aThe Ownership of Mass Media has become an interesting topic for sociologist as mass media plays an important part in people’s lives. Mass media is a form of communication aimed at society without personal contact e.g. radio, television internet and so on. In the UK, the ownership of mass media is concentrated within a few number of giant companies, where profit making has become the main agenda. An example can be from Bagdikian (2004) who states that in 1983, 50 corporations managed the majority of all news media in the USA, however by 2004 media ownership were concentrated between 7 corporations, for instance, The Walt Disney Company, who own Disney along with ABC studio, Marvel Studio and Lucas Films. Curran (2003) mentions that ownership of English newspaper has always been concentrated in the hands of a few powerful ‘press barons’. The aim of this essay will be to discuss and evaluate how the ownership of mass media reflects control over content. In order to achieve this, the essay will compare and contrast between the two approaches, proving that the Marxists view has a stronger case whilst using evidence to support the argument.
The concentration of media ownership has increased in the form of Global conglomeration, horizontal and vertical integration, technological convergence and so on, this, in turn, poses a threat to society’s democracy and heightens the power of the already powerful as more of what society knows is dominated and controlled by the global corporations. Doyle (2002) states that too much concentration of media is lethal and unsafe as the media have the capability to make or break political careers and have major influence on public opinion, an example being Rupert Murdoch, who strongly supported the war in Iraq that he used the media to support his beliefs, Doyle (2002) urges that the abusive power and impact by elites needs to be supervised by media as they can influence and control society in a negative aspect, e.g. Rupert Murdoch who used ownership of the Sun to promote his satellite company Sky Broadcasting when it was losing money. This, in turn, supports the Marxist view upon ownership of mass media.
On the other hand, Pluralists argue that owners of media are broadly responsible for the management of media information and content as the content is mainly carved according to consumer demand, thus, only providing the consumers what they want. According to Nelson Thorne (2008), Rupert Murdoch transformed The Sun Newspaper into an entertainment tabloid which was a success as he believed that giving what the consumer wanted was a key to success. Furthermore, editors, broadcasters, and journalists have a solid feeling of expert morals which provides a system of checks and controls on potential misuse of media power from owners. Pluralists propose that the mass media is a key part of the democratic process as the electorate get most of their information about the political press from the media, pluralist believes that journalist, editors and owners can be trusted. Moreover, pluralists argue that society holds the real power of Supply and Demand as they can choose whether to buy or not to buy. If the audience does not like what the media owners are providing to them or suspect that the media source provided is one-sided, the consumers would not purchase the product. The media, therefore, supply what the buyer wants rather what the owner chooses.
Pluralists contend that it is practically impossible for owners to interfere with the content of media as their businesses are economically too complicated for them to regularly intrude on a day-to-day basis. Pluralists highlight the Public Service Broadcasters (PSB) (e.g. BBC) hold up a significant amount of share in the media market in the UK. Pluralists contend that PSB is fair-minded and objective, and evens out any potential prejudice in the private sector. Pluralists also state that media owner’s powers are restricted by the government e.g. in some societies laws restrict people from owning more than one type of media. Moreover, television, radio and newspaper in Britain are accountable to legal controls and rules enforced on them by the government. Pluralists argue that the professionalism of editors and journalist also restricts the power of owners. They believe that journalists are determined in their pursuit of the truth and thus, they have too much dignity to be biased in favour of one particular view.
However, Marxists disagree with Pluralists and believe that the media is dominated by the elite class who own media corporations, which gives them total power and control to manipulate the content of the media and society’s interests. Marxists believe that Elite class use cultural power (Status) to dominate institutions such as Education and Mass media and transfer ruling class ideology for the production of inequalities in wealth and income. Marxists argue that these agencies socialise the working class into accepting the ideas and system of Capitalist, thus, Marxists believe that the working class experience false class-consciousness- failure to see the reality of their situation as they are being exploited by a system that benefits a powerful minority only. Marxists argue that media owners restrict choice and diversity of content for the consumers and provide content that attracts a larger audience and increases sales. Miliband (1973) contends that media’s role is to mould how people think about the world they live in and states that society is barely informed about important matters such as inequalities in wealth or why poverty prevails. Marxists propose that media owners shape the content so only accepted views are heard. Tunstall and Palmer (1991) urge that governments are no longer involved in regulating the activities of media owners as they need their support to either achieve power or hold onto it.
Marxists claim that society is seen as passive consumers, viewers of distorted and imperfect accounts of news and cheap entertainment, provide by the media as the people have been disillusioned into believing they are being provided with what they want. Correspondently, society just accepts what the media provides them with, where the public is easily manipulated by the mass media. Pluralists argue that media owners and media workers cannot afford to ignore the views of society. Marxists claim that media owners intentionally aim to promote ideas that benefit them. Herman and Chomsky (1988) contend that the media engage in propaganda campaigns in favour of media owner’s interests, an example being Donald Trump, who is boosting his presidential campaign by making controversial impacts in social media.
Schlesinger (1978) suggest that journalist uses news journals to ease work and that many articles are prepared in advance due to narrow deadlines. Sociologist still believes that journalist is forced to ‘Gate Keep’ the media content they present to the public as they are guided by news values, shared norms and values believing it is necessary for society, reporting news which is found to be false and over dramatized to provide a good story. In a sense, these stories can have a negative impact on the public and cause moral panics amongst society. Cohen (2002) argued that the media plays a major part in creating moral panics i.e. arousing public anxiety over a threatening issue. This, in turn, supports Marxists claim that society is easily manipulated and that media owners control media content.
In conclusion, it has been identified that the ownership of mass media does reflect control over content, even though Pluralists make a reasonable argument that mass media still is an important part of democratic process, media owners aim to just make profit, media provides what the public want and that media audience are the real power holders. However, Marxists provide an ironclad argument which is more likely to be considered as they share that the media is controlled by small groups or individual, choice and diversity of content is restricted, media owners manipulate media control content and use it to manipulate the society, society is passive (easily manipulated) and promotes ideas that benefit them through media with the supporting evidence provided, thus concluding that ownership of mass media does reflect over content.