2012
DOI: 10.5172/impp.2012.2216
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Public broadcasters and innovation: a contested combination in Flanders

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The design of this analytical model is somewhat different from the earlier work of Donders, et al (2012), its clearest point of reference. First, it focuses on the views of top managers of innovation within PSM organisations and not on all of the stakeholders.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The design of this analytical model is somewhat different from the earlier work of Donders, et al (2012), its clearest point of reference. First, it focuses on the views of top managers of innovation within PSM organisations and not on all of the stakeholders.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…There are no established methodologies for its study and the debate on alternative theories to approach the issue has arisen (Rogers & Sparviero, 2011). One of the few studies on innovation and public service media is that of Donders et al (2012) on Flanders. The article joins government rhetorics on innovation and their derived policy actions through the public service media.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Public broadcasters' role in technological innovation in particular has met with criticism from commercial players. They argue against this task for public broadcasters, whereas policy makers often acknowledge that public broadcasters can act as a lever to enhance broadband connectivity, can stimulate the transition to new standards such as DAB+, and can pool resources by working together at a European level (Donders et al, 2012). 4.…”
Section: The Core Values Of Psm and Content Acquisition: A (Mis) Match?mentioning
confidence: 99%