Well as we all know, Globalization has done more good than bad to many in terms of various aspects. Looking at how globalization has affected many media companies in the US, there have been many mergers amongst media companies so that they can survive. Some of these companies would include Disney, AOL Time Warner, Bertelsmann, News Corporation, etc. With so many mergers that have taken place, it reduces the level of privatization of most media companies. Furthermore, there is constant competition amongst companies because of a high level of ownership in the midst of some media companies.
In some places major multinational corporations own media stations and outlets. Often, many media institutions survive on advertising fees, which can lead to the media outlet being influenced by various corporate interests. Other times, the ownership interests may affect what is and is not covered. Stories can end up being biased or omitted so as not to offend advertisers or owners. The ability for citizens to make informed decisions is crucial for a free and functioning democracy but now becomes threatened by such concentration in ownership (Shah, 2008).
Consequently, the potential for journalism to nurture and expand any semblance of civil society, a space relatively independent of the state and the market, where open discussion and debate about (for example) the terms of social organization, the direction of public policy, the bases of cultural identity can take place among individuals, organizations, and other interest groups, is undermined (Shah, 2009). For example, because commercialized mass media need large audiences to survive financially, they may respond by eliminating political news or avant garde entertainment deemed by the owners to have the potential to displease certain segments of their audience.
The result is that the range of issues discussed in the news is reduced. And when an issue or problem deemed acceptable is discussed, the range of acceptable perspectives on the issue also is relatively small. Consumers of this kind of artificially narrow and perhaps irrelevant information may begin to feel increasingly alienated and disconnected from the civic life of their communities (Shah, 2009). They may develop a sense that they are without relevant, actionable information and, therefore, powerless to control the course of their own lives.
References
1. Shah, A. (2009). Media Conglomerates, Mergers, Concentration of Ownership Author And Page Information. http://www.globalissues.org/article/159/media-conglomerates-mergers-concentration-of-ownership (Accessed June 1st 2011)
2. Shah, H. (2008). (Journalism in an Age of Mass Media Globalization.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2577072/Journalism-in-an-Age-of-Mass-Media-Globalization (Accessed June 1st 2011)
Hi Gwen,
ReplyDeleteIt is true that the media industry has seen mergers because of globalisation. I guess this reiterates the meaning of globalisation where the world becomes smaller. Thus, we have lesser media firms who are media giants of the world. But this could also lead to journalists only writing stories that are in favour for these companies and this restricts their freedom of speech especially when they find an interesting story. Thus, it is an irony that globalisation has supposedly lead to freedom of speech, yet freedom of speech is still restricted for journalists working in big media firms.
xoxo
nivitra
Heya Gwen,
ReplyDeleteI agree with the point you made about how ownerships of news companies may lead to news stories being bias, as these news companies do not want to offend their advertisers. I think that since these media companies own the newspapers and publish news, they may think that they are allowed to edit out certain aspect of the news and report different angles of news. Therefore, I personally feel that this is why online news media comes in handy, as will be able to validate the facts and find out the truth apart from what is shown in the mainstream media. What do you think?