Public broadcasters need independence, panel finds
Editorial independence and stable funding are a must for any public broadcaster, members of a Legislative Council panel said after concluding a fact-finding trip into foreign broadcasting.
Legislative councillors Sin Chung-Kai, Emily Lau Wai-hing and Albert Cheng King-hon said they found several other similarities among public broadcasters in Canada, the US and Britain, including a legal backing for a mandate and an arm's length relationship with the government.
As members of Legco's information technology and broadcasting panel, the three councillors visited the foreign broadcasters and other groups on a fact-finding mission.
Being funded by the government, RTHK was effectively a government department, and such a role hurt its editorial freedom, the three lawmakers said after concluding the 10-day-trip.
While RTHK has some allocated airtime on commercial television channels, they said Hong Kong needed a public broadcasting system with its own channel.
Mr Cheng said: 'I don't think it works when you look at a public broadcaster without a channel. I'm sure Hong Kong will be looking at a PBS [public service broadcaster].'
The panel met with broadcasting authorities, major public broadcasters, and small and local community channels, ombudsmen and pressure groups on broadcasting and freedom of the press.
In Ottawa, they held meetings with the Canadian Broadcasting Corp, and the National Public Radio and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting in Washington. In London, the panel met officials at the BBC and Channel 4.
'We have seen in the three countries that there is a general acceptance of a public broadcaster that should be free to broadcast material,' Ms Lau said. She added that there was some confusion among government officials about the difference between a state broadcaster and a public service broadcaster.
For example, Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen said during his election campaign last year that he did not like horse racing programmes on RTHK, which some interpreted as government interference.
'Government officials have an expectation that RTHK should be a propaganda arm,' Ms Lau said.
The lawmakers said they had asked the groups about the best ways to safeguard editorial independence and build firewalls between the government and broadcasters.
Public broadcasters also need public funding and the panel said it examined how the British, American and Canadian authorities were funded.
The CBC is government-funded in Canada, while in Britain the BBC is paid for mainly by mandatory licence fees by anyone who owns a television. In the US, it is mixed, with money from the government as well as donations and corporate sponsorship. They said foreign broadcasters typically had a charter ensuring stable funding.
But Mr Cheng added: 'It doesn't matter where the funding comes from, we need to make sure it is at arm's length from the government and that they don't use money to control the broadcaster.'
The lawmakers said they were not ready to make recommendations. They will compare the pros and cons of the overseas models and submit a report to Legco in July.
