THE NEW MEDIA MONOPOLY of this book in , the firm was simply Time, THE NEW MEDIA MONOPOLY many is as true for linked corporations as it is. The New Media Monopoly: A Completely Revised and Updated Edition With Seven New Chapters (): Ben H. Bagdikian: Books. When the first edition of The Media Monopoly was published in , critics called Ben Bagdikian's warnings about the chilling effects of corporate ownership .

Bagdikian The New Media Monopoly Pdf

Language:English, Indonesian, German
Genre:Politics & Laws
Published (Last):18.07.2016
ePub File Size:24.68 MB
PDF File Size:20.84 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Registration Required]
Uploaded by: DICK

THE NEW MEDIA MONOPOLY MEDIA THE NEW ALSO BY BEN H. BAGDIKIAN DoubleVision:ReflectionsonMyHeritage'Life'and Professi Author: Ben H. Jul 16, The media monopoly. by: Ben H. Bagdikian. Publication urn:acs6: mediamonopoly00bagd_0:pdf:0fdad7a-4daaaecc. download The Media Monopoly - Ben H. Download PDF · Read online The New Communications Cartel · Democracy and the Media The New.

Whatever the number, tl. Who and what are these dominant five media corporations? Time Warner, The Largest OnJanuary lo, 2ooo, the American television audiencewas invited to the most expensive marriage ceremony in history.

It was a coryorate wedding, so the loving couple were two men, and it was not uncouth to mention money. In the Wall Street Book of Common Stock, it is mandatory to mention the wealth of newly joined couples.

The New Media Monopoly

The merger joined America Online, headed by Steven Case, and Time Warner, headed by Gerald Levin in corporate weddings it is not always easyto distinguish which is the groom and which the bride. Case, forty-two years old, had built a firm with the most common acronyrn, aol, for the serversthat lead to sites in the vast universe ofthe Internet.

Levin's Time Warner had been the empire Henry Luce had built seventy-seven years earlier when Luce had co-founded Time magazine. Long before the marriage, Luce and his successorsat Time, Inc.

Iater merged with Warner Brothers, which itseHhad gathered other firms in music, movies, television, and newer media.

The word be6lme n mantra with merger specialists,investment bankers, ffid errlrepreneurs. A Iist of the properties controlled by AOL Time Warner hkee ttrn typed pages listing zgz separate companies and lutrslrliaries.

You might also like: AUTOMATA THEORY EBOOK

In zooo, the tnet'kclplacewas flooded by investors in the digital world enger'firr magical pieces of paper called stockoptions that harl rrrrrdesomepeople millionaires overnight. The pubIic was told that this was the "new economy. The new economy developed, at the very least, birth pains.

By zoo3, Time Warner had a metaphoric yard sale on its front lawn. Steven Case and Gerald Levin had been unseated by unhappy board members, and by zooz the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice had amounced that they wished to examine how AOL had kept its books before the merger.

TTobemore precise,he and his playmates really make that money for his corporate parent, the Walt Disney Company. The firm now controls more subsidiaries than Walt himseHhad added, like his first Disneyland.

The innocence of Mickey and his friends Goofr, Dumbo, and the Seven Dwarfs enchanted generations of children around the world. David Low, the Britishpolitical cartoonist, called Walt "the most significant figure in graphic arts since Leonardo. His Fantasia, a series of color movie epirodes set to music played by the Philadelphia Symphony Orehestra,is still presentedperiodically in theatersall over the world. He grew up on a Missouri farm, and after his Uncle Mike, a lotromotiveengineer on the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe, lxrught him a box of crayons, Walt drew pictures of tiny anlmals on everything, including the side of the farm truck.

When the farm failed, the family moved to Chicago, where, alier his daytime high school classes,Walt went to night clnssesat the Academy of Fine Arts. After he had becomea I lollywood success,a legend grew that he had no ability in art, but it was not true althouglr,when his artists went on xtrike shortly after World War II, their picket signs read, "Walt Can't Draw";.

It would become the reventy-third largest industry in the United Statesunder a leuderwhoseroots couldnotbe more difierent.

His parents required him Io rlo two hours of homework for every hour he watched television. Michael beganas a premedical student at Dennison I lrriversity A. But in sixweekshe went to CBS children s progamming, where his job was picking the right spot in which to drop commercials.

Eisner was not charmed with the routine, and instantly he sent out hundreds of r6sum6s. He received only one response, but that one was crucial. Eisnerhad caughtthe merger and acquisitionfever ofthe tg8os and rggos. It was in this kind of environment that media conglomeration began, and Ben Bagdikian often called it as a monopoly of sorts in his book New Media Monopoly[4]. These three companies have merged in different periods of time, but have merged for one reasonto reach out to more people that have divided due to fragmentation, and have control over their perspectives and views by presenting to them similar materials.

Bagdikian goes all the way and connects all five different major media American companiesTime Warner, Walt Disney, Murdochs News Corporation, Viacom, and Bertelsmannand almost like a conspiracy, ties them all together in a way that they may be different companies, but they behave similarly and disseminate the same information.

Bagdikian even goes on and theorizes that some of them have the same members in their board even if it is illegal.

Bagdikian bases his theory of new media monopoly on the ties between five major media outlets that own more than a thousand media outlets all over the United States, and all over the world as well. This gives five media companies the power to control information and monopolize the way people think on a global scale. Challenges brought by new media monopoly First, new media monopoly gives the false image of democracy. In the year , fifty corporations controlled U.

People had a choice, although fifty corporations are already too few corporations to offer healthy competition in a country as huge as the United States. The number immediately compacted in four years, from 50 corporations down to 29 corporations. In the year , 29 corporations had turned into 5 huge media mega conglomerates mentioned earlier that have a global scale.

Five corporations control advertising, book publishing, news wire agencies, television shows and many more that have international scope. Five corporations control what people see on television, what people read on the newspaper, and these five corporations have the power to shape the way people think, without people actually realizing that someone is trying to control the way they view the world.

This gives people a false image of democracy and freedom because one might think that they have a choice to filter out the things they need to know and not know, but in the end, they are only reading things other people want them to know.

An Analytical Paper: New Media Monopoly by Ben Bagdikian

And if media monopolies have this kind of power, it becomes very prone to political corruption and it ends up playing a huge role in the persistence of political dynasties and the existence of huge political families that even if they have a terrible track record in public administration, they are still voted into office.

Vote-hungry politicians look to media monopolies for support.

That is because these monopolies have a huge reach as they have solved their issues on audience fragmentation, and media empire owners such as Rupert Murdoch back these vote-hungry politicians so that they create policies that benefit their empires.

This has created a small circle of benefits that dont ever trickle down to the marginalized and the disenfranchised in the world. Corruption persists because of this monopoly, and the media that is supposed to be the bastion of integrity that will fight such a monopoly has become part of a now systemic problem.

Bagdikian says that: American media companies indulge in mutual aid, and share investments in the same media products.

They jointly conform to the periodic ratings that presume to show what kinds of programs have fractionally larger audiences, after which the competitors then imitate the winners and take slightly varying shares of the total profits.

One of the results of this constricted competitions is that the thousands of media outlets carry highly duplicative content. Basically what Bagdikian says is that even if these media empires arent really sitting in one room sharing information with one another, they almost copy one another when the other is successful. Say a superhero movie becomes a blockbuster hit for Media Empire AMedia Empires B and C will then try to copy such superhero formulas, therefore giving us the same book with a different cover.

And if this is whats happening in our media, then we are basically receiving the same information over and over again. The very idea is frightening, and the very idea is a threat to media self-regulation, and is a threat to press freedom in totality, and this threat exists all over the world, and not just in the United States of America.

Threat to media self-regulation First, let us return to the definition of media self-regulation. Media self-regulation is defined by Miklos Haraszti as a joint endeavor by media professionals to set up voluntary editorial guidelines and abide by them in a learning process open to the public.

The New Media Monopoly: A Completely Revised and Updated Edition With Seven New Chapters

Bagdikian said that this monopoly and control over information creates an impasse. People have become resigned to the assumption that what the major media tells them is the norm and is unchangeable. This makes the people passive; this makes people feel that they are unable to change anything about the media.

Instead of double-checking on the media, the public becomes resigned to just believe the media, or if they do not, they feel that it is impossible to change the media anyway, because of the deep-rooted and systemic problems it has. Threat to press freedom New media monopoly creates a threat against press freedom because individual journalists are being constrained by their corporate owners or sponsors.

A journalist may have the most noble of intentions, but in the wrong media company, noble intentions are often put to naught. Although there are many true-to-life examples about this, I would find it difficult to cite it without assuming too much, hence I will be using an example that I found in the television show called The Newsroom, which I feel is a fitting example of how new media monopoly threatens press freedom.

Media Reform Advocacy Groups:

In the Newsroom[7] , there exists a fictional broadcast company called Atlantis World Media. It is said to have the Koch brothers as one of their corporate sponsors, and Rupert Murdoch is also said to have a stake in their company. Both the Koch brothers and Rupert Murdoch are also mentioned to have stakes in other media companies as well, which makes their environment the perfect reflection of Bagdikians new media monopoly.

However, Will, with his sparkling resume as a prosecutor, often dissects his sources on air, and does not bother that the stories he is reporting are outwardly criticizing sponsors that help the show exist in the first place.

In one episode, Will exposed the political agenda the Koch brothers are involved in. After the expos, Will was called up to the owner of AWMs office, and was threatened with suspension, if he did not stop reporting about the Koch brothers.

Log in to Wiley Online Library

The idea of the Koch brothers does not bother Will too much; but seeing that there are more things he needs to report, and more things he feels the public should know, Will stops reporting about the Koch brothers. The public began demanding more about the Koch brothers, but Will, threatened by the loss of his job and the people he can help with his job in the future, refuses to report about it any further.

People started calling out their news channel for it, but AWM doesnt respond to this, although Will is personally challenged by the experience, because he believes that reporting about what the Koch brothers have been doing with future senate candidates. The call soon dies out, and AWM continues on protecting its sponsors.The usual rumors questioned whether the directors were about to take back Eisner's "keys lo the kingdom. After the expos, Will was called up to the owner of AWMs office, and was threatened with suspension, if he did not stop reporting about the Koch brothers.

But this was only the beginning. Marcos may have curtailed such oligarchy back in his day, but in todays world, the Lopezs are back in power and are one of the highest-earners in the media and entertainment business. He stated: "I think Ralph Nader has already powerfully defined the issues in this campaign and has had influence on the positions of both major party candidates.

In the year , 29 corporations had turned into 5 huge media mega conglomerates mentioned earlier that have a global scale.