Chapter 5 Media conglomerates When a newspaper and a broadcast television station are under a single operation, it is often as part of a media conglomerate with many other interests as well. The largest magazine company in the world following acquisition of Owns 15 local television stations and various digital media properties. Thus by providing information the media can inspire and generate political social ideas and aid in shaping policy agenda and priorities. Since the lone benefit of altering the rule will be more profits to the owners of existing media conglomerates, and more concentration of media, there seems to be no good basis for eliminating the ban. There was diversity, albeit not perfect. They have been able to sustain their oligopoly over communication resources through huge investments, synergistic mechanisms, and horizontal, vertical, and diagonal expansion.
Over the last decade, there has been diversification of Indian media into multiple sectors and this has created an atmosphere of inter-sectoral relationships. In the period before passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, when companies were prohibited from owning more than one radio station in a market, cross-ownership of a same-market newspaper and radio station would not have posed a major threat in terms of monopolizing opinion. These may include a news content industry fund or levy, or other forms of tax breaks or public service subsidies, in addition to the existing local content scheme. And despite their downplaying of their future prospects, a study by the American Journalism Review found almost all of these companies experienced double-digit growth in earnings in the year 2000. Since the enactment of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the number of owners of commercial radio stations declined from approximately 5,100 to approximately 3,800, a decrease of 25% 2 Compaine and Gomery 2000.
The pressure to merge local television stations and newspapers is pure greed. Thus, the poor and the elderly, who are of less interest to advertisers, are also likely to be of little interest to profit-maximizing newspapers. It meant that the population of the licence areas controlled by one person or company could not exceed 60% of the total Australian population. As it has since 2003, argued that the relaxed rule would pave the way for more media consolidation. Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under Creative Commons licence. Commissioners Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein, both Democrats, opposed the change.
But diversity and pluralism remain policies of high consequence because they are directed at maintaining an informed population. With this concentration of ownership, decisions of formats were made within the same group, and so the economics of competition disappeared in favor of classic oligopoly — particularly within bigger markets. This principle will be jeopardized if broadcasters are allowed to own, or be owned by, a newspaper in the same community. The print media and public agencies have ignored and not given journalist space for reporting to take place on a critical issue such as this. That would be a dangerous precedent for democracy, permitting a handful of companies that control the production and distribution of news, entertainment, and ideas to become further consolidated. For instance, Robert Kuttner, in his book, Everything for Sale 1996 , persuasively links the erosion of civic life through the 20th century with the agenda-set ting power of the mass media in general and broadcast television in particular. Their study of local television ownership and market concentration shows the same trend for broadcast television.
The public, and in particular people in rural and regional Australia, do not even get a look-in. Gannett now produces one out of every seven newspapers sold in the United States. In disagreement to public perception I believe the media to be at a crucial juncture and a comprehensive framework to stabilize media can help sustain democratic values and editorial independence. It can be achieved when common people are well informed about their rights. For newspapers under joint agreements only the editorial units are separate; all other portions of the companies, including printing, advertising, and delivery, operate jointly. Institutions seek to protect their monopoly power. That is, from the beginning, we need to acknowledge that the history of institutions plays a vital role, and that institutional ownership matters.
There are few media groups which own almost all the media viz electronic, print and advertising agencies in Pakistan. The economies of scale of such combinations help to keep the second newspaper in business. For example, Gannett, after a multi-billion dollar spate of acquisitions in 2000, grew from 74 daily newspapers to 99, and it operates as a local monopoly in each of these markets. This monopoly power endangers democracy, and merger with a local broadcast television station would endanger democracy further. How should we make sure that the stated policy of safeguarding the public interest is ensured? The so-called dinosaur nightly news programs — local and national — consistently draw audiences five times that size. The marketplace of ideas calls for criteria of accuracy and completeness, and these qualities must count in any definition of diversity. The 1996 Telecommunications Act for radio did not work, and its failure ought to alert us to the dangers of eliminating long-time ownership rules.
Programmers use violence as part of their profit-seeking activity, and Hamilton argues for the need for media firms to internalize their negative externalities. Its purpose is to prevent a single person or company from controlling more than two out of three media platforms — commercial radio, commercial television and newspaper — in the same radio licence area. Although there have been no established cases of media monopoly, the recent takeover of a prominent media house by an industry leader has raised eyebrows over an absence of legislations or specific regulator in dealing with possible issues of media monopoly. For example, in 1975 a single entity could not own more than 14 radio stations nationwide, while today one entity owns more than 1,000 stations. While niche newspapers do reach targeted audiences, they differ from the broad-based, dominant monopoly newspapers that set the political, social, and cultural agenda of the community.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 set off the greatest merger wave in history. Formerly Clear Channel, it owns a large number of radio stations across the country, the radio streaming platform , which in turn owns , , The , , , , and , all being among the , and previously held a stake in and as well as several television stations later under the management of , and now owned by separate companies. Studying the economics of mass communication as a homogeneous good or service assumes away the important roles played by the media in society and public life. The study went into the state and extent of cross media holdings in the industry, the international experience in this matter, the need for caps on vertical holdings, and for transparency and public disclosure of ownership and holding patterns in the media sector. It owns or a large number of television stations across the country that are affiliated with all six major television networks, including stations formerly owned by , , , and.
Modernizing these cross-ownership rules would benefit consumers access to these traditional sources of local media. In addressing this question, we need to recognize that in the newspaper and television industries there are market failures. It was created to regulate the telephone monopolies, but also regulate the licensing for the spectrum used for broadcasting. Owns one of the , , which publishes video games and manufactures video game consoles, one of the major , and the online distributor. Community service has given way to corporate profit centers Compaine and Gomery 2000; Halonen 2001; Squires 1994 1. The generally does not allow cross ownership, to keep from one license holder having too much local media ownership, unless the license holder obtains a waiver, such as and the have in New York.