling the market as they want. However, the large number of free-flowing information has necessitated PSM organizations to ensure high levels of trustworthiness of commercial broadcasters. This has not been possible since large and global media houses including CNN, BBC World Service, Aljazeera suffer from inconsistencies. This highlights that the most important factors to be upheld by PSMs include consistency, and

trustworthiness. Murdock, Jackubowicz, Curran, Collins, Street collectively show their discontentment with the current imbalance in information control and agenda setting roles being concentrated in the hands of a few. In line with this, they argue that the causative factor for this is lack of consistency and continuity among broadcasters in giving account of facts. They give an example of the Japanese firms during the earthquake and tsunami which concentrated on the affected people rather than the facts behind the disasters. The Japanese media failed to give facts of the disasters while concentrating on other issues; a factors that shows the degree of inconsistency among public medias which results in failure to deliver comprehensive accounts of reality, ultimately leading to public misinformation. Based on this, it is essential that the public media become more responsible and committed to information dissemination to maintain continuity and consistency. This example conforms to the notion that authoritativeness and trustworthiness are the two unique selling points of PSBs (Collins, Finn, McFadyen, & Hoskins, 2001). Thus, PSB in any democracy should be allowed to assume this role that operates on clearly established values, objectives and functions. In different media landscape and with increasing digital media convergence, the media is slowly becoming close to the users which helps in increasing value to the importance of media o the public. This has unveiled the notion that PSB institutions should develop a relationship with all forces; the public and civil society, states, and technology. Nonetheless, this is possible by engaging the public in PSB content creation and dissemination. In most situations, support for PSB starts from assumptions that PSBs are both essential for development but also pillars of a functioning democracy (Smith, 2012). According to Curran (1996), PSB is preferable since it offers a planned diversity of programs suited to different tastes and needs including those of minorities that make the majorities. As such, the most important initiative is for PSB firms to

seek support from key stakeholders (Blumler & Kavanagh, 1999). However, these efforts are only workable as per Jackubowicz (2006b) prediction which agrees that whenever there is pressure from the public, policy makers are able to find solutions to financial questions as well as institutional change affecting PSB firms. Such factors help establish close ties between the PSB firms with the public and key stakeholders. However, this does not come easily as was witnessed in New Zealand where despite the organized efforts of SAVETVNZ7 campaigners the broadcaster was banned. However, Australian PSBs; ABC and SBS are renewing their relationship with the audiences; according to (Debrett, 2010) and Flew (2009) Australian PSBs are slowly reforming their partnership with several organizations for the generation of content serving multicultural Australia. In Nepal, the government is intervening with public broadcasters relationships with civil society while restraining them from developing. The other recommendation for PSBs is the need for re-embedding PSB in society which Iosifidis (2010, p. 18) claims has been a great failure. Reasoning behind the failure is that several PSBs have made themselves inaccessible to the public whilst engaging the services of politicians and the government (Bardoel & d'Haenens, 2008). In addition, other policymakers view PSBs as problems and should not be part of solution to societal problems (Iosifidis, 2010, p. 18). Due to this, PSBs are supposed to review their viewpoints of policymakers via partnership and collaboration with everyone during production to delivery of their public service content.

References Ang, I. (1991). Desperately Seeking the Audience. London.: Routledge. Bardoel, J., & d'Haenens, L. (2008). Reinventing public service broadcasting in Europe: prospects, promises and problems. Media, Culture and Society, 30(3) , 337-355. Barnes, P. (2006). Capitalism 3.0: A Guide to Reclaiming the Commons. San Fransisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishing. Barnett, S. (2004). Which End of the Telescope? From Market Failure to Cultural Value. In D.

Tambini & J. Cowling (Eds.), From Public Service Broadcasting to Public Service Communications. London: IPPR. Blumler, J., & Kavanagh, D. (1999). The Third Age of Political Communication: Influences and Features. Political Communication, 16(3) , 209-230. Bollier, D. (2002). Reclaiming the Commons: Why we need to protect our public resources from private encroachment. The Boston Review . Candel, R. S. (2012b). Redefining and Repositioning Public Service Media in the Multiplatform Scenario - Challenges, Opportunities and Risks. Hamberg: Hans-Bredow-Institute. Coleman, S. (2004). From service to commons: re-inventing a space for public communication. In D. Tambini & J. Cowling (Eds.), From Public Service Broadcasting to Public Service Communication (pp. 88-98). London: IPPR. Collins, R. (2011). Content online and the end of public media? The UK, a canary in the coal mine? Media, Culture & Society, 33(8) , 1202-1219. Collins, R., Finn, A., McFadyen, S., & Hoskins, C. (2001). Public Service Broadcasting Beyond 2000: Is There a Future for Public Service Broadcasting? Canadian Journal of Communication, 26(1) , 3-15. Debrett, M. (2010). Reinventing Public Service Television for the Digital Future. London: Intellect . Fourie, P. J. (2010). Distributed public service broadcasting as an alternative model for public service broadcasting in South Africa. Communicare , 29 (2), 1-25. Heikkila, H., Ahva, L., & Autio, H. (2010). Long and winding road: the quest for partnership from the perspective of 'Audience'. RIPE 2010. ondon. Iosifidis, P. (2010). Reinventing public service communication : European broadcasters and beyond. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Jackubowicz, K. (2006b). Keep the essence, change (almost) everything else: redefining PSB for the 21st century. In I. Banerjee & K. Seneviratne (Eds.), Public service broadcasting in the age of globalization (pp. 94-116). Singapore: AMIC. Leonhard, P. (2012, November 17). The future of media, television, broadcasting. Retrieved February 25, 2013, from www.mediafuturist.com: http://www.mediafuturist.com//my_presentations/ Lowe, G. F. (2008). Public service broadcasting in 'partnership' with the public: Meanings and implication. RIPE 2008 Conference. Mainz. Murdock, G. (2005). Building the Digital Commons:Public Broadcasting in the Age of the Internet. In G. F. Lowe & P. Jauert (Eds.), Cultural dilemmas in public service broadcasting (pp. 213231). Gteborg: Nordicom. Raats, T., & Pauwels, C. (2012). Public service media and public service partnership: beyond the hype. Providing tools for sustainable PSM models. Brussel: IBBT-SMIT (Vrije Universiteit Brussel). Smith, E. (2012). A Road Map to Public Service Broadcasting. Kualalampur, Malaysia: Asia Pacific Broadcasting Union (ABU). Srensen, J. K. (2011). The Paradox of Personalisation Public Service Broadcasters Approaches to Media Personalisation Technologies. Copenhagen, Denmark: University of Southern Denmark. Splichal, S. (2007). Does hostory matter? Grasping the idea of public service media at its roots. In J. Bardoel & G. F. Lowe (Eds.), From public service broadcasting to public service media (pp. 237-256). Gotenberg: Nordicom.

This is a sample paper on Public Service Broadcasting. We are able to offer research on various aspects of Public Service Broadcasting, as well as, other broadcasting topics. Do not hesitate to contact or visit us at Write my PhD- Dissertation if you are pursuing your PhD Write my Capstone Project if you are doing your capstone Write my Essay if you need an essay Write my Literature Review for a detailed well outlined and analyzed literature review Or check us out at Custom Writing and papersareus for sample topics