"PBS can be a viable alternative to commercial broadcasting and an acceptable conduit to the traditional education system," Diaz explains.
Recently, UNESCO convened a planning workshop on the proposed Philippine public broadcasting service with ample help from the Asian Institute of Journalism and Communication and the Office of Government Mass Media group. During the powwow, the anticipated highs and lows of such a system were discussed. The daylong meeting ended with over forty participants fired up with optimism that the concept of a PBS was a step closer to fruition.
By day’s end, it was clear that NBN 4, which has been in doldrums for several years now, is the most likely candidate for a takeover. The conversion will happen by way of legislation and once operational, the colossal task begins of convincing viewers that the new station is not a rehash of the old. Such a PBS hopes to provide a broad programming spectrum similar to the renowned British Broadcasting Corporation in England, ABC of Australia, Canadian Broadcasting System, NHK of Japan and ZDF of Germany.
A PBS will have as its chief task the provision of service to audiences that are traditionally not factored in commercial broadcasting, e.g. cultural minorities and specific groups of disadvantaged people. In a capsule, Diaz describes PBS as one that is expected to provide a common reference point for all members of the public, a forum for broad public discussion, impartial news coverage, pluralistic, innovative and varied programming, the reflection of different ideas and beliefs in plpuriethnic and multi-cultural societies, a diversity of national and cultural heritage, programming that is of wide public interest and one that is attentive to the needs of minorities, original productions by independent producers and extended viewer and listener choices through program offerings that are not provided by the commercial broadcasting sector.
A working definition of PBS, in addition to the more palatable but nebulous suggestion of Diaz (i.e. all things to all men and women which could also refer to water, air, nutrition, knowledge, etc), would be broadcasting produced, financed and controlled by the public, for the public. It should not be what many Filipinos abhor: a propaganda machine of the party in power. In fact, for it to serve the public fairly, it should be structured in such a way that it operates independently and distant from all vested interests.
UNESCO further dissects the definition by citing that PBS is neither commercial nor state-owned and is thus free from both political interference and pressure from commercial forces and sycophants. Through PBS, citizens are informed and educated as much as they are entertained. The commitment to educate the public is instantly discerned in the programming mix because it would feature all types of instructional methods, formal, non-formal, informal learning services. When guaranteed with pluralism, programming diversity, editorial independence, appropriate funding support, accountability and transparency, PBS can serve as a true cornerstone of democracy.
It can be a meeting place where all citizens are welcome and considered equals, says PBS advocate Anthony Smith; an information and education tool made accessible to all because it was meant for all. What is promising about PBS is that its mandate will appeal to the imagination and entertain without sacrificing quality.
Ultimately, PBS can provide a learning network and can facilitate a continuing dialogue between and among government, business and civil society. Cultural identity will be strengthened and pluralism in society enhanced. National integration does not merely remain a buzzword but is closer to reality because PBS can respond to national concerns and even mitigate social conflict.
It will be wise for everyone to support the establishment of a PBS in the country because for the longest time, we operate under a commercial system that is sadly governed by entertainment and guided by ratings. The tragic result is that even news programs and public affairs shows have had to be dressed up as showbiz, pandering to the tacky call of sensationalism. The need for an alternative is based on the tremendous power of broadcasting which, like the literature and theater it evolved from, is a mirror of society, and in the words of UNESCO’s pundit Moyo, useful to "see who we are, from where we came and where we might be going."
