Back to overview

Klaus Unterberger "The Time of Naivety is over" With these words, Verá Jourova, Vice-President of the EU Commission and Commissioner for Values and Transparency, expressed her concern about the current state of the digital transformation. The fact is: a handful of globally operating data corporations have taken extensive control of the internet. Google, Facebook, Twitter and TikTok have created new economic empires and dominate young people's media consumption with their social media offerings. This could be seen as a remarkable business success, were it not for serious negative effects: Data collection and utilisation that is as extensive as it is hidden from the public, algorithmic control of information, fake news and filter bubble effects put the original enthusiasm about the internet into perspective.

The latest surge of innovation in digital technology also triggers not only fascination, but fears at the same time: Artificial intelligence that independently creates texts and images to the exclusion of human control. The analysis of media use is also worrying. Increasingly, people do not seek access to editorial media and rely on the newsfeed in their social media consumption. The worrying thing is: the "news-will-find-me" generation gets its information from the very sources it trusts least.²

But if media quality is not just a look back - at what has already been produced - but looks to the future for good reason: What is quality on the net? What can one rely on in the online world, or not? Is the flood of social media offerings washing away all quality criteria? Can we accept that people get completely different answers to the same question from their digital search engine because artificial intelligence constructs personalised information with the help of algorithmic data analysis? And more importantly, can we trust these messages? Can research and enquiry be reduced to a "will be right"?

It is obvious: the question of quality is more urgent than ever in view of the massive disruptions in the media economy and media use. At stake are not only market shares and shareholder value, but the trustworthiness and credibility of information as the basis for a democratic public. The crucial question is whether technologies and artificial intelligence can be publicly controlled. In the case of Google, Facebook and TikTok, the answer is no. How these companies collect data, according to which interests they evaluate it, how they use it, whether for commercial exploitation or even for intelligence surveillance,is in the dark. The US government has already classified the Chinese operator of TikTok as a "security risk" because of its collection of data from Americans³.

If this is indeed the case, wouldn't Google & Co. also be a security risk for Europeans? The question of who has digital technologies at their disposal is thus already a decisive quality criterion: Can I trust the information on the net? Is the communication space also secure? Who checks algorithms and playout channels? Do the media and those who disseminate public communication have controllable regulations and functioning quality assurance? How can media users recognise quality on the net and by what? ORF Public Value has initiated intensive analyses on this in recent years: With the development of "Public Network Value"⁴ , Prof. Thomas Steinmaurer has created a basis for which quality criteria are relevant for the fulfilment of the public service mission in the digital age.

In numerous contributions, scientific analyses and an international study, the "Transform" process has dealt with the digital transformation of the ORF⁵, which was accompanied by a series of public debates in the "ORF DialogForum"⁶. Currently, the public value study "Entertainment in the Digital Age" addresses the question of how public service media should behave in the face of the onslaught of Netflix, Disney and Amazon Prime.⁷ The search for a trustworthy internet that is not only market-compatible but also democracy-compatible is also in full swing internationally: the project "A European Perspective"⁸ can be seen as a trend-setting beginning of how digital transformation is already being used today for a cross-border public service: 11 public broadcasters are participating in the pan-European initiative under the leadership of the "European Broadcasting Union". Its aim is to develop a digital European newsroom. News stories from the participating broadcasters are collected and processed by an automated translation system for the individual national languages.

The advantage for media users: A range of quality-checked reporting from different European countries will be created, providing access to authentic information at the push of a button. In addition, work is being done on the development of a public-law algorithm that could be used for a trustworthy source of information while observing existing journalistic quality standards as well as the guidelines on personal privacy and data protection and, above all, under public control. "A European Perspective" thus does pioneering work in the development and implementation of digital technologies beyond commercial interests and thus creates a contribution to the often demanded European public sphere.
This is precisely the point of the "Public Service Internet Manifesto"⁹, which was developed with the cooperation of around 200 scientists worldwide. It is addressed to European media policy, but also explicitly to the public service media. It calls for a digital infrastructure oriented towards the common good that produces not only "shareholder value" but above all "stakeholder and public value" as an alternative to commercial platforms. Public service media, their resources, but also their competences should play a decisive role in this. Within a few months, the "Call for Action" was supported by more than 1,300 academics and media experts worldwide, including Jürgen Habermas, Noam Chomsky, Evgeny Morozov and many others.

However, the ORF cannot wait for European solutions. Due to the current challenges of digital media production, the question of quality must be answered in a practical way. Therefore, all ORF regulations, especially its "Social Media Guidelines"¹⁰ not least concern online media production. This is also the case in ORF quality assurance¹¹. Whether audience or expert:inside interviews, quality profiles or quality checks, whether public value studies or public value reports: they all include the dimension of digital transformation. The focus is on the public service mandates, the fulfilment of which is also obligatory in the digital age. Have we answered all the questions with this? No. The developments and the speed of innovation of technological development do not allow conclusive answers to the question of quality.

Until then, the following applies: Whoever claims quality on the net must also prove it. "The way is the goal"¹² is both a practical and purposeful orientation. After all, media users also change their opinions from time to time, especially when the media world changes. After all, democracy is also always looking for new ways to assert itself against corruption and authoritarian presumption, against populism and alternative truths, and not least against data oligarchies, surveillance and manipulation. If the "time for naivety" is indeed over, the question of what media quality actually is and who it benefits becomes all the more pressing. Especially in view of the numerous crises, in view of war and climate emergency, in view of fear of the future and uncertainty, public value, the demonstrable public value that media produce for society, is of particular importance. Especially when it comes to maintaining a "res publica", a democratic public sphere in the digital age and developing it for the future.