Opinion: ‘A dominant public broadcaster is not without risk’

This opinion piece was published on Friday, October 11, 2024, on Villamedia. Read the original here.

Without the NOS, the reach of journalistic media among young people is on the verge of collapse, even though a diversity of reliable sources is essential for the democratic functioning of society. The issue is far more complex than Villamedia made it seem, argues Nienke Venema, director of the Democracy and Media Foundation.

A growing body of research shows that the NOS holds a dominant position in the news market. Its reach is particularly vast among young people, the Media Authority concluded last week in its report “Young People, News, and Social Media.” The NOS is the news brand that young people encounter most frequently on social media. Seventy-two percent of young people regularly view NOS content, and 85 percent trust the news outlet.

The good news for journalism is that a large proportion of young people are exposed to quality news thanks to the pioneering work of the youth channels NOS op 3 and NOS Stories. They present the news in an accessible way via platforms such as Instagram and TikTok, often in the form of videos or infographics. These channels are right where the audience is, and in doing so, the NOS fulfills its public service mission with enthusiasm. It’s a huge compliment that they began experimenting with this so early on, and it demonstrates visionary and innovative thinking.

But there’s also bad news: without the NOS, the reach of journalistic media among young people is on the verge of collapse. “How do you actually view the enormous power of the NOS?” I asked during the presentation of the youth report at a library in Amsterdam. By that, I really meant “power” and not “reach,” as Lars Pasveer later suggested in Villamedia. It is, in fact, a worrying trend that young people who are open to news are now reached by only one journalistic outlet, amidst a sea of non-journalistic sources lacking independent content. The result is that the NOS’s news selection, choice of topics, and perspective are dominant, and thus have an enormous influence on public opinion among young people.

Pluralism

In a pluralistic media landscape, users have access to multiple sources of information for consuming the news—ideally a combination of public and private outlets—as the WRR also acknowledges in its recent report *Aandacht voor media*. Our media landscape is so robust because we have a combination of private and public news media. People read a story on NOS.nl and can then check what other independent media outlets, such as De Telegraaf and NU.nl, are reporting on the same topic, and they can also read about topics that the NOS does not cover. This is also known as pluralism. A diversity of reliable sources is valuable and essential for the democratic functioning of society. “If news organizations do not establish a clearer presence on social media in the near future, young people will continue to be deprived of a pluralistic range of options,” writes the Media Commission in its recommendations.

A dominant public broadcaster in the news sector is not without risk. Our public media are a great asset; trust in the NOS is high, and thanks to public broadcasting, there is still something of a shared reality in our country (quite unlike in the United States, for example). That deserves all praise and appreciation. But public broadcasting is also vulnerable. The largest political party in the Netherlands considers it a “useless thing” and wants to abolish it, and the second-largest party in the cabinet wants to cut its funding by nearly half. This isn’t just talk: this cabinet is already cutting funding for the NPO. In addition to public broadcasting in such a political climate, you want to have at least a few strong players in the mix.

But those other major players face two obstacles. First, the news brands of DPG and Mediahuis are, by nature, text-based media. They lack an audiovisual culture, whereas compelling and “snappy” videos are the best way to reach young people. Second, the NOS is a single brand, whereas DPG and Mediahuis are a collection of separate titles. Should DPG set up separate youth platforms for all its news brands without a clear revenue model in sight? Or should there be a DPG-wide youth brand—and would we still consider that to be pluralistic?

It’s great that the Media Authority has raised this issue, but its recommendation that commercial news outlets increase their visibility on social media to reach young people is a knee-jerk solution. The issue (let alone the solutions) is also more complex than Villamedia makes it out to be. We need to recognize that newspaper companies are facing real challenges with this issue. It’s too easy to dismiss this as “jealousy,” and above all, to place a heavy burden of responsibility on the NOS.