National broadcasters funded out of the public purse have historically formed a vital component of the broadcasting sector in most countries and the rationale for these broadcasters – which can offer alternative programming to that provided by the commercial sector – remains strong. At the same time, two key issues continue to pose a threat to the success of publicly-funded broadcasters. The first is ongoing attempts in many countries by the governing authorities to exert control over such broadcasters, undermining their independence and the quality of their news and other programming. The other is the ever-present desire of governments to cut budgets, which has resulted in increased pressure on the level of public funding received by these broadcasters, and a consequent search for alternative sources of funding.

This study looks at the way in which national, publicly-funded broadcasters are organised and paid for in six countries where support for these broadcasters remains strong, namely Australia, Canada, France, Japan, South Africa and the United Kingdom. The focus is on the legal and practical arrangements under which these broadcasters operate, including broadcasting obligations, governance structures and funding arrangements. The study pays particular attention to the ways in which these countries have dealt with the threats noted above, namely how they have guaranteed the editorial independence of these broadcasters, while at the same time ensuring their accountability to the public and providing them with public funds.

In the past, a central broadcasting organisation supported by public funding has often been the only national broadcast medium and such organisations continue to occupy a dominant position in much of the world. In many countries, the commitment to publicly-funded broadcasting remains strong and this is reflected in public support, government funding and viewing statistics. There are a number of good reasons for this. These broadcasters have the potential to ensure that quality programmes covering a wide range of interests, and responding to the needs of all sectors of the population, are broadcast. They can provide an effective complement to commercial services, satisfying informational needs and interests that the market does not respond to. At their best, they ensure diversity in programming and make an important contribution to satisfying the public’s right to know. They also serve as a focal point for promoting a sense of national identity and fostering a democratic and rights-respecting culture.

In many countries, however, the government exerts a great deal of control over state-funded broadcasters, using them as a mouthpiece for government rather than as an independent source of information for the public. It is only when the independence of these broadcasters is guaranteed – in law and in practice – that they can truly operate as servants of the public interest, providing high quality information from a variety of sources to the public.

The rapid proliferation of commercial and other forms of broadcasting is posing a new and dynamic challenge to publicly-funded broadcasters. Technological developments have completely altered the nature of broadcasting with households in many countries now having access to tens, if not hundreds, of channels. Digital technology allows limited frequency ranges to accommodate far more signals, opening up the airwaves to ever increasing numbers of broadcasters. The ongoing development of satellite and cable networks has also had a significant impact on access to broadcasting all over the world. These developments are complemented by the rapidly falling costs of starting up a broadcasting enterprise. The Internet promises even more exciting and profound changes and virtually everyone who has access to fairly basic equipment will effectively be in a position to operate as a broadcaster in the near future.

These developments pose a particular threat to broadcasters which remain under government control. Many citizens prefer to tune in to independent commercial broadcasters, where they are available, than to a national broadcaster which is effectively a government mouthpiece. This can lead to a significant erosion of support for publicly-funded broadcasting, to the longer-term detriment of the greater public interest. It is perhaps ironic that in these circumstances, declining viewing statistics mean that government control no longer delivers the desired result, so that ultimately, even government support for publicly-funded broadcasters wanes.

Publicly-funded broadcasters are also facing new challenges as the dominant understanding of the role of government changes. Moves to downsize government and privatise or commercialise government-run industries have been very popular. These changes have affected even activities once deemed core public functions such as responsibility for roads and monopoly utilities. At the same time, demands on certain public functions, for example in relation to medical services and education, are increasing, putting further pressure on scarce resources.

Given these developments, it is natural that the question of the extent and nature of direct public support for national broadcasters is coming up increasingly frequently and some countries are exploring new ways of satisfying the need for an alternative to commercially-driven programming. One approach is to impose public service obligations on private broadcasters. Many countries already impose some such obligations on all licensed broadcasters but the overall trend is towards relaxing regulation and it is becoming increasingly difficult for national governments to effectively impose regulatory conditions.

Another approach is to look for alternative ways of providing public funding for programming which serves various public needs and interests. In some countries, independent programme producers, who are not linked to a specific broadcaster, may receive public funding for individual programmes. Alternatively, private broadcasters may apply for funding for programmes which fulfil a public service role. Community broadcasters are also playing an increasingly important role in satisfying needs which other forms of broadcasting do not. It is increasingly common for publicly-funded broadcasters to be required to include within their overall broadcasting, a certain proportion of programmes from independent producers.

Despite the growing importance of these alternative models, and the new challenges described above, the vast majority of countries world-wide still rely heavily on a national publicly-funded broadcaster or broadcasters to satisfy the public’s needs in this area. Support for such broadcasters remains strong where they have managed to maintain their independence from government and other influences and where they are able to produce quality programming which complements that provided by the private sector.

Broadcasting organisations which meet these conditions are frequently referred to as "public service broadcasting organisations" and a set of attributes has come to be associated with them. The first section of this study provides a brief overview of those attributes. The second section looks at a number of international standards relevant to public service broadcasting organisations, particularly as derived from the human right to freedom of expression as elaborated by various courts and official bodies.

These sections are followed by a series of country sections analysing the public service broadcasting organisation(s) in the relevant country. Each country section is organised under five main headings, Introduction, Services Provided, Public Service Mandate, Governing Structure (covering Internal Governance and Regulatory Mechanisms) and Financing. Under the section on Services Provided, the study describes the main services, including programme channels, offered by national public service broadcasting organisations. The section on Public Service Mandate includes an outline of the special legal and administrative obligations placed on public service broadcasting organisations. The section on Governing Structure is divided into two sub-sections, describing first the governing structure of the broadcasters themselves and second any external bodies which exercise power over them. Finally, a brief description of the main sources of funding for these public service broadcasting organisations is provided.

The country sections are followed by a section containing two tables comparing the various arrangements regarding public service broadcasting organisations in the six countries studied. This is followed by a section assessing the goals of public service broadcasting organisations, and the pros and cons of the different arrangements in the various countries.