Public Broadcasting through the Public Sphere: A Reimagining of Public Service Media in New Zealand

Abstract

During 2013, the New Zealand government heralded the launch of the Ultra-Fast Broadband (UFB) and Rural Broadband Initiatives (RBI) as significant tools across a range of economic and social policy areas, including the delivery of education and health services and the promotion of development policies for Maori. Conspicuously absent in the associated political discussion was the issue of public service broadcasting and the possibility for internet-based technologies to provide an efficient and cost-effective platform for the production and delivery of non-commercial public service media. The reason for this omission may be due to the governing National Party's historic disregard for public service broadcasting, as demonstrated by its disestablishment of a number of public broadcasting initiatives since 1999. Drawing on a Habermasian theoretical framework and Dan Hind's concept of ‘public commissioning’, the purpose of this article is to outline an alternative system for public service broadcasting based on a series of referenda and on open public debate. I begin by examining the present public broadcasting system and the traditional centrality of the state in governance and gatekeeping issues. I argue that the communicative potential of social media, enabled by universally accessible ultra-fast broadband, could provide an adequate platform for public gatekeeping, with the state having a significantly reduced role. I make the argument that the technological and resourcing mechanisms for such a system already exist, and the required shift in audience culture is already present in the consumption of entertainment and reality TV texts.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Armstrong

2005, ‘Public Service Broadcasting’, Fiscal Studies, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 281–99.

Atkinson

2000, ‘Putting It Right’, New Zealand Political Review, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 14–17.

Aukett

2002, ‘Seeing More of New Zealand On Air: Local Content Television Broadcasting Quotas in the Era of Globalization’, Auckland University Law Review, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 672–700.

Bohman

2004, ‘Expanding Dialogue: The Internet, the Public Sphere and Prospects for Transnational Democracy’, in Crossley

Roberts

J.M.

(eds), After Habermas: New Perspectives on the Public Sphere, Blackwell, London.

Castells

2001, Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, Business and Society, Oxford University Press, New York.

Castells

2004, 'Informationalism, Networks, and the Network Society: A Theoretical Blueprint, in Castells

(ed.), The Network Society: A Cross Cultural Perspective, Edward Elgar, Northampton.

Claassen

2011, ‘Communication as Commodity: Should the Media be on the Market?’, Journal of Applied Philosophy, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 65–79.

Claassen

1994, ‘Broadcasting Myths and Political Realities: New Zealand's Experience in Comparative Perspective’, Political Science, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 235–53.

Cocker

1998, ‘Broadcasting as Consumer Product: Questioning the Adequacy of New Zealand's De-regulated Broadcasting Market’, New Zealand Journal of Media Studies, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 16–22.

10.

Dahlgren

2012, ‘Online Journalism and Civic Cosmopolitanism’, Journalism Studies, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 156–71.

11.

Dunleavy

2008, ‘New Zealand Televison and the Struggle for “Public Service’”, Media, Culture and Society, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 795–811.

12.

Dunleavy

Thompson

2011, ‘The TVNZ 7 Decision and the Decline of Public Television in New Zealand’, open letter, 14 April, www.scoop.co.nz/stories/ED1104/S00053/media-academics-open-letter-tvnz7-and-public-broadcasting.htm.

13.

Habermas

1989 [1962], The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Enquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, trans. Burger

, Polity Press, Cambridge.

14.

Hind

2010, The Return of the Public, Verso, London.

15.

Jenkins

2004, ‘The Cultural Logic of Media Convergence’, International Journal of Cultural Studies, vol 7, no. 1, pp. 33–43.

16.

Kothari

Pearson

Zuberi

2004, ‘Television and Multiculturalism in Aotearoa New Zealand’, in Horrocks

Perry

(eds), Television in New Zealand: Programming the Nation, Oxford University Press, Melbourne.

17.

Lippman

1922, Public Opinion, Allen & Unwin, London.

18.

Lunt

Livingstone

2013, ‘Media Studies' Fascination with the Concept of the Public Sphere: Critical Reflections and Emerging Debates’, Media, Culture and Society, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 87–96.

19.

Maharey

1982, ‘Cultural Studies: Mapping the Field’, New Zealand Cultural Studies Working Group Journal, vol. 3, pp. 5–10.

20.

McChesney

1999, Rich Media, Poor Democracy: Communication Politics in Dubious Times, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL.

21.

McChesney

2004, The Problem of the Media: US Communication Politics in the 21st Century, Monthly Review Press, New York.

22.

Ministry of Economic Development 2013, ‘Ultra-Fast Broadband Initiative’, www.med.govt.nz/sectors-industries/technology-communication/fast-broadband/ultra-fast-broadband-initiative.

23.

Moe

2008, ‘Dissemination and Dialogue in the Public Sphere: A Case for Public Service Media Online’, Media Culture and Society, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 319–36.

24.

Morozov

2012, The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom, Public Affairs, New York.

25.

O'Malley

2009, ‘Introduction’ in O'Malley

Jones

(eds), The Peacock Committee and UK Broadcastng Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.

26.

Ouellette

Hay

2008, Better Living Through Reality TV: Television and Post-Welfare Citizenship, Blackwell, Malden, MA.

27.

Rasmussen

2013, ‘Internet-based Media, Europe and the Political Public Sphere’, Media, Culture and Society, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 97–104.

28.

Salvatore

2013, ‘New Media, the “Arab Spring” and the Metamorphosis of the Public Sphere: Beyond Western Assumptions on Collective Agency and Democratic Process’, Constellations, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 217–28.

29.

Sunstein

2000, ‘Television and the Public Interest’, California Law Review, vol. 88, pp. 511–23.

30.

Trenz

2009, ‘Digital Media and the Return of the Representative Public Sphere’, Javost, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 33–46.

31.

van Dijck

2012, ‘Facebook as a Tool for Producing Sociality and Connectivity’, Television and New Media, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 160–76.

32.

Valtysson

2010, ‘Access Culture: Web 2.0 and Cultural Participation’, International Journal of Cultural Policy, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 200–14.

33.

Wood

1981, ‘Editorial’, New Zealand Cultural Studies Working Group Journal, no. 1, pp. 1–3.

34.

Wood

1982, ‘Smashing the Audience’, New Zealand Cultural Studies Working Group Journal, no. 4, pp. 11–17.