Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Media role and responsibility
Roles of the media in society
Roles played by the media in society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Media role and responsibility
It is imperative that people understand the concentration of media ownership also referred to as media consolidation. This term refers to a course of action whereby a few individuals or organizations control an increasing share of the mass media. Research reveals increasing levels of consolidation with many media industries that are already highly dominated by a very small number of organizations. Media consolidation is closely related to issues of editorial liberation, media bias, and freedom of the press (Common Cause 2007), which are usually discussed by those who view it as dangerous to society. This paper will argue that media consolidation via the Internet is disadvantageous to society, and the federal government should not keep the door open for the continuing consolidation of the electronic media. I will dispute this through discussions of the implications and effects of media consolidation on businesses and citizens, through a closer look at some proposed media consolidations of large organizations, and how we might negotiate a difference between the economic freedom of large media businesses, which may be necessary to keep them viable, and the needs of citizens for media access at a fair price.
The implications and effects of media consolidation became a topic of great debate in the late 1960s (Anderson 2002). Currently there are new writings on the topic appearing every day. Some topics of discussion include; consolidation being viewed as predecessors of global capitalism, the traditional notion of media having a public interest obligation being diminished, and how media audiences are treated as consumers rather than citizens (Anderson 2002). One topic is the positive effects on businesses with media consolidation. Th...
... middle of paper ...
...e Press. 2008. Web. 17 Sept. 2011. .
Huebsch, Russell. "Positive Effects of Media Consolidation." EHow. Demand Media Inc. 2010. Web. 15 Sept. 2011. .
Lewis, Peter H. "Uunet and MFS Plan to Merge As Internet Meets Fiber Optics." The New York Times. 1 May 1996. Web. 14 Sept. 2011. .
McChesney, Robert W. "Making Media Democratic." Boston Review. 2009. Web. 16 Sept. 2011. .
Shah, Anup. "Media Conglomerates, Mergers, Concentration of Ownership." Global Issues. 2 Jan. 2009. Web. 14 Sept. 2011. .
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.
In 1996, Congress passed the Telecommunications Act thereby lifting restrictions on media ownership that had been in place for over sixty years (Moyers 2003; Bagdikian 2000: xviii). It was now possible for a single media company to own not just two radio stations in any given local market, but eight. On the national level, there was no longer any limit on the number of stations a company could own – the Act abandoned the previous nation-wide ownership cap of forty stations (20 FM and 20 AM). This “anti-regulatory sentiment in government” has continued and in 2004 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved a new rule that would allow corporations to own “45 percent of the media in a single market, up from [the] 35 percent” established by the 1996 Act (Croteau & Hoynes 2001: 30; AFL-CIO 2004). Companies can now also own both a newspaper and a television station in the same city (AFL-CIO 2004). This deregulation has led to a frenzied wave of mergers – most notably the Viacom/CBS merger in 1999, the largest in history (Croteau & Hoynes 2001: 21). Ownership of the media has rapidly consolidated into fewer and fewer hands as companies have moved to gobble up newspapers, television stations, and radio stations across the country.
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.
Media finds its central role in the democratic debate in providing information, analysis, and a diversity of perspectives to the public. In recent years, with what is known as a media revolution, the amount of telecommunication outlets has increased dramatically. Often called “a product of healthy market competition,” the media revolution has theoretically expanded the public’s access to a multitude of facts, opinions, and general information (Miroff, et al. 2015). However, with a
Scribd.com - "The 'Standard'" 14 Mar. 2005. The 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' Web. The Web. The Web. 22 Feb. 2012.
At approximately the same time that media was being engulfed in corporatism came the internet boom. The first organization to really take initiative with this new medium was th...
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.
McDougall, Gilles. (1995). The Economic Impact of Mergers and Acquisitions on Corporations. Retrieved on July 9th, 2006 from http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/ineas-aes.nsf/vwapj/wp04e.pdf/$FILE/wp04e.pdf
The contributors of mass media hold a great amount of power on determining what viewers see. Mass media is assembled with many key components such as the owners of media, journalist and the government. This essay will examine the impact of policy ownership in regards to modern mass media. Mass media is owned by many large corporations that contribute in deciding what media should entail and how media content is delivered to the audience. Therefore, media owners, journalist and the government contribute greatly to the delivery of Canadian mass media. There are many contributors to mass media in Canada, therefore, examining the importance of each contributor allows audience members to gain more knowledge about media contributors and the impact
This interview focuses on the public's access to mass media. A good background of public access and democracy is provided. Both Hill and Springer have been involved with issues surrounding this for several years. Their focus seems to be on the role that cable television plays in public access. Media ownership and its reduction into the hands of a few is a major issue that they discuss.
In assessing the economics of the media business, it is helpful to first examine the ways in which publishing companies are owned and financed. Broadly speaking, media systems can be owned by the state, by private corporations, or by a mixture of both, all of which are financed through advertising (McCullagh 75). As with any other business, the publishing industry is profit-oriented, and the premise for all strategies deployed and actions taken is ultimately a means to achieve financial rewards.
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...
Although the future of newspapers and print media is very gloomy right now I think that once the newspapers that were revered and respected in their heyday develop a model that can incorporate and transition traditional news along with current web and online media at a reasonable rate and with the high quality that we have been known to expect I think that newspapers will make a surprising comeback and will be once again at the head to the public sphere and will be viable and thriving online entities.
Press, F. (no date) ‘Who owns the media?’. Free Press. Available at: http://www.freepress.net/ownership/chart (Accessed: 23 March
According to the Chicago Maroon this possible deregulation stands to abolish six key rules on media ownership limits, including a newspaper/television cross-ownership rule (no firm can own a newspaper and TV station in the same market), a cap on radio ownership (no firm can own more than 8 radio stations in a single market), and a cap on TV network ownership (no firm can own more than one of the four major TV networks). Removing any or all of these rules would likely unleash a huge wave of consolidation of commercial media firms and make our schlock-driven and commercially-saturated mass media yet more schlock-driven and commercially-saturated. There can only be few who want this deregulation to take place, the owners and shareholders of these billion dollar companies who want to fill their pockets even more full.