Platform Imaginaries and Dutch Public Service Media

Abstract

Over the past decade, public service media (PSM) have increasingly distributed content through digital platforms, most prominently YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. This article explores how this process of platformization, the integration of digital platforms in PSM, affects the public service remit of promoting key public values, such as universality, independence, and diversity. Specifically, it interrogates how Dutch PSM imagine platforms and their users, as well as how these imaginaries affect online public service strategies. The starting point is the notion of platform imaginaries: the ways in which social actors understand and organize their activities in relation to platform algorithms, interfaces, data infrastructures, moderation procedures, business models, user practices, and audiences. The analysis of these imaginaries builds on key public service policy documents and 15 interviews with employees from the NPO (Nederlandse Publieke Omroep; the governing body), the broadcasting associations, SKO (audience measurement service), and the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. Our analysis of these materials shows that the online strategies of Dutch PSM are guided by three imaginations of platforms as (a) intermediaries that function on the basis of specific “laws,” (b) places where new audiences reside, and (c) powerful corporations that largely operate beyond the national sphere of influence. These platform imaginaries consist of a complex of interrelated observations, arguments, ideas, and practices, which are generally accepted and partly contested. The main bone of contention is how platform audiences should be seen. It has been difficult to reconcile competing ideas about audiences and, consequently, about the role of PSM in a platform environment, as broadcasters and policy makers lack the necessary (aggregate) data to determine how the media landscape is exactly changing and what the best public service response is. The conclusion of the article proposes a number of steps to resolve this deadlock.

Public service media, sports and cultural citizenship in the age of social media: An analysis of BBC Sport agenda diversity on Twitter

“…Concurrently, social media have provoked crucial changes in media consumption patterns, with users currently demanding global content in real-time and on multiple devices. Consequently, mainstream news organisations have taken social media more seriously to explore new storytelling techniques, interact with the users, and reach wider audiences (Van Es and Poell, 2020). News organisations have identified on social media platforms, especially on Twitter, unlimited possibilities for audience interaction, and feedback to reframe strategies and enhance sports content.…”

“…In the age of 'digital plenitude' (Hutchins and Rowe, 2009), technological affordances provide new opportunities for PSM to distribute their content through an expanding array of platforms, services, and applications (Van Es and Poell, 2020). PSM can benefit from digital platforms to strengthen 'cultural identity and diversity, social cohesion, media literacy, emancipation, information citizenship, and so on' (Donders, 2019(Donders, : 1014.…”

New Strategies for Old Dilemmas: Unraveling how Spanish Regional Public Service Media Face the Platformization Process

“…As noted by Couldry and Hepp (2017), platforms do not reflect the social; they produce the social structures in which we live. In this context, PSM have not escaped the process of platformization, being forced to implement gradual changes (D'Arma et al, 2021;Stollfuß, 2021;van Es & Poell, 2020). In Donders's (2019Donders's ( : 1024 words, "public broadcasters are well aware of the platformization and are working to adapt to it".…”

“…While not for revenue, these platforms compete directly with PSM for viewers' attention, especially regarding young audiences (Goyanes et al, 2021). In this context, there are recurrent debates about what services, products, benefits, or value PSM should provide and what models of funding and control are appropriate (Evens & Donders, 2018;Don-ders, 2021;van Es & Poell, 2020). Although the debate is historic, platform capitalism (Srnicek, 2018) brings with it new challenges that have become an incipient academic line of great interest (Berry, 2020;D'Arma et al, 2021;Donders, 2019;Stollfuß, 2021).…”

Editorial independence in an automated media system

“…For the moment there is no dominant actor in these fields, and the market structure of audience metrics suggests editorial technologies may not need to become concentrated into a few hands. Moreover, especially public service media (PSM) and larger organisations are increasingly (collaborating in order to) develop their own technologies, sometimes as an explicit counterweight to platforms' services (van Es & Poell, 2020).…”