Media
...d or not present at all. Also since small groups are incapable of competing against the giants they are either consumed of destroyed by the large companies. 2. The concentration and dependence of government also impacts the content of the news, the interests of business and government drives the content of the news. The news content which contradicts the interests of government or the parent company is prevented from being published or aired. Thus, minority issues are subdued / trivialized and only the ‘powerful’ groups get benefited. Media’s dependency on Advertising Since the media is mostly controlled by large companies and the ultimate purpose is profitability, the media relies heavily on advertising revenues and the advertiser’s choice influences the direction and policy of media outlets. Media outlets will try and increase the size of the audience for advertisers to reach a wider consumer audience and thus attracting more advertisers and in turn revenue, although this should help reaching the news to a wider society, but, advertisers are not interested in quantity, but quality of the audience, audience with the buying power and effluent. This reinforces the idea of the media ultimately acting as a tool for elite dominant groups. Smaller, less wealthy groups such as labour unions, human right organisations, NGO’s etc., who may want to start news sources of their own will be unable to do so due to the nature of their audiences, thus will not be able to attract advertisers to sustain their efforts. Also, due to the importance of advertisers in the media business, the media outlets will do anything to cater to the needs of their advertisers, often reflecting advertiser’s interests in their news content at the expense of objectivity and independence. Reliance on government, business and expert sources Media relies heavily on ‘official sources’, in order to maintain an image of credibility, most news media make extensive use of official sources, often giving them the first and the final word and many more words in between. Most of the news is devoted to official actions and reaction, thus, public relation departments of governments, interest groups and companies spend a lot of time providing this information to the media. This dependency gives unprecedented advantage to powerful groups in getting their issues on the political agenda and influence their resolution, thus, unofficial and less powerful groups are less likely to influence political outcome since their views are given less legitimacy in the news coverage. There is a whole range of institutions, including embassies, intelligence, parliament and departments who give stories, tips and images to press, as official sources these influence the agenda of issues that the media covers. The officials providing the news do not try to educate the public, instead the goal is to represent issues and events in ways that gain support and public empathy and influence outcomes. Chomsky states that ‘all news in the United States is primarily propaganda – the selective release of information intended to protect and promote the interests of those in power. For example in Gulf War the media was extensively used for propaganda, the government deliberately promoted the ideas of Saddam Hussein as a traitor and threat. Similarly in Afghanistan, human rights violations has suddenly come to light although these have been there for ages, and the prevention of this has become justification for the bombings in Afghanistan. There may be element of truth in the stories, but crucial information is left out that may influence public opinion. The extensive use of official sources is that they do lend credibility to the news, but leave out important information. The trivialisation of issues in the media has created a public that is largely uninformed about major issues. The media not only selects particular events to report but also presents in such a way to appeal to public and this requires the framing of the story in a particular way, this results in highlights of some aspects of the story while hiding others. The way the media presents the news can be referred to as a systemic bias. Bennett says ‘this bias is defined as the way the media imposes its own narration of politic and policy, the way it favours simplicity over complex, persons over institutional practices, emotions over facts, and game over substance’. Thus, the media provides a superficial and distorted image of the society. The issues are dramatised around the personalities, this leads to trivialisation of content, because the preoccupation with drama often distracts attention from the political significance of the event. “Flak” as a means of disciplining “Flak” refers to the negative response to a particular media statement or program, this the most common way of disciplining media. Media usually self disciplines if they realize that a particular statement, opinion or fact may generate flak. The ability to generate flak that is costly and threatening to media is directly related to power and wealth. The more power, influence and money an individual or company has, the more successful will be the flak. Thus if media makes a statement which conflicts the interest of a particular NGO, then that NGO would most likely generate flak by giving a public statement or a press release. But, compare it with flak generated by say Microsoft by pulling out all the advertising money; it does not take much to understand who the media will favour and whose interests media will look after. The government is also a major producer of powerful flak by threatening to cancel licenses. Democracy as mechanisms of control The democracy encourages open society and needs informed and rational public and media is a means to convey information about political issues and current events to the public, but this ability is reduced by the reliance on official sources and government and power groups control over the content. Since public opinion is the product of mass media as it is the primary source from which society is informed about issues that affect them. Media treatment of minorities Media is accursed of acting irresponsibly towards minorities in society where multicultural principles are present but do not actually translate into practice. Although there is shift and minorities are increasingly present in images depicting people in position and power, but, this is very limited, in general there are some common themes that could be used in describing media treatment of minorities. Minorities are in general portrayed; 1. as invisible and irrelevant, 2. in terms of race stereotyping, 3. as social problem, and 4. as tokens for entertainment Minorities as Invisible Racial minorities have always been ignored by the media unless convenient to do otherwise. Whether in advertising, newscasting, TV/film, minorities are virtually invisible and under-represented. Minorities are unworthy of coverage unless caught in the situations of crises and conflict. The dearth of minorities in the media is a rule rather than the exception. Furthermore is the absence of racial minorities in creative positions (e.g. director, producer, editor etc.), fewer are employed in the upper levels of management where key decision-making occurs. For women of colour the situation is even worst, this insensitivity, discrimination and racism are indeed a natural and necessary component of the mass media. Minorities as Stereotypes Historically, minorities were presented in a manner consistent with prevailing prejudices and attitudes. For example aboriginals were projected as ‘noble savages’, ‘drunken native’ etc. Other racial minorities were labelled as dropouts, pimps, and drug pushers or magicians, mathematical or scientific geniuses. Blacks in film and TV roles were often portrayed as entertainers, sport figures, villains, victims and domestics. Very rarely did minorities appear with something significant to say or do. This characterisation rarely provoked the critical issue to minority being part of the community, that things could better with their involvement, that racism is a problem or there is more to minorities than the images projected. The film industry has also share in the stereotyping of minorities. According to Michael Parenti, the author of Make Believe Media “Politics of Film and TV, minorities were historically caricaturised as heathen savages or as subordinates in devoted service to white masters. Minorities were obligated to actions related to serving, smiling, or shuffling. Similarly, third world women of colour were slotted into the category of background or filler as servants, alternatively as dangerous or evil, with potential to destroy all that i...