Media Moguls and Monopolies!!! 

Ahhhh media and policy, my favorite thing. I value studying and analyzing media trends and dynamics; the importance of media relations is quite grand in our society. We live in a heavily mediated society, with the majority of the population relying on media sources and content for their news. Policy can be changed all it wants, however, without proper media coverage / awareness, important subjects and issues are swept under the rug, not emphasized enough, therefore allowing the masses to be uneducated or falsely led with information. The hypodermic needle theory reasons that anyone is susceptible to believing what they see in media, without question, or further challenging… if you're a passive audience. Which in America's case, the majority of us are passive media consumers. This means media outlets, industries, and institutions can heavily impart specific ideologies and opinions, shifting our society's values. Obviously, this can be very dangerous. I also probably talk about conglomerations and media use in so many other blog posts, it just goes to show you how frustrating the span of media influence can be. 

This brings me to this blog post's theme. Under policy, I saw "Media Consolidation". I immediately associated this with the word "conglomeration", and then "monopoly" which will bring me to the Sherman Anti-trust Act, really enforced by my boy, T. Roosevelt. Media conglomerations have always interested me. I'm a tad obsessed with the influence of media and representation within media, so obviously this sparks my interest. Media consolidation is used to characterize media institutions, or in other words, mass media ownership. How this happens is pretty self-explanatory. First, a monopoly is established within a given media industry, one company owns a plethora of other media businesses. Second, there is large-scale owners in a given industry; these owners buy up many companies and means for media production, like radio stations and newspapers. Lastly, concentration forms, then leading to a conglomeration (Encyclopedia Britannica). Disney is a great example for media conglomeration as it owns an expansive list of productions, studios, companies, labels, and more (anything from Vice to Marvel Studios). The problem with consolidation like this is how it impacts media consumption. With conglomerations, the variety of content, differing perspectives / opinions, and reliable cross-checking from sources becomes less varied and no longer diverse. Hypothetically, if a conglomeration wanted to only impart a certain ideal, maybe for instance a political platform, they could easily manipulate the majority of the population by imparting these messages all throughout their domain. Allowing every media consumer to constantly be exposed to the same kind of messaging, which in turn, changes their beliefs and sways them in favor of what that conglomeration intended. The messaging can be subtle and overt, but all still contributing to the subliminal shifting of ideological pedagogies. This conditioning proves very crucial to altering cultural beliefs / values (circling back to the hypodermic needles theory). Another dangerous aspect to this concept is the lack of representation this dynamic affords. Marginalized groups can be further outcasted, with fewer opportunities to voice their opinions, needs, and advocacy. There is less opportunity for these minorities to reach the greater population. This can perpetuate the cycle of privilege and hegemony which innately follows that. As a woman of color, this aspect frightens me, for I fear I may not get a chance to be represented PROPERLY within media industries. To put this in perspective. Say if Disney only hired white men to create, film, and produce their content (which isn't too far off from our current reality of how media industries operate:/), my job market then significantly dwindles as I won't be hired by any of the companies they reign over. Now, my perspective cannot be voiced. I'm not saying Disney actually does this, but theoretically, this is how it'd operate. Lastly, and pretty blatantly, these conglomerations completely deny market competition. Not only is this not very capitalistic, but also slows down social progress, innovation, and sharing of ideas, not to mention, impacts our economy with spikes in prices due to a smaller economic market this generates. Needless to say, conglomerations are dangerous and media consumers must be aware of this in order to protect themselves and our society.

So, if media conglomerations are essentially monopolies to a certain extent, can't we make this illegal? Yeah, no. The Sherman Anti-trust Act is used to break up control over a particular market as to evenly distribute its power/influence, ensuring a capitalistic state, free marketplace of ideas, and even economic distribution. Although the actual definition of this Act states it is legislation that will "curb concentrations of power that interfere with trade and reduce economic competition" (Encyclopedia Britannica), media finds exemption from this. In the past, with the supreme Court's ruling in Associated Press v. United States and the Turner Broadcasting System v. the FCC, the court feared that monitoring these monopolies with "the application of antitrust laws to the media constituted an unjustified intervention of the government into the dissemination of ideas that could threaten freedom of the press" (Schultz). Basically, the government is afraid of violating the first amendment and having the country be in uproar about it (deregulation advocates, etc.). So currently, the government applies "special rules" in context dependent cases of media conglomerates. Basically, when all said is done, the government is really not doing much to stop the expansion of these media institutions, which certainly can account for some of the circulating and pervasive ideologies we see in our society today. Essentially what I'm saying is, even though we may not be able to stop the current projection of media consolidation and conglomeration, we can at least be wiser media consumers (NOT passive audiences), recognizing when lack of representation / diversity of opinion, circulating ideology, and market-based competition is at risk due to how and WHO controls our media. We must take those extra steps to inform ourselves, cross-check information constantly with differing sources (not under the same company… do the research to know who owns what and when they have taken it), and challenge big name corporations for what they do (by not supporting institutions under their domains). Yeah, I'm looking at you Disney… better watch out, we're onto you. 

Pictured above: Some major media conglomerates / what they own or have stakes in. 

Sources: 

Schultz, David. “Media Exemption to Antitrust Laws.” Media Exemption to Antitrust Laws, 

www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1128/media-exemption-to-antitrust-laws.

The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica. “Sherman Antitrust Act.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 

Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 27 Feb. 2020, www.britannica.com/event/Sherman-Antitrust-Act.