Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
HOW DOES Public Broadcasting PLAY A ROLE IN DEMOCRACY
HOW DOES Public Broadcasting PLAY A ROLE IN DEMOCRACY
Characteristics of public service broadcasting
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Paddy Scannell’s article ‘Public Service Broadcasting and Modern Public Life’, defending the viewpoints from Peacock Committee, tried to remind people public service broadcasting is not only a gold digging business but also a benefit for democratization. In order to illustrate public service broadcasting is not established for profit, he used BBC as an example. Taking two things from Habermas to support his idea those are a historical approach and the concern with ‘general public’ (Scannell,1989).Thus, as Scannell stated, public service broadcasting played an unconsciously beneficial, it is fair to ask that why did broadcasting play a social role improving democracy? In other words, are public service broadcastings contributed to the development of democracy global-perspectively actively or broadcasting had just fellow the rule of market which means promoted democracy was a result of adapting market.
Public service broadcasting has two essential characteristics: the provision of a service of mixed programmes on national channels available to all’. As far as Scannell was concerned, PSB is accessible to all citizens consisting of assorted programmes, which is exactly the same as Habermas’ public sphere – an area is guaranteed to all citizens (Habermas, 1989). According to Habermas, public sphere is where public opinion can be formed. Scannell stated that B formed a new public life which audiences (includes viewers, listeners and audiences), as for Scannell they could be a general public, are entitled to have their opinions. Scannell believed that B ‘resocialized private life’ as a result of a new public life. B broke the undoubtedly ‘aura’ of performers, gave communicative rights to audiences. On account of broadcasting is avail...
... middle of paper ...
...tion. Yet, whether this promotion is spontaneous or not, Scannell did not explicitly answer this question. Basis of information I obtained, it was largely because of ideology.
Reference
Curran, J. (2010) ’Media and Power’. London: Routledge, pp.1-39
Jaromír Volek, KMSŽ FSS MU (2006)Regulating public service broadcasting: The Cases of the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Ireland.Masaryk University
Paddy,S.(2000),For-anyone-as-someone structures,in ‘Media Culture Society ‘,JAN.vol. 22 no. 1 5-24
Peter,D.(1997)Communication and Citizenship: Journalism and the Public Sphere London:routledge pp.4
Richards; Giles, C.(2004)’Commentary: The future of Public Service Broadcasting and the BBC’, in Peacock, A.(ed.) Public Service Broadcasting without BBC .London
Street, J. (2001) ‘Media Effects’, in Mass Media , Politics and Democracy.Newyork:Palfrave. pp. 80-99
I was able to understand this idea through Scannell’s use of the news to still be a recurring aspect for most families’ daily rituals. As Scannell says, ‘the care structures of news are designed to routinise eventfulness’ and in this way “news is part of the fabric of days for us’. This has allowed me to acknowledge and comprehend the nature and extent as to which these temporal qualities impact our life. It has given me reason to believe that these ‘care structures’ is actually something that provides us with order and organises out daily routines to sync up with media events, this is how our private life, through mediation connects to the public sphere. However, one could bring up the argument to Scannell as to whether technologies as the internet which allows live s=and 24/7 streaming of television programs, is resulting in a time shift to which traditional daily counties is moving away from television broadcasting structures. In this contemporary sense, I found that Scannell’s analysis of these broadcasting technologies is gradually becoming expired in light of these new “time shifting technologies” such as Netflix and
Michael Parenti (2002) declares media in the United States is no longer “free, independent, neutral and objective.” (p. 60). Throughout his statement, Parenti expresses that media is controlled by large corporations, leaving smaller conglomerates unable to compete. The Telecommunications Act, passed in 1996, restricted “a single company to own television stations serving more than one-third of the U.S. public,” but is now overruled by greater corporations. (p. 61). In his opinion, Parenti reveals that media owners do not allow the publishing of stories that are not beneficial and advantageous. Parenti supports his argument very thoroughly by stating how the plutocracy takes control over media in multiple ways: television, magazines, news/radio broadcasting, and other sources.
In “Wires and Lights in a Box,” the author, Edward R. Murrow, is delivering a speech on October 15, 1958, to attendees of the Radio-Television News Directors Association. In his speech, Murrow addresses how it is his desire and duty to tell his audience what is happening to radio and television. Murrow talks about how television insulates people from the realities in the world, how the television industry is focused on profits rather than delivering the news to the public, and how television and radio can teach, illuminate, and inspire.
Public broadcasting was birthed, was to ensure that there is a medium where every voice had a platform. The goal was to ensure that citizens have access to information is essential in balancing the nation. Taras (2001) borrows a quote from Lowe and Juart (2005), who sate that public broadcasting “is to build social capital by “bridging” “bonding” and “witnessing”, but most of all by treating audience members as citizens rather than as consumers” (lowe & jauert, 2005).
Taras examines the commitments and values of CBC with the Canadian government and the citizens. He looked at a particular case of when CBC clashed with the government, and how CBC struggled to keep their TV programs running (Taras, pp.4-5). Next he talked about how the media industry is being taken controlled by powerful corporation and claims that PSB have the responsibility to protect the minorities (Taras, p.6). Subsequently, Taras discussed the ups and downs CBC had gone through until this day. Lastly, Taras explores the complex and intimate relationship between public broadcasters and the government; how they take advantage of each other to accomplish their goals. Ultimately, Taras believes that PSB will continue to have an impact in society despite living in a generation of digital media.
First, the role of the media is to represent the public and intervene between the public and the government. The media is a mirror, which re...
Habermas, J. (2000). The public sphere. In P. Marris & S. Thornham (Eds.), Media Studies : A reader(2nd.) (pp. 92–97). New York: New York University Press.
A relatively great deal of research has addressed the detrimental effects of entertainment for democracy and political engagement (Putnam 2000) and linked, for example, the ‘tabloidization of news’ to the media giving up on its informational role and capacity to ‘teach’ the public rather than simply ‘tickling’ it (Thussu 2005: 15). Giving way to entertainment values and trivial human-interest ...
... small media reforms (like public journalism) will be enough to reduce the commercial and corporate imperatives driving our existing media systems (Hackett and Zhao, 1998, p. 235). Instead, a fundamental reform of the entire system is needed, together with a wider institutional reform of the very structures the media systems work within, our democracies. This will be a difficult task, due to powerful vested interests benefiting from the status quo, including media, political and economic elites. Reforms will need to be driven by campaigns mobilising public support across the political spectrum, to enable the citizens of the world to have a media system that works to strengthen democratic principles as opposed to undermining them. This task is challenging, but it will become easier once people begin to understand the media’s role in policymaking within our democracies.
One way in which government achieves this objective, is by its ability to misuse the media’s ability to set the agenda. Contrary to popular belief, media is in fact an enormous hegemony. In fact, separate independent news organizations do not exist. Rather than creating an independent structured agenda of their own, generally lesser smaller news organizations adapt to a prepared agenda, previously constructed by a higher medium. Based upon this information alone, it is quite apparent that media functions in adherence to the characteristics of a hierarchy.
The aim of this paper is to achieve better understanding of political communication by critically reviewing Jesper Stromback’s four-dimension concept of mediatisation of politics. The essay is divided into three parts as follows. The first part presents the concepts of mediation and mediatisation, which contribute to the basis of Stromback’s theories. In the second part, the concept of mediatisation of politics by Stromback is deconstructed. With the help of such a concept, political communication can be perceived as a process in which adaptations between politics and media as well as competitions between media logic and political logic are involved in. The final section of the paper points out the limits of Stromback’s concept and further illustrates the extent to which political communication can be better understood. Political communication, in this context, should be conceived of as a process conducted under the functions of different variations beyond the spheres of media and politics.
In recent years, the importance of news broadcasts has increased. More people need to access the news to stay in touch with the rest of the world’s affairs. More TV channels have developed to give viewers more news. Both commercial and government networks are used to present the news to the general public. However, because of the different fundings and target audiences, different networks will focus on different aspects of the news, to make as many people of their target audience watch their particular broadcast. Therefore the separate channels can bring in a far larger audience, and take away another channels audience, therefore reducing competition.
At just a quarter of a century in governing regulations, listening to complains and making recommendations, while maintaining the standards of the laws of Jamaica as it is concerned with the media. There is one inevitable aspect the Broadcasting Commission has to continuously keep abreast with, and that is change.
Sewel, Philip W. “From Discourse to Discord: Quality and Dramedy at the End of the Classic Network System” Television and New Media 11.4 (2010): 235-59. Web. 18 January. 2014.
India has the largest democracy in the world and media has a powerful presence in the country. In recent times, Indian media has been subject to a lot of criticism for the manner in which they have disregarded their social responsibility. Dangerous business practices in the field of media have affected the fabric of Indian democracy. Big industrial conglomerates in the business of media have threatened the existence of pluralistic viewpoints. Post liberalisation, transnational media organisations have spread their wings in the Indian market with their own global interests. This has happened at the cost of an Indian media which was initially thought to be an agent of ushering in social change through developmental programs directed at the non-privileged and marginalised sections of the society. Though media has at times successfully played the role of a watchdog of the government functionaries and has also aided in participatory