The Dangers of media conglomeration + Conclusion

Media consolidation has some benefits but also has larger negative effects towards society if not properly addressed. Its positive effects concern primarily consumers and investors. For viewers and consumers of media, they can have more choices at a lesser price than what other competitors charge, allowing their audience to consume popular media in one multi-modal space. Those who oppose government control, would feel comfortable in a big-name company leading the advances of media and entertainment. Individuals who invest in large media conglomerates believe that these companies are innovators in the developments of the medium, placing risks and develop content that will be for the “betterment of all”. In summary, consumers wanting a platform where all their favorite blogs, news, and entertainment are in one space and for shareholders and investors, a successful venture that will never lose profit because it follows the norm.

With these benefits comes consequences. With a large number of media entering in digital streaming platforms, media consolidation can impact the originality and creativity in the media landscape as parent companies try to churn out as many productions as possible to fill their digital library (Doyle 2019). The FCC (Federal Communications Commission) a government organization that works to protect the public interests in the field of communication and media oversees how much control a large media companies have in the market (in other words media consolidation), In 2005 they relaxed the rules which began the harmful trend in where many small corporations and media entities were being bought out by these conglomerates. Although having more media companies and new networks in the market than in the past, only few are owned by local providers and are controlled by larger media “Families and parent companies” only looking into national and mainstream content (Kimmelman 2005).

....

Now large media conglomerates have used their influence to shape public opinion before. In 2018 CNN journalists uncovered that the Sinclair Broadcast Group used its vast networks of 200 tv stations to broadcast a script where local news anchors repeated the same message to denounce “Fake news stories” from mainstream media to their local audience. Dead spin (2018) created a video edited compilation of all these news stations delivering the exact same script, in which these companies halted their local programing.

The issue is that a large media organization is making its rhetorical intentions as if was being said by your trusted local journalists and newscasters, in essence like a wolf in sheep’s clothing, but instead of eating you, they manipulate you (the public) into thinking the way they want you to think. If one company has that much influence to shape public opinion, it can certainly affect citizen participation in our democracy

Conclusion

So, it is safe to say, media conglomeration should not be stopped but rather than monitored with more regulations and oversight. By identifying how media conglomerates influence consumers and seeing its flaws, we can see how a consumer should be more knowledgeable with the media they consume. With more content being created every day, users spend about 7-8 hours a day with media (Statista, 2021), they should be aware of how these conglomerates operate and have a space where they can comment on bettering the said content. The public should shift its consumption to media companies that are focused in their local communities and toward their personal experiences or companies that expand the bounds of debate and inform educational topics in a engaging and innovative way.

...

This is part of a research project with Florida International University. Check it out in the Literate Consumer