Since the television appeared, the entire world changed the way of communicating and the means get data about the issues that occur around us (Beggs J., 2013). But what happens if we only have one media to communicate all that information? How does this affect the existence of only one way to get the information to the veracity and the objectivity? That is exactly the situation in México, a country which prevails in a Monopoly in Television, and this control manipulate the information according to its interest.
A monopoly is a market with only one seller that does not have any kind of competition or is very weak, and the offer is not attractive for the client. That single seller is called a monopolist. The monopolies are very powerful businesses that are impossible not to notice. Their principal objective is to obtain the major control that they can have over the market in which they are interacting.
On the other hand, the monopolies are created by private initiative or by the government, and this occurs because it grants the rights of doing business in a particular market (Beggs J., 2013). In this case, the existence of only one media is very convenient because they have in their hands the power of the production and transmission of programs in Mexico. They also have a great percentage of the Mexican people controlled and they do this (control) with their ads and messages given to the people
However, Televisa is one of the most influential and largest companies in the Spanish-speaking world, based on its market capitalization, and is a major participant in the global entertainment business (Grupo Televisa, 2013). This firm was created in 1930 by Emilio Azcárraga Vidaurreta, and since that time Televisa has become in one of the ...
... middle of paper ...
...ey have the power to manipulate people. So there are plenty of reasons to stop the monopolies not only economically, but also socially because they doesn't allow the free development of thinking, and even with the regulations and laws the companies are trying to create monopolies, so they can earn more money.
Works Cited
Beggs, J. (2013). What is a monopoly? Retrieved 03 24, 2014, from Economics: http://economics.about.com/od/monopoly-category/a/What-Is-A-Monopoly.htm
Beggs, J. (n.d.). About.com. Retrieved from Economics: http://economics.about.com/od/monopoly-category/a/What-Is-A-Monopoly.htm
Grupo Televisa. (2013). Investor Relations. Retrieved 03 24, 2014, from Televisa: http://www.televisa.com/inversionistas-ingles/
Perdomo, D. (n.d.). Alter Net. Retrieved from http://www.alternet.org/story/144787/monopoly_capitalism_is_the_root_of_all_of_america's_problems
Unfortunately, these monopolies allowed companies to raise prices without consequence, as there was no other source of product for consumers to buy for cheaper. The more competition, the more a company is forced to appeal to the consumer, but monopolies allowed corporations to treat consumers awfully and still receive their business. Trusts were bad for both the consumers and the workers, but without proper representation, they could do nothing. However, with petitions, citizens got the first anti-trust law passed by the not entirely corrupt Congress, called the Sherman Act of 1890. It prevented companies from trade cooperation of any kind, whether good or bad. Most corporate lawyers were able to find loopholes in the law, and it was largely ineffective. Over time, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890, and the previously passed Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, which regulated railroad rates, grew more slightly effective, but it would take more to cripple powerful
To differentiate monopolies from trusts, it must be said that single companies were able to form monopolies when in control of “nearly all of one type of product or service… [This] affects the consu...
Michael Parenti (2002) declares media in the United States is no longer “free, independent, neutral and objective.” (p. 60). Throughout his statement, Parenti expresses that media is controlled by large corporations, leaving smaller conglomerates unable to compete. The Telecommunications Act, passed in 1996, restricted “a single company to own television stations serving more than one-third of the U.S. public,” but is now overruled by greater corporations. (p. 61). In his opinion, Parenti reveals that media owners do not allow the publishing of stories that are not beneficial and advantageous. Parenti supports his argument very thoroughly by stating how the plutocracy takes control over media in multiple ways: television, magazines, news/radio broadcasting, and other sources.
Over the centuries, the media has played a significant role in the shaping of societies across the globe. This is especially true of developed nations where media access is readily available to the average citizen. The media has contributed to the creation of ideologies and ideals within a society. The media has such an effect on social life, that a simple as a news story has the power to shake a nation. Because of this, governments around the world have made it their duty to be active in the regulation and control of media access in their countries. The media however, has quickly become dominated by major mega companies who own numerous television, radio and movie companies both nationally and internationally. The aim of these companies is to generate revenue and in order to do this they create and air shows that cater to popular demand. In doing so, they sometimes compromise on the quality of their content. This is where public broadcasters come into perspective.
We all hear the term “monopoly” before. If somebody doesn't apprehend a monopoly is outlined as “The exclusive possession or management of the provision or change a artifact or service.” but a natural monopoly could be a little totally different in which means from its counterpart. during this paper we'll be wanting into the question: whether or not the govt. ought to read telephones, cable, or broadcasting as natural monopolies or not; and may they be regulated or not?
Second: The break of monopolies or “trustbusting” began in the late 19th century with President Roosevelt. However, it was the Sherman Act passed by Congress in 1890 that really began dismantled large monopolies. The Sherman Act “was based on the constitutional power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce” (Sherman Anti-Trust Act (1890). This act helped dismantle many of the monopolies that had been formed by companies’ trusts such as Northern Securities Company, Standard Oil and the American Tobacco Company. These companies had shareholders put their shares into one trust so the company could control “jointly managed” businesses and keep their prices low. This gave little competition to the major monopolies as other smaller companies could not stay in business and have such low prices. With the help of the courts monopolies continue to be kept at bay and competition continues to be encouraged within industries today.
The state of limited competition, in which a market is shared by a small number of producers, is known as an oligopoly. Many Canadians can relate to the power trio of Rogers, Bell and TELUS as a perfect example of oligopoly as they own an accumulated 92% of the entire wireless market. There are fewer companies in this market; every decision made by each company has a strong impact on Canadian consumers. Judging from many consumer complaints, they feel forced to choose from these three companies because they are the only companies with consistent, wide ranged service. Many complaints include lack of service and overly expensive bills. Therefore, the oligopoly of the Big 3 Telecoms are a definite disadvantage for consumers because their influence
Even though monopolies are illegal, public corruption allows companies to form and continues to be a problem today. In an article published by the Los Angeles, Anh Do
An oligopoly is defined as "a market structure in which only a few sellers offer similar or identical products" (Gans, King and Mankiw 1999, pp.-334). Since there are only a few sellers, the actions of any one firm in an oligopolistic market can have a large impact on the profits of all the other firms. Due to this, all the firms in an oligopolistic market are interdependent on one another. This relationship between the few sellers is what differentiates oligopolies from perfect competition and monopolies. Although firms in oligopolies have competitors, they do not face so much competition that they are price takers (as in perfect competition). Hence, they retain substantial control over the price they charge for their goods (characteristic of monopolies).
Since this debate still rages on, many people argue both sides of the story of the pros and cons. Many would argue that not breaking up monopolies actually increase the competition of companies that are attempting to break into some of the market share that the monopoly already has, more so than the free market that exists now. Proponents of the Sherman Anti-Trust act argue that “absolute power corrupts absolutely” (Martin, 1996) as originally quoted by Baron Acton. The idea that no competition within the business world establishes no risk and reward that is all part of the entrepreneur spirit of the U.S. spirit.
One way in which government achieves this objective, is by its ability to misuse the media’s ability to set the agenda. Contrary to popular belief, media is in fact an enormous hegemony. In fact, separate independent news organizations do not exist. Rather than creating an independent structured agenda of their own, generally lesser smaller news organizations adapt to a prepared agenda, previously constructed by a higher medium. Based upon this information alone, it is quite apparent that media functions in adherence to the characteristics of a hierarchy.
A Monopoly is a market structure characterised by one firm and many buyers, a lack of substitute products and barriers to entry (Pass et al. 2000). An oligopoly is a market structure characterised by few firms and many buyers, homogenous or differentiated products and also difficult market entry (Pass et al. 2000) an example of an oligopoly would be the fast food industry where there is a few firms such as McDonalds, Burger King and KFC that all compete for a greater market share.
Monopolies have a tendency to be bad for the economy. Granted, there are some that are a necessity of life such as natural and legal monopolies. However, the article I have chosen to review is “America’s Monopolies are Holding Back the Economy (Lynn, 2017)” and the name speaks for itself.
A monopoly is “a single firm in control of both industry output and price” (Review of Market Structure, n.d.). It has a high entry and exit barrier and a perceived heterogeneous product. The firm is the sole provider of the product, substitutes for the product are limited, and high barriers are used to dissuade competitors and leads to a single firm being able to ...
One of the fundamental roles of the media in a liberal democracy is to critically scrutinise governmental affairs: that is to act as a watchdog of government to ensure that the government can be held accountable by the public. However, the systematic deregulation of media systems worldwide is diminishing the ability of citizens to meaningfully participate in policymaking process governing the media (McChesney, 2003, p. 126). The relaxation of ownership rules and control, has resulted in a move away from diversity of production to a situation where media ownership is becoming increasing concentrated by just a few predominantly western global conglomerates (M...