1

New digital realities and old PSB models – the case of public access and

participation in Singapore’s televisual landscape

Submitted and accepted by Media International Australia in October 2017 for publication. [Note: The authors thank the Editor, two anonymous reviewers, Jeffrey Lim, Terence Lee and Howard Lee, for their constructive comments which have made this a much better paper. Corresponding author email address: tania.lim@murdoch.edu.au]

Abstract

Does public service broadcasting (PSB), with its 20th-century state-controlled and state-

funded structure, still have a role to play in increasing access, public participation, and a

strong national media system in today’s globalising East Asia? This article, by taking

Singapore as a case study, examines why and how traditional PSB media players have been

forced to change their institutional and transactional responses to the ‘shocks’ of digitization.

In particular, it examines how the rise of web 2.0, with its de-territorialised media services

and social media, challenges PSB’s relevance as trends towards universal access, a greater

participatory culture and active audiences render PSB content increasingly anachronistic.

Introduction

On 4 May, 2016, local news site Mothership.sg described how Singaporeans’ fascination for

the latest Korean drama series Descendants of the Sun on their TV and personal computer

screens almost became a ‘cultural moment’ in Singapore. It also declared that “local TV must

up its game on locally-produced content or we’ll one day live-stream its death” (Lim and

Tan, 2016).

This anecdote reveals an underlying ‘crisis’ that Singapore’s local TV broadcaster

MediaCorp faces in delivering Public Service Broadcasting (PSB) to audiences. For PSB

service providers like MediaCorp Singapore (hereafter MediaCorp), competition for TV

audiences has intensified. De-territorialised media services on the internet, like Netflix and

Viu, offer easy access to popular local and foreign content, flexible scheduling, and

customisable streaming experiences enabled by the internet, mobile platforms and its

associated technologies. This issue is not a Singapore-only phenomenon. Despite differing

2

PSB models adopted across Western and Asian countries (Brevini, 2015), most PSB systems

face a similar ‘PSB crisis’. Declining mass TV viewership (Nakamura et al., 2013; Tambini,

2015), greater audience fragmentation, niche channels, and increasingly distanced audiences

(Tambini, 2015) demand new PSB models that engage with new audiences actively. These

audiences consume and produce media content in a ‘sharing’ economy, accessing content

offered by online media distributors like Netflix, and online ‘produsers’ in a Youtube-like

environment (Bruns, 2008). Moreover, digitisation has created new business models for

content production, programming and distribution across entire media industries

(Cunningham and Silver, 2013). New transnational media and technology giants (Flew and

Cunningham, 2007), and the rise of Internet-based social media have also created ‘agitations’

to economy, state and civil society (Fuchs 2014).

Thus, digital technologies, changing media consumption trends, and regional dynamics of

increased pop cultural flows present a challenge for the old BBC ‘Reithian’ PSB model for

organising PSB media globally (see Baranjee and Seneviratne, 2005). In a digital era where

PSB broadcasters no longer dominate local viewership trends, especially in Europe and East

Asian countries like Singapore, they need to renegotiate their relationship with various

publics, audiences, the market and the state. They need to revamp older PSB models into new

digital-based Public Service Media (or PSM) (Tambini, 2015; Jakubowciz, 2010).

Scholars distinguish between PSB and PSM in several ways. Jakubowicz (2008, 2010)

focused on PSM in terms of “public service content provision” that is not restricted to

traditional broadcasting but uses other platforms, including the Internet or “PSB + other

platforms + Web 2.0, representing a technology-neutral definition of the [PSB] remit”, and

allowing for stronger citizen participation in content production. Bardoel and Lowe (2007)

discuss PSM as a new phase of public services that improves upon the legitimacy and

relevance of traditional PSB services. They view PSM operators as public communicators

which actively engage with a demanding audience to deliver customized content on online,

mobile and social media. Brett (2009, 2010) refers to PSM as “PSB online” that encourages

innovation in content, production, formats, and ultimately engaged with a younger and

networked audience. Thus, while both PSB and PSM are non-commercial media, PSB offers

national publics universal access to scheduled TV and radio broadcasts, PSM extends

beyond scheduled one-way broadcasting to include more interactive media services, such as

3

the use of web-based social media that enable greater public active participation, even in

content production.

Despite shifts by Western and other distinctive Asian media systems (such as Japan’s)

towards developing PSM services, many Asian broadcasters still operate under the ‘old’ PSB

model, as is the case in Singapore. Though policy efforts have ‘nudged’ Singapore’s

traditional PSB provider, MediaCorp, to address this PSB crisis (including incentivising PSM

services), it is clear that state responses to revising the PSB models do not go far enough, as

their measures are potentially complicated by conflicting policy objectives and entrenched

market practices.

In this article, we discuss what constraints and challenges Singapore’s PSB operator faces in

its attempt to transform into a PSM operator that is responsive to digital agitations. This

article is organised as follows. First, we examine how MediaCorp faces both structural and

policy constraints because of its overlapping (and conflicting) roles as both national PSB

operator broadcaster and as commercial profit-making media operator. Second, we analyse

the institutional practices of Singapore’s current PSB model by examining its entrenched

media structures. Finally, we review recent policy responses by Singapore’s PSB services to

modern challenges and trends. We conclude by arguing that Singapore’s PSB institutional

practices should disentangle from commercialisation and focus on going back to delivering a

good quality PSB service while encouraging PSM experiments which appeal to interactive

and online audiences. Where such PSM experiments is supported by public funding, funding

bodies should consider applying an ex-ante public value test when entrenched PSB operators,

like MediaCorp, plan new services on both old and new media platforms, similar to what is

applied to different European media systems (see Holland and Moe, 2011). In the following

section, we look at PSB in Singapore as an example of how old PSB models created for a

different era are outdated and largely fail to meet public interest objectives.

The multiple roles of Singapore PSB

MediaCorp is Singapore’s main public service broadcaster, and by default the key PSB

operator. It delivers content over seven TV channels, eight FM radio stations, and Toggle.sg,

an internet-enabled application service that is accessible online. MediaCorp has been a state-

4

owned corporation since 1994, and its primary shareholder is Temasek Holdings, a state

investment company (Temasek, 2017). It was first established as a government department in

1963 under the Ministry of Culture as Radio TV Singapore (RTS) (Nair, 1980: 4). RTS was

later transformed into an independent statutory board in 1980 and became the Singapore

Broadcasting Corporation (SBC) that was itself corporatised in 1994 and revamped several

times into its current form as MediaCorp (McDaniel, 1994; MCI, 2016).

Up until the entry of Singapore International Media’s pay TV service, Singapore Cable

Vision in 1992 (see NLB, 2004) SBC (MediaCorp’s predecessor) was the only PSB

broadcaster of publicly-funded content and services to Singapore audiences on free-to-air TV

and radio. During this time, SBC ventured into commercialisation while retaining its PSB

role (see Gwee, 2011; Curtin, 2007). From 2000 to 2004, a brief period of limited

competition was introduced in the broadcasting market. A second free-to-air terrestrial

broadcaster SPH MediaWorks (henceforth MediaWorks), then fully owned by Singapore

Press Holdings, was awarded the second FTA licence. This briefly broke the ‘unity of

control’ that MediaCorp had enjoyed as the monopoly FTA terrestrial broadcaster in

Singapore and diluted the dominance of MediaCorp who also enjoyed strong links to the

state. MediaWorks competed with similar imported programming as MediaCorp but added

more locally-commissioned English-language and Chinese-language content. This also

triggered intense and commercially devastating competition for advertising revenue.

Although MediaWorks won recognition for some of its original productions, receiving the

‘Broadcaster of the Year’ award at the Asia TV Awards 2002, it restructured and eventually

shut down in 2005. The terrestrial TV market reverted to a single Free-to-Air broadcaster,

MediaCorp, delivering most of the PSB programmes once again (OECD Global Competition

Forum, 2013). From 1994 until 2011, a Radio and TV Licence (RTV) fee was collected

directly by the media regulator from the public who had TV sets in their homes, and radio

sets in their vehicles, which became a key funding source for PSB programmes on

MediaCorp Singapore’s TV and radio channels. As part of FY2011 budget, the Singapore

government announced that the RTV licence was to be abolished in 2011 (MDA, 2011).

Subsequently, the government launched a PSB Review Panel in 2010, which submitted its

report in 2011, and was acted upon by the Government in 2012. The Review Panel

recommended ways to raise PSB viewership through tweaking some aspects of the PSB

5

funding schemes, to extend the reach by including online media platforms that could carry

PSB programmes, and nurture programs for talent development (MCI, 2012a). While this

widened the range of possible PSB facilities beyond the model of the single facility operator,

most PSB content was commissioned and produced by MediaCorp.

Further, the PSC scheme was widened in scope into the PSB Contestable Fund (PSCF) for

selected PSB funding to PSB programmes that can be showcased on the online media

platforms. The PSC Scheme (known as Public Service Content Scheme) was an alternative

scheme created by the government to encourage innovative content through a co-investment

mode where an independent media producer who co-finances TV production and secures

local terrestrial TV scheduling, can commercially exploit the same content overseas. Since

2012, this scheme was changed to the PCFS (PSB Contestable Funds Scheme) where it is

given out as a grant to platform owners instead (MDA, 2012). Examples included ‘local

online multimedia sites like MediaCorp’s xinmsn and Singapore Press Holdings’ RazorTV

and nationwide pay-TV platforms such as Starhub TV and SingTel’s mio TV’ (MCI, 2012).

While responding closely to audiences’ new media habits, MDA limited platform

partnerships to the big local media players in the Singapore market1.

The PSB remit and meaning of ‘public service’ has morphed into diversified media choices

and technological advancement. This placed industry exportability alongside serving the

educational needs of the public. Indeed, the 2012 PSB Review Panel recommendations

demonstrate how raising content quality was not only a public service goal, but also an

industry development goal:

The panel has recommended several strategic measures to raise the quality and appeal

of PSB programming and to widen the reach of these programmes beyond traditional

FTA channels. These recommendations also seek to benefit public viewing interests

and contribute to the development of the media industry in Singapore. (MCI, 2012a –

emphasis added)

In 2012, the Ministry of Communication and Information (MCI) noted that it was revising

PSB funding schemes that were administered by Media Development Authority (MDA).

MDA was established in 2003 with the intent to regulate and develop the media industry.

Central to these revisions were incentives to raise the quality of PSB content for local

6

audiences and to explore new markets overseas for locally-produced Singapore TV content.

The latter was a significant shift from its initial remit of producing ‘public service’ content,

towards commercialising local content.

MDA also regularly reviews its domestic schemes to ensure that these are aligned

with the internationalisation efforts. For instance, effective from end-July 2012, MDA

has put in place a revised copyright ownership framework for MDA-supported,

locally produced Public Service Broadcasting, or PSB, programmes. It put in place

institutional mechanisms and a generous copyright framework which allows content

creators to better exploit their assets for sale of programmes overseas, licensing, and

merchandising. (MCI, 2012b)

While the changes made in 2012 were noteworthy, multiplying media platforms to maximise

the reach of PSB content does not equate to effective PSM delivery, without exploring new

content genres that cater to active audiences. Encouraging independent media producers,

many who are used to servicing the monopoly broadcaster, to commercially exploit their

content, without viable digital business models, strays from what counts as ‘public service’.

Existing scholarship on Singapore TV (Tay and Turner, 2009; Lee, 2010; Chan, 2012; Tan,

2008) demonstrates how locally-produced Singapore TV content have served the state’s

cultural and linguistic policies. Examples included encouraging themes of multiculturalism

on its mass English-language TV channels while asserting the use of standard English

language, simplified Mandarin Chinese for its Chinese-language channels, as well as

ensuring Malay and Tamil language programming. These moves reflect national language

policies. Lee (2010) describes how ‘governmentality’ is cultivated amongst its media players

and audiences, to support its nationalist agenda and larger social policies. For example, this is

evident in recent discourses of the PSB crisis faced by MediaCorp Singapore in providing

PSB programmes in 2015 and 2016:

It’s going to be a challenging environment for Mediacorp, as it is for most

broadcasting companies in the world. Even the BBC is struggling with declining

viewership and tight budgets. Commercially, MediaCorp will face greater competition

for eyeballs and for advertisers. Even more challenging, will be for MediaCorp to

maintain its place as the broadcaster of choice for news, current affairs and

7

entertainment… And yet it’ll continue to play an indispensable role as the national

broadcaster helping to bring the whole nation together. It’s not just another

commercial entity, responding to market signals without caring about the value and

the significance of your content. You have to continue to produce programmes that

celebrate our culture and heritage, reflect our society and values, educate and entertain

your audiences, as well as report news and produce current affairs content which

matter for Singaporeans, and which are compelling to watch. (Prime Minister Lee

Hsien Loong, emphasis added)(CNA, 2015)

Foreign programmes will not reflect our local values and culture. Through PSB

programmes, our media industry players can tell the Singapore story from a

Singaporean perspective, with a Singaporean heart… Over the years, our vernacular

channels have contributed significantly to the development of bilingualism

here…They allow Singaporeans to stay connected to our language, culture and

communities. Besides Chinese programming, we will also ensure that Suria and

Vasantham have adequate resources to continue producing quality programmes to

serve our different ethnic communities. (Minister Of State Chee Hong Tat, emphasis

added) (CNA, 2016)

PSB discourses related to MediaCorp conflate its role as a national broadcaster with that of

providing PSB programming that fulfils nation-building objectives. Such objectives included

celebrating multilingual and multicultural Singapore culture and heritage. By clearly

segmenting its PSB programming along multiculturalist lines for TV and radio, MediaCorp’s

PSB output was successful in attracting local audiences in the 1980s to late 1990s. However,

the banality of its local content across multiple language channels failed to attract a younger

viewership in the 2000s (see Chan, 2012a). This was symptomatic of ‘pockets of passive

resistance and contestations’ to popular discourses of civil society in Singapore (see Chong

2005). It also limited MediaCorp’s regional expansionist efforts (Pugsley, 2007), and has had

an economic impact on the independent production industry and its plans for regional

expansion, while also suffering declining local viewership and limited audience engagement

on diversifying its content to appeal to younger, active audiences.

Scholars like Jakubowicz (2010) and Debrett (2009) have argued that when PSB operators

transform to PSM through innovation, it would spur cross-promotion and encourage diversity

8

online. In its pure form, PSM creates shared public spaces for citizens to engage and interact

across various media platforms and participate by giving feedback on programming to

sharing content of public interest (van Dijck and Poell, 2015). However, as Singapore’s

attempt towards developing PSM has risen mainly from a single media broadcaster with a

dual commercial-public remit, MediaCorp has continued to focus on its national broadcaster

role, while trying to provide quality PSB content to Channels 5 and 8, its biggest viewership

channels (Chan, 2012b).

In response to a 2017 query, raised during a regular Parliamentary session, about how the

Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) articulated support for local media

development and PSB’s relevance in the digital era, Minister Chee Hong Tat responded by

drawing on PSB discourses that focused more on MediaCorp’s roles in developing the

Singapore media sector, rather than of its ‘public interest’ role:

Locally produced PSB programmes can best capture and convey our unique

Singaporean flavour… Last month, our first local bilingual TV series for pre-

schoolers ‘Junction Tree’ was shown on Okto. This series is supported by IMDA2 and

the Lee Kuan Yew Fund for Bilingualism. Mediacorp has also started featuring sports

programmes, including programmes that encourage young Singaporeans to take an

interest in sports and lead active lifestyles. (MCI, 2017)

Online media competition from Netflix and social media like YouTube have triggered a

policy response that has moved MediaCorp Singapore’s institutional practices closer to those

of commercial media. MediaCorp invested heavily in digital delivery and online originals on

Toggle.sg. This echoes early phases of PSM development in Europe (see Hellman and Sauri,

1994). While MediaCorp Singapore is constantly restructuring itself in a bid to maintain its

dominant position within the local media industry, it is unclear if this will lead to

transformative, institutional arrangements that deliver PSM services that engage audiences.

What follows is our discussion of some constraints that may hinder MediaCorp developing

effective PSM services.

9

Constraints on developing viable ‘PSM’ models

In today’s digital media age, institutional and policy changes to existing PSB models to

address digitally-networked and active audiences is necessary but inadequate in delivering

and developing engaging ‘public service’ content. The gold standard of an existing PSB

model that has adapted digitally is the BBC. Arguably one of the most successful PSB

operators to convert digitally into PSM, the BBC delivers great breadth of quality news,

information and drama programming. All PSM operators need to go beyond simply creating

content that “inform, educate and entertain” audiences, to serving the public in ways that the

private sector, left unregulated, would not. In a digitized world with viewer sovereignty and a

vast range of programs available at relatively low cost, the traditional market failure rationale

that forms the basis of PSB legitimacy is now largely mitigated. In this section, we examine

MediaCorp’s entrenched economic structure and institutional practices, and content strategies

to illustrate how these serve explicit cultural policy objectives, and argue that both constrain

MediaCorp’s ability to deliver engaging PSM services to diverse local audiences.

10

Economic structure and institutional arrangements of PSB funding

Figure 1 synthesizes various economic and institutional relationships between MediaCorp

and key stakeholders in the media landscape of Singapore: Temasek Holdings (one of the two

sovereign wealth funds of Singapore) owns MediaCorp; IMDA provides regulatory oversight

and PSB funding; MediaCorp also receives funding from other government agencies and

ministries.

Figure 1: Simplified Architecture of Singapore’s PSB Landscape vis-à-vis MediaCorp

MediaCorp’s delivery of traditional PSB and new PSM content that relies on both public

funding and advertising can, at times, lead to diverging programming interest. For instance, a

TV programme that garners higher advertising revenue may not necessarily serve the TV

station's PSB remit. Making this compromise dilutes programming quality. In part, the

challenge in shifting from PSB to PSM models stems from having to change institutional

Media Development Authority (now IMDA)

Temasek Holdings

MediaCorp (previously SBC)

Commercial Income

Other Government Agencies

Government of Singapore

Independent Production Houses

Internal Production

Global Content Acquisition

Free-to-air broadcasting

Online & Digital Platforms

International Broadcasting

PSB Remit

Source: Constructed by authors (drawing on various published sources, including past MDA Annual reports and news releases, Advisory committee reports by PACE (Programme Advisory Committee for English Programmes), ACCESS

(Advisory Committee for Chinese Programmes) and other PACs(Programme Advisory Committees)2, and MediaCorp news releases)

11

practices to allow for more innovative strategies to be deployed to actively engage viewers.

This is particularly relevant in the current context where there is a high premium on viewer

sovereignty and bespoke experiences. For instance, short of territorial viewing rights, viewers

are now able to access content on any device, anytime, anywhere at their own pace on

services like Netflix and YouTube. In contrast most of MediaCorp’s content is still delivered

through scheduled programming.

Prior to 2011, SBC (MediaCorp former namesake up to 1994) was funded through a

household TV and vehicle radio receiver tax that was collected annually by IMDA and ad-

hoc grants by the government for key programming content that it deemed of national

significance, such as key sporting events like the Olympic Games, Asian Games, and World

Cup football matches (Han, 2014). . The conventional argument for pricing PSB is that

against high production and fixed costs, the cost to add an additional viewer (i.e marginal

cost) is low. However, this logic holds true for existing content but not for producing new

content. Notwithstanding the limited incentives such pricing strategies may provide for

innovative content, responding to these challenges will require governments to explore newer

approaches to generate revenue to fund PSB.

Through PSB funding, the government supports the production of about 90% of the 5600

hours that PSB programmes annually (Channel NewsAsia, 2015), which include local and

acquired overseas programmes such as educational, arts and cultural programmes (Lau, 2016;

MediaCorp 2015).

In exchange for funding, the government expected MediaCorp to deliver good quality and

sufficient hours of PSB programming that reached as many households as possible, and

disseminate nation-building messaging. These expectations concerning the purpose of PSB

programmes were often expressed in MDA’s annual reports:

Our Public Service Broadcast (PSB) funding backed a total of 4,744 hours of content

on MediaCorp’s free-to-air (FTA) channels, attracting some 4.5 million viewers.

(MDA Annual Report 2014: 8)

12

Supported by MDA, local content has been steadily improving in quality. Local

content producers have also been working hard to create more compelling and

engaging Public Service Broadcast (PSB) programmes. Together, such content has

been crucial in helping to strengthen the Singapore spirit and identity. (MDA Annual

Report 2013-2014: 57)

PSB funding supports the production of about 90% of the 5600 hours that MediaCorp

telecasts annually, which include local and acquired overseas programmes such as

educational, arts and cultural programmes (Lau, 2016; MediaCorp 2015).

The tax was discontinued in 2011 and replaced with block grants from IMDA and other

government agencies, and advertising revenue. The replacement of the annual tax (collected

from viewers) with block grants from the government had a structural impact on power

relations, strengthening the links between the state and MediaCorp. This made it more

difficult for the broadcaster to be seen as independent of state and market interests. With

increased government funding for PSB programmes, the relationship has become more

entrenched.

In recent years, PSB funding increased by 35% from S$470 million between 2007 and 2011, to S$630

million between 2012 and 2016 (Lau, 2016). For example, in 2014, MediaCorp earned S$653.8

million in revenue, while MDA’s annual report stated that it received government grants of

S$145 million for PSB programmes as of 1 April 2014. Of this revenue, PSB funding from

the state made up about at least 20% of the PSB broadcaster’s revenues. MDA also supported

PSB content production and talent development of S$21.38 million in the same year, directly

financing the production sector, not just for the broadcaster (see MDA Annual Report

2014/2015).

Through IMDA, MediaCorp obtains direct funding for its public service remit across its TV

and radio channels, while MediaCorp is expected to also maintain its commercial remit,

independent of state support, in keeping with its other investment stakeholders, such as

Temasek Holdings.10 In addition, MediaCorp, in consultation with IMDA, also commissions

independent production houses to create content that works to increase diversity in its

programming.

13

Adding more complexity to the state’s funding role, several Ministries – such as the Ministry

of Communication and Information, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs – have also begun to

overtly seen to be funding TV programmes on MediaCorp’s terrestrial TV channels. State

funding for public communications and international relations campaigning is evident on

shows such as MediaCorp Channel 8’s dialect programme Eat Already? (CNA 2016a) to

reach out to senior citizens about government schemes for them, and Channel NewsAsia’s A

Little Red Dot Diplomacy (2017) featuring various Singapore ambassadors.

Interestingly, despite recognising the declining viewership of MediaCorp’s TV channels, for

Singapore’s case, there is no such decline in PSB funding from the state. Instead, annual PSB

funding will be increased by 28% to $250 million over the next five years (2015-2019) to

‘strengthen the quality of PSB programmes, which aim to promote national values and

celebrate the Singapore identity, culture and heritage’. The discursive practice of equating

PSB programmes with nation-hood is used to justify the increased state funding ties the PSB

service to fulfilling policy goals of nation-building. With decreasing viewership and

stagnating growth in Singapore’s resident population, the use of PSM to achieve these

objectives of celebrating identity, culture, and heritage will become increasingly expensive.

MediaCorp is still the dominant media player in its domestic TV market because it

commands the largest pool of PSB funding and generates the largest library of PSB content.

While some pay TV operators such as Starhub TV and mio TV may have increased their

subscriber base over the years, the base of domestic audiences still consume some PSB

programme on MediaCorp’s channels. However, without a new way of transacting on these

PSB funds, there is little incentive to switch to a drastic, new PSB model to arrest the

declining viewership (see PSB Review Panel, 2012).

Impact on PSB Content

MediaCorp has dutifully fulfilled its role as a national broadcaster, and provided universal

access to its PSB services, which should reach all local audiences. However, against the rise

of alternative media channels and content, its efforts to continue delivering good PSB content

have become less appealing to local audiences over time.

14

Debrett (2010) lists eight PSB principles4 identified by BBC’s Peacock Committee (cited by

Harrison, 2000: 66) - such as providing quality news and universal access - that define good

PSB services. She discusses how the future of public service broadcasting should be based on

reinterpreting PSB principles to address supporting the development of PSM. This means

leveraging upon the Web 2.0 era of wired and wireless technologies, mobile digital and social

media platforms.

MediaCorp appears to comply with many of these principles for being an effective PSB

service. For example, it provides universal access, and addresses diversity by serving

minority interests through its TV channels and radio stations. MediaCorp broadcasts key

events of national interest, including the annual National Day Parade, sporting events that

Singaporeans participate actively in, and content that forms an important part of Singapore’s

official cultural heritage like newsreels of colonial and pre-independence Singapore, and

biographical material addressing founding Prime Minister Lee Kwan Yew’s contribution to

nation-building (see MediaCorp, 2015; MCI, 2014).

In terms of PSB’s provision of quality news, Tay and Turner (2008: 78) have argued that

MediaCorp News, ‘in the role of Channel News Asia, self-branded as the Asian CNN,

epitomises and champions an implicit alternative Asian news value system that is clearly

supportive of government strategies to construct the nation and maintain social stability’.

Local news programming was often the most watched content on MediaCorp’s TV services

across its various four TV language channels. Its award-winning shows such as Current

Affairs and Money Mind continue to be refreshed up till today. Since its launch in 2001,

Channel News Asia’s growth in its regional footprint has plateaued, as other Asian regional

broadcasters are also vying for the same transnational Asian audiences – most notably

China’s CCTV, Japan’s NHK, and South Korea’s Ariang TV.

As a result of state-directed language policy, MediaCorp also offers limitedChinese dialect

content on radio and TV to serve older Chinese Singaporeans who are not reached by the

official Mandarin language channels . MediaCorp's programming is constrained by the Speak

15

Mandarin campaign and language policy state objectives. This campaign promotes Mandarin

as the primary and only official Chinese language used on national media. As a result, several

production companies have become niche producers of Mandarin-language programming.

However, over the years, MediaCorp’s ‘public service’ content on TV appeared less

concerned with engaging audiences’ diverse interests, and more with promoting larger socio-

political goals, including bilingualism and multiculturalism, while attempting to

commercialise.

During the 1960s to 1970s, Radio Television Singapore (later known as Singapore

Broadcasting Corporation (SBC), Television Corporation of Singapore (TCS) and then

MediaCorp) maintained a narrow PSB selection of TV and radio news and current affairs,

supplemented by acquired foreign entertainment programmes. Subsequently, from 1980s to

2000s, MediaCorp saw two major shifts in delivering PSB content, partly state-initiated and

partly self-initiated.

Firstly, as SBC was gradually corporatized from 1980 to 1994, it introduced more TV genres

into its PSB programming slate. This ranged from children’s and arts programming to more

minority-language content, and they launched a third terrestrial TV channel Channel 12

(NLB, 2014). Simultaneously, SBC (later TCS) also commercialised into producing and co-

producing dramas and telemovies that were exported in the late 1980s to 1990s (see Curtin,

2007). MediaCorp’s PSB content, including many of its local dramas, often articulated the

Singapore government’s and its citizenry’s anxieties of post-colonial independence,

embracing cultural policies of bilingualism and multiculturalism to strengthen citizens’ sense

of national identity.

Secondly, from 1999 to 2008, MediaCorp entered a phase of content and channel expansion,

partly spurred by local media competition, cultural policy shifts, and maintaining its PSB

remit of ensuring content diversity. For example, MediaCorp embarked on a number of

ambitious moves to set up niche channels, attempting to tackle local and regional media

competition. This included the ill-fated SportCity channel set up in 2000 (Wong, 2015), and a

more successful venture into a 24-hour Asian news channel established in 1999, Channel

NewsAsia. During this period, audiences had access to a greater variety of content as

16

MediaCorp and SPH MediaWorks competed in early 2000s, although advertising revenues

suffered as a result (OECD Global Competition Forum, 2013).

With the economic push towards promoting the media sector as part of Singapore’s creative

industries in 2003-2007 as articulated in the Media 21 development blueprint that set out

MDA’s masterplan for developing Singapore’s media sector, some of the PSB funded content

served the dual purpose of promoting national identity and promoting media productions and

Singapore talents internationally (see MDA, /2008). This approach continued into the next

phase of developing the creative industries under the Singapore Media Fusion Plan (see Lee,

2016).

Throughout 2000 to 2010, MediaCorp tried to balance programming of what would be

deemed commercially-successful PSB-funded content with public interest content. For

instance, MediaCorp had flexibility to tap on PSB funding to produce programmes like The

Little Nyonya, a highly commercially successful TV drama in 2009-2010. They also

received funding to secure telecast rights for key events in the World Cup (Han, 2014).

Since 2013, without any resolution to the dual purpose of PSB-funded content, MediaCorp

began shifting towards delivering its PSB remit in a PSM manner, implementing state-

endorsed recommendations proposed by the PSB Review Panel in 2011. With its Toggle.Sg

on-demand service launched in 2013, MediaCorp operates closer to a PSM model. Toggle.sg

has become an internet platform for, and selectively curates content from, its seven free-to-air

TV channels. It also premieres Toggle.sg originals, that eventually shift over to its terrestrial

TV channels (Today, 2016). The industry was also introduced a more inclusive PSM

monitoring service – SG-TAM, launched in 2016 by GfK Media. It attempts to re-value and

measure audience engagement on both traditional and digital platforms. This metrics service

was commissioned by the regulator IMDA (IMDA, 2017).

As seen above, the dual purpose of PSB-funded content comes with its own challenges as

there is lack of directive whether commercial success of PSB-funded content outweighs the

importance of the public interest nature of the content. The original PSB remit is about public

engagement which is best measured by qualitative audience feedback. On the other hand, a

commercially-driven motive would be to acquire advertising revenues which is a function of

achieving TV ratings (Debrett 2010). Furthermore, scholars have observed that some

17

European public service broadcasters (e.g. Poland and Italy) rely on TV advertising revenues

to subsidise their services (Sehl, Cornia and Neilsen, 2016), and their metrics used were more

suited to price advertising revenues than measure public engagement. Similarly, MediaCorp

have some reliance on advertising revenues (MediaCorp 2014, 2016) and is accountable for

its performance on delivering PSB content, based on both quantitative ratings and qualitative

feedback from ACCESS and other Programme Advisory Committee (PAC) reports3.

MediaCorp has to serve dual roles as a national broadcaster (funded by IMDA) and an entity

with fiduciary responsibilities to its principal shareholder Temasek Holdings. These roles

present a set of conflicting obligations. While MediaCorp must provide quality news,

consistent with the normative values of a PSB service (see Jakubowicz, 2007; Debrett, 2009),

it also has to satisfy its role as a state broadcaster for nation building, public education and

others. Over and above these obligations, it must yield commercial returns that satisfy

Temasek Holdings. Negotiating the complex state-media-politics nexus has necessitated the

use of ‘OB Markers’ (a term in Singapore that Cheong (2012) refer to as topics which are

‘out-of-bound’ for public debate by the media) to prevent coverage of what is perceived to

be sensitive (Lee, 2002). However, in recent years there is a call to reduce the boundaries of

these markers and publicly discuss socially relevant yet sensitive issues (Tham, 2015).

Against the dual purpose nature of PSB-funded content and the roles expected of MediaCorp,

the entity is a ‘hybrid’ PSB operator while attempting to transform into Singapore’s PSM.

While the social role of PSB operators are often clearly supported by policymakers in Europe

(Moe and Syvertsen, 2009) and some parts of Asia (see Banerjee and Seneviratne, 2008),

many Asian PSB operators, like in Singapore, are also state broadcasters and lack autonomy

which can weaken their legitimacy in performing an important public service that activates

citizen participation (Raboy, 1997).

Conclusion

As national audiences are increasingly fragmented and de-territorialised, the ‘PSB crisis’ that

public service media need to address are also about creating shared media experiences

amongst an increasingly wide spectrum of audiences who are into niche-viewing, binge-

watching, and time-shifting in their media use. While these audiences may have some

18

‘mediated public connection’ to their distinctively national older PSB or newer PSM media

channels (Couldry, Livingstone and Markham, 2007), what kind of policy adjustments and

institutional re-arrangements will be needed to strengthen public trust in PSM’s legitimacy as

public media that builds a vibrant public sphere or multiple spheres that inform citizens and

guide public conversation.

‘Disruptive’ platforms like YouTube and Twitter cannibalise public media audiences to

amplify their services (van Dijck and Poell, 2015; Larsen, 2014). The rising popularity of

these platforms challenges the legitimacy of traditional PSB operators who are supposed to

unify audiences and promote national cultures (Larsen, 2014), be an instrument to champion

the voice of minority groups, ‘inform, educate, and entertain’, and provide a platform free of

vested interests (Brett, 2010). Putting public interest higher than individual wants and tastes,

public service content could continue to maintain a valuable role in unifying audiences back

into publics and caring communities.

Moreover, this disruption demands a paradigm shift in treatment of what counts as PSB. In

several ways, Singapore’s recent policy responses to these disruptions need to be

reconsidered to help MediaCorp meaningfully transform itself into an effective PSM that

engages interactive Singaporean audiences.

Firstly, following from the PSB Review Panel 2011’s recommendations, the state encouraged

MediaCorp to engage Singapore’s online viewing audiences on digital platforms. However,

initial PSM efforts to respond to these disruptions are not adequate because creating

Toggle.sg to extend PSB content delivery of existing TV channels online does not equate to

actively engaging the online audience. MediaCorp Singapore will need to shift away from the

‘scarcity’ and ‘single facility’ model for PSB provision, towards greater collaboration with

online niche producers that have growing communities to get the attention of a highly

individualised, fragmented TV-viewing publics (eg. Nightowl Cinematics, WahBanana on

YouTube). These niche digital media providers offer better value through product

differentiation and focus, against the strong waves of global Hollywood and pan-Asian media

content (like Korean pop culture) that compete for local viewership. Incumbent PSM

broadcasters will have to change their dominant mindsets to adopt more collaborative

platforms and partnership models.

19

Secondly, policy changes that encourage the separation of national broadcaster role from

commercial obligations may bring PSM operators like MediaCorp back to an original

purpose of delivering good quality PSB services in news, documentaries and factual content

that is relevant to Singapore and other Asian viewers. This would disentangle MediaCorp

from a complex institutional structure of funding (see Figure 1), conflicting roles and

obligations as PSB operator, national broadcaster, and commercialising media asset.

Thirdly, the state signalled a strong commitment to funding PSM services in Singapore in

years to come, recognising the need to invest in new digital assets and content that is au fait

with the rapidly changing social media landscapes. With this larger public funding, the state

could include a PSB ‘ex-ante public value test’ to assess the merits of further digital

innovations. Cultural policies that support PSM services should include funding criteria such

as ‘whether the proposed new service delivers adequate “public value” in addressing social

and cultural needs of its society, and the possible market impact of these PSM services before

they launch new services that compete with commercial operators (see Donders and Hallvard,

2011; Brevini, 2013).

In a highly digitised and commercialised media environment, PSM is still relevant in the 21st

century of disruptive platforms and diversified content if it addresses shared public interests

of digitally-engaged audiences, and upholds ‘Reithian’ ideals of quality PSB content. In order

for Singapore to have an effective delivery of PSM, it is paramount that MediaCorp or

whichever entities that are assigned to take on the role of PSM have full clarity that the PSM

interest be given the top most priority amongst competing roles.

While the old PSB model worked to develop MediaCorp Singapore into a strong national

media broadcaster in the 1980s to early 2000s, it will not help it transition effectively into a

PSM for the 21st-century with competing digital media players. PSM must partner closely

with trusted and innovative social media players that audiences engage with. Today, the

entities that have the strongest engagement with audiences are largely transnational media

players, especially digital players such as Google, Facebook, and others. Given this shift in

power to engage audiences, the question is whether the key drivers of PSM will be

determined by transnational information-technology-driven media players in the future.

20

Notes

1. In recent years, some PSB funding has gone to newer stakeholders like Starhub through schemes such as the PSB Contestable Fund. However, few innovations have emerged on Starhub’s free TV channels. MediaCorp attempted to gauge viewer interest with new content offering different multi-media, handheld devices through its ‘Test Tube TV’ programming belt from 2011 to 2013 with its MediaCorp Content Innovation Fund, to engage audiences to vote for their favourite concept ideas. See Telecoms Asia 2011 news report at https://www.telecomasia.net/content/mediacorp-launch-5m-content-innovation-fund (accessed 11 March 2017). 2. The PACE, ACCESS and PACs are advisory committees who represent a cross-section of Singapore audiences to give annual feedback to the media regulator, IMDA, about local TV content quality, content codes and guidelines. These committee reports are shared publicly on IMDA’s website. See https://www.imda.gov.sg/regulations-licensing-and-consultations/content-standards-and-classification/committee-report. 3. Since 2016, MDA became part of a newly converged regulator and industry promoter of the information technologies and media industries, known as InfoComms Media Development Authority (or IMDA) of Singapore. PSB fees are based on an annual tax of SGD 110 collected from every TV viewing household and SGD 27 per vehicle radio. 4. These are: (i) providing universal coverage as a basis to form a public sphere; (ii) provision of quality, impartial news and current affairs that provides resources to encourage an informed and active citizenship diversity; (iii) serving minority interests; (iv) reflecting national culture and identity; (v) provision of innovative content ; (vi) direct funding of one broadcasters by a body of users; (vii) competition to offer good programming rather than focusing on audience ratings; and (viii) giving programmers flexible content guidelines.

References

Banerjee I and Seneviratne K (2005) Public Service Broadcasting: A Best Practices

Sourcebook, AMIC, UNESCO Publication. Available at

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001415/141584e.pdf (accessed 10 October 2016).

Bardoel J and Lowe GF (2007) From Public Service Broadcasting to Public Service Media.

In: Lowe GF and Bardoel J (eds) From Public Service Broadcasting to Public Service Media:

The Core Challenge. Goteborg, Sweden: Nordicom, pp. 9-26.

21

Brevini B (2013) Public Service Broadcasting Online: A Comparative European Policy

Study of PSB 2.0. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Brevini B (2015) Public service and community media. In: Mansell R and Ang PH (eds) The

International Encyclopedia of Digital Communication and Society. UK: John Wiley & Sons

Inc, pp. 1-9.

Chan B (2012a) Home, identities and transnational appeal: the case of Singaporean television dramas. Critical Studies in Television 6(2): 114-126.

Chan B (2012b) MediaCorp Channel 5’s viewership on the decline. The Straits Times, 31

March. Available at http://smong.net/p/the-straits-times-mediacorp-channel-5s.html

(accessed 1 October 2016).

Channel NewsAsia (2012) MDA gave S$470m in support of Public Service Broadcasting

over past 5 years. 9 July. Available at: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/mda-gave-s-

470m-in-support-of-public-service-broadcasting-over-p/281506.html (accessed 10 October

2016).

Channel NewsAsia (2015) PM Lee officially opens the Mediacorp Campus at one-north. 8

December. Available at: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/pm-lee-officially-

opens-the-mediacorp-campus-at-one-north-8253594 (accessed 11 September 2016).

Channel NewsAsia (2016) How to strengthen Singapore’s public service broadcasting in

digital age: MCI. 11 April. Available at:

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/how-to-strengthen/2685236.html (accessed

3 September 2016).

Cheong Yip Seng’s (2012) OB Markers: My Straits Times Story. Singapore: Straits Times

Press.

22

Chong T (2005) Civil society in Singapore: popular discourses and concepts. Sojourn Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia 20(2): 273-301.

Chua BH (2012) Structure, Audience, and Soft Power in East Asian Pop Culture. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.

Couldry N, Livingstone S and Markham T (2007) Connection or disconnection? Tracking the mediated public sphere in everyday life. In: Butsch R (ed.) Media and the Public Sphere. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 28-42.

Cunningham S, Flew T and Swift A (2015) Case studies and conclusion. Media Economics.

London: Palgrave, pp. 129-153.

Cunningham S and Silver J (2013) Screen Distribution and the new King Kongs of Online

World, London: Palgrave Pivot.

Curtin, M (2007) Singapore: From State Paternalism to Regional media Hub. Playing to the

world’s biggest audience: The globalization of Chinese film and TV. Berkeley, Los Angeles,

USA: University of California Press, pp. 176-191.

Debrett M (2009) Riding the wave: public service television in the multi-platform era. Media,

Culture & Society 31(5): 807-827.

Debrett M (2010) Public service media. In: Reinventing Public Service Television for the Digital Future. Bristol: Intellect Books, pp. 185-201.

Donders K and Moe H (eds) (2011) Exporting the Public Value Test: The Regulation of

Public Broadcasters’ New Media Services across Europe. Goteborg: Nordicom.

Flew T and Cunningham S (2007) Media policy. In: Parkin A, Summers J and Woodwards D

(eds) Government, Politics, Power and Policy in Australia. Melbourne: Longman, pp. 905-

910.

Flew T (2007) Global media, the knowledge economy, and new competition. In:

Understanding Global Media. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillian, pp. 98-137.

23

Fuchs C (2014) Social media and the public sphere. Triple C: Communication, Capitalism &

Critique 12 (1): 57-101.

Gwee J (2009) Innovation and the creative industries cluster: a case study of Singapore’s creative industries. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice 11(2): 240-252.

Han LY (2014) Govt messages during World Cup: ministry replies. Straits Times, 17

July.Available at: http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/govt-messages-during-world-cup-

ministry-replies (accessed 15 August 2016).

Hellman H and Sauri T (1994) Public service television and the tendency towards

convergence: trends in prime-time programme structure in Finland, 1970-92. Media, Culture

& Society 16(1): 47-69.

InfoComm Media Development Authority (IMDA) (2017) SG-TAM. 20 September.

Available at: https://www.imda.gov.sg/industry-development/infrastructure/sg-tam (accessed

10 October 2017).

Jacka E (2003) Democracy as defeat – the impotence of arguments for public service

broadcasting. Television & New Media 4(2): 177-191.

Jakubowicz K (2004) A square peg in a round hole: the EU’s policy on public service

broadcasting. In: Bondebjerg I and Golding P (eds) European Culture and the Media. Bristol:

Intellect Books, pp. 277-301.

Jakubowicz K (2007) Public service broadcasting in the 21st century: what chance for a new

beginning? In: Lowe GF and Bardoel J (eds) From Public Service Broadcasting to Public

Service Media. Göteborgs universitet, Göteborg: Nordicom, pp. 29-49.

Jakubowicz K (2008) Participation and partnership: a Copernican Revolution to reengineer

public service media for the 21st century. In: RIPE@2008 Conference: Public Service Media

in the 21st Century: Participation, Partnership and Media Development (ed Lowe GF),

Mainz, Germany: October 8–11, 2008.

24

Jin DY and Kim DH (2013) The birth of East Asia: cultural regionalization through co-

production Strategies. Spectator 27(2): 31-45.

Larsen H (2014) The legitimacy of public service broadcasting in the 21st century: the case of

Scandinavia. Nordicom Review 35(2): 65-76.

Lau JN (2016) Singapore TV: from local to global. Bibliography Asia, National Library

Board (Singapore), 7 April. Available at:

http://www.nlb.gov.sg/biblioasia/2016/04/07/singapore-tv-from-local-to-

global/#sthash.1MGNNrNa.dpbs (accessed 10 October 2016).

Lee T (2002) The politics of civil society in Singapore. Asian Studies Review 26(1): 97-117.

Lee T (2010) The Media, Cultural Control and Government in Singapore. London: Routledge. Lee, T. (2016) Forging an ‘Asian’ media fusion: Singapore as a 21st century media hub, Media International Australia, 158(1), pp. 80-89. Lim J and Tan M (2016) Local TV must up its game on locally-produced content or we’ll one day live-stream its death. Mothership.sg, 4 May. Available at: https://mothership.sg/2016/05/local-tv-must-up-its-game-on-locally-produced-content-or-well-one-day-live-stream-its-death/(accessed October 2016). Livingstone S (2005) On the relation between audiences and publics. In: Livingstone S (ed.) Audiences and Publics: When Cultural Engagement Matters for the Public Sphere. Bristol, UK: Intellect Books, pp. 17-41.

Tham YC (2015) Kishore Mahbubani: make OB markers on race and religion narrower. The Straits Times , 6 June. Available at: http://www.straitstimes.com/politics/kishore-mahbubani-make-ob-markers-on-race-and-religion-narrower (accessed 11 March 2017).

Media Development Authority (MDA)-MediaCorp Media Release (2009) International

distributors to distribute Channel NewsAsia’s High Definition programmes. 31 March.

Available at:

http://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/data/pdfdoc/20090407004/microsoft+word+-

+cna+hd+prog+dist-miptv+31mar09_clean.pdf (accessed 10 October 2017).

Media Development Authority (MDA) (2008) The Digital Way Forward. MDA Annual

Report 2007-2008.Available at: https://www.imda.gov.sg/-

25

/media/imda/files/about/resources/corporate-publications/04-ar0708.pdf?la=en (accessed 23

September 2016).

Media Development Authority (MDA) (2011) Radio and Television licence abolished.

Available at: https://www.imda.gov.sg/about/newsroom/archived/mda/media-

releases/2011/radio-and-Television-licence-abolished (accessed 23 September 2016).

Media Development Authority (MDA) (2012) Factsheet - Revised Public Service Broadcast

Framework – PSB Contestable Funds Scheme. 25 July. Available at:

https://www.imda.gov.sg/about/newsroom/archived/mda/media-releases/2012/fact-sheet--

revised-public-service-broadcast-framework--psb-contestable-funds-scheme (accessed 20

April 2017).

Media Development Authority (MDA) (2014) Celebrating Our Stories. MDA Annual Report

2013-2014. Available at: https://www.imda.gov.sg/-

/media/imda/files/about/resources/corporate-publications/mda_ar_full.pdf?la=en (accessed 23

September 2016).

MediaCorp (2015) MediaCorp broadcasts key National Day Programmes ‘live’ for Singapore

citizens and worldwide audience. 4 August. Available at:

http://www.mediacorp.sg/en/corporate/mediacorp-in-the-news/media-releases/mediacorp-

broadcasts-key-5855810 (accessed 13 Oct 2017).

McDaniel DO (1996) Broadcasting in Singapore. Broadcasting in the Malay World. New

Jersey, USA: Ablex Publishing Corporation, pp. 163-190.

Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) (2012a) Public Service Broadcast (PSB)

Review Panel Makes Recommendations: Recommends Enhancements to PSB Delivery, 2

March. Available at: https://www.mci.gov.sg/pressroom/news-and-

stories/pressroom/2012/3/public-service-broadcast-review-panel-makes-recommendations

(accessed 23 April 2016).

Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) (2012b) MCI’s response to PQ on

marketing Singapore-produced content. Parliament Sitting on 15 October 2012, Notice Paper

No. 354 of 2012, Question No. 744 for Oral Answer. Available at:

26

https://www.mci.gov.sg/pressroom/news-and-stories/pressroom/2012/10/mcis-response-to-

pq-on-marketing-singaporeproduced-content (accessed 23 April 2016).

Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) (2014) MCI’s response to PQ on World

Cup. Parliament Sitting on 14 April 2014. Available at:

https://www.mci.gov.sg/cos2017/mcicorphome/pressroom/news-and-

stories/pressroom/2014/4/mcis-response-to-pq-on-world-cup (accessed 15 Oct 2017).

Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) (2017) Response by Chee Hong Tat,

Minister of State for Communications and Information, at the Committee of Supply Debate

on 6 March 2017. Available at: https://www.mci.gov.sg/pressroom/news-and-

stories/pressroom/2017/3/innovation-in-media-and-communications (accessed 7 March

2017).

Moe H and Syvertsen T (2009) Researching public service broadcasting. In: Wahl-Jorgensen

K and Hanitzsch T (eds) The Handbook of Journalism Studies. New York: Routledge, pp.

398-412.

Nakamura Y. Aramak H, Higashiyama I, and Ida M (2013) Perceptions of Public Service:

Findings of An International Comparative Study. Japan: NHK Broadcasting Culture

Research Centre, May. Available at:

https://www.nhk.or.jp/bunken/english/reports/pdf/report_13050101-2.pdf (accessed 10

September 2016).

Nair B (1980) Communication in Colonial Independent Singapore. Singapore: AMIC.

National Library Board (NLB) (2004) Singapore Infopedia: First subscription television channel. 28 December. Available at: entry of Singapore International Media’s pay TV service, Singapore Cable Vision 1992 (accessed 22 Oct 2017).

National Library Board (NLB) (2014) Singapore Infopedia:Singapore’s first television station. 23 December, Available at: http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_1064_2006-04-03.html?s=mediacorp (accessed 10 September 2017).

OECD (2013) Competition Issues in Television and Broadcasting: Contribution from Singapore (Session II). Paper presented at OECD Global Competition Forum 2013. Available

27

at: http://www.oecd.org/daf/competition/TV-and-broadcasting2013.pdf (accessed 10 September 2016).

Raboy M (1997) The World Situation of Public Service Broadcasting. Paper presented at

1997 UNESCO International Roundtable on Cultural and Educational Functions of Public

Service Broadcasting. Available at: http://media.mcgill.ca/files/1997_Unesco.pdf (accessed

15 February 2017).

Ramesh S (2012) Public Service Broadcast Review panel’s ideas to improve programmes.

Channel NewsAsia, 2 March (updated 21 January 2013). Available at:

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/public-service-broadcast-review-panel-s-

ideas-to-improve-program-8446974 (accessed 10 October 2016).

Scannell P (1990) Public service broadcasting: the history of a concept. In: Goodwin A and

Whannel G (eds) Understanding Television. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 11-29.

Tan KP (2008) Cinema and Television in Singapore: Resistance in One Dimension. UK: Brill.

Tambini D (2015) Five theses on public media and digitization: from a 56-country study.

International Journal of Communication 9: 1400-1424.

Tambini D and Cowling J (2004) (eds) From Public Service Broadcasting to Public Service

Communications. UK: Institute for Public Policy Research.

Tay JN and Turner G (2008) What is television? Comparing media systems in the post-

broadcast era. Media International Australia 126: 71-81.

Temasek Holdings (2017) Portfolio: Major Investments. Available at:

http://www.temasek.com.sg/portfolio/portfolio_highlights/majorportfoliocompanies

(accessed: 12 September 2017).

Tham I (2015) Singapore Budget 2015: funding boost for PSB programmes; $250 million a

year in next 5 years. The Straits Times, 15 March. Available at:

28

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/singapore-budget-2015-funding-boost-for-psb-

programmes-250-million-a-year-in-next-5-years (accessed 10 October 2016).

Tham R (2015) How Night Owl Cinematics’ Ryan and Sylvia became Singapore’s YouTube

power couple. TODAY, 15 December. Available at:

http://www.todayonline.com/entertainment/celebrity/how-night-owl-cinematics-ryan-and-

sylvia-became-youtubes-power-couple (accessed 10 October 2016).

TODAY (2016) Toggle to launch 11 new shows. January 28. Available at:

http://www.todayonline.com/entertainment/television/toggle-launch-11-new-shows (accessed

10 October 2017).

Urichhio W (2009) Contextualizing the broadcast era: nation, commerce, and constraint.

Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 625, September: 60-73.

Van Dijck J and Poell T (2015) Making public television social? Public service broadcasting

and the challenges of social media. Television & New Media 16(2): 148-164.

Wong, D (2015) Sport, broadcasting and cultural citizenship in Singapore. In: Dashper K,

Feltcher T and Mccullogh N (eds) Sports Events, Society and Culture. London, New York:

Routledge, pp. 100-114.