The state, specific governments, or the public, own a large proportion of the world's media - especially radio and television. The term “public media” is often used to refer to these forms of media ownership. There are important distinctions between these forms however.

• Public Service Broadcasting (PSB) uses public money to broadcast in the interests of the public as a whole. They are often established by law, but they are non-partisan, not supporting a particular party including the incumbent ruling party. PSBs are not-for-profit.
• State and government media are owned by the state or the government of the day (and financed out of public money) and directly controlled by it. It may perform a public service function or it may be a propaganda instrument of the state or government. State and government media is also generally not-for-profit.

These media may be financed out of one or all of these sources:

• A license fee paid by television viewers
• The government budget
• A programming fee paid by partner stations
• Public subscriptions and grants
• Commercial advertising

These different revenue sources have potential implications for the broadcaster's day-to-day independence. A license fee, advertising, and other revenues that do not go directly through the government budget may make it easier for the broadcaster to maintain a distance from government (although many still depend on government mechanisms to collect license fees).

UNESCO defines Public Service Broadcasting (PSB) as “broadcasting made, financed and controlled by the public, for the public. PSBs are neither commercial nor state-owned; they are free from political interference and pressure from commercial forces. Through PSBs, citizens are informed, educated and also entertained. When guaranteed with pluralism, programming diversity, editorial independence, appropriate funding, accountability and transparency, public service broadcasting can serve as a cornerstone of democracy.”[i]

Widely-accepted principles for PSBs include:

• Universal accessibility (geographic)

• Universal appeal (general tastes and interests)

• Particular attention to minorities

• Contribution to sense of national identity and community

• Distance from vested interests

• Direct funding and universality of payment

• Competition in good programming rather than numbers

• Guidelines that liberate rather than restrict programme-makers

PSBs may be mainly funded by television license fees, as is the case for the British Broadcasting Commission (BBC); directly by the government, for example the Australian Broadcasting Commission; by individual subscribers, grants and programming fees as is the case for National Public Radio (NPR) in the US; or at least partially from commercial sources, as is the case with the Australian Special Broadcasting Service (SBS). What PSBs have in common in terms of funding is that they are not dependent on advertising.

PSBs are often established by government through acts of parliament, and while some are subject to broad oversight by the state, most also have strict guarantees of independence written into their constitutions. The Swedish PSB for example, SvT, is kept at arms-length from the state by being owned by a foundation, not the state, and by directly collecting license fees from the public, not via the government. However it is subject to broad oversight by a parliamentary committee as a check-and-balance mechanism.

In transitional democracies there have been some bold attempts to rapidly retrieve and modernize the public service ideal, after a history of heavy-handed state control. In South Africa since 1993 the public broadcaster has statutory independence and even, at one stage, had its board members appointed after public hearings.[ii]

However others struggle to achieve true public service broadcasting. In the former Soviet Union, “PSB development…is still affected by local transitional challenges [as well as] coping with global challenges of [the] media environment.” In Latvia in 2011 for example, “PSB policy making is still oriented to the value for officials or elite rather than for the public,” with PSBs still operating as “paternalistic broadcasters that tend to function as public educators “from above.”[iii]

State- and government-owned broadcasters, directly controlled by the state, were a common model in the Soviet Union (and later in many countries that followed its lead). In the post-Soviet era, these broadcasters have often proven difficult and slow to reform. In Latvia for example, two decades since independence the distinction between public service broadcasting and state broadcasting remains unclear to many parliamentarians.[iv]

French and British colonisers took their public broadcasting model overseas, but it did not travel well, and colonial broadcasters enjoyed little independence. After independence, many post-colonial governments continued with the same tradition of broadcaster-as-government-propagandist.

Public service broadcasting was founded on a belief that still holds true in most of the world: the private sector alone cannot guarantee pluralism in broadcasting. The trouble is that public media have largely failed to do that too. In many countries, the advent of private broadcasting has made governments even more determined to cling onto editorial control of the public broadcaster.

Public, state or government media are usually broadcasters. But there are still some government- and state-owned newspapers in existence. They do not enjoy the same economic rationale as public broadcasters and often function as little more than government propaganda sheets. There are exceptions, and Uganda is an interesting example. The largest newspaper in the country is New Vision, in which the state holds a controlling stake. The paper is known to have a level of editorial independence, professionalism, and for publishing a range of views – though this independence was questioned when New Vision was accused of pro-government bias in the 2011 elections.[v] Fortunately, there is also a range of independent private media in Uganda that voice alternative views.