POLITICAL ECONOMIC THEORY II:Diversification, Instrumental

<< POLITICAL ECONOMIC THEORY I:Internationalization, Vertical Integration

POLITICAL ECONOMIC THEORY III:Criticism, Power of Advertising >>

Theories of Communication MCM 511

LESSON 31

POLITICAL ECONOMIC THEORY II

Diversification

The trend to the concentration of ownership dates back to the end of the nineteenth century.

However, cross-media ownership control by non-media companies, the integration of media

companies and the internationalization of ownership have widened and deepened media

concentration to an unprecedented degree.

One commentator puts it more graphically when he states the great media empires spanning the

world have subjugated more territory in a decade than Alexander the Great or Genghis Khan did in

a lifetime.

The expansion these empires has been furthered by attendant political factors. Freeing media

companies from regulations on what they can own and control has been done in the name of

competition, choice and quality.

The arguments forwarded has been that emergence of more channels and outlets, increase access to

information and knowledge , and more control over when and what people watch and listen to

appears to confirm the argument that free market brings more choice for the individual.

Thus any concerns about the increased concentration of ownership are offset by more choice.

Supporters of the free market see the explosion of choice as making redundant old fashioned

anxieties about media monopoly as deregulation encourages competition, investment and a growing

diversity of product. Critics such as Graham Murdock acknowledge that the more choice argument

is highly plausible and seductive, but he argues a distinction must be made between plurality and

diversity. He says, "There may be more communication goods and services in circulation but many

of them are versions of the same product in a variety of packages".

While there may be more television channels, they are increasingly broadcasting the same

programmes. Murdock argues there are four ways in which media owners limit diversity and

thereby pose a threat to democracy.

Four ways in which media owners limit diversity

1. The consequences are to be observed in the reduction of independent media sources,

concentration on the largest markets. They use their power to shape the terms and nature of the

competition of the markets in which they are major players.

2. Avoidance of risks reduced investment in less profitable media tasks (such as investigative

reporting and documentary film-making they can insist their outlets support their general business

interests by giving publicity to success, and suppressing coverage that is potentially embarrassing.

3. Neglect of smaller and poorer sectors of the potential audience and by attempting to maximize the

complementarities or `synergies' between various components of their media and business

operations , media owners can limit peoples perspectives.

The effects of economic forces are not random, but as Murdock and Golding puts it:

" consistently to exclude those voice lacking economic power or resources... the underlying logic of

cost operates systematically, consolidating the position of groups already established in the main

mass-media markets and excluding those groups who lack the capital base required for those least

likely to criticize the prevailing distribution of wealth and power. ..

Conversely those most likely to challenge these arrangements are unable to publicize their dissent or

opposition because they cannot command resources needed for effective communication to a broad

audience."

4. Often a politically unbalanced range of news media they use their resources to support certain

political or ideological causes. Murdock cites the case of Time Warner and Batman. By owning the

Theories of Communication MCM 511

rights the comic character the multi-media giant can orchestrate the development of the product to

maximize its profits. Batman developed into a film publicized by Time Warner through its

magazines and promoted via its cable and television networks, the soundtrack of which was

released on its record labels and whose merchandising included children's toys produced through its

manufacturing interests.

The predominant character of what the media produce can be largely accounted for by the exchange

value of different kinds of content, under conditions of pressure to expand markets, and by the

underlying economic interests of owners and decision-makers.

Economic interests of owners and decision-makers

These interests relate to the need for profit from media operations and to the relative profitability of

other branches of commerce as are result of monopolistic tendencies and processes of vertical and

horizontal integration.

How ownership is linked with control. For political economists such as Murdock and Golding who

have documented the expansion of the global media giants there is a direct relationship between

ownership and control.

Two approaches analyzing the relationship between ownership and control Murdock in 1980

identifies two approaches in Marxist thought to analyzing the relationship between ownership and

control what he labels as:

1. Instrumental: direct intervention

2. Structural: economic structures shape the activities of media owners

Instrumental: direct intervention

In its most crude form instrumentalism focuses on `conspiracy and direct intervention.' Owners and

managers are seen to conspire to determine which person, which facts, which versions of the facts

and which ideas shall reach the public. The policy of the owners is seen as working as a whole to

produce a press that strongly defends private enterprise... and may be bias towards the political

leanings of the proprietors. Sometimes the impact of the views and prejudices of those who own and

control the capitalist media is immediate and is direct by the constant and every day interventions.

Political economist scholar Miliband does not simply examine how owners influence particular

papers but focuses on the ways in which the press as a whole represent the interests of the ruling

class. According to him there are a number of pressures apart from capitalist ownership e.g.

advertising censorship, the consensual values of people working in the media, the official climate-

which all work in the same conservative and conformist direction. Thus instrumental approaches

focus on the control exercised by individual capitalists to extend their own interests, and ways in

which the media as a whole work to reinforce the general interests of a capitalist class.

Structural: economic structures shape the activities of media owners

Critics see such analysis too simplistic. It presents the mass media as `servants'- or more graphically

as the `cudgel of oppression' of a ruling class with little or not autonomy. The media simply act as

a conveyor belt for the ideas of the ruling capitalist class. This ignores the ability of journalists and

media workers to resist intervention of owners. Researches have shown that while owners often try

to exercise control over editorial content they do not often do not succeed.

Similarly researchers have also doubted the ability of a single individual to oversee the empires of

the contemporary global firms. So the other strand of Marxist thought is the structural approach

which locates discussion of ownership and control in the context of the mode of production of

political economy. And the limits it places on the choices and actions of press proprietors and

personnel, whatever their origins, social connections or personal commitments. Analysis is not

centered on the activities and interests of individual owners but on the constraints and limitations

placed on owners, managers and workers by nature of the capitalist economy.

Theories of Communication MCM 511

So structuralists in the word of Murdock `examine the ways in which the policies and operations of

corporation are limited by the general dynamics of media industries and capitalist economies.

Economic structures shape the activities of media owners, controllers and workers and pressures

under which they work. These pressures emanate from the emphasis on the need to maximize profit

and the demands of competition. Thus Murdock argues that there is no need for owners to intervene

directly because the logic of the prevailing market structures ensures that by and large the output

endorses rather than opposes their general interests.

Table of Contents: