In 1924, Radio Broadcast magazine ran a contest asking, “Who is to pay for broadcasting and how?” A century later, we’re still grappling with this question. Media freedom often comes up in discussions about journalism’s challenges. However, what may be more critical is media sustainability.
HD Kellogg Jr., the winner of the 1924 contest, thought that listeners should financially support broadcasting. This model suggested receiver capabilities-based fees as in today’s tiered subscription services. He even envisioned regulatory bodies by proposing a government-managed broadcasting fund. Although it was not adopted immediately, various forms of this paradigm have been developed over time.
UK’s TV license system exemplifies a mandatory fee case used to support public service broadcasting. This has enabled the BBC to grow while many other media houses are struggling. The key thing here is that the public, which journalism serves, should be involved in keeping the profession alive.
The funding dilemma becomes more complicated as technology advances and media consumption habits evolve.
The recent controversy surrounding Africa Uncensored’s funding shows the on-going challenge of balancing public interest, commercial viability and audience responsibility in media funding.
Today, traditional revenue streams for media are rapidly eroding away. Cable subscriptions in the US which were once a major source of income for news networks like CNN have fallen from 98.7 million subscribers in 2016 to 58 million subscribers in 2023, with projections for only 40 million subscribers by 2028. This, together with falling ratings and ad revenue, has led media organisations to explore alternative sources of funding.
One emerging trend is the rise of digital news products that require subscription fees. In fact, Mark Thompson, the CEO of CNN, recently announced plans to launch CNN.com’s first-ever paid product before the end of 2024, with an eye on creating a billion-dollar digital business. However, it is not known if such ventures will be a success given the saturation of the online subscription market and dominance of established players like The New York Times.
The media landscape in Africa faces other challenges. A significant part of foreign development assistance estimated to amount to about $600m annually, goes into African media development. While this funding supports important journalism projects, it also raises questions about external influences on local media traditions and independence.
The situation has been further complicated by the influx of Chinese media investments in Africa. China Global Television Network, Xinhua and China Radio International are examples of Chinese media houses that have brought the “constructive journalism” model into Africa instead of the western “watchdog” type. This has stirred debates over press freedom and journalist norms in African countries.
Amidst all these challenges, one thing is clear: sustainability in journalism does not only mean resisting government interference or securing advertisers’ dollars. It also means coming up with a model where people know how important journalism is and actively support it through either voluntary subscriptions or compulsory fees.
The question asked in 1924 is still pertinent today: who will pay for quality journalism, and how? While seeking solutions, we should not forget that without a sustainable model of operation it is impossible for journalism to fulfil its vital role in society, no matter how free it could be from external influences. Thus, to safeguard the future of this profession there is more than just protecting its freedom but creating a financial basis.
