Effects of Mergers in Communications Field
This is an excerpt from the paper...
The mergers which have created giant communications conglomerates led by moguls such as Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch affect consumers both negatively and positively. The primary positive effects are the technological advances made, while the major negative effect is the commercialization of products, including entertainment, news and information. The incredible amounts of money involved in acquiring and operating huge communications media organizations make it inevitable that the decisions made by the leaders of those organizations will be based on little but economic pros and cons. This means that the aim of the giant communications organization is to sell advertising, which means in turn that the primary consideration is the number of viewers, listeners, readers, including their age and spending capacity. When profits are considered above all else, the value of the product--whether entertainment, news, or information--can only suffer. The lower the common denominator at which the media aim its product and advertising, the more watered-down is the product to appeal to the biggest audience. In a democracy, this is particularly dangerous, for true democracy depends on a fully informed electorate. When the media are run by people who do not want to upset their audience, who do not want to drive away that audience, who want only to expand that audience, the needs of a democracy are not important. In addition, the media conglomerate will be very unlikely to disseminate inf
. . .
rgers decreases consumer choice over the broad spectrum, despite the fact that channels will be added to the menu. Adding 20 sports channels and movie channels to a consumer's choice list hardly adds to the likelihood of an educated electorate or a stronger democracy.
In fact, Turner is less the leading media mogul in the early years of the 21st century that he was decades earlier. The size of the conglomerates forming in the new century truly boggles the mind and surpasses the ability of individuals to control them independent of group considerations. Still, there are such men as Rupert Murdoch whose expanding medias empire shows that a few rare individuals maintain their power. Murdoch's blatant conservatism is such that any discerning viewer who watches Murdoch's Fox News Network will see that conservative agenda in action. The arrogance of Murdoch with respect the choices of consumers is on full view in William Shawcross's biography of the man. In that work, Murdoch argues: "Anybody who, within the law of the land, provides a service which the public wants at a price it can afford is providing public service" (Shawcross, 1992, p. 427).
Such a statement is terrifying when one realizes that Murdoch's media empire is expandin
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Rupert Murdoch, Britain Argentina, William Shawcross's, Geirland Sonesh-Kedar, Marshall McLuhan's, Broadcasting System, AOL Time-Warner, Porter Bibb, Company Chandler, AOL-Time Warner, annual revenues, consumer choice, ted turner, aol-time warner, global village, connell 2000, common denominator, money involved, shawcross 1992, media mogul, shawcross 1992 427, lee solomon 1990, geirland sonesh-kedar 1999, europe latin america, aol-time warner merger,
Approximate Word count = 3078
Approximate Pages = 12 (250 words per page)
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
