Thread View: rec.mag
1 messages
1 total messages
Started by New Liberation News Service
Sat, 03 Oct 1992 06:37
The Media Monopoly (part 2)
Author: New Liberation News Service
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1992 06:37
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1992 06:37
116 lines
5909 bytes
5909 bytes
/* Written 4:29 pm Sep 21, 1992 by bfrg9732@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu in cdp:alt.activism */
/* ---------- "The Media Monopoly (part 2)" ---------- */
The Media Monopoly
by Ben H. Bagdikian
Part 2 -- Introduction
----------------------------------------------------------------
"The dream of every leader, whether a tyrannical despot or a
benign prophet, is to regulate the behavior of his people."
-- Colin Blakemore ("Mechanics of the Mind")
Today we live in a world which is changing so rapidly that
receiving the best information possible is indispensable. If we
are not getting the *entire* picture, if we are not getting
unbiased information, then we are unable to make *informed*
decisions. Bagdikian declares that "...ignorance of economic and
political change is destructive of democracy and fatal to
intelligent decision making."
More than at any time in our history, we depend on the mass media
to inform us about what is occurring, about the "news." It is the
mass media which decide what *is* the news. "The mass media
become the authority at any given moment for what is true and
what is false, what is reality and what is fantasy, what is
important and what is trivial."
"Authorities have always recognized that to control the public
they must control information." Thus, those in power have it in
their interest to control the information. And yet, for "a
realistic picture of society there is no such thing as a central
authority." Reality has many angles and to centralize control
over information limits our perspective on reality to a single
angle or viewpoint -- that of whoever has power.
"The Age of Enlightenment created a new kind of society... It
acknowledged that the democratic consent of the governed is
meaningless unless the consent is informed consent." Thus
*information* was crucial in a democracy. In the United States,
the first amendment sought to guarantee a plurality of
viewpoints, a plurality of information. "Diversity of expression
was assumed to be the natural state of enduring liberty."
But unfortunately, "Modern technology and American economics have
quietly created a new kind of central authority over information
-- the national and multinational corporation. By the 1980s, the
majority of all major American media... were controlled by fifty
giant corporations." These powerful information czars can easily
drown out attempts by the less powerful to put forth dissenting
viewpoints. "The fifty men and women who head these
corporations... constitute a new Private Ministry of Information
and Culture."
Bagdikian argues that "...while it is not possible for the media
to tell the population what to think [at least not overtly,
B.R.], they do tell the public what to think about." The
permissable range of discussion is defined by the mass media.
"What is reported enters the public agenda... [Thus,] More than
any other single private source and often more than any
governmental source, the fifty dominant media corporations can
set the national agenda."
This control over our information and ultimately of our lives by
these corporate dinosaurs is not new. "When Fred Friendly
resigned as president of CBS News in 1966 because the network
refused to cancel a fifth daytime rerun of 'I Love Lucy' for a
crucial Senate hearing on the Vietnam War, he was told that the
loss of revenue from a delayed episode of 'Lucy' was intolerable
to shareholders, who would not accept any decrease in net
profits."
Or again, more recently the chairman of the board of the largest
newspaper chain, Gannet Company, told an interviewer, "Wall
Street didn't give a damn if we put out a good paper in Niagara
Falls. They just wanted to know if our profits would be in the
15-20 percent range."
[When we see "commercials" on television, it becomes harder and
harder to distinguish them from outright propaganda. Witness, for
example, the string of Dow Chemical commercials ("Dow let's you
do great things"). As Abbie Hoffman once said, "You see these
commercials and you feel so relieved!" You want to exclaim, Wow!
Thanks for helping, Dow!] B.R.
"News and public information have been integrated formally into
the highest levels of financial and nonjournalistic corporate
control. Conflicts of interest between the public's need for
information and corporate desires for 'positive' information have
vastly increased."
Although it is true that within the dominance of the fifty
corporados controlling the media there still is *some* mixture of
news and ideas -- still "there are also limits... The limits are
felt on open discussion of the system that supports giantism in
corporate life and of other values that have been enshrined under
the inaccurate label 'free enterprise.'" Sure, these slaves of
mammon will allow a controlled range of debate. But "when their
most sensitive economic interests are at stake, the parent
corporations seldom refrain from using their power over public
information."
"When fifty men and women, chiefs of their corporations, control
more than half the information and ideas that reach 220 million
Americans, it is time for Americans to examine the institutions
from which they receive their daily picture of the world."
----------------------------------------------------------------
Synopsis/Review by Brian Redman
"Ah yes, Armageddon. I remember it well."
End part 2
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads