ZeePedia

POLITICAL ECONOMIC THEORY II:Diversification, Instrumental

<< POLITICAL ECONOMIC THEORY I:Internationalization, Vertical Integration
POLITICAL ECONOMIC THEORY III:Criticism, Power of Advertising >>
img
Theories of Communication ­ MCM 511
VU
LESSON 31
POLITICAL ECONOMIC THEORY II
Diversification
The trend to the concentration of ownership dates back to the end of the nineteenth century.
However, cross-media ownership control by non-media companies, the integration of media
companies and the internationalization of ownership have widened and deepened media
concentration to an unprecedented degree.
One commentator puts it more graphically when he states the great media empires spanning the
world have subjugated more territory in a decade than Alexander the Great or Genghis Khan did in
a lifetime.
The expansion these empires has been furthered by attendant political factors. Freeing media
companies from regulations on what they can own and control has been done in the name of
competition, choice and quality.
The arguments forwarded has been that emergence of more channels and outlets, increase access to
information and knowledge , and more control over when and what people watch and listen to
appears to confirm the argument that free market brings more choice for the individual.
Thus any concerns about the increased concentration of ownership are offset by more choice.
Supporters of the free market see the explosion of choice as making redundant old ­ fashioned
anxieties about media monopoly as deregulation encourages competition, investment and a growing
diversity of product. Critics such as Graham Murdock acknowledge that the more choice argument
is highly plausible and seductive, but he argues a distinction must be made between plurality and
diversity. He says, "There may be more communication goods and services in circulation but many
of them are versions of the same product in a variety of packages".
While there may be more television channels, they are increasingly broadcasting the same
programmes. Murdock argues there are four ways in which media owners limit diversity and
thereby pose a threat to democracy.
Four ways in which media owners limit diversity
1. The consequences are to be observed in the reduction of independent media sources,
concentration on the largest markets. They use their power to shape the terms and nature of the
competition of the markets in which they are major players.
2. Avoidance of risks reduced investment in less profitable media tasks (such as investigative
reporting and documentary film-making they can insist their outlets support their general business
interests by giving publicity to success, and suppressing coverage that is potentially embarrassing.
3. Neglect of smaller and poorer sectors of the potential audience and by attempting to maximize the
complementarities or `synergies' between various components of their media and business
operations , media owners can limit peoples perspectives.
The effects of economic forces are not random, but as Murdock and Golding puts it:
" consistently to exclude those voice lacking economic power or resources... the underlying logic of
cost operates systematically, consolidating the position of groups already established in the main
mass-media markets and excluding those groups who lack the capital base required for those least
likely to criticize the prevailing distribution of wealth and power. ..
Conversely those most likely to challenge these arrangements are unable to publicize their dissent or
opposition because they cannot command resources needed for effective communication to a broad
audience."
4. Often a politically unbalanced range of news media they use their resources to support certain
political or ideological causes. Murdock cites the case of Time Warner and Batman. By owning the
96
img
Theories of Communication ­ MCM 511
VU
rights the comic character the multi-media giant can orchestrate the development of the product to
maximize its profits. Batman developed into a film publicized by Time Warner through its
magazines and promoted via its cable and television networks, the soundtrack of which was
released on its record labels and whose merchandising included children's toys produced through its
manufacturing interests.
The predominant character of what the media produce can be largely accounted for by the exchange
value of different kinds of content, under conditions of pressure to expand markets, and by the
underlying economic interests of owners and decision-makers.
Economic interests of owners and decision-makers
These interests relate to the need for profit from media operations and to the relative profitability of
other branches of commerce as are result of monopolistic tendencies and processes of vertical and
horizontal integration.
How ownership is linked with control. For political economists such as Murdock and Golding who
have documented the expansion of the global media giants there is a direct relationship between
ownership and control.
Two approaches analyzing the relationship between ownership and control Murdock in 1980
identifies two approaches in Marxist thought to analyzing the relationship between ownership and
control ­ what he labels as:
1. Instrumental: direct intervention
2. Structural: economic structures shape the activities of media owners
Instrumental: direct intervention
In its most crude form instrumentalism focuses on `conspiracy and direct intervention.' Owners and
managers are seen to conspire to determine which person, which facts, which versions of the facts
and which ideas shall reach the public. The policy of the owners is seen as working as a whole to
produce a press that strongly defends private enterprise... and may be bias towards the political
leanings of the proprietors. Sometimes the impact of the views and prejudices of those who own and
control the capitalist media is immediate and is direct by the constant and every day interventions.
Political economist scholar Miliband does not simply examine how owners influence particular
papers but focuses on the ways in which the press as a whole represent the interests of the ruling
class. According to him there are a number of pressures apart from capitalist ownership e.g.
advertising censorship, the consensual values of people working in the media, the official climate-
which all work in the same conservative and conformist direction. Thus instrumental approaches
focus on the control exercised by individual capitalists to extend their own interests, and ways in
which the media as a whole work to reinforce the general interests of a capitalist class.
Structural: economic structures shape the activities of media owners
Critics see such analysis too simplistic. It presents the mass media as `servants'- or more graphically
as the `cudgel of oppression' ­ of a ruling class with little or not autonomy. The media simply act as
a conveyor belt for the ideas of the ruling capitalist class. This ignores the ability of journalists and
media workers to resist intervention of owners. Researches have shown that while owners often try
to exercise control over editorial content they do not often do not succeed.
Similarly researchers have also doubted the ability of a single individual to oversee the empires of
the contemporary global firms. So the other strand of Marxist thought is the structural approach
which locates discussion of ownership and control in the context of the mode of production of
political economy. And the limits it places on the choices and actions of press proprietors and
personnel, whatever their origins, social connections or personal commitments. Analysis is not
centered on the activities and interests of individual owners but on the constraints and limitations
placed on owners, managers and workers by nature of the capitalist economy.
97
img
Theories of Communication ­ MCM 511
VU
So structuralists in the word of Murdock `examine the ways in which the policies and operations of
corporation are limited by the general dynamics of media industries and capitalist economies.
Economic structures shape the activities of media owners, controllers and workers and pressures
under which they work. These pressures emanate from the emphasis on the need to maximize profit
and the demands of competition. Thus Murdock argues that there is no need for owners to intervene
directly because the logic of the prevailing market structures ensures that by and large the output
endorses rather than opposes their general interests.
98
Table of Contents:
  1. COMMUNICATION:Nature of communication, Transactional approach, Communication is symbolic:
  2. THEORY, PARADIGM AND MODEL (I):Positivistic Perspective, Critical Perspective
  3. THEORY, PARADIGM AND MODEL (II):Empirical problems, Conceptual problems
  4. FROM COMMUNICATION TO MASS COMMUNICATION MODELS:Channel
  5. NORMATIVE THEORIES:Authoritarian Theory, Libertarian Theory, Limitations
  6. HUTCHINS COMMISSION ON FREEDOM, CHICAGO SCHOOL & BASIC PRINCIPLES OF SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY THEORY
  7. CIVIC JOURNALISM, DEVELOPMENT MEDIA THEORY & DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPANT THEORY
  8. LIMITATIONS OF THE PRESS THEORY:Concentration and monopoly, Commercialism
  9. MCQUAIL’S FOUR KINDS OF THEORIES:Social scientific theory, Critical theory
  10. PROPAGANDA THEORIES:Origin of Propaganda, Engineering of Consent, Behaviorism
  11. PARADIGM SHIFT & TWO STEP FLOW OF INFORMATION
  12. MIDDLE RANGE THEORIES:Background, Functional Analysis Approach, Elite Pluralism
  13. KLAPPER’S PHENOMENSITIC THEORY:Klapper’s Generalizations, Criticism
  14. DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION THEORY:Innovators, Early adopters
  15. CHALLENGING THE DOMINANT PARADIGM:Catharsis Social learning Social cognitive theory
  16. SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEROY:Symbolizing Capacity, MODELLING
  17. MODELING FROM MASS MEDIA:Recent research, Summary, PRIMING EFFECTS
  18. PRIMING EFFECT:Conceptual Roots, Perceived meaning, Percieved justifiability
  19. CULTIVATION OF PERCEPTIONS OF SOCIAL REALITY:History
  20. SYSTEMS THEORIES OF COMMUNICATION PROCESSES:System
  21. EMERGENCE OF CRITICAL & CULTURAL THEORIES OF MASS COMMUNICATION
  22. REVISION:Positivistic perspective, Interpretive Perspective, Inductive approach
  23. CRITICAL THEORIES & ROLE OF MASS COMMUNICATION IN A SOCIETY -THE MEDIATION OF SOCIAL RELATIONS
  24. ROLE OF MASS MEDIA IN SOCIAL ORDER & MARXIST THEORY:Positive View
  25. KEY PRINCIPLES USED IN MARXISM:Materialism, Class Struggle, Superstructure
  26. CONSUMER SOCIETY:Role of mass media in alienation, Summary of Marxism
  27. COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE:Neo Marxism, Characteristics of Culture
  28. HEGEMONY:What exactly is the meaning of "hegemony"?
  29. CULTURE INDUSTRY:Gramscianism on Communications Matters
  30. POLITICAL ECONOMIC THEORY I:Internationalization, Vertical Integration
  31. POLITICAL ECONOMIC THEORY II:Diversification, Instrumental
  32. POLITICAL ECONOMIC THEORY III:Criticism, Power of Advertising
  33. AGENDA SETTING THEORY:A change in thinking, First empirical test
  34. FRAMING & SPIRAL OF SILENCE:Spiral of Silence, Assessing public opinion
  35. SPIRAL OF SILENCE:Fear of isolation, Assessing public opinion, Micro-level
  36. MARSHALL MCLUHAN: THE MEDIUM IS THE MESSAGE AND MASSAGE
  37. KNOWLEDGE GAP THEORY:Criticism on Marshal McLuhan
  38. MEDIA SYSTEM DEPENDENCY THEORY:Media System Dependency Theory
  39. USES AND GRATIFICATIONS THEORY:Methods
  40. RECEPTION THEORY
  41. FRAMING AND FRAME ANALYSIS:Information Processing Theory, Summing up
  42. TRENDS IN MASS COMMUNICATION I:Communication Science, Direct channels
  43. TRENDS IN MASS COMMUNICATION II:Communication Maxims, Emotions
  44. GLOBALIZATION AND MEDIA:Mediated Communication, Post Modernism
  45. REVISION:Microscopic Theories, Mediation of Social Relations