«Comunicazioni sociali», 2013, n. 3, 44-57 © 2013 Vita e Pensiero / Pubblicazioni dell’Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore HEIKKI HELLMAN - HEIDI KEINONEN SEMI-COMMERCIAL OR SEMI-PUBLIC SERVICE? Legitimacy and regulation of commercial television in Finland 1. INTRODUCTION Public service broadcasting and commercial broadcasting are usually regarded as op- posing television systems. This historical dichotomy still influences legislation and reg- ulation – for example, in the European Union. However, Western Europe has also wit- nessed a number of hybrid models that are blurring the line between public service and commercial television, combining social obligations and private funding. According to previous research, national characteristics and the prevailing political system are always influential in the construction of public service broadcasting 1 . Similarly, commercial and hybrid models of broadcasting are shaped by the cultural and societal context. This article, which focuses on Finland, shows that the development of broadcasting reflects closely the national context, the specific political, cultural, social and economic environments affecting policies taken and organisations built. Specifically Finnish con- ditions include such factors as the small population, the large area of the country, the tradition of political coalitions, the fast growth of the economy and the separateness of the Finnish language. In addition, this national context is continuously changing, neces- sitating prioritisation of both the temporal and societal context and the size of the market as factors. We suggest that, when expanding its television services and compromising between public and commercial models, Finland applied an original strategy that might be called ‘‘consolidation through balancing’’ 2 . While focusing on one country, our analysis has relevance in a wider context, too. Past successes, as well as failures, in the organisation of Finnish broadcasting may help us understand the development of European television in general and provide crucial information about how organisational models are historically legitimated. National ap- plications of the hybrid model might serve as examples for other countries as the recent European Union regulation concerning electronic communications directs part of the commercially funded channels to serve as channels of ‘‘general interest’’ 3 . 1 Hallin D.C., Mancini P., Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004; Humphreys P.J., Mass Media and Media Policy in Western Europe, Man- chester: Manchester University Press, 1996. 2 Svendsen E.N., ‘‘From Sovereignty to Liberalisation: Media Policy in Small European Countries”, in Small among Giants: Television Broadcasting in Smaller Countries, edited by G. Ferrell Lowe, C.S. Nielsen, Gothenburg: Nordicom, 2011, 131-162. 3 EC (European Parliament and Council). 2009. Directive 2009/136/EC of the European Parliament and the Council Amending Directive 2002/22/EC on Universal Service and Users’ Rights Relating to Electronic Communications Networks and Services, Directive 2002/58/EC Concerning the Processing of Personal Data and the Protection of Privacy in the Electronic Communications Sector and Regulation (EC) No. 2006/2004 Libro_Com. soc..indb 44 23/04/2013 9.54.31