Arguments for Media Consolidation and Deregulation:
Beneficial to the Consumers of Media:
1. The marketplace generally delivers to the public: if the people like it, the people get it, and if the people do not like it, then what is being delivered generally dies out. So, if the people want differing viewpoints, the people will get them. This train of thought can be furthered to emphasize that quality media succeeds since the people are responsible for the success of the type of media (so the people would want quality media to prevail versus poor quality media).
2. The competition between the few conglomerates leads to low prices, another boon for the consumers of media.
3. Better journalism can be provided to a community by sharing the resources of the print and television news staffs.
4. If there is regulation, the level of objectionable programming would increase since those who own the media source will be looking to turn a profit and in today’s day and age, sex sells.
5.
Benefits to and of the Media Conglomerates
1. Newspapers are losing market share, and therefore profit and value, so limiting the amount of traditional print media that a company owns is incomprehensible since the conglomerates are not actually controlling too much of what retains the largest impact on the society as whole.
2. The rules of the Federal Communications Commission are dated to 1975, meaning that the standards that may have made sense for regulating the media then are not applicable to modern day scenarios that have seen the rise of the Web and cable television.
3. Federal regulations on the media are tools for the government to interfere and control speech, particularly speech directed towards the government itself.
4. Internet and cable TV create many outlets that allow for many voices to be heard, along with the more traditional outlets that have been available like the newspapers and the radio.
Arguments against Media Consolidation and For More Regulation:
Beneficial to the Consumers of Media:
1. A diversity of opinion from a variety of sources is necessary to promote democracy and is important to keep the people objectively informed.
2. The number of outlets is not necessarily as much of an issue as the amount of outlets available to the people that are not in direct or indirect control of big corporate media.
3. Conglomeration homogenizes the playlists and local news on the radio, effectively shutting out different viewpoints and news that may deter the big corporations.
4. According to Senator Bryon Dorgan, “Diverse, independent, and local media sources are essential to ensuring that the public has access to a variety of information” and such sources are deprived to a community when few owners own most outlets of media.
Disadvantages of Media Conglomerates
1. Few large conglomerates effectively create less competition, which in turn creates monopolies, ending democracy and limiting the points when the people can have a say in the media (restricting the public’s access to information).
2. The same owners of the more traditional media have control of the newer media for many own some of the most popular parts of the internet.
3. Conglomerate ownership creates monopolies, jeopardizing minority ownership and focus on localism, creating net losses of local news.
4. Regardless of the opinion that media consolidation creates more outlets for the people, these outlets are from, according to Senator Bryon Dorgan, the “same ventriloquists” of many other media outlets.
5. Cross promoting from the media companies has replaced substantive reporting and inadequate reporting of the media business itself.
Overall, I believe that media consolidation has had a negative impact on a journalist’s ability to provide important information to the citizens of our democracy. Because big media owns many of the sources that the people derives their news from, including newspapers and news stations, even some news related websites, they are able to control what the public sees and hears. This is like having blinders put on the public, for how many of them are able to see and realize what may truly be occurring? Though I do not believe that the media conglomerates are out to get us and intend to do evil, I do believe that the corporate media, to some extent has deprived people of the truth or facts and opinions that may be essential to our understanding and perception of the world. This may be due, in part, to the fact that they desire to protect their own best interests and assets, and to do so would require that the information that the people receive from their national or local journalists be jaded.
