04-12-2012, 06:41 PM
The supposed and the real role of mass media in modern democracy
The supposed and the real role.pdf (Size: 263.6 KB / Downloads: 41)
Abstract.
A range of different scientific disciplines are explored for what they might
contribute to an understanding of the economic and other factors that influence mass media,
and how the media in turn influence the political climate and the democratic process in
modern democracies. The contributions from the different disciplines are combined into an
integrated model of a causal network. This tentative model shows that fierce economic
competition forces the media to produce entertaining stories that appeal to people's emotions.
Preferred topics include danger, crime, and disaster, which the media select in ways that make
the audience perceive the world as more dangerous than it is. This influences the democratic
process significantly in the direction of authoritarianism and intolerance.
More generally, the competitive news media select and frame stories in ways that
hamper the ability of the democratic system to solve internal social problems as well as
international conflicts in an optimal way. These effects are unintended consequences of the
structure of the media market.
The empirical support for each element in the theory, as well as for the integrated
model as a whole, is discussed in an appendix.
Introduction
The mass media constitute the backbone of democracy. The media are supplying the
political information that voters base their decisions on. They identify problems in our society
and serve as a medium for deliberation. They are also the watchdogs that we rely on for
uncovering errors and wrongdoings by those who have power. It is therefore reasonable to
require that the media perform to certain standards with respect to these functions, and our
democratic society rests on the assumption that they do (Venturelli 1998; Kellner 2004;
McQuail 1993; Skogerbø 1996). The most important democratic functions that we can expect
the media to serve are listed in an often-cited article by Gurevitch and Blumler (1990). These functions include surveillance of sociopolitical developments, identifying the most relevant
issues, providing a platform for debate across a diverse range of views, holding officials to
account for the way they exercise power, provide incentives for citizens to learn, choose, and
become involved in the political process, and resist efforts of forces outside the media to
subvert their independence.
Media economics
Most newspapers, radio- and TV stations get most or all of their income from
advertisements and sponsoring. The media will therefore seek to optimally satisfy the
interests of their advertisers, which are not necessarily coincident with the interests of the
readers, listeners and viewers (Baker 1994; McManus 1994).
The predominant view among economists is that free competition generally benefits
society because it provides the most differentiated supply of commodities to the optimal price.
This line of reasoning dominates European as well as American media policy (Blumler 1992;
Graber 1993; Noam 1991; Sepstrup 1989).
Developments on the media market
The development of the mass media during the last several decades is characterized
by the following main tendencies:
Convergence: Different media like newspapers, radio, television, telephone and internet are
increasingly being fused together, technologically as well as economically.
Concentration: Media companies are being merged together and controlled by fewer owners.
This concentration is horizontal (several media under the same owner) as well as vertical
(several links in the "food chain" under the same company group). Different media bring
news from the same sources.
Globalization: The media are owned by multinational companies broadcasting across borders.
Commercialization: Advertisements are sneaked into entertainment as well as news stories.
The distinctions between advertisements, news and entertainment are increasingly blurred.
Audience groups with less spending money are not considered.
Popularization of the media
The simulation of proximity is an important element in popularization. A political
decision can be difficult to explain in abstract terms. It helps when the medium shows an
ordinary person telling what the consequences of the decision is for him or her. The audience
feel that a story is more convincing when they see an example they can identify with. But in
fact it is less credible because the example may not be representative. A magazine can show a
person who felt better after taking a certain brand of alternative medicine, and fail to show the
99% who felt worse after taking the same medicine.
Advertising has a profound influence on the choice of programs. TV advertisers
prefer to have their commercials shown in association with soft entertainment. Ideal from the
advertisers' point of view are shows such as competitions where one can win sponsored
merchandise, or soap operas that portray a privileged lifestyle where luxurious goods give
status (Shoemaker and Reese 1996).
This does not provide good conditions for the political debate. It is difficult to find
sponsors for serious political debates because these do not make the viewers relax and
because some of the viewers will disagree with the points of view presented (Herman and
McChesney 1997; McManus 1994, 1995).
Furthermore, the commercial media are not very inclined to cover controversial issues
in a balanced way. People prefer to hear points of view that they agree with. It is therefore
adverse to the media's economy to view a controversy from both sides and present alternative
points of view. The media are prone to choose side in a controversy; and if later evidence
should favor the opposite side, they are likely to keep silent about the matter rather than
loosing face. Disclaimers are not profitable. This is a self-amplifying process. The more the
media create consensus about a particular issue through biased coverage, the fewer
proponents of the opposite view will there be to balance the issue, and the more difficulties
will these proponents have in gaining access to the media (Ericson et al. 1989).