This article examines the evolution of public service broadcasting (PSB) regulation in the UK, contrasting two opposing perspectives on its role and addressing its contemporary challenges. Analysing the historical context and recent regulatory changes, the article argues that PSB remains vital to the UK's media landscape, providing high quality content and serving the public good. However, it identifies technological advancements and political interference as significant threats to its continued success. The article critically evaluates the draft Media Bill's potential to address these challenges and enhance PSB's competitiveness. Additionally, it raises concerns about potential bias within the regulatory body, Ofcom, urging greater transparency and fairness in its oversight of the media market. The article emphasises the need for a robust regulatory framework to ensure the continued viability of PSB and foster a vibrant and diverse media ecosystem.
{"title":"The Historic, Present and Future Role of Regulation in Securing the Standards of ‘Public Value’ Media","authors":"Jacquie Hughes","doi":"10.1111/1467-923x.13365","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.13365","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the evolution of public service broadcasting (PSB) regulation in the UK, contrasting two opposing perspectives on its role and addressing its contemporary challenges. Analysing the historical context and recent regulatory changes, the article argues that PSB remains vital to the UK's media landscape, providing high quality content and serving the public good. However, it identifies technological advancements and political interference as significant threats to its continued success. The article critically evaluates the draft Media Bill's potential to address these challenges and enhance PSB's competitiveness. Additionally, it raises concerns about potential bias within the regulatory body, Ofcom, urging greater transparency and fairness in its oversight of the media market. The article emphasises the need for a robust regulatory framework to ensure the continued viability of PSB and foster a vibrant and diverse media ecosystem.","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140368961","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
BBC funding (the licence fee model and the funding level) has been turned into a big issue out of all proportion to the low financial stakes—equivalent to the cost of one takeaway coffee a week for the whole household, excluding those with free TV licences. This article first proposes and explores three possible reasons for all the fuss: that licence payers take the BBC for granted, underestimating the value they get from it; that the attacks on BBC funding are part of a wider ‘war’ against it, driven by commercial or political vested interests; and that at least some of the criticisms of the licence fee reflect genuine, although much exaggerated, disadvantages. The article then evaluates four alternative funding models: advertising, subscriptions, general taxation and a universal household levy. It argues that the best long‐term model would be a flat, universal household levy, with exemptions for those least able to pay, as in Germany, with the funding level set by an independent body organised by Ofcom; and that, because the licence fee is becoming harder to sustain, this new funding model should be introduced at the start of the next BBC Charter in January 2028.
BBC 的经费（执照费模式和经费水平）已经变成了一个大问题，与其低廉的经济利益完全不成比例--相当于整个家庭一周一杯外卖咖啡的费用，这还不包括那些拥有免费电视执照的家庭。这篇文章首先提出并探讨了所有这些争论的三个可能原因：许可证支付者认为 BBC 是理所当然的，低估了他们从 BBC 获得的价值；对 BBC 经费的攻击是一场更广泛的 "战争 "的一部分，是由商业或政治既得利益所驱动的；至少有一些对许可证费的批评反映了真正的弊端，尽管被夸大了许多。文章随后评估了四种可供选择的筹资模式：广告、订阅、一般税收和全民家庭税。文章认为，最佳的长期模式是统一、普遍的家庭税，像德国那样对最无力支付者免税，资金水平由通信管理局组织的独立机构确定；由于许可证费越来越难以维持，这种新的筹资模式应在 2028 年 1 月英国广播公司下一部宪章开始时引入。
{"title":"BBC Funding: Much Ado about the Cost of a Coffee a Week","authors":"Patrick Barwise","doi":"10.1111/1467-923x.13371","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.13371","url":null,"abstract":"BBC funding (the licence fee model and the funding level) has been turned into a big issue out of all proportion to the low financial stakes—equivalent to the cost of one takeaway coffee a week for the whole household, excluding those with free TV licences. This article first proposes and explores three possible reasons for all the fuss: that licence payers take the BBC for granted, underestimating the value they get from it; that the attacks on BBC funding are part of a wider ‘war’ against it, driven by commercial or political vested interests; and that at least some of the criticisms of the licence fee reflect genuine, although much exaggerated, disadvantages. The article then evaluates four alternative funding models: advertising, subscriptions, general taxation and a universal household levy. It argues that the best long‐term model would be a flat, universal household levy, with exemptions for those least able to pay, as in Germany, with the funding level set by an independent body organised by Ofcom; and that, because the licence fee is becoming harder to sustain, this new funding model should be introduced at the start of the next BBC Charter in January 2028.","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140369852","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Across the world, public service media faces a legion of simultaneous threats—to its funding, its distribution, its value and its independence. These threats come at a time when the fundamental purpose of public service media—to provide high quality, verified, and impartial news and information—could not be more consequential. As our digital spaces become epistemological junkyards, cluttered with bot‐inflated, AI‐generated text and clickbait content, so the public need for stable, grounded and verified media intensifies. In such a chaotic information environment, one might have expected that the UK government would enhance its commitment to public service media. Instead, successive UK governments have undermined its sustainability, reputation and future.
{"title":"Keeping Democracies Alive: The Role of Public Service Media","authors":"Martin Moore","doi":"10.1111/1467-923x.13359","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.13359","url":null,"abstract":"Across the world, public service media faces a legion of simultaneous threats—to its funding, its distribution, its value and its independence. These threats come at a time when the fundamental purpose of public service media—to provide high quality, verified, and impartial news and information—could not be more consequential. As our digital spaces become epistemological junkyards, cluttered with bot‐inflated, AI‐generated text and clickbait content, so the public need for stable, grounded and verified media intensifies. In such a chaotic information environment, one might have expected that the UK government would enhance its commitment to public service media. Instead, successive UK governments have undermined its sustainability, reputation and future.","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140371878","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This essay examines the complex relationship between the BBC and Scotland's evolving political landscape, shedding light on the challenges faced by the broadcaster since the inception of devolution in 1999 and particularly the 2014 independence referendum. The study contends that the BBC, in its attempts to address accusations of inherent bias and to adapt to Scotland's unique political identity, may have overreacted. Examining the shift from regional opt‐outs to the establishment of the dedicated BBC Scotland channel in 2019, the essay argues that this strategic pivot may now be increasingly redundant amid the diminishing likelihood of a second independence referendum. This change challenges the channel's relevancy and poses commercial concerns for Scotland's production industry. Highlighting the risk of restricted appeal, this essay suggests that the declining relevance of the independence debate necessitates a re‐evaluation of the BBC's approach in Scotland. The analysis underscores the need for adapting to the still evolving Scottish political landscape and argues for strategic measures to ensure the continued relevance of the BBC in Scotland.
本文探讨了英国广播公司与苏格兰不断变化的政治格局之间的复杂关系，揭示了自 1999 年权力下放以来，特别是 2014 年独立公投以来广播公司所面临的挑战。研究认为，BBC 在试图解决固有偏见的指责和适应苏格兰独特的政治身份时，可能反应过度。文章研究了从地区选择退出到 2019 年建立 BBC 苏格兰专门频道的转变，认为在第二次独立公投的可能性越来越小的情况下，这一战略支点现在可能越来越多余。这一变化对该频道的相关性提出了挑战，并为苏格兰的制作业带来了商业上的担忧。本文强调了吸引力受限的风险，认为随着独立辩论相关性的下降，有必要重新评估 BBC 在苏格兰的做法。分析强调了适应仍在演变的苏格兰政治格局的必要性，并主张采取战略措施，确保英国广播公司在苏格兰的持续相关性。
{"title":"Navigating the Scottish Political Landscape: An Analysis of BBC Scotland in the Independence Era","authors":"Andrew Liddle","doi":"10.1111/1467-923x.13362","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.13362","url":null,"abstract":"This essay examines the complex relationship between the BBC and Scotland's evolving political landscape, shedding light on the challenges faced by the broadcaster since the inception of devolution in 1999 and particularly the 2014 independence referendum. The study contends that the BBC, in its attempts to address accusations of inherent bias and to adapt to Scotland's unique political identity, may have overreacted. Examining the shift from regional opt‐outs to the establishment of the dedicated BBC Scotland channel in 2019, the essay argues that this strategic pivot may now be increasingly redundant amid the diminishing likelihood of a second independence referendum. This change challenges the channel's relevancy and poses commercial concerns for Scotland's production industry. Highlighting the risk of restricted appeal, this essay suggests that the declining relevance of the independence debate necessitates a re‐evaluation of the BBC's approach in Scotland. The analysis underscores the need for adapting to the still evolving Scottish political landscape and argues for strategic measures to ensure the continued relevance of the BBC in Scotland.","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140372170","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Nothing works, but plenty to do","authors":"Nick Pearce","doi":"10.1111/1467-923x.13385","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.13385","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140372257","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Good quality information is a public utility: the rich and powerful will always have access to what they need to know, but poor people do not. Indeed, increasing inequalities in access to decent information underlie other more obvious inequalities. Bad information does not respect borders and yet democracy depends on informed citizens. The case for public intervention in what used to be called broadcasting, now including digital media—but which needs to be thought of as a public information space—is at a tipping point. This collection of essays sets out these vital challenges and offers some innovative solutions.
{"title":"Introduction: Where Next for Public Service Broadcasting?","authors":"Suzanne Franks, Jean Seaton","doi":"10.1111/1467-923x.13381","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.13381","url":null,"abstract":"Good quality information is a public utility: the rich and powerful will always have access to what they need to know, but poor people do not. Indeed, increasing inequalities in access to decent information underlie other more obvious inequalities. Bad information does not respect borders and yet democracy depends on informed citizens. The case for public intervention in what used to be called broadcasting, now including digital media—but which needs to be thought of as a public information space—is at a tipping point. This collection of essays sets out these vital challenges and offers some innovative solutions.","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140372679","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The society in which the police operate is changing radically, meaning that we need to rethink our policing and wider public safety institutions. Policing needs to be clearer as to its purpose, and needs to work in a much more collaborative way with other public services, particularly to do more to prevent crime and harm. Policing needs new or reformed capabilities in areas such as legitimacy, technology and skills. And finally, policing needs a better organisational platform if it is to play its role in keeping people safe in the transformed conditions of the twenty‐first century.
{"title":"A New Mode of Protection: The Case for Redesigning our Policing and Public Safety Institutions","authors":"Rick Muir","doi":"10.1111/1467-923x.13377","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.13377","url":null,"abstract":"The society in which the police operate is changing radically, meaning that we need to rethink our policing and wider public safety institutions. Policing needs to be clearer as to its purpose, and needs to work in a much more collaborative way with other public services, particularly to do more to prevent crime and harm. Policing needs new or reformed capabilities in areas such as legitimacy, technology and skills. And finally, policing needs a better organisational platform if it is to play its role in keeping people safe in the transformed conditions of the twenty‐first century.","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140228281","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article reviews a recent report by the Institute for Government on how opposition parties in the United Kingdom should prepare for power. The article comments on the distinctive constitutional context in the UK regarding government transitions, the provisions in The Cabinet Manual on access by opposition parties to the civil service prior to a general election, how opposition parties can make effective use of these access talks, and the specific challenges facing the Labour Party as it prepares for the prospect of a change of government later in 2024. It is argued that the current guidelines in The Cabinet Manual on access talks need clarification on several crucial matters, not least the timing of their commencement during a parliamentary term, which opposition parties should be eligible to participate, and under what conditions.
本文评述了英国政府研究所（Institute for Government）最近关于英国反对党应如何为执政做准备的报告。文章评述了英国关于政府过渡的独特宪法背景、《内阁手册》中关于反对党在大选前接触公务员的规定、反对党如何有效利用这些接触会谈，以及工党在为 2024 年晚些时候政府更迭的前景做准备时所面临的具体挑战。本文认为，《内阁手册》中关于准入谈判的现行指导方针需要澄清几个关键问题，尤其是在议会任期内开始谈判的时间、哪些反对党有资格参与以及在何种条件下参与。
{"title":"Preparing for Government","authors":"Jonathan Boston","doi":"10.1111/1467-923x.13375","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.13375","url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews a recent report by the Institute for Government on how opposition parties in the United Kingdom should prepare for power. The article comments on the distinctive constitutional context in the UK regarding government transitions, the provisions in The Cabinet Manual on access by opposition parties to the civil service prior to a general election, how opposition parties can make effective use of these access talks, and the specific challenges facing the Labour Party as it prepares for the prospect of a change of government later in 2024. It is argued that the current guidelines in The Cabinet Manual on access talks need clarification on several crucial matters, not least the timing of their commencement during a parliamentary term, which opposition parties should be eligible to participate, and under what conditions.","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140251079","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
While the term ‘establishment’ is ambiguous, it generally refers to a formal relationship between a church and the state in which it operates. This can range from parliamentary representation (as with the Church of England) to mere observance by the monarch (as at the Church of Scotland's annual General Assembly). Since the 1960s there have been proposals regarding Crown appointments and the number and status of the Lords Spiritual. There exists no major push for full disestablishment of the Church of England, but a bill is currently before Parliament.
{"title":"Reforming the Established Church: History and Proposals","authors":"David Torrance","doi":"10.1111/1467-923x.13374","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.13374","url":null,"abstract":"While the term ‘establishment’ is ambiguous, it generally refers to a formal relationship between a church and the state in which it operates. This can range from parliamentary representation (as with the Church of England) to mere observance by the monarch (as at the Church of Scotland's annual General Assembly). Since the 1960s there have been proposals regarding Crown appointments and the number and status of the Lords Spiritual. There exists no major push for full disestablishment of the Church of England, but a bill is currently before Parliament.","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140249981","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article considers the relationship between views of social mobility in British politics, identifying four competing views in government statements, political news stories and opinion pieces. The two established views are the Blairite liberal view, which seeks to widen entry into the ‘playing field’ of educational ‘opportunity’, and its companion bourgeois view, protecting the acclaim given to elite educational experiences. Against these established views are two insurgent views: a (politically ignored) socialist view and a ‘postliberal’ view introduced into the Social Mobility Commission under the chairship of the loosely Conservative‐aligned Katharine Birbalsingh. On the right, the postliberal and bourgeois views explicitly clash. On the left, with the socialist view dormant, the postliberal view is assimilated by Labour almost as a socialism substitute, appearing in turn with the Blairite liberal view in Labour rhetoric. The result is, respectively on right and left, disharmony and incoherence in the meaning of social mobility.
{"title":"The Limits of ‘Opportunity’: Is There a Clear Labour or Conservative View of Social Mobility?","authors":"Joseph Maslen","doi":"10.1111/1467-923x.13368","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.13368","url":null,"abstract":"This article considers the relationship between views of social mobility in British politics, identifying four competing views in government statements, political news stories and opinion pieces. The two established views are the Blairite liberal view, which seeks to widen entry into the ‘playing field’ of educational ‘opportunity’, and its companion bourgeois view, protecting the acclaim given to elite educational experiences. Against these established views are two insurgent views: a (politically ignored) socialist view and a ‘postliberal’ view introduced into the Social Mobility Commission under the chairship of the loosely Conservative‐aligned Katharine Birbalsingh. On the right, the postliberal and bourgeois views explicitly clash. On the left, with the socialist view dormant, the postliberal view is assimilated by Labour almost as a socialism substitute, appearing in turn with the Blairite liberal view in Labour rhetoric. The result is, respectively on right and left, disharmony and incoherence in the meaning of social mobility.","PeriodicalId":504210,"journal":{"name":"The Political Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140251968","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：