Media consolidation has some benefits but also has larger negative effects towards society if not properly addressed. Its positive effects concern primarily consumers and investors. For viewers and consumers of media, they can have more choices at a lesser price than what other competitors charge, allowing their audience to consume popular media in one multi-modal space. Those who oppose government control, would feel comfortable in a big-name company leading the advances of media and entertainment. Individuals who invest in large media conglomerates believe that these companies are innovators in the developments of the medium, placing risks and develop content that will be for the “betterment of all”. In summary, consumers wanting a platform where all their f<iframe src="https://anchor.fm/elijah-pestana/embed/episodes/The-Dangers-of-media-conglomeration--Conclusion-e1honb6" height="102px" width="400px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe>avorite blogs, news, and entertainment are in one space and for shareholders and investors, a successful venture that will never lose profit because it follows the norm.
With these benefits comes consequences. With a large number of media entering in digital streaming platforms, media consolidation can impact the originality and creativity in the media landscape as parent companies try to churn out as many productions as possible to fill their digital library (Doyle 2019). The FCC (Federal Communications Commission) a government organization that works to protect the public interests in the field of communication and media oversees how much control a large media companies have in the market (in other words media consolidation), In 2005 they relaxed the rules which began the harmful trend in where many small corporations and media entities were being bought out by these conglomerates. Although having more media companies and new networks in the market than in the past, only few are owned by local providers and are controlled by larger media “Families and parent companies” only looking into national and mainstream content (Kimmelman 2005).
These factors play a critical role in our society as each person uses media in consuming and producing information on a daily basis. With so much content being produced, audiences will wish to go to the conglomerates who have a larger collection of programs and better production value than other sources of information. Entering a one-stop-shop where the consumer will receive advertisements, corporate ideologies and rhetoric that will only give side of a particular issue and experience to the consumer (Chomsky 1988 see advertisements). Most conglomerates defend their claim of acquiring media companies as monitoring media ownership is a “infringement to corporate speech”, yet it is the individual who benefits from limiting media ownership as it prevents any one company from dominating a particular market, and it allows the consumer to make an informed decision and gives the public a wide selection of differing viewpoints in the free market of ideas letting democracy and expression thrive (Kimmelman 2005).
Now large media conglomerates have used their influence to shape public opinion before. In 2018 CNN journalists uncovered that the Sinclair Broadcast Group used its vast networks of 200 tv stations to broadcast a script where local news anchors repeated the same message to denounce “Fake news stories” from mainstream media to their local audience. Dead spin (2018) created a video edited compilation of all these news stations delivering the exact same script, in which these companies halted their local programing.
The issue is that a large media organization is making its rhetorical intentions as if was being said by your trusted local journalists and newscasters, in essence like a wolf in sheep’s clothing, but instead of eating you, they manipulate you (the public) into thinking the way they want you to think. If one company has that much influence to shape public opinion, it can certainly affect citizen participation in our democracy.
Conclusion
So, it is safe to say, media conglomeration should not be stopped but rather than monitored with more regulations and oversight. By identifying how media conglomerates influence consumers and seeing its flaws, we can see how a consumer should be more knowledgeable with the media they consume. With more content being created every day, users spend about 7-8 hours a day with media (Statista, 2021), they should be aware of how these conglomerates operate and have a space where they can comment on bettering the said content. The public should shift its consumption to media companies that are focused in their local communities and toward their personal experiences or companies that expand the bounds of debate and inform educational topics in a engaging and innovative way. With the power of social media and the advancements in the Digital Age, audiences of media have the power to become both producers and critics of the content that is being made across the world, having the power and say in the digital conversation in our media landscape.
Authors note
We hope you enjoyed this topic! Now that you took the time to understand Media Consolidation, ask yourself these questions...
What do I think about media conglomeration?
Does it help me when I use media?
How can I better my media habits?
We here at the Literate Consumer encourage our readers to consume knowledgeable content effectively. We encourage you to look at our other projects like...
Media Literacy: Smelling the BS
Rhetoric! In a appealing way
Rember inquiry is the path to discovery!
-ELIJAH PESTANA Informative articles and
videos from topics mentioned here
Comments