Electric motors are to save car industry, optimised broadcasting contributions to European media landscape. Two examples of dramatic reduction of necessary discourses. We must have courage to rethink mobility when man wants to have a future in his environment. And we must have courage to rethink media, especially public media, if we want to hold on to ideal of an open, democratic society. As problem is not solved by introduction of battery-powered cars alone, or does not solve itself by adjusting licence fees.
The debate on public service media has long since spread to Europe. On Sunday, Switzerland will vote on abolition of licence fees and, refore, on future of its broadcasting Corporation. The most important question, however, is not that after a solidarity-based funding of public media in times of social media and online streaming, but how media and communication in societies of 21st century are organized at all Should. Spend money or save money? Everyone has a quick opinion. And although in Germany constitutional law does not allow abolition of fees by referendum, public service broadcasters are a slight target socially dissatisfied.
Markus Heidmeier is co-managing director of Berlin Cooperative. It designs change processes for public institutions, non-profit organizations as well as private and public media houses. He is one of initiators of a sis paper of 40 representatives from science and civil society, who turned 2017 to prime ministers with a call for innovation for public service broadcasting. © PrivateThis discomfort is linked to erosion of social institutions, an oft-invoked unleashing of capital and a general solidarity. In addition, re is a technological dynamic that already influences our daily lives. In perspective, algorithms, robots and artificial intelligence will not only change mobility and media, but also leave deep traces in our society and our human image. And just to accompany this process, we need a public media offer. In a completely privatized media world, financial power and innovative power of global technology groups would ensure that we will soon be in 80 million German filter bubbles and eventually live in eight or ten billion worldwide echo chambers. Is that desirable?
It's all about securingSince democracy has always been a technology-driven project, we also need to talk about technology when we think about future of public service media. Newspapers, radio and finally television have long ensured a basis of simultaneity and connection within society. The events of time were capable of connecting to a large audience. Powerful algorithms, on or hand, can not only provide optimized road traffic, but also optimised attention management in future. Each and every one gets in his communication streams exactly what suits her and to him. But what exactly is that supposed to be? Is it content and communication events that tie attention as long as possible, while displaying as much publicity and above all many data from user profiles? Or is it primarily a matter of offering users a mixture of appropriate and relevant content and communication events?
Public service media are relevant to our democracy system, y only have to look very different from a structural and supply-side. The fact that changes here are so cumbersome take place is biggest problem of future-oriented realignment. The order of public service media has become identical over past few decades with safeguarding of system that carries out this mission: we need it, so everything must remain same. An apparatus made up of complex structures, intransparent processes, questionable political linkages and, last but not least, top journalists in management roles are now suffering from innovation blockades, mediocre offers, declining acceptance in Population and, in turn, debates on system it should secure.
So how could a vision for public-law media look like in 21st century? It is not without fundamental renewal of contract without regard to logic of order. In addition to an information bid, this new order also provides for an innovation imperative. The innovation imperative inevitably leads to a technology and thus an investment contract (for example in cooperating start-ups).
Date Of Update: 04 March 2018, 12:03
