This thesis analyzed the transformation of Uzbek state broadcast media into a public broadcaster. Based on the quantitative data, widely supported by the qualitative research, the researcher assessed that the prospects for public broadcasting in Uzbekistan were not good. The research was based on the responses of 22 Uzbek broadcast journalists and determined their perception of their roles in two time frames: present day and the future.The researcher grouped the respondents, based on their views of their present day roles, into two categories: "Independent Broadcasters" and "Socially Responsible Broadcasters." Independent Broadcasters showed professional confidence, strongly believed in the power of broadcast media and widely. supported the concept of public broadcasting in a transitional political environment.Socially Responsible Broadcasters strongly supported the idea of journalists being held accountable to the public, mostly agreeing that journalists were innovators and should promote diversity, equality, and represent the interests of the disadvantaged to the broader community. Unlike the Independent Broadcasters, these journalists were less confident about how well they were perceived by the audience and were concerned about whether their programs were relevant to the community.In the second study, respondents' views on their future roles were grouped into three categories: "Pessimists," "Pragmatic Idealists," and "Optimists."Journalists in the Pessimists' group expressed rather negative feelings about the future of their profession. In their view, Uzbekistan did not need a public media and journalists were not to serve as innovators in the society.Optimists expressed the opposite feelings, saying that they wanted to believe Uzbekistan would have public broadcasting in the future. They thought that the common good and the public interest should be the basis of broadcasting.Pragmatic Idealists believed that broadcasting would have to be a public corporation. But unlike the Optimists, these journalists were concerned about a lack of professionalism and funding, traditionalism in program content, and the lack of an advertising culture.All of the respondents, in this case, supported the idea of developing advertising as a means of supporting broadcasting in the future and saw it as a way of freeing themselves from government control and gaining editorial independence.Respondents in this study said that as long as they remained under state authority they would not call themselves "public broadcasters." They mostly agreed that a changing society needed a strong public media, which was independent of government influence and the marketplace. / Department of Journalism