Dr Lucyna Słupek, Jagiellonian University, Polish Political Science Association, author of
the book "Television – A Cultural Good or an Element of the Market. The Transformation of
Television in the Countries of the EU"
TELEVISION IN THE DIGITAL ERA – A CULTURAL GOOD
OR AN ELEMENT OF THE MARKET?
The question raised in the title encompasses a wide range of complex issues which – for reasons of
necessity – will only be covered in passing. I will be focusing on the following: a general reflection on
the importance of the media, particularly television, in the modern world and the technological
changes that television has undergone as well as the impact of these changes on the communication
paradigm and the role of public broadcasters in the digital age.
Our response to the title question should be tied to the issue of the role of the media and their impact
on society and the individual. The theory of mass communications contains many proposals in this
respect. Initially, the dominant view was a belief in the power of the media – its capacity to trigger
immediate, direct and identical results, all of which were planned by the commissioning organisation
(the omnipotence of the media model). This view was subsequently brought into question by later
research which revealed the complex nature of this process, highlighting the impact of a number of
factors independent of the media such as the social groups in which a given individual interacts, each
person's individual predispositions, the recipient's cognitive structures etc. Contemporary
communication theories (e.g. concept of uses and gratification) are based on the fundamental
assumption that recipients represent an active group, acting in a rational manner and who use the
media to satisfy their own needs – researchers no longer only examine how the media use the public
but also look at how the public itself uses the media. Today, it is the formulation by the media of
social definitions and meanings which is seen as being the most important effect of the media's
influence – definitions and meanings that are systematically disseminated on a wide scale and which
are integrated by recipients within their own cognitive structures – or not, as the case may be. We are
therefore dealing with a situation where meanings are constantly in the process of being renegotiated.
This is the result of the power of the media (which creates images of our reality) and the power of the
recipients themselves (who create their own views on reality based on their symbolic interaction with
the constructs of the media) (T. Goban-Klas). Another important role of the media is that of agenda
setting, which is understood as referring to a group of topics or issues which people think about and
discuss in the public sphere. This hypothesis ("agenda setting") also demonstrates that recipients attach
importance to various events based on the attention which the media gives them. In my view, it is the
very function of the media – the way in which it satisfies the fundamental needs of individuals, society
and democracy – which is a determining factor for including television and its content in the category
of cultural goods.
Furthermore, it may be argued that the media, particularly television, plays a significant role in
shaping our world today. We can even state that – in much the same way as we all live in a defined
"social space" and "geographical space" – so too we all live in what may be termed a "media space".
As T. Goban-Klas has noted, the mass media have a number of basic characteristics: firstly, there are
.../...
EN
-2many forms of mass media, secondly, the mass media operate in a systematic manner, thirdly mass
media output is targeted at a mass audience, fourthly, thanks to their scope, the regularity of their
output and their repetitive nature, the mass media represents a central and constitutive component of
our modern society.
The term mass media, argued Marshall McLuhan, not only refers to the size of the audience or the
number of recipients but rather to the fact that everybody is linked to the mass media at the same time.
The omnipresence of the media in our lives today is also borne out by the fact that – for the first time
in the history of mankind – we are now functioning in a society where children are being brought up
and are growing up in "media houses" where the television and now, to a similar extent, the internet,
are conveying a diverse range of news items and stories, from morning to night, seven days a week,
including Sundays. This information is not being transmitted by those who are closest to them – their
parents, grandparents – it is not the church or the elders in their community who are performing this
task but professional "story tellers" whom they do not know personally. And it this distance, this
change of perspective and geography, in the physical sense of the term, which is one of the most
important aspects behind the creation of media space. As a result, there is no sense of place, to use the
words of the eminent US media analyst Joshua Meyrovitz.
Meyrovitz draws our attention to the fact that the culture of our past societies was a culture that was
passed down from one generation to the next by people from our immediate social and physical
surroundings, based on direct contact and usually operating within the same cultural norms. The
media, particularly the electronic media, have changed this situation. They have brought together
social systems that were previously apart, blurred the distinction between public and private
behaviour; lastly, they have weakened the relation between an individual's social position and their
position in the physical sense. Wherever we may be (at home, at work, in the car) we are now able to
stay in contact with the whole world and go online whenever we want. The television and the internet
now mean that we are becoming involved in issues which, in the past, we felt did not concern us.
Thanks to modern communications technologies, physical barriers are no longer of any importance as
far as obtaining social information is concerned. They now also mean that every issue which is
publicised by the media becomes a matter of interest for each of us.
The integration of our contemporary world and our ever closer mutual dependencies, can give us the
impression that our spacetime is shrinking. A new social order is coming into being, which the
globalisation theorist Manuel Castells refers to as a network society, a society in which it is the
advanced technologies used to process and transmit information that are the most important agents of
change. Living in the network society means above all living for the moment today, where the speed
of communication and the flow of information are a measure of our modernity and where the past and
all models based on it are waning in importance. The development of communication technologies
has thus given rise to a culture of immediacy, which is bringing about significant changes in the way
people relate to one another. In this era of "cybercivilisation" the system of inter-generational cultural
transmission is being turned on its head – we are witnessing a reversal of the roles and rules of
socialisation. The older generations are being forced to not only acknowledge the independence of
younger generations but also to learn from them the new principles, behaviour and skills which the
.../...
-3accelerated rhythm of life has imposed on everyone. Furthermore, it is the behavioural models of those
who are best adapted to the realities of the digital and computer age that are becoming dominant.
According to Margaret Mead's theory, the younger generations are adapting themselves to radical
changes ever more quickly while their need for the cultural inheritance of the older generations is
becoming increasingly smaller. The media are therefore playing a key role in identifying the process
of socialisation. In addition, it is often not our own experiences but rather those of the media that are
allowing us to uncover the world around us. We are learning about other individuals, foreign people,
their cultures, their value systems and their problems not through personal contact but through the
media which have today become the primary source for definitions, images and interpretations of our
social reality.
The modern media, especially television, are seen as being one of the key institutions within the public
sphere, a forum for discussions on social affairs. Public opinion, which is shaped with the help of the
media, is becoming a significant political force. One vital factor that should also be borne in mind
when discussing the development of the media space is that the media have become one of the most
important instruments of societal power, an instrument of social control and management, for
mobilising and triggering innovation. Yet the fact that the media are an instrument of power does not
necessarily mean that they strengthen the power of government. Many media observers even claim
that they are increasingly dismantling the state's monopoly on the formulation of political, semantic
and cultural spaces.
Several years ago, the author Michael Crichton drew a comparison between the mass media and the
dinosaurs. In his opinion, the traditional forms of mass communication are gigantic, clumsy creations
that are simply not adjusted to the new requirements and conditions created by IT and the advancing
process of digitalisation. As they are obsolete and unable to adapt, they are destined to become extinct
and will – as he vividly put it – "become the next fossil, which will be used to produce fuel". Today it
is hard to agree with this pessimistic vision of the future of the media – they are not becoming extinct
but, in line with Paul Levinson's maxim of "adapt or die" they are in the process of changing, just as
they have done many times in the past.
Television became a mass medium in Europe after World War II. Using analogue broadcasts, and a
limited frequency band, it began by broadcasting just one universal programme, which were gradually
supplemented with additional channels – a second channel, which was often innovative and more
ambitious than the first channel, and a third regional channel. The first major expansion in the
programmes offered came about due to the introduction of cable broadcasting. Cable television made
it possible to provide more specialist programmes and to offer fee-paying channels, which effectively
led to the segmentation of the audience and to a move away from the principle of the universal
accessibility of programmes. Satellite technology transformed television from a national to a
supranational medium, thus removing any constraints related to the restricted scope of the terrestrial
network. It also freed television from the problem of a lack of available frequencies and deepened the
trend to providing more specialised programmes. Digital television has enriched all types of
broadcasts, and has made it possible to increase the number of channels many times over, improve the
technical quality of broadcasting and to combine traditional forms of media with new media services.
.../...
-4As the digitalisation of transmission has made it possible to encrypt broadcasts, so it has become
easier to introduce a system of conditional access, i.e. a pay-per-view system.
These transformations in the realm of television reflect a general move away from an industrial
society, which was characterised by divergent or isolated cultures, societies or media to an open, postindustrial information society, whose shape is largely determined by the processes of convergence.
Convergence encompasses a wide range of phenomena, it is a process whereby once different cultures,
societies, economies, legal and media systems are becoming increasingly alike. Henry Jenkins defines
convergence as a "flow of media content between different media platforms, cooperation between
multiple media industries and the migratory behaviour of media audiences who go almost anywhere in
search of the kinds of entertainment experiences they want" (Jenkins, p. 9). Globalisation, the IT
revolution and the digitalisation of the media are all factors that have driven the convergence process
forward. "The introduction of digital (binary) code has led to the convergence of media which operate
using the same universal code for the recording and transmission of information – and thus to
convergence on the technological front. Many theoreticians believe that we will see the emergence of
a new supermedium in the not too distant future (......) integrating such existing appliances as the
computer, mobile telephone, MP3 player, television" (A. Zwiefka-Chwałek, p. 150).
The convergence process i.e. the integration of traditional television with telecommunications and IT
through digitalisation is helping to establish a new communications paradigm for television. Its first
important aspect is the creation of new television signal distribution platforms which mean it can offer
a much broader range of programming through a variety of channels: terrestrial, cable, digital satellite
television, mobile television via mobile telephone networks, as well as television – including on
demand programmes – which is distributed via the telecommunications networks and the internet. The
second key aspect of this process is that it represents a gradual move away from the traditional linear
mode of communication – where a broadcaster emits a programme based on a programme schedule –
towards a non-linear system of communications, which offers viewers programmes on demand. This
means that viewers can themselves decide what they watch and when (programmes exist in isolation
from the schedule and are available at any time). A third change which has arisen as a result of the
increasing presence of new digital technologies is that recipients are now able to add their own content
to television programmes (open transmissions, co-creation).
The internet occupies a particularly important position among the new television signal distribution
platforms (webcasting or netcasting). Its popularity, especially among young people, has effectively
forced television to come up with new ideas in terms of its content, organisation and distribution.
Television is making use of the internet in a number of different ways – by creating websites with
information about the broadcaster and its programmes on offer or by setting up additional internet
distribution channels, where the viewer can watch the programmes as they are broadcast or at a later
date. Lastly, it is using the internet to enhance the programmes it broadcasts by introducing a number
of interactive elements involving a smooth transition from the programme to the internet.
(K. Jakubowicz). On the other hand, we are witnessing a process, which is referred to as the
mediatisation of the internet. It involves the inclusion on traditional websites and portals of content
.../...
-5taken from the mass media: press articles, audio and video files as used in radio and television
programmes.
Such convergence in the area of the media is not only occurring on the technological front – we are
also seeing structural and institutional convergence. The individual branches of the media sector – the
cinema, the print media, radio and television – were separate from one another until the 1970s and
essentially functioned independently within national markets, in line with national regulations. During
the course of the last thirty years, however, there have been a number of dramatic changes, which have
led to the creation of a fluid global media market while new technologies have encouraged mergers
and the overlapping of sectors that were once separate. Researchers consider the following aspects to
be the most important for the development of the new media structure: concentration of ownership; the
transition from public to private ownership (deregulation), the creation of supranational corporations,
the integration of various types of media, the multimedia nature of the programmes on offer
(A. Giddens, p 497). Institutional convergence is also evident through the increasing similarities
between public and commercial broadcasters in terms of the programmes they broadcast.
Another example of convergence is the overlap between different formats and types of journalism and
the emergence of various hybrid forms – the most widely discussed of which is infotainment since it is
the form that raises the most concerns – but which also include new forms such as edutainment or
docutainment i.e. the encroachment of entertainment into the domain of news journalism,
documentaries or educational programmes. It is possible that a new form of "super journalism" will
develop in the future, which will combine the styles of reporting used in the press, radio and on
television. One platform that provides particularly fertile ground for such forms of integration is the
internet, where press or radio portals post online video files and recordings produced by television
channels.
The processes described above are having a substantial impact on shaping journalism today.
Kevin Kawamoto even suggests introducing the term "digital journalism", which is characterised by:
hypertextuality, interactivity, non-linearity, multimediality, convergence and personalisation.
(K. Kawamoto, after: A. Zwiefka-Chwałek). The boundaries between the different forms of journalism
are slowly starting to blur – press journalists are invited to appear on television programmes to
comment on current affairs, TV journalists write articles for newspapers, while both groups of
journalisms write blogs on the internet…. Today's journalists need to have a more universal skill set –
the concept of backpack journalism has been coined to describe the mobility required of journalists
and their ability to combine and use a wide range of different tools. In the report compiled by Instytut
Monitorowania Mediów, Polish journalists identified a number of additional challenges and dangers:
-
the growing power of the internet
falling standards of journalism
chasing after sensationalism and the increasing tabloidisation of the media
the presence of people in the profession who have become journalists by accident
the ease with which one can "become" a journalist without any specialist training or skills
.../...
-6-
the increasing commercialisation of the profession: its dependence on producers, sales or
viewing figures, advertising, the demand for certain types of information
- increasing time pressure facing journalists
- the politicisation of the profession
(http://www.instytut.com.pl/raporty/IMM/o_firmie/DZIENNIKARZE_2010_IMM_media.pdf
Meanwhile, in a report on the state of the media and journalism in the USA prepared by the Project on
Excellence in Journalism (http://pl.ejo-online.eu) the report's authors highlighted a number of bad
practices in journalism, particularly web journalism, where information taken from traditional forms of
media is simply placed on news portals, often unchanged in any way, thereby popularising a veritable
"copy-paste" culture.
When considering the role of public television in the digital era, we need to address the question of
what conditions public television must meet if it is to fulfil its duties towards society responsibly. Let
us begin by reminding ourselves of the fundamental requirements that all forms of media should meet
if they are to properly function within a system of democracy. The correct functioning of media
organisations in the public sphere requires that the following four basic conditions be met:




freedom – the media must be free from all pressures and controls both on the part
of government and groups of private owners,
pluralism – both externally (diversity of media institutions) and internally
(diversity of content),
access – the general public must be guaranteed access to the media,
representation – the media should present the views, opinions and positions of
various groups in society.
In the digital age, guaranteeing access to the media at any time and place means – in the case of public
television – ensuring that it is universally accessible for people through a variety of different forms of
distribution i.e. via television, mobile telephones or via the internet. This particularly applies to the
younger generation, who are accustomed to the fact that any item of information or programme may
be accessed at any time, at the click of a mouse. If television is to continue to represent an important
and primary source of information, it must be capable of communicating with its recipients in a
modern manner. Programmes should be prepared based on the assumption that – subject to certain
changes –they will be made available on a variety of platforms. Equally, programmes should enable
recipients to participate in their creation, through the introduction of various forms of interaction.
Alongside its universal and thematic programmes, public television should also offer customised
programmes, a personalised selection of programmes that is available on the internet and which is
adjusted according to the varying needs and expectations of recipients. This means that we are
witnessing a gradual move away from the two key elements that had, until recently, formed the very
basis of public television's identity – universal accessibility and universal content. This does not
however mean they will disappear completely, rather that public television will involve the coexistence of a variety of communications platforms.
.../...
-7In terms of guaranteeing access to the media, digital terrestrial television is also starting to take on a
greater importance, as it allows those households which only receive programmes through terrestrial
systems to also access a rich and diverse range of programmes. Restricting access to television –
which is a medium that plays an important role in providing access to information, knowledge and
culture – can lead to social exclusion and reduced social and work-related activity, which can
engender a feeling of marginalisation and exclusion. It is also worth remembering that digital
television also creates a large number of additional opportunities such as facilitating access for the
disabled, which should be introduced on a wider scale by public broadcasters. Access to digital
transmission involves financial costs such as the purchase of equipment for receiving the digital
signal, which is not only a problem for certain members of the public but also for the state. It requires
a series of systematic solutions, which can ensure access to TV for people on low incomes, who are
underprivileged or disabled.
From the very beginning, public television has always had a duty to provide its viewers with
programmes that are varied, impartial, honest and of good quality. Today, this obligation is perhaps
more important than ever before. The increasing competition on the commercial television market
means that in their fight to win mass audiences, private broadcasters will be forced to discontinue
broadcasting "mission" programmes on their open-access television channels. Higher quality,
ambitious or "attractive" programmes will be increasingly transferred to thematic channels, which are
often for subscribers only. Quality programming on commercial television channels will be accessible
on fee-paying thematic channels while the universal channels will provide entertainment for less
discerning viewers.
It is vital to ensure the independence of public broadcasters as whenever television is controlled by the
government and politicians it serves the interests of its controlling authorities more than those of
society at large. Protecting the independence of television also represents a means of ensuring its
impartiality. A sure and stable system of financing is very important for the autonomy of the public
media. Funding from the state budget does not represent the best solution as the public media were not
set up to serve the state but rather society and should not therefore be state-funded. The subscriber's
fee or TV licence fee, which is a standard charge paid by members of the public, is probably the best
and most tried and tested form of financing as it provides a reliable budget that enables planning over
a longer time frame. The range of programming provided by public broadcasters is the concern of
every member of the public and is directly related to the democratic needs of each society. Bearing in
mind, however, that the content of public television is to be distributed and made available via a
number of different platforms, we should gradually stop using the term "radio-television licence". For
this will no longer be a fee for owning a television but rather for unlimited access to public
broadcasting any time, anywhere.
In this age of digital, integrated media, it is important to stress one other important role of public
television, its role in integration. As we have seen, a number of technological revolutions, both small –
cable and satellite broadcasting – and large – digitalisation – are deepening the trend towards
specialisation and individual programming and are leading to the gradual fragmentation of the
television audience. What is more, these technological advances mean that people now have access to
.../...
-8an increasing number of foreign programmes. Meanwhile, to have a cohesive society and to preserve
this cohesion over time, we need to continuously nurture our national culture and traditions and ensure
that we have a strong identity and sense of community. It is not possible to carry out these tasks in a
haphazard and spontaneous manner; they cannot be left to the commercial media, which are guided
only by the argument of money. The responsibility for this should lie with the public broadcasters,
whose motivation for action should be public values and objectives. One of the reasons for preserving
the integrating role of television is that public broadcasters often have extensive and unique archives,
which represent a special form of audiovisual heritage, which the commercial sector has yet to
acquire. These archives are currently in the process of being digitalised and will in the future be made
available via a variety of different distribution channels to younger viewers, for whom they will
represent a veritable lesson in history. Older viewers, in turn, will be able to reflect on their past
involvement.
Our discussion on the future of public television in the globalised, digital era leads us to one more
reflection. We are living at a time when – in Europe, at least – access to information is no longer a
problem; it is rather the surplus of information, information overload – the chaos of information which
is proving problematic. Global news is becoming intertwined with local news, key events with stories
of little importance, useful facts with worthless information, news that is important for society at large
with gossip and sensationalism etc. Some viewers, those who have better communication skills and a
higher level of education will be able to dissect this material in an appropriate manner and to use this
wealth of information to satisfy their own needs and to expand their knowledge. Those who are less
educated and who have poorer skills in this area, however, will either need more time and will need to
put more effort into finding and assimilating new information – or they simply won't use it. As a
result, the information society may in fact introduce a new form of stratification within society, a
division into rich and poor in terms of people's access to information.
The media are there to help us bring some order to the world and to prioritise news events yet this task
is becoming increasingly difficult in today's conditions. We are living in fascinating albeit difficult
times, where reality is fluid and unpredictable, something which Kenneth Jowitt and
Zygmunt Bauman have termed a global disorder, which has replaced the Cold War order and which
Immanuel Wallerstein refers to as the end of the world as we know it, that is to say the end of the
world based on a capitalist economy. Ulrich Beck, in turn, prefers the term a risk society noting that
every action today carries with it some form of danger. This means that there is all the more need for
well-organised and well-managed public media, which can describe and interpret reality in an honest
and responsible manner and can act as a guide in this reality that is slipping out of our control. Public
media that will act in the interests of society and the public – not just consumers. After all, the media
not only caters to their viewers' needs – it also helps to shape them.
.../...
-9BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Allan, S. (2008). Newsy w sieci, Wyd. UJ, Kraków 2008;
Baran S.J., Davis D.K. (2007). Teorie komunikowania masowego, Wyd. UJ, Kraków;
Bartoszcze R., Słupek L. (2001). Telewizja – dobro kultury czy element rynku. Transformacja telewizji
publicznych w krajach Unii Europejskiej, WSZ, Rzeszów;
Bauman Z.(2000). Globalizacja: i co z tego dla ludzi wynika, PIW, Warszawa;
Bustamante E.(2008). Public Service in Digital Age: Opportunities and Threats in a Diverse Europe.
(in;) I.Fernandez Alonso, M. De Moragas (eds.), Communications and Cultural Policies in Europe,
Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya, pp. 185-216;
Giddens A. (2004) Socjologia, PWN, Warszawa;
Goban-Klas T. (1999). Media i komunikowanie masowe. Teorie i analizy prasy, radia, telewizji i
Internetu, PWN, Warszawa – Kraków;
Jakubowicz K. (2007). Media publiczne. Początek końca czy nowy początek, WaiP, Warszawa;
Jakubowicz K. (2008). Polityka medialna a media elektroniczne, WaiP, Warszawa;
Jakubowicz K.(2010). Unia Europejska a media. Między kulturą a gospodarką, WaiP, Warszawa;
Jenkins H. (2007). Kultura konwergencji. Zderzenie starych i nowych mediów, WaiP, Warszawa;
Jędrzejewski S. (2010). Radiofonia publiczna w Europie w erze cyfrowej, Universitas, Kraków;
Kawamoto K. (2003). Digital Journalism. Emerging Media and the Changing Horizons of Journalism,
Oxford;
McLuhan M. (2004). Zrozumieć media. Przedłużenia człowieka, Wyd. Naukowo-Techniczne,
Warszawa;
McQuail D. (1994). Mass Communication Theory, Sage Publication, London;
Mrozowski M. (2001). Media masowe. Władza, rozrywka, biznes, ASPRA-JR, Warszawa;
Ociepka B. (2003). Dla kogo telewizja. Model publiczny w postkomunistycznej Europie, Wyd.
Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, Wrocław;
Instytut Monitorowania Mediów, Raport Dziennikarze 2010, dostępny na stronie
(http://www.instytut.com.pl/raporty/IMM/o_firmie/DZIENNIKARZE_2010_IMM_media.pdf
Rola i znaczenie mediów publicznych w Europie, Warszawa 15 kwietnia 2008, sprawozdanie dostępne
na
stronie:
http://www.krrit.gov.pl/Data/Files/_public/Portals/0/konferencje/dm_konf_080415_spraw.pdf
Słupek L. (2005). Media publiczne w Unii Europejskiej, [w:] M. Magoska (red.), Media, władza,
prawo, Wyd. UJ, Kraków;
Steenfadt O. (ed.), Future or Funeral? A Guide to Public Service Media Regulation in Europe,
publikacja dostępna na stronie: http://www.mediapolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/Future-or-Funeral11-11-2011-final-WEB.pdf;
Zwiefka-Chwałek A. (2009). Dziennikarstwo uczestniczące jako przejaw mediamorfozy, Wyd.
Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, Wrocław.