Public Broadcast Systems in the United States - Essay Example

Journalism, Mass Media, and Communication Public broadcast systems in the United s operate under certain fundamental principles and professional ethics that regulate their conduct and practice. Upholding these principles and ethics often involves challenges of balance particularly in cases where the public broadcast systems receive substantial support from multiple stakeholders. Delivering value entails a range of factors that include the determination of a balance between objectivity and addressing certain interests for the public (Crook 21). There is the assumption that well supported public broadcast systems will tend to develop certain biases in favor of the government. Such assumptions thrive on the notion that the promotion of the government agenda forms part of the policies of the public broadcast systems. However, case analyses have shown that public broadcast systems can still achieve a high degree of proficiency in delivering value in the ways that uphold professionalism and balance. Certain universal thresholds must be met in order for the public broadcast systems to achieve the element of objectivity and trust from the multiple stakeholders. Despite favorable policies and adequate funding, public broadcast systems have to engage with certain fundamentals that relate with the establishment of principles and attitudes that attune with the core values of media and broadcasting (Crook 54). The need to protect the truth and achieve objectivity in reporting enjoins these systems to bind their practices under certain obligations that cover the interests of all stakeholders. Impartial reporting requires the adoption of a range of policies that effectively connect with the fundamentals of business as understood under the framework of change and development. Cases abound where public broadcast systems have resisted the pressure to conform into objects of manipulation by the government. Professionalism entails the upholding of the interest of the majority while still defending the rights of the minority. Well-supported public broadcast systems in parts of the world have played important roles in criticizing negative policies (Crook 19). These systems have demonstrated a capacity to keep checks on public systems despite the fact that they draw much of their financial support from such systems. For instance, public broadcast systems in the United States have been instrumental in providing critical analyses on matters of national importance. Such matters have included policies on homeland security, approaches adopted on the global war against terrorism, government policies on spending, and other factors that involve a range of issues that connect with matters of national importance. In these roles, the broadcast systems have faulted the government on certain flaws in its approach. Such an approach to the practice of broadcasting restores balance, objectivity, impartiality, and professionalism in the field of practice. Public broadcast systems have provided forums for parties with varying perspective without regard to affiliations or stakes. Within the aspect of professionalism, including multiple parties in the determination of processes often aligns with the need to foster understanding and inclusivity across the board. Such strategies are meant to respond to the diverse nature of the society in ways that represent the interests of all. Such an approach offers value in the practices of the public broadcast systems in the sense that they avoid the temptation of sectional appeasement and deliberate misrepresentation of issues. In order to avoid the temptations of bias and prejudicial treatment, public broadcast systems should establish the margins of influence and cooperation in ways that protect the principles of professionalism and journalistic standards as understood within a universal scope. Content regulation plays an important role in determining the performance of the media in a variety of respects. Most significantly, regulating the content of media determines the manner in which the media houses relate with the government and the markets. Regulation of content has its positive aspects as well as negative ones. For instance, the regulation of content requires that media houses operate under certain ethical principles that determine the levels of professionalism and the value of content to the consumers. The effect of regulation could be seen from the fact that it divides the media and the regulatory authorities into separate and independent authorities. The government, which plays the role of regulator, imposes certain requirements on the media. As such, the government relinquishes its other interests in the media in order to serve the role of watchdog without stakes. Consequently, the media achieves some significant level of independence as it develops its own internal mechanisms of determining the most appropriate content as demanded by the consumers and ethical considerations. The law of demand and supply incorporates into the practice of content regulation in the sense that it allows the media to balance between the demands of the market and the requirements of the regulatory authorities. In this sense, it becomes appropriate to consider the fact that some of the issues that connect with the demands of the industry have to be considered in light of the impact of regulation on the supply of content and the patterns of consumption. There is a sense of democracy that results from the regulation of content since the media adopts positions that effectively aligns its operations to the interests of the public. Public demand and the interests of the stakeholders often thrive under such operating environments as opposed to the kind of practices that operate in government-controlled practices. On the negative side, regulation limits the scope of media coverage in some significant ways. Critics against government control of media contend that only minimal regulation should be allowed within the practice of media. Those who hold onto this view argue that the practice of regulation stifles creativity and provides loopholes for government control of media content. According to them, the government’s role should be limited to providing structures and systems that allow for self-regulation within the media industry (Crook 44). Such regulation has had tremendous positive impacts in the United States where some media houses have had to shut down following revelations of high-level negative practices within their ranks. The pursuit of the objectives of the media should be controlled by a range of factors that appropriately determine quality of content within a universal perspective. In order to improve the media, stakeholders should devise new methods that increase the participation of multiple players in the processes of news making and dissemination of information. The United States has developed tremendously in the field of information technology. More opportunities should be given to the public to contribute in content given the fact that technology has made it easier for the public to gather and transmit information, videos, and experiences to complement on the mainstream perspective. Rules of editing and quality should be reexamined with the view of finding the most appropriate ways of enriching the content of news and the participation of the public. Works Cited Crook, Tim. Comparative Media Law and Ethics. New York: Routledge, 2009 Read More