미디어 플랫폼 시대의 방송법 이념에 대한 헌법 연구 - 영국 Small Screen: Big Debate를 중심으로 -

Abstract

In the convergence of broadcasting, communication, and the Internet, media usage patterns are being diversified, individualized, and distributed in the form of platforms. On the other hand, the current 「Broadcasting Act」 is insufficient to cover and regulate the new media platform environment. The Korea Communications Commission is foretelling the enactment of the 「(tentative name) Audiovisual Media Service Act」 as an integrated law that can cover both OTT and pay broadcasting platforms. In this regard, the need for research on the ideology of the 「Broadcasting Act」is not only an opportunity to improve the ambiguity of the ideology according to the aforementioned 「Broadcasting Act」, but also because it is necessary to discover a new ideology suitable for the changing media platform environment. In the meantime, there has been a clear tendency to avoid applying the cultural state principle to broadcasting in constitutional studies. This is because, although it is true that broadcasting belongs to culture, there is an obvious limitation that the risk of broadcasting under national control increases when the constitutional cultural state principle is applied to broadcasting. Therefore, it is clear that the most important ideology in the constitution regarding broadcasting is freedom and independence of broadcasting based on democracy. However, considering that the concept of ‘broadcasting’ has expanded to a comprehensive range of ‘media’ with the advent of the media platform era, it is impossible to exclude discussions about broadcasting as a culture in the context of the continuous growth of Hallyu through various media platforms. In other words, I fully agree that the role of the state, which is close to guardianship, should be guarded against in the media, but I think that intervention is possible according to the cultural state principle when state support is needed in the media as culture. For this purpose, in this paper, not only the constitutional freedom of broadcasting, but also the relationship between the cultural state principle and broadcasting were mentioned. On the other hand, as media use is personalized and decentralized, discussions about the meaning and necessity of public broadcasting are emerging as important issues. In particular, the UK is leading this discussion through ‘Small Screen: Big Debate’. Public broadcasting needs to fulfill its function of ‘social integration’ based on high institutional trust. Therefore, in the new 「(tentative name) Audiovisual Media Service Act」, the ideology regarding the social integration role of public broadcasting should be included. Second, The idea of universal reach should be defined more actively. This is because, in the media platform era, it is difficult for public broadcasting to be universally delivered unless efforts are made to actively expose public broadcasting. Since public broadcasting cannot be said to fulfill its responsibilities by staying in the same way as it was in the past, the concept of universal viewing rights in Article 76 of the 「Broadcasting Act」 needs to be expanded and revised into an active ideology and duty. Lastly, in the media platform era, it is difficult to secure the sustainability of public broadcasting, which is in competition with private media companies with huge capital. Therefore, in the new 「(tentative name) Audiovisual Media Service Act」, ‘sustainability’ of public broadcasting should be established as one of the important ideologies and there should be an explicit provision on securing finance, which is essential for securing sustainability of public broadcasting.