Skip to main content
Log in

A public and private-choice model of broadcasting

  • Published:
Public Choice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Conclusion

This paper has established a framework for the analysis of program diversity and audience shares under different regimes of ownership, regulation, and channel quality. The model is one of comparative statics, and lends itself to analytical solutions. It can serve as a tool to clarify programming decision-making and the impact of various institutional arrangements. The audience maximization of commercial broadcasting leads to program quality similar to that of a direct democratic process. To create a bias towards quality, alternative mechanisms had to be introduced. That, together with the potential for the propaganda use of broadcasting and the potentially large rents of controlling a scarce channel, made questions of broadcast policy extraordinarily hard-fought, especially in European countries. However, the emergence of alternative distribution channels and payment mechanisms has moved television programs much more into the mainstream of economic transactions. In consequence, the need to use the political arena to assure the supply of certain programs has declined, the marginal losses to incumbent channels has successively decreased, and the propaganda reach has been reduced by the spread of programs over the distribution. Therefore, liberalization is less resisted because the stakes have become lower.

There are, however, some losers, in relative or absolute terms, of a multichannel media landscape, in particular the traditional public-broadcast institutions. Not only does their audience share decline, but, most fundamentally, an important part of their programming function, together with the influential constituencies that go with it, is taken away by regular market participants. Thus, while the analysis predicts a decline in the importance and intensity of media policy discussion, the major exception will be the friction accompanying the decline in the scope of public broadcasting.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barnouw, E. (1982) Tube of Plenty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beebe, J.H. (1977) Institutional Structure and Program Choice in Television Markets. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 91: 15–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, A. (1979) Governing the BBC. London: British Broadcasting Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, D.R. (1982) International Radio Broadcasting. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downs, A. (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, R.E. and Greenberg, M.G. (1982) Audiences for Public Television. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gans, H. (1974) Popular Culture and High Culture. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, J.B. (1985) The Economics of Pay-TV Media. Video Media Competition, (ed.) E.M. Noam. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hotelling, H. (1929) Stability in Competition. Economic Journal, 34: 41–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, H.H. and Kievman, M.S. (1983) Radio and Television Programming. Ohio: Grid Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, H. (1971) The Invisible Resource. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • — (1980) Fact and Fancy in Television Regulation. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacAvoy, P.W. (1977) Deregulation of Cable Television Administrative Papers on Regulatory Reform. Washington, D.C.: American Institute for Public Policy Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mander, J. (1978) Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television. New York: Williams Morrow and Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosco, V. (1979) Broadcasting in the U.S.. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, D.C. (1979) Public Choice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noam, E.M. (1985) Video Media Competition. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noll, R.G., Peck, M.J., and McGowan, J.J. (1973) Economic Aspects of Television Regulation. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M., Jr. (1965) The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owen, B.M. (1975) Economics and Freedom of Expression: Media Structure and the First Amendment. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poltrack, D.F. (1983) Television Marketing, Network/Local/Cable. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothenberg, J. (1962) Consumer Sovereignty and the Economics of Television Programming. Studies in Public Communication, 4: 45–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sasson, D. (1985) Political and Market Forces. West European Politics, 8: 67–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, M.A. and Owen, B.M. (1977) Television Programming: Monopolistic Competition and Welfare. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 91: 103–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, P.O. (1952) Program Patterns and Preferences, and the Workability of Competition in Radio Broadcasting. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 66: 194–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turnstall, J. (1983) The Media in Britain. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waterman, D. (1985) Prerecorded Home Video and the Distribution of Theatrical Feature Films. Video Media Competition, (ed.) E.M. Noam. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wildman, S.S. and Owen, B.M. (1985) Program Competition, Diversity, and Multi-Channel Bundling in the New Video Industry. Video Media Competition, (ed.) E.M. Noam. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiles, P. (1963) Pilkington and the Theory of Value. Economic Journal, 73: 183–200.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Additional information

Professor and Director, Center for Telecommunications and Information Studies, Columbia University. I am grateful to Michael Botein and Mark Nadel for helpful comments.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Noam, E.M. A public and private-choice model of broadcasting. Public Choice 55, 163–187 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00156816

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00156816

Keywords

Navigation