Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T11:01:26.721Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Public service broadcasting in Italy: Historical trends and future prospects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 May 2016

Matthew Hibberd
Matthew Hibberd*
Affiliation:
Stirling Media Research Institute, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, Scotland. Telephone: + 44 1786 466219, Fax: + 44 1786 466855. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The article outlines the current structure and organization of public service broadcasting in Italy and explores various options for its future development. With moves towards digital broadcasting, RAI is set to enter a discrete next stage which will bring new challenges and will inevitably lead to a revision of its public service remit. While it is currently unclear how far Italian public service broadcasting will change, there is evidence that members of the government and senior RAI managers wish partially to privatize core elements of its public service. Focusing on the development of television, the article addresses some of the salient issues facing RAI and other public service broadcasters who have become the victims of a pervasive disenchantment with public provision of goods and services.

L'articolo intende delineare l'attuale struttura ed organizzazione della televisione pubblica in Italia, e discuterne varie possibilità di sviluppo futuro. Si sostiene che l'avvento del digitale significherà per la RAI un nuovo stadio di sviluppo, nuove problematiche, ed una sostanziale revisione della sua funzione di servizio pubblico. Anche se la situazione non è chiara, tutto fa pensare che ministri e alti dirigenti RAI intendano privatizzare parzialmente elementi chiave del servizio pubblico. L'articolo si concentra sulla televisione, e tratta alcune delle questioni principali con cui devono fare i conti la RAI ed altre TV pubbliche, divenute vittime del diffuso scetticismo nei confronti del ruolo pubblico nella fornitura di servizi.

Type
Research Article
Information
Modern Italy , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , November 2001 , pp. 153 - 170
Copyright
Copyright © Association for the study of Modern Italy 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

∗ I should like to thank the participants at the conference ‘Italy in the Digital Era: Mapping the New Media System’, London, 13–14 October 2000, and the organizers, Forgacs, David and Magistretti, Stefano, for their comments and suggestions on the earlier version of this article presented there as a paper. The Stirling Media Research Institute helped fund the research, and I am grateful to its director, Professor Philip Schlesinger, for his kind help and support. My colleague, Will Dinan, read a draft of this article and made insightful and helpful comments. It goes without saying that any errors remain my sole responsibility.Google Scholar

1. Borriello, Edoardo, ‘Dalla liquidazione IRI nasce RAI Holding’, La Repubblica, 4, October 2000.Google Scholar

2. Collins, Richard, A Future for Public Service Broadcasting?, unpublished text of keynote speech at the international conference ‘Public Service Broadcasting in a Digital Age’, University of Alberta, Banff, 8–10 June 2000.Google Scholar

3. Judt, Tony, ‘Nineteen eighty-nine: the end of which European era?’, Daedalus, 123, Summer 1994, pp. 1–4.Google Scholar

4. Euromedia Research Group, The Media in Western Europe: The Euromedia Handbook, 2nd edition, Sage, London, 1997, p. 103.Google Scholar

5. Gambaro, Marco, Polo, Michele and Poggio, Natalia, Servizio pubblico televisivo. Ricerca per il CNEL, unpublished paper, 2000, p. 8.Google Scholar

6. Richeri, Giuseppe, La TV che conta: televisione come impresa, Baskerville, Bologna, 1993, pp. 52–1.Google Scholar

7. Achille, Yves and Miège, Bernard, ‘The limits to the adaptation of European public service broadcasting television’, Media, Culture and Society, 16, 1994, p. 33; Euromedia Research Group, The Media in Western Europe, pp. 117–18Google Scholar

8. Achille, and Miège, , ‘The limits to the adaptation’, p. 32.Google Scholar

9. Collins, , A Future, p. 10; see also Graham, Andrew and Davies, Gavyn, Broadcasting, Society and Policy in the Multimedia Age, John Libbey, Luton, 1997.Google Scholar

10. Collins, , A Future, p. 11.Google Scholar

11. Scannell, Paddy, ‘Public service broadcasting and modern public life’, Media, Culture and Society, 11, 1989, p. 140.Google Scholar

12. Schlesinger, Philip, Miller, David and Dinan, William, Open Scotland? Journalists, Spin Doctors and Lobbyists, Polygon, Edinburgh, 2001, pp. 2–6; Somalvico, Bruno, ‘Per un autentico federalismo radiotelevisivo’, RAI. Idea e progetto. Comunicazione per il XXI secolo, Licorno, Rome, 1998.Google Scholar

13. Fontanarosa, Aldo, ‘E l'Authority conferma: Berlusconi in testa sul video’, La Repubblica, 17 February 2001. Admittedly, Berlusconi's shares are held in a blind trust and he no longer works for Mediaset. His nine-month period in office in 1994 was, however, marked by a sustained political attack on the independence of RAI. The respected journalist Enzo Biagi said at the time: ‘The attack against the public service of RAI, conducted from outside and within the company, now presents a situation of serious danger to the freedom of information and communication, for democracy in Italy’ (L'Europeo, 16 November 1994, p. 20).Google Scholar

14. BBC News Online, 23 January 2001.Google Scholar

15. Burgelman, Jean-Claude, ‘Communications policy in western Europe’, in Corner, John, Schlesinger, Philip and Silverstone, Roger (eds), International Media Research: A Critical Survey. Routledge, London, 1997, pp. 129–31. The Amsterdam Protocol, signed by member states of the EU in December 1998, reinforced the special role of public service broadcasting in declaring the licence fee to be a legitimate source of state funding in the media sector. The mention of broadcasting in the protocol was prompted by a fierce debate within the European Commission as to the legality (or otherwise) of the licence fee in relation to the Treaty of Rome.Google Scholar

16. Collins, , A Future, p. 19.Google Scholar

17. Collins, , A Future, p. 13.Google Scholar

18. Barca, Flavia, Indies. Le società di produzione televisiva in Gran Bretagna, RAI-ENI, Rome, 1998, p. 139.Google Scholar

19. Hibberd, Matthew, Kilborn, Richard, McNair, Brian, Marriott, Stephanie and Schlesinger, Philip, Consenting Adults?, Broadcasting Standards Commission, London, 2000, p. 78.Google Scholar

20. Quoted in Collins, , A Future, p. 14.Google Scholar

21. Gambaro, , Polo, and Poggio, , Servizio pubblico televisivo, p. 8.Google Scholar

22. Quoted in Collins, , A Future, p. 17.Google Scholar

23. Collins, , A Future, p. 15.Google Scholar

24. Quoted in Monteleone, Franco, Storia della radio e della televisione in Italia. Società, politica, strategie, programm i 1922–1992, Marsilio, Venice, 1992, p. 224.Google Scholar

25. Monteleone, , Storia della radio, p. 426.Google Scholar

26. The supervision of RAI has remained relatively unchanged since the mid-1970s, although the Presidents of the two Chambers of Parliament now nominate members of RAI's governing body, the Administrative Council. In turn, the Administrative Council is supervised by various political and regulatory bodies. First there is the Parliamentary Commission that supervises radio and television services and scrutinizes the general management of RAI. Secondly, there is the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications that monitors the RAI-State Convention. Finally, there is the Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazion i (AGCOM), which supervises a wide range of media and anti-trust legislation, including media concentration and ownership rules covering the press and television and radio industries.Google Scholar

27. Esposito, R. and Grassi, A., ‘The monopoly reformed: the new Italian Broadcasting Act (Part 2)’, EBU Review, 26, 5, 1975, p. 53.Google Scholar

28. Hibberd, Matthew, ‘The reform of public service broadcasting in Italy’, Media, Culture and Society, 23, 2, 2001, pp. 233–52.Google Scholar

29. Rizza, Nora, ‘Il palinsesto come fattore di produzione’, Problemi dell'informazione, 15, 4, 1990, p. 527.Google Scholar

30. Barca, Flavia, ‘La televisione digitale in Italia. Scelte istituzionali orientamento delle imprese televisive’, Economia della Cultura, 3, 1999, pp. 299–300.Google Scholar

31. De Vescovi, Francesco, Il mercato della televisione, Il Mulino, Bologna, 1997, p. 115.Google Scholar

32. In Italy, digital satellite broadcasting has begun. There are two companies offering services: Telepiù (controlled by Plus, Canal) and Stream (jointly controlled by News International and Italia Telecom). After slow starts, both companies have increased their audiences with film, football, entertainment and interactive packages. The overall impact of satellite TV on the Italian broadcasting market remains marginal: on current estimates, digital satellite television will attract 5.8 million households by 2005 (La Repubblica, 13 June 2000) and there are over 21 million households in total. See Barca, ‘La televisione digitale in Italia’, pp. 300–1, for an in-depth analysis. However, a proposed merger between Telepiù and Stream might have an impact on this level of growth should national and European regulators allow it to go ahead: see Fontanarosa, Aldo, ‘Nasce la super pay-TV’, La Repubblica, 25 April 2001.Google Scholar

33. Although much excitement has been generated by the possible takeover of two minor national channels, Telemontecarlo and TMC2, by the SEAT group (controlled by Telecom Italia), the takeover bid is currently subject to court action and it is unclear whether it will be successful: ‘Il Tar congela la decisione dell'Authority’, La Repubblica, 8 March 2001.Google Scholar

34. See Hibberd, , ‘The reform of public service broadcasting’. The interference includes that by political parties over appointments to sensitive areas of the company (directors of the news services and the Administrative Council).Google Scholar

35. Jacobelli, Jader (ed.), Letizia Moratti. Io e la RAI, Rizzoli, Milan, 1996, p. 96; RAI, 1997, Annual Report, ERI, Rome, pp. 60–1.Google Scholar

36. Raiuno is defined as the channel for the family, for the mass public. Raidue's editorial policy aims to attract different groups, providing more social provision in its broadcasting coverage. Raitre's editorial policy ties it closer to the territorial or geographical realities, therefore to the regions and provinces in Italy.Google Scholar

37. Since 1997, however, there have been some small signs of change in the programme output of both RAI and Mediaset. Both companies have invested more money in drama productions, and the incorporation into Italian law of new EU production quotas should mean that investment in domestic and European programming remains buoyant. See Buonanno, Milly, Indigent si diventa. Locale e globale nella serialità televisiva, Sansoni, Florence, 1999, pp. 71–72, and Barca, Indies, p. 7.Google Scholar

38. Cornford, James and Robins, Kevin, ‘New media’, in Stokes, Jane and Reading, Anna (eds), The Media in Britain: Current Debates and Developments, Macmillan, London, 1999, p. 109; AGCOM, Il libro bianco sulla televisione digitale terrestre, Rome, 2000, p. 11.Google Scholar

39. AGCOM, Relazione annuale sull'attività svolta e sui programm i di lavoro, Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, Rome, 1999, p. 97.Google Scholar

40. AGCOM, Il libro bianco, pp. 6–19.Google Scholar

41. Fontanarosa, Aldo, ‘TV di Stato, ecco il piano per privatizzarle’, La Repubblica, 29 August 2000.Google Scholar

42. This would also allow the Italian government to tackle the thorny issue of the licence fee; a reduction of RAI's dependence on licence fee money would allow the government greater freedom to amend the current system: see Somalvico, Bruno, ‘L'evoluzione del concetto di servizio pubblico nel sistema televisivo europeo’, Rivista Italiana della Comunicazione Pubblica, 1, 1999, pp. 70–72.Google Scholar

43. Celli, Pier Luigi, ‘Foreword’, in Lasagni, C. and Richeri, Giuseppe, Il palinsesto sociale in Europa, Rome: RAI-ENI, Rome, 2000, p. 99.Google Scholar

44. Gambaro, , Polo, and Poggio, , Servizio pubblico televisivo, p. 36.Google Scholar

45. Carta dei doveri e degli obblighi degli operatori del servizio pubblico radiotelevisivo, RAI-ENI, Rome, 1999.Google Scholar

46. Lasagni, and Richeri, , Il palinsesto sociale in Europa, pp. 17–76.Google Scholar

47. Balassone, Stefano and Guglielmi, Angelo, La brutta addormentata. La TV e dopo, Theoria, Rome and Naples, 1993, p. 43.Google Scholar

48. ‘Celli si dimette. RAI nella bufera’, La Repubblica, 8 February 2001.Google Scholar

49. Veltri, Elio and Travaglio, Marco, L'odore dei soldi. Origini e misteri delle fortune di Silvio Berlusconi, Riuniti, Rome, 2001.Google Scholar

50. It should also be noted that Italian television has been affected by numerous programming setbacks in the past few months, which have further undermined confidence in the broadcasting system. Both RAI and Mediaset were heavily criticized for their New Year's Eve coverage: RAI's coverage was hit by technical faults, and Mediaset failed to tell their viewers that its end-of-year ‘live’ programme on Canale 5 had, in fact, been prerecorded! Also, in 2001 the Sanremo Festival, televised by RAI, had its lowest viewing audience for years.Google Scholar

51. McQuail, Dennis, ‘Mass media in the public interest: towards a framework of norms for media performance’, in Curran, James and Gurevitch, Michael (eds), Mass Media and Society, Edward Arnold, London, 1991, p. 72.Google Scholar

52. Dahlgren, Peter, Television and the Public Sphere: Citizenship, Democracy and the Media, Sage, London, 1995, p. 9.Google Scholar

53. Somalvico, , ‘L'evoluzione del concetto di servizio pubblico’, pp. 61–62.Google Scholar

54. Gambaro, , Polo, and Poggio, , Servizio pubblico televisivo, p. 33.Google Scholar