Robert Castrucci
Media studies have been examining the behaviour of the television public for many years now. The formulation of Katz and Lazarsfeld’s “Two step flow theory” was followed by the cultural studies trend, and this research has continued with recent surveys such as those of Henry Jenkins. During all this time an ever more participatory role of the viewer has been clearly evident. This kind of participation, in a highly convergent and interactive technological context, entails a rapid increase in the active involvement of the public, who takes control of television contents in forms, ways and times that were not originally intended, resulting in the dynamics of network sharing that are in no way foreseeable or planned by broadcasters.
Some scholars claim the era of pedagogical TV be over, pointing towards the demise of the power of the programming schedule and the broadcaster in determining the type and quality of content available to users. This regards public service broadcasters in particular, since their paradigm derives from the original mission to “inform, educate and entertain”. It is clear that a thorough revision of the way in which this mission can be pursued in the digital network context is necessary, and it also seems that doubts regarding the possibility of continuing to carry out this mission tout court still need to be resolved.
Internet is evolving towards use patterns based on social networking, where the power and influence of opinion leaders is enormously increased. Active and interactive audiences continue to appreciate professional contents and it also seems that the long-standing controversy regarding the exploitation of intellectual property rights is being overcome. New business models are emerging from the innovative strategies of global technology companies (whether they be Apple or Google or Facebook), which can offer remuneration to content producers.
The solutions now being experimented with, which are due to constitute the standards of use and remuneration of the near future, have both pros and cons for public service companies. The pros include the possibility of re-establishing contact with audience sectors which had increasingly been breaking away from the old forms of broadcasting, while the cons regard at least two nodes: one of them concerning the value chain, the other concerning the geographic size of the markets. Technological companies are emerging as new gate-keepers – intermediaries between content and audiences – and, although they do not directly produce content, they have a strong grip on the public (also thanks to powerful network externalities). Thus they exercise a significant competitive force on the content producers, including public service companies. In addition, these new gate-keepers are global companies that give rise to platforms of worldwide extension, as opposed to the various public services that are confined to national dimensions.
The world of television in general and of public service companies in particular is adopting a range of strategies, focused partly on the exploitation of Hertzian television (such as through live events and the creation of artificially planned events), partly on the qualitative evolution of television content regardless of the specific platform of use, and partly on a multimedia and post-television presence on Internet.
What is certain is that if public service companies intend to carry on contributing towards shaping the values and behaviour patterns of their society of reference, they must abandon their reassuring and easy incomes based on technologies and markets that are becoming obsolete, and must instead focus on their credibility, authority, quality and reputation, searching for ever-new ways and means to tackle the global market as protagonists. |
