Talk:Public broadcasting/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Public broadcasting. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

MediaCorp

I read somewhere MediaCorp in 1994 (then Singapore Broadcasting Corporation) was privatised by turning into the Television Corporation of Singapore. Is MediaCorp a public broadcaster in the sense as RAI, TVE and ZDF are or is it commercial as I see the corporate name being "MediaCorp Private Limited?" --58.69.182.85 (talk) 12:39, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

NHK commercial-free?

I'm sure I've seen commercials (not promos) on NHK..

Propaganda

I think the article needs a section talking about how public tv runs programs that imposes certain opinions on children. I am not informed enogh to write this article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.38.99.188 (talk • contribs) 16:56, 17 December 2006

Hmmm, I think not. Sounds like a recipe for an article full of poorly sourced or unsourced, hugely generalising and subjective POV rants, resulting in edit wars of the type we see in the beloved "criticsms of ..." sections.

Pit-yacker 18:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Advantages and Disadvantages: Confusing Phrase

Under "Advantages and Disadvantages" you list certain "cultural biases" of commercial broadcasting including the item: "law presented as if it were truth." This statement appears vague and misleading. Do you mean to say "interpretations or opinions of law presented as if they were truth"? --xerxes_sator@yahoo.com 26 May 2005 23:04 GMT

Untitled

I removed the info on Israel Broadcasting Authority, cleaned it up and expanded it and moved it to that article. I also fixed the link to IBA in the list of public broadcasters. This article isn't really the place for details on every public broadcaster (other than the list), unless the details are illustative of some point about public broadcasting in general (e.g. not just that public broadcasting _exists_ in this or that country as that purpose is satisfied by the list at the end). Blorg 12:49, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Leftist Bias

This article has a very clear leftist bias. That is, a bias in favour of public broadcasting. This is obvious especially when compared with the commercial broadcasting article (which also has a leftist bias). It would be nice to see it fixed without having to declare a NPOV dispute.

To justify this claim, note how the first (introductory and descriptive) paragraph of the commercial broadcasting article already points out a perceived disadvantage, while the "Advantages and Disadvantages" section of this article mentions only one disadvantages and proceeds to basically dismiss it in one paragraph.

I can't agree, that is it's not clear to me. And whether a bias in favour of public broadcasting is present here or not, how would that be "leftist"?

I can't agree either - I don't see a bias in favor, and I agree that even a favorable bias would not be leftist. It probably depends on the country, in fact, as to how public broadcasting is perceived politically, if at all. Lucylu6 (talk) 23:42, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

By leftist he means, it is in favor of public broadcasting because it is operated by the government instead of private entities... --188.195.145.22 (talk) 14:20, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

"Defining Public Broadcasting" section very weak

Actually, I'd go so far as to call it horrible. Presumably the "Broadcasting Research Unit" is some British organization (the article doesn't say and it's a red link), since all the original examples came from there. More recent edits have added more international examples but have succeeded only in making the section flabbier. Only one of the points listed there has anything like the quality of a definition; the rest are at best a wish-list. The term "public service broadcasting" used in the intro also adds confusion. The intro says that the term means something different in the UK, but much of the rest of the article takes the UK as the defining example so it's hard to take it seriously. (From this perspective it's not clear what sort of distinction, if any, is being drawn; all broadcasters in this country are licensed, in the words of the Communications Act of 1934, to "serve the public interest, convenience, or necessity".) The bit about the CBC erroneously suggests that advertising is a recent thing; in fact, not having advertising on radio is the recent development (for values of recent including now 30 years of history)—TV always had advertising, and radio historically did. All in all, the section should be, if not "taken out and shot", at least shrunk by about 75%. 121a0012 16:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually technically it's the other way around about radio advertising. The first time ads were aired it was considered a daring step. What is more recent is the set-aside for a dedicated public spectrum, but public, noncommercial radio is in fact the original form. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.143.206.54 (talk) 04:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Public broadcasting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:46, 12 January 2018 (UTC)