COM 549 – Week 8 Blog Post

Readings:

1. “Afterword: Media Monopoly” (1997) by Ben H. Bagdikian
2. “Archivists struggle to preserve crucial records as paper gives way to pixels” (1999) – by Florence Olson
3. Christensen – Breaking The Wire (Ch 10)

Post based on reflections on Bagdikian article.

**************

In “Afterword: Media Monopoly” an extremely interesting and important dilemma is posited by the author Ben Bagdikian. The article’s central premise is “the conflict-between what is good for business and what is good for the quality of life in society.”  I might put it in more simple terms – telecommunication companies wield far too much control in American life. There are too few companies controlling too valuable an infrastructure and service (essentially the means of distribution of digital media in many forms). Combine that with the fact that they have influence in Washington D.C. thanks to their powerful army of lobbyists, and the ability to align public opinion with their own agenda at times and all the ingredients are there for corporations to be corrupt at worst and negligent at best in their efforts to promote social equity.

As the author explains it, the crux of the problem is mass media companies are the most influential forces ”socializing and politicizing” the American public.  Because so many mass media companies are owned by large American corporations, the possibility of a dangerous conflict of interest becomes apparent. Through various forms, corporations are able to extend their beliefs and motives to an unsuspecting American public, “inappropriate as it may be.”

What is the most identifiable ‘value’ that corporate American might want to extend to the general population? Taxes. Corporate America would immediately and consistently have you believe that there’s nothing more anti-American than taxes themselves. A violation of the primary tenants of our civil religion – individuality, personal responsibility, and the steadfast belief in oneself and Providence, NOT government to solve life’s challenges and make ones decisions. Corporations’ disdain of taxes and their ability to impose that shared mindset on the public is mentioned as an explanation for why the true crises in the United States go unattended to year after year – crises such as inadequate housing and unsafe neighborhoods, lack of universal health care, underfunded and overcrowded schools, a lack of a universal living wage, lack of mass transit infrastructure, and inequitable executive compensation.

Before corporate American culture could truly socialize and politicize the general population however, it first needed the right medium. The television was just that. In the 1950s, the television set became a mainstay in American homes, transforming the way families scheduled their lives and budgets. No longer did Americans have to head out for a night out at dinner and the movies or theatre for entertainment. A perfectly fun and much more inexpensive evening could be had at home.

As television became the most “powerful merchandising tool in human experience” the addition of countless new stations and the introduction of the remote control combined to catalyze a race between networks in an all out competition for an increasingly fractured audience. The unfortunate consequence has been the same type of ‘lowest common denominator’ appeal to content production that we’ve discussed and read about all quarter. Except in terms of television programming, it became about lowest common denominator ways to try to shock, and thus captivate, an audience, usually through violence and sex. 

I’d like to read the rest of this book. I would need to do a bit of research on the author, but my impression is that the belief system of the author is more aligned with Ralph Nader than I might typically prefer. That said, as I’ve been known to sound off on in class this quarter in COM 549, the uneven playing field between consumers/the American public and telecoms is a very important issue to me. So important in fact that it’s made me consider a career in policy or, God forbid, even politics. With so few companies owning the means of distribution of the World’s most precious resource – information and the ability to connect - I can’t help but try to conceive of ways in which a truly free-market and common sense approach could be applied.

Though it’s a discussion for another day, my initial thought would be public ownership of broadband and all the fiber optic cable that allows the the amazing free flow of information in 21st century society.

Similar to what Bagdikian said to conclude: “The airwaves do not belong to the broadcasters. They do not belong to the advertisers. The owners, by law, are the people of the United States.”