PBS chairman refutes claims of editorial bias

The Chairman of the Public Broadcasting Services (PBS), Tonio Portughese, distanced himself and the broadcasting service from any claims of political bias in their news coverage.

Speaking on Andrew Azzopardi’s radio programme ‘Ghandi x’nghid’, which was aired this morning, Portughese said that the internal set-up of PBS was, in fact, based on a model which aimed to prevent such bias.

“PBS adopts a system whereby it is editorially represented by four members – two from each side of the political landscape,” he said. “The scope is and has always been that anything that is broadcasted will be the subject of scrutiny and surveillance.”

“Both parties have a big say in what gets aired and what does not.”

However, having pointed out that the chairman and high-ranking board members were appointed by government, Azzopardi asked whether the system should be changed to cater for better and more widespread representation.

“We cannot escape the fact that PBS is a company and, by law, it is the discretion of shareholders to appoint board members,” Portughese said. “Government is certainly a shareholder but its contribution equates to less than a third of our total revenue.”

Portughese admitted that PBS was reliant on investment, with plans to build a big studio already underway, but stressed that much of this came through advertisements. “We are not a profit-making business but, of course, we do depend on advertising,” he said. “Events like the Eurovision and the World Cup help a lot in this regard with an agreement already in place to give us full rights to cover the next three editions of the World Cup.”

The PBS chief was also keen to point out the difference between state-owned broadcasting stations and public ones, of which PBS – as it name reveals – is one of them. “There seems to be a general perception that public broadcasting means belonging to government,” he said. “There is a big difference between the two terms.”

“I don’t believe that broadcasting should belong to the state,” he said. “Our obligation is towards the public and we are accountable to them.”

“Ultimately, we need to find a balance between our interest as a company and our national obligation,” he said. “We cannot, for instance, choose to not broadcast a particular football match simply because we feel that few supporters might watch it.”

Portughese was also optimistic on the prospects of sister channel TVM 2, expressing his belief that people were starting to understand that it was not a “relegated” version of TVM. “It is important that both (stations) are of the same level, quality, are given the same financial input, and follow the same strategy,” he said. “People seem to be getting used to the fact that TVM 2 is not a relegated or ‘Serie B’ version of TVM.”

“Of course, any bias will most likely be towards TVM due to its news coverage and popular current affairs programmes,” he said. “It is our job to continue to improving both channels, whilst trying to eradicate the possible bias people have for TVM.”