In a democracy, most governments try to ensure that they support Public rather than State broadcasters.

 

Why is this?

 

Put simply, this is because elected governments need the public to engage with politics and politicians. They need this engagement to be more than a formulaic trip to the polls every few years. If they are to win elections, the public need to think politicians are responsive their concerns. So some kind of dialogue is constantly necessary.

 

In a country where governments are not elected this is not seen as necessary. The State effectively consists of only those in power. They talk to themselves. The general public barely get a look in.   

 

In a democracy, the State is not simply those in power.

 

The State is something that the people want to be an expression of their collective selves.

The State should be the sumation of all the people in the country. It represents common values and aspirations. It exists because people generally want to live together. The State should protect individuals' rights to live as they wish, while making sure that the exercise of those rights does not harm others.

 

The people devolve power to a political party or regime to allow it to run the State for the greater good of all.  But the party is not The State.

 

Dictators love to blur the concept of the state with themselves. Colonel Gaddafi says he is the people – meaning he is the State. At a recent talk, the Egyptian writer Ahdaf Soueif said that the uprising in Egypt was “the people wresting the state back from the leadership”. Those involved in the uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa understand the difference between State and their leaders.

 

In a democracy, to protect the State (or the people’s collective will to have the right to rule themselves) there are broadly five pillars that need to play a supporting role. All five pillars need to be in place or things will eventually go wrong.

 

Politicians – who act honestly and are prepared to accept the responsibility the people delegate to them

Security Services – like the army and police to maintain order and defend the people

An independent Judiciary – to uphold good laws that protect the will of the people

Religion – in most societies Churches and religious leaders still play a key role for people on moral issues

An independent media – to provide access to information and link civil society to the leadership

 

 

 

In that environment, a Public Broadcaster is one of the vital links between government and people. Through its activities people find out why decisions are made and what impact they will have. They can ask questions of leaders through the media and hold leaders to account for their actions. They can expect the media to pick up on their concerns and put them to politicians and help provide the two way dialogue that democratic politicians see as vital if they are to maintain support at the polls.

 

Public broadcasting also has a vital role to play in education and development. It can use its ability to reach people in their homes to spread information about how to remain healthy, how to combat disease, how to learn more about the world in which they live and empower themselves.

 

Public broadcasters can only do this job effectively if they operate under a regulatory system that allows them to exercise their judgement independently of government.

 

This independence allows them to broadcast factual, accurate and impartial information. They don’t simply repeat things the government tells them without asking questions. They verify what they broadcast. They do not leave out uncomfortable facts or ignore events that everyone knows are taking place.

 

Once the public realise that the public broadcaster is acting independently, they start to trust it. That trust enables people to speak more openly to the journalists. That makes the broadcaster more credible to politicians. So the politicians start to see it as an effective way of communicating with people and persuading them that their actions are right – or at least reasonable.

 

The laws and regulations around the public broadcaster have to support this role. Good regulation allows independent, responsible journalism to flourish in the public interest.

 

 

To do this, a government establishes in law a regulatory body that is not an arm of government. It can – in dialogue with the public and journalists – define codes of conduct within the law. It can hold to account those with a license to broadcast.  This helps create an environment where journalists can operate effectively – regardless of whether they work for public or private organizations.

 

The Public Broadcaster sits in this framework. It will almost certainly need some additional governance. The journalists within the Public Broadcaster need to report to professional Executive board made up of journalists and media experts.

 

That board should not report directly to any government Ministry.

 

A buffer needs to be created between government and the Public broadcaster. One way is to create a body of respected citizens can play a role in forming a strategic body or board to which the Executive can report. That body should both protect the Public Broadcaster’s independence and ensure that its actions are accountable to the general public. The key question for the governing body should be; “Is this organization working in the public’s interest?”

 

This senior board would hire and fire the person (CEO) who leads the Public Broadcaster on a day to day basis and chairs the Executive Board. The CEO hires and fires the Executive Board.

 

So the government puts in place the legal framework for an independent broadcaster. It does not interfere with the day to day workings of the organization. If it has criticisms it can expect those criticisms to be public aired and for the public to judge whether or not they are justified.

 

In the end this system is underpinned by the Trust of the audiences. If the Public Broadcaster does its job properly it will be trusted and people will watch and listen. If it is not trusted people will go elsewhere. If audiences evaporate it would be hard to argue that there is still a need for such a Public Broadcaster.

 

In a democracy, the politicians are judged by the people and if they do not get enough votes they find themselves out of office.

 

In the media if people choose not to watch or listen, then the broadcaster loses any useful role and will in time go out of business or – in the case of a public broadcaster - lose the argument for any public funding.

 

Either way, the people should be the ones to decide who and what they wish to support and the legal framework should support that principle.  

Jerry Timmins, Managing Director GMT Media Ltd