THE DANGERS OF MEDIA CONSOLIDATION
Here's our Daily News editorial for today. For more about media consolidation check out my previous blogs on that topic.
THE RECENT SALE OF Dow Jones, the publisher of the Wall Street Journal, to media shark Rupert Murdoch has raised a lot of questions about media consolidation - questions that, unfortunately, too many news outlets weren't willing to look at until it became clear that they, too, could be chum for News Corp.
America's media aren't completely controlled by one person or group, but it is undeniable that we're on that course. Last year, Knight Ridder, the former owner of this paper and publisher of 31 other newspapers, went up for sale, and the growing conglomerate vultures were circling. unlike the local media group that bought the Daily News and Inquirer. Large conglomerates like McClatchy Newspapers bought up the rest, ensuring that some content from town to town remain unvaried.
To compete, and to avoid takeovers, outlets are cutting budgets, which means fewer reporters to cover stories. When the Journal can post healthy profits hovering around $30 million per quarter, but one man can come in and offer 200 times that to buy the whole kit and caboodle, no one is safe.
A poll of journalists, editors and news executives around the country by the Project for Excellence in Journalism reported that 43 percent of national editors say their staff size has decreased in the past three years. When asked if the "bottom line" was hurting news coverage or just changing the way organizations do things, 74 percent of journalists said it was hurting coverage.
So, the signs have been there for a while that not only are media companies gobbling each other up, but that this trend is having a serious impact on the quality of news. Rupert Murdoch, to be clear, isn't the problem. He's merely a symptom.
Finally, feeling threatened by the growing shadow of Murdoch and his news outlets' conservative slant, Democratic politicians are speaking out more forcefully for the need to maintain a diversity in news sources. Everyone from Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama to Chris Dodd have started to make this a key issue. Yes, they do so in their own self-interest, but that shouldn't invalidate their point. One can only hope that Republicans make this a main campaign theme as well, because it's only a matter of time before a liberal billionaire tries to beat Murdoch at his own game.
In the end, when politicians and the public fight to ensure varied and diverse ownership in media, we all win. *
Comments (4)
Flavia wrote this post last week but I'm posting it today because I was on vacation at that time. Just FYI.
Posted by: admin on August 21, 2007 16:29
I remember when Mr. Murdoch bought the Hearst paper in San Antonio, the San Antonio Light. Until that time there were 2 thriving newspapers in town with very loyal readers to each.
I should know because I spent a summer between semesters selling the paper. It was tough to get people to switch.
And my mom was a writer for the Light. She would interview local church leaders and community activist, and through her column in the Metro section, voice the concerns of people that didn't have much of a say in the city.
Needless to say, she, and most of the writing staff of the Light who leaned more to the people's side were laid off. Their services were no longer needed, and people lost a caring voice.
Now I am grown and I know that it is the nature of business for the big fish to eat the little fish. The community is only an after thought in the corporate jungle. People get laid off all the time.
But in many towns all over the country, with only one paper, only one set of views are passed along. In Mr. Murdoch's world, the paper is just another avenue for him to shape our popular culture and influence our minds.
Now Mr. Murdoch can buy and buy and buy. Like the rich kid on the block who has the football...but here is the secret...we don't have to play with him.
Seek out other avenues of news and entertainment, as difficult as it may be. Know who owns what and see how they are connected...there is a reason that news anchors is always doing a news story on company X or Y.
Hold the news to a high standard. Fact check and let the switchboards know when they are being dishonest or mistaken.
And be on the look out for attacks on net nuetrality and the eventual drive for a man like Murdoch (or Murdoch himself) to attempt to control the internet. Don't let it happen!
Posted by: jdnla on August 23, 2007 17:54
"But in many towns all over the country, with only one paper, only one set of views are passed along. In Mr. Murdoch's world, the paper is just another avenue for him to shape our popular culture and influence our minds."
Spare me. The nightly network news is one set of views on 3 "separate" networks attempting to shape our popular culture and influence our minds. The far left had their way with the media for decades. A little competition in the arena of ideas gets introduced and you whine like schoolgirls.
Posted by: on August 23, 2007 20:50
I don't see how Mr. Murdoch buying every media outlet he can get a hold on is a little comeptition. Sounds more like the creation of a monopoly.
The arguement people make about the far left or right running the media is asburd. I'm more worried about the fact one person is determining what people hear and read then the political affilations of that person.
Posted by: agincourt on August 24, 2007 11:05