|WikiProject Radio||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors|
Public vs. Commercial Broadcasting
The article states that "public broadcasting where programming is largely funded by government or public donations is more common elsewhere [i.e. outside of the Americas]." While public broadcasting is indeed more common there, commercial broadcasting has achieved at least parity with public broadcasting in most of the world. This article, on the other hand, implies that commercial broadcasting is dominant only in the Americas. While that was the case at one time, it is no longer true. Most countries have so-called dual broadcasting systems, with commercial and public broadcasting existing side by side, but even in Europe, if one were to add up the audience statistics of commercial vs. public radio and television services, the results would, in many cases, show that public broadcasting is no longer the dominant form of broadcasting, at least according to that definition.
Yes, the Americas are different because they have always been dominated by commercial broadcasting (public broadcasting has traditionally had a marginal role there), but we cannot really imply that commercial broadcasting isn't a major force elsewhere. The 1990s, after all, were a decade that drastically changed the international broadcasting landscape.
I open this up for a discussion. If there are no responses, I will take that as permission to make the changes myself. WorldWide Update 19:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Furthermore, the nuetraility of the article is beyond dispute; The tone of the overall article continuously harps on the "public vs private" issue to leave the impression there is something "wrong" with priavte broadcating. It's political granstanding, nothing else.18.104.22.168 (talk) 21:28, 10 September 2009 (UTC) A REDDSON.
I moved the sentence below here from the lead, since I couldn't copyedit it without adding weasel words.