| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 新聞研究所 === 95 === On Jan 3 2006, the Legislative Yuan had passed through the Statute for Disposing of Public-Sector Stock Shares in Wireless TV Businesses, which confirms to support a public-owned broadcasting enterprise by merging CTS (Chinese Television System), TITV (Taiwan Indigenous Television), Hakka TV (Hakka Television Service) and MACTV (Taiwan Macroview TV) with current PTS (Taiwan Public Television Service). It took six years to pass through the statute and enforce the policy of building the public broadcasting system. The executive authorities also appeared to be indecisive. It is an issue worthy of serious concern as to how the public broadcasting system in Taiwan could be built.
From the perspectives of state theories and critical political economy of communications and through secondary analysis and in-depth interview, we explored three key subjects in this study: the background of the TV publicizing policy, how actors in the policy process interact and contribute to the public broadcasting system, and state and society relations.
The study found that there are political and media factors which lead to the proposal to build public broadcasting system. In the first place, political authority had not withdrawn from the media. In addition, the laisser-faire media policies after liberalization had brought about vicious competition in media industry. Therefore, media reform activists, mainly media academics, proposed building public broadcasting system through helping DPP presidential candidate writing Communication White Book.
The study also found that state autonomy was restricted by civil society, which caused state was not able to make policies advantageous to itself at will. That’s the reason why the executive authorities’ position on publicizing policy was ambiguous and indecisive. The active involvement in policy making process of social movement groups (especially the media reform group) prevented further privatization and politician-businessman collusion of media in Taiwan. The media reform group played a crucial role in this policy process, but seeking self-interest of other actors was the reason why they were willing to collaborate with the media reform group to support public broadcasting system. In the future, we still need the intellectuals to lead the people to be critical and self-conscious, developing further reform. The state, as an active regulator, should keep policy transparency and expand public participation.
|
|---|
