Avalik-õigusliku telekanali (Eesti Televisioon) roll avaliku diskussiooni foorumina saate „Vabariigi kodanikud“ näitel
Kuupäev
2009
Autorid
Ajakirja pealkiri
Ajakirja ISSN
Köite pealkiri
Kirjastaja
Tartu Ülikool
Abstrakt
Kirjeldus
The aim of this bachelor thesis “Role of the Public Broadcasting TV (Estonian
Television) as a Forum of Public Discussion: the Case of „Vabariigi Kodanikud“ was to
investigate for what extent the broadcasted telecast of the public television (ETV)
“Vabariigi Kodanikud”, covering orders of the day, presents a forum of exchanging
ideas, which offers multiform, topical, constructive possibility of discussion, involving
different parts of society.
At the build-up of the study the presumption was made that ETV as a public television,
which aim is to serve the public interest, has to create a public dispute and discussion
discourses to design and develop the space for public thinking.
In the first part of this thesis I wrote about the concept of public sphere. I mainly relied
upon Jürgen Habermas’es ideal-typical model of public sphere, which is related to the
concept of deliberative democracy. For getting a more comprehensive view I presented
an overview of criticism to Habermas’es theory, made by other authors. In addition, I
brought out the David Croteau’s and William Hoyness’es public sphere media model.
To localize the work I briefly wrote about the plan for development of Estonian Public
Broadcasting (ERR) in years 2009-2012. I also gave an overview of the annual report
2008 of ETV, composed by ERR and TNS Emor and added some research results of
I.World.Media.
The empirical part of the work consisted of 5 broadcasts „Vabariigi Kodanikud” by
analysis of what I used methods of qualitative analysis. In addition I carried through
expert interviews with the producers of the telecast, which were analysed by qualitative
analysis method. On the ground of this I answered to the questions put up in the work.
From theoretical materials it appeared that the public TV must present a forum for the
discourse for handling problems essential for the society and an important institution of designing public thinking space and developing it. For this, the public TV has to create
programs which offer diversified and topical discussions involving as much people as
possible who would debate and reach consensus.
The telecast “Vabariigi Kodanikud”, dealing with problems of life of society, appares to
be a place for public thinking room, it as if creates a public debate forum involving
thanks to the interactive environment, possibly lots of people in it. But this show does not
belong to the ten of most popular ones. At the same time the important fact is, that
Estonians prefer to watch social and political shows on ETV, can not be ignored. The
popularity of the show is about 7-8%, which is good by the opinion of the producingteam,
because it means, that it still reaches many people. In addition, the team
understands what kind of show we are talking about – it would not be possible to get for
it a watching percentage of Sundays rating show. It is quite clear that “Vabariigi
Kodanikud” is not a rating show.
For the involvement of TV-watchers, the idea of interactivity has been developed. One
can send an e-mail or call to the show. At the same time it is obvious that the time
devoted to watchers is not in agreement with the needs. By the view of the producers of
the show the time given to watchers to enounce their opinions does not correspond to
their actual need. By the opinion of Andres Kuusk and Epp Ehand the internet
environment of the show would need a separate editor, who would answer to the written
comments, argue and discuss with people. This would also favour more the discussion
environment, the one to which this show is striving for but which at the moment is falling
short. In this case more such discussion environment would come into being, what would
bring upon more TV watchers.
The answers to the ERR opinion poll 2008 show, that people rather not step into the
course of a show via mail or phone, there is not even enough interest. Here the
differentiation between two things is necessary. Firstly, for those people, calling to the
show the given time is really not enough. At the same time, there is not enough those
people who are willing to interact, so that their participation would essentially distinguish for example in results of opinion polls. There is more of these, who are not active
viewers, let alone participants of the telecast.
One significant aspect, what came out from this work was that the aim of the telecast is
not reaching consensus. One specific goal is to generate a conflict. From one side, it is
understandable, as conflict is a promoting force. While the broadcast continues only fifty
minutes, it should start from the very first minutes. At the same time, it contradicts with
what is said in the ERR development plan – achieving certain consensual understanding,
and the Jürgen Habermas’es idea that the goal of a discussion is reaching consensus.
As it was only five telecasts under observation (during a season about 70 telecasts have
been broadcasted), and as the interviews were made mainly with producers of the
telecast, no well-grounded conclusions can be made. To make them, more telecasts ought
to be analyzed. Secondly, more interviews have to be done beside producers also with
members of citizenry. Then the two sides would be represented – the producers and socalled
active citizens. On this ground then it can be analyzed in what extent the aims of
the producers of the broadcast and opinions of citizens communions coinside.
Märksõnad
H Social Sciences (General), bakalaureusetööd