Sean O Siochru and Bruce Girard with Amy Mahan (2000) in Global Governance: A Beginners Guide in Chapter 1--Introduction to National Media Regulation: Why Media Regulation?--lists two justifications, societal and industry regulations. The writers draw a fine line between media diversity,which pertains to diversity in the contents of the media, media plurality, which relates to different types of media.
But conglomeration i.e. cross-media ownership and convergence of information technology are posing a threat to both media diversity and media plurality. Thus, constricting "the public sphere" or "ideal communication sphere". The writers in fact make a case for citizens media in which people become involved in media not simply as consumers, but as producers and broadcasters.
A free-market economy and conglomerates have emerged as the major threats to the freedom of the press. In many cases, advertisers, who have become the economic lifeline of the media, not only determine what news is to be published but also what qualifies as "news". Conglomerates are in fact'private ministries of information' that generate their own news and control others. An outcome of the free-market economy, media moguls encroach on the marketplace of ideas.
Conglomeration is nibbling away at the audience's choices and resulting in the uniformity of opinion. When diversity of opinion gives way to a uniform world-view, democratic discourse comes to an end. The present media give news in fragments that makes it difficult for the audience to connect the dots and have the big picture. It becomes difficult for the common people to follow the development of a particular issue over time.
This situation promotes apathy and cynicism at the expense of political participation. Common people become mere spectators in a democracy which otherwise should be a participatory business. Democracy and a free media are sacrificed at the alter of the free-market economy which the linchpin of capitalism. this down-slide of the media can be balanced by the emergence of the citizens' media which is run by the community instead of a corporation. In a citizens' media the common people are part of the journalistic activity. This instills in them a sense of belonging.
I agree with you that a citizens media would be an ideal situation to counter media conglomeration. One example that came to mind as I was reading your post was CNN's iReporter section. That allows anyone around the world to create their own story and upload their own videos of new events for viewers to see. I think the idea of iReporting is exactly that of the citizens media-it enables the average American to get his or her voice heard. The only problem with integrating the citizens media on a larger scale is that it could somewhat diminish the reputation of media reporting in that journalism has a set of ethics that *should* be followed by reporters. Even though this is not always the case, when I read a newspaper or article, I generally assume it was written without bias and with journalistic integrity. This could be hard to control with a large citizens media.
ReplyDeleteYour reservations are absolutely right. But my point is once a citizens' media evolves, it will evolve its own ethics. We cannot frame a 'code of conduct' or regulations for something which does not exist. First it was media that came into being and then after experiencing its pros and cons and after much debate and deliberations, sets of ethics came into being in different times and different societies.
ReplyDeleteRight now the common citizens need to be heard their side of the story about any event.