The advantages and disadvantages of the concentration of ownership Essay

The advantages and disadvantages of the meanness of ownership - Essay ExampleThe advantages and disadvantages of the concentration of ownership With the advent of globalization, the seemingly uncontrollable force of capitalism, and the quick development in technology, the media has become a commodity that can be sold and acquired like both goods or services in the market. By 1980s, the United States gradually deregulated the American media industries, paving the way for the chip in trading of media ownership. As a result, media ownership becomes increasingly concentrated as many companies and individuals see the benefits and fountain that come with controlling an effective tool in shaping public opinion and influencing all polity networks. Currently, six media conglomerates operate the majority of mass media platforms not just in the US tho worldwide News Corporation, Bertelsmann, Vivendi, AOL-Time Warner, Disney and Viacom while only three news agencies lord over the report age and syndication of news and journalistic materials. This paper will summarize the advantages and disadvantages of the concentration of mass media ownership.AdvantagesThe main advantage allowing media consolidation is primarily in the economic front. Concentrating several smaller or individual outfits under one owner means come apart management, better access to funding and other resources. Biagi (2006) underscored that a large company can afford to place employees better, pay them higher wages and provide for better working conditions. (14). In addition to this, large companies who gobble up smaller media outfits are in a better position to manage the arranging effectively. harmonize to Wilkins and Christian (2008), the consolidation of ownership allows media practitioners to benefit from standardization and centralization of production (333). All in all, the benefits-arguments turn down to economic efficiencies. This fact is supposedly important in order for media outfits to survive in an increasingly competitive environment. Disadvantages Critics argue that the concentration of media ownership hurts the public interest most. The main position is that because large media owners compliments maximum financial returns and always susceptible to increased commercial pressures, it would go at great lengths in producing contents that would deliver the most profit, and in the process increase advertiser and sponsor influence, compromising the truth of the news, often becoming unethical, and so forth. The consolidation works roughly the same the monopoly wherein the owner exercise a higher degree of control and power not just over a media organization but, much importantly, to the content that the organization produces. The disadvantage is greatly felt in an environment wherein the mass media finally evolved into humungous organization wielding enormous political power. Today, the largest media conglomerates were responsible for a large number of media sta tutes and regulations that are biased towards the interest of their corporations sooner of the interest and welfare of the general public. According to Gupta (2006), for instance, there is now little substantive coverage of the outstanding media deals in terms of the perceived effects of these deals, and that in most cases, journalists are directly affected but they do not report their own concerns because of internal pressure (289). Finally, the concentration of power that results as a consequence of the consolidation of media outfits supposedly limits the diversity of opinion and the quality of ideas available to the public and greatly diminishes the supposed message pluralism (Biagi 14). Diversity and message pluralism is important because they reinforce the concepts of individualism and freedom. According to Perreira (2007), this is done by ensuring fit