TO BE SEEN AND ALSO HEARD: TOWARD A MORE TRULY PUBLIC BROADCASTING SYSTEM FOR CHILDREN A dissertation submitted to the Kent State University College of Education, Health, and Human Services in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Jon Judy June 2020 i A dissertation written by Jon Judy B.A., Kent State University, 2001 M.A., Kent State University, 2005 Ph.D., Kent State University, 2020 Approved by _________________________, Director, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Natasha Levinson _________________________, Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Quentin Wheeler-Bell _________________________, Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee William Kist Accepted by _________________________, Director, School of Foundations, Leadership and Kimberly S. Schimmel Administration _________________________, Dean, College of Education, Health and Human Services James Hannon ii JUDY, JON, PhD., May 2020 TO BE SEEN AND ALSO HEARD: TOWARD A MORE TRULY PUBLIC BROADCASTING SYSTEM FOR CHILDREN (217 pp) Director of Dissertation: Natasha Levinson, PhD. The purpose of this humanities-based study is to evaluate how the American public broadcasting system has traditionally served children, how it currently fulfills that role, and finally to propose a new approach to children's public broadcasting that is more democratic and attentive to children’s interests. American broadcasting developed as a series of compromises amongst ideologically-opposed voters and organizations. Further, public broadcasters are reliant on private donors, thus diluting the democratic quality of their programming. The author argues that this paradigm violates children’s rights. The unsatisfied adult consumer of public broadcasting has political recourse by which they can attempt to influence regulations that affect public broadcasting. Children lack such political agency, so extra care must be taken to protect their interests; public content generated for them should be as free of market influence as possible, until they gain the agency to decide for themselves their thoughts on the interplay of public and private goods. The current public broadcasting paradigm does not evidently or obviously seek out children’s thoughts on the programming provided for them. The author argues that by allowing children a more direct voice in the shaping of programming created for them, public broadcasters may both serve their traditional, recognized function better by empirically demonstrating that their content matches their publics’ interests while also helping to ensure that children’s right to speak is being respected. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation was begun as my marriage began it final deterioration. It was in its final stages when my mother died in October of 2019. It was defended via teleconference in March of 2020, as our society began our first tentative steps toward adjusting to a post-coronavirus world. I am now frantically crossing my T’s and dotting my I’s, hoping against hope that I’m getting this close to properly prepared. I’ve massive stacks of grading to do, as I struggle with transitioning the one hundred high school sophomores I’m teaching this semester to distance learning, a format with which they, like I, am uncomfortable. The world is burning. This lengthy preamble is my way of contextualizing an apology. I am sorry to those to whom I am indebted for the completion of this dissertation and of my doctoral degree, because I just haven’t the time nor the cognitive bandwidth to thank them properly. And so I simply say thanks to: Kathleen Carey, Maranda Shrewsberry, Danielle Shirey, Jason Judy; and to my dissertation director, Natasha Levinson, whose patience and kindness are surpassed only by her intellect. I once found her mind intimidating; I find it now instead to be inspiring; and thanks finally to the rest of my committee, whose insights and support were invaluable: Quentin Wheeler-Bell, William Kist, and Todd Hawley. I love and appreciate you all, although I’ll concede to loving some of you significantly more than the rest. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................................v CHAPTER I. BRIEF HISTORY OF AMERICAN BROADCASTING REGULATION ...................1 Public Versus Private Goods: Parallels Between Histories of Television and Schooling .......................................................................................................................2 Early Enthusiasm About and Conflict Over Television ........................................4 Parties to the Compromise: Three Competing Ideologies of American Television History..........................................................................................................................11 Democratic Equality and National Identity Pre-broadcasting .............................20 Democratic Equality, National Identity, and Broadcasting .................................23 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................31 II. SALIENT CHANGES TO BROADCASTING IN RECENT DECADES ..................32 Content Regulation of Non-Traditional Broadcasters ..................................................34 Parallels to 21st Century Broadcasting in 20th Century Magazines....................37 Historical Support for the Eventual Demise of Traditional Broadcasting ....................40 Modified Versions of Labaree’s Classifications and the Modern Broadcasting Paradigm .......................................................................................................................41 Case Study: Past Interaction Between Democratic Equality and Social Efficiency TV Camps ..........................................................................................44 YouTube, Yoyo Ma, and the Social Efficiency Perspective ...............................46 The Public Sphere and the Obsolescence of the American Broadcasting Systems ......47 Lack of Demand for a More Robust Public System and a more Regulated Private System ...........................................................................................................................53 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................54 III. BRIEF HISTORY OF BROADCASTING REGULATIONS AND CHILDREN......55 Fears for Children’s Well-being ...................................................................................55 Benefits Associated with Some Children’s Programming............................................56 Broadcasters’ Attempts to Elude Regulation ................................................................60 A Neoliberal FCC and the end to the Progressivism of the 1970s ...............................63 Historical Lack of Action on Children’s Behalf ...........................................................67 IV. CHARACTERISTICS OF AN IMPROVED PUBLIC BROADCASTING SYSTEM FOR CHILDREN...............................................................................................................77 Intersections of Censorship and Education ...................................................................77 Invalidity of a Negative-Freedom-Oriented Approach to Education ..................81 Flourishing as a Fundamental Concept in Education ...................................................82 A Flourishing Education is Personalized, Individualized, and Positive- Freedom-Oriented ................................................................................................83 iv Need for Individualized Education ......................................................................88 The Problem with Educators as Sources of Change .....................................................91 Students as a Source of Change ....................................................................................93 Students’ Right to a Voice in Education .......................................................................93 Summary .......................................................................................................................98 V. PUBLIC BROADCASTING AND POTENTIAL FLOURISHING ..........................100 Education as a Menu ...................................................................................................101 Public Broadcasting Potential to be a “Full Menu” of Life Options .................104 Standards-Choice Paradigm, and the Restriction of the Public School “Menu” ...............................................................................................................105 Beyond “Bread and Butter” and “Objectively Good Things” ...........................112 Public Broadcasting and Representation ...........................................................113 Market and Political Influences on Public Broadcasting Shortcomings ............118 Summary .....................................................................................................................128 VI. CHILDREN AS A SPECIAL CASE IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE AND IMPLICATIONS FOR BROADCASTING ....................................................................130 An Example of the Exclusion of Children from the Public Sphere ............................130 Defining the Public Sphere ................................................................................132 Problems with the Public Sphere .......................................................................133