Public Service Media today in Europe: Final Declaration

Content, funding and governance, three pillars to face the future of Public Service Media in Europe

 

Context

During this 21st century, the greatest historical transformation of the culture and communication ecosystems has taken place. This transformation occurred in the context of globalisation and insufficient regulation of change, which has favoured extreme corporate concentration in the space defined by the convergence between digital technologies and cultural industries. The asymmetries and imbalances between democratic public authorities and the large corporations in the sector have continued to grow, to the point of putting fundamental democratic values at risk, such as respect for diversity and pluralism. The emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) is accelerating this process even further.

Digital change has also brought a rapid increase in media outlets and content distribution channels. Yet this expansion has not produced greater diversity in practice. Instead, the media ecosystem is increasingly shaped by algorithmic logic and market forces that restrict effective pluralism. At the same time, liberal democracies face growing pressures — including extreme polarisation, disinformation, and the uncertain impact of artificial intelligence — that challenge the balance of the media system.

In this context, Public Service Media (PSM) cannot be evaluated without reference to the wider framework of media activity in which they sit, a framework which is in constant evolution. Under the direction of the international television and media consultant David Lowen, the Catalan Society of Communication-Institute of Catalan Studies (SCC-IEC), the Association of Journalists of Catalonia (CPC) and the Institute of Communication of the Autonomous University of Barcelona (InCom-UAB) organized the debate “Public Service Media today in Europe” on June 9th and summarized the conclusions in the following final declaration.

Public Service Media today in Europe: Final Declaration

PSM are more necessary than ever. Their role cannot be understood merely as a complementary offering within the market, but as a structural component for ensuring pluralism, social cohesion, universal access to information, the preservation of language and culture, and democratic strengthening. However, this mission is subject to a growing “stress test” because of a paradox: they are being asked to assume more social, cultural, and democratic responsibilities, but with fewer resources. In Europe, over the last ten years, funding for public service media has grown less than inflation and has lost weight as a share of GDP[1].

Based on this diagnosis, the future of PSM can be analysed around three closely related areas: content and its ability to reach citizens; funding and the business model; and the governance needed to preserve independence and ensure the proper use of public resources. The guiding principle is clear: without a well-defined mission, resources lose direction; without sufficient resources, the mission weakens; and without institutional safeguards, both the mission and the resources can be exposed to political interference or market pressures.

That is why PSM need to regularly review their mission and effective operations. They need to react quickly to change. They should not fear refreshing the range of their activities. They need to renew and strengthen their bond with viewers and users of their content. Only in this way can they stay relevant in a digital media landscape.

 

Content and public service

First, around content, the mission of PSM cannot be limited to producing high-quality public service programmes. In an environment of information overload and algorithmic mediation, it must also be ensured that this content is visible, relevant, and accessible to diverse audiences. This includes, of course, online services both as distribution channels and as a subject of public funding.

Therefore, greater importance must be given to distribution, promotion, digital presence, and branding. Having good and relevant content is not enough if the public does not identify or recognise the public service. For this reason, the focus must be on citizens and on their ability to access content, even if that means operating on third-party platforms and losing part of the — legitimate — control over consumption data. Today, the challenge is not only to produce, but to reach the audience, be recognisable and build a relationship of trust and loyalty.

This mission is especially relevant in the field of minoritised or minority languages and cultures, where the conditions are different from those of hegemonic languages and cultures. In contexts such as Catalan, public service has a specific role in cultural preservation, linguistic normalisation, and social cohesion. In this regard, local content, the presence of minoritised languages and connection with plural communities should be strengthened. Proximity, language, and cultural diversity are not peripheral elements of the public mission, but a central part of its democratic value.

 

Funding and business model

Second, around funding and the business model, PSM face the challenge of revising their production models to “do more with the same,” while taking advantage of cooperation and seeking complementary resources from the value they already generate. However, this need for efficiency does not mean replacing stable public funding with strictly commercial logic. Funding and the business model must always be subordinated to the public service mission, and not the other way around.

PSM must be able to generate commercial income — advertising spaces, content sales, merchandising, rental of facilities, service provision — without compromising their mission and if they act according to ethical and transparent criteria toward the audience. In fact, more resources can lead to greater management autonomy and greater capacity for innovation.

 

Governance and regulation

Finally, in governance and regulation, more public funding does not automatically mean greater government control, but it does require robust institutional safeguards. The central question is not only how much public money is allocated to PSM, but how it is assigned, how it is managed and how it is protected from possible political interference. Similarly, any reduction in funding should not lead to less regulation, which should be adjusted primarily to the public objectives that are intended to be achieved.

Because citizens are, in fact, the ultimate source of public resources. For this reason, legislative chambers must establish rules of the game that guarantee transparency, independence, and the quality of public service. In this regard, multi-year programme contracts are a much more appropriate response than annual budgets for sustaining long-term audiovisual projects, planning investments, ensuring stability, and reducing dependence on the political cycle and circumstances.

 

Conclusion

In short, the future of PSM in Europe depends on the capacity to coherently articulate these three areas: a clear content offering adapted to the digital environment; stable and sufficient funding that includes sustainability models compatible with public service; and robust governance that preserves independence and social usefulness. This is with the aim of ensuring that PSM continue to provide democratic, cultural, and social value in an increasingly fragmented, competitive communication ecosystem shaped by distribution platforms.

Barcelona, 9 June 2026

---

[1] Funding of Public Service Media, EBU Media Intelligence Service, February 2026.