미국 초기 방송역사에서‘공익’개념의 사회적 결정 요인, 1920~1925 = Social Determinants of Public Interest in Making American Broadcasting, 1920~1925 Focusing on ‘Citizen Radio’ and High Power Frequency Policy

국문 초록 (Abstract)

미국 방송 제도의 원형이 만들어졌던 시기에 초점을 맞추고 있는 이 논문은 청취자 시민사회, 정부, 기업 등의 이해주체들이 어떤 갈등과 대립의 과정을 거쳐 방송의 공익성을 규정했는가를 밝히기 위해 라디오 아마추어들의 ‘시민라디오’기획과 미상무성의 라디오 고출력 주파수 정책 사례를 분석했다. 특히 1차 세계대전 이후부터 1922년초 이른바‘방송붐’이 막 일어나기 시작하던 시기 동안에 등장했다 사라진‘시민라디오(Citizen Radio)’가 일방향 매스커뮤니케이션의 근대 방송 형태가 확립되기 이전, 텔레그래프, 라디오폰 등을 통한‘일 대 일,’‘일 대 다수,’ ‘다수 대 다수’의 자발적인 커뮤니케이션 활동으로 구성된 시민들의 커뮤니케이션 네트워크였다는 것과, 라디오 아마추어 공동체는 이를 시민들의 공익으로 규정했음을 밝혔다. 반면 미 상무성과 라디오 대기업이 규정했던 공익성의 철학적 기조와 정책실천 논리는“최대다수에게 최대의 방송서비스”를 제공한다는 양적 기준과“기술합리성”이었다. 이 두 가지 기준은 클래스 B 등급제, 수퍼파워와 고출력 네트워크 등의 대기업의 이해가 관철되는 정책 선택을 정당화하였고, 이를 통해 국가 공동체가 요구하는 방송의 공익성은 오로지 광역단위의 상업방송이라는 사회적 형태를 통해서만 실현되는 것으로 개념화되었다. 즉 기술합리성에 의한 공익개념을 도구로 상업방송 제도를 전제로 하고 있는 정치 철학과 정책이 이미 싹터서 자라나고 있던 교육, 농업, 문화, 사회소수자의 목소리와 의견을 표출하는 공간으로서 라디오의 가능성을 제거해버렸다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study was to examine who determined the meaning of public interest and how it was applied to regulatory policies in the institutionalization of the U. S. radio broadcasting. In policy debates over the interpretation and application of the public interest, the major actors were the public (radio amateurs and listeners), the radio industry, and the government as a regulatory agency in negotiating and controlling the conflict of interest between the two actors. To reveal how these three actors competed and confronted political philosophy and economic interests, this study analyzed the unsuccessful project of Citizen Radio and two broadcasting policy cases--Class B licensing and superpower or high power network policy--implemented by the U. S. Department of Commerce. For this policy analysis, this study relied mainly on archival research using historical documents of the government and congressional hearings, and the popular press published between 1920 and 1927.
Particularly, this study paid attentions to recover the historical meaning of ‘Citizen Radio,’which declared its existence and purpose in 1919 and was defeated around 1922 when the radio boom arose. The radio was a revolutionary two-way communication and participatory technology in the context of 1910s and 1920s, which was similar to the digital communication network of present day Internet. By examining the defeated potential of citizen radio as a two-way participatory medium, this study rejected the ahistorical and technological-deterministic view that described modern form of one-way commercial broadcasting as a very natural communication system for the U. S. The historical experience of citizen radio offered that the institutional conditions and the determination of forms of social use of radio were more important than the capacity and potential of technology per se to develop radio for fulfilling people’s democratic life. Radio amateurs determined Citizen Radio as public interest.
However, through the analysis, this study found that policy-makers’underlying political philosophy and rational basis were the criteria of “the greatest good for the greatest number”and “technological rationality.” These two criteria justified and legitimated discriminatory radio spectrum allocation, transmitting power, and licensing policies in favor of radio corporations, such as RCA, GE, Westinghouse, and AT&T. These radio corporations argued that technical progress itself would best dictate its own governing rules and that government officials should limit regulatory activities to technical considerations in the use of quantitative criteria. By the two criteria, it was conceptualized that commercial broadcasting best serves the public interest of national community as the only form of a social communication system. That is, the concept of the public interest narrowly defined by the instrumental use of technological rationality ignored the fact that spectrum and power policies were not simple technical matters, but political and social decisions that would determine institutional characteristics and material substances of national broadcasts. Based on this finding, this study did not attempt to repeat the simple dichotomy that commercial was evil and noncommercial was good. However, this study demonstrated how the public interest framed by technological rationality defeated and removed the growing alternative potential of radio as a social forum for the marginalized voices and for the unique needs of diverse geographic and/or social communities--the missed opportunity.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 〈국문초록〉
• Ⅰ. 논의의 출발
• Ⅱ. 공익 개념의 역사적 맥락과 조건
• Ⅲ. 라디오 아마추어와 시민라디오
• Ⅳ. 주파수 정책과 고출력 정책에 나타난 공익 기준
• Ⅴ. 결론
• 〈ABSTRACT〉