Rich media, poor democracy

From Driscollwiki

McChesney, R. W. (1999) Rich media, poor democracy: Communication politics in dubious times. Urbana & Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

Note: page numbers here are relative to my crummy PDF. Page 1 is start of Chp 1 (+16 to correct.)

Contents 1 1. U.S. media at the dawn of the twenty-first century 1.1 Structural features of the 1990s media system 1.2 Horizonal integration 1.3 Editor and editorial 1.4 Consolidation 1.5 Conglomeration 1.6 Vertical integration 1.7 Cross-promotion 1.8 Rebound of independents 1.9 Competition (lack of) 1.10 Looking at this phenomenon institutionally 1.11 Analyzing content 1.12 Audience demand 1.13 Trend incorporation 1.14 Hypercommercialism 1.15 What does this mean for the art of *making? 1.16 Advertising innovations 1.17 "Clutter" 1.18 Blurring boundary between editorial and advertising 1.19 Commercialization of U.S. childhood 1.20 Commercialism v hypercommercialism 1.21 Farewell to journalism 1.22 History of journalism 1.23 "Blackouts" of coverage 1.24 How to make journalism profitable 1.25 "Attack on journalism" 1.26 Chilling effects 1.27 Quashing public debate 1.28 History of regulation 1.29 Regulation process 1.30 Telecommunications Act of 1996 1.31 Superopolies 1.32 Telecomm Act ruinous for radio 1.33 Jump offs 1.34 Open questions

1. U.S. media at the dawn of the twenty-first century

"Real trends" in U.S. media (1)

• Corporate concentration
• Conglomeration
• Hypercommercialism

"[U.S. media system is] integral part of the capitalist political economy" (1)

• Troublesome
• Decline in public service
• Corruption, degradation of journalism
  • "to the point where it is scarcely a democratic force" (1)
• Regulation (Telecomm Act 1996) enacted in "undemocratic" fashion (1)

Structural features of the 1990s media system

• Concentration and conglomeration
• Despite increasing options, consolidated ownership, control (2)
  • Survival strategy in the face of media change?
  • Consolidation ensure preparedness for drifting audience attention
  • "vastly less risky"

Horizonal integration

• Control as much of the output in a given medium as possible (2)
  • e.g. dominating AM radio
• Lower overhead, better bargaining position, stronger lobbying
• More influence over prices, less competition
• Market oligarchies are highly stable
  • Stability is desirable, difficult for new players to enter
  • Stability is maintained through deregulation, mergers, acquisitions (3)

Editor and editorial

• Rise of "professional journalism" assuaged some concern regarding the free speech implications of horizontal integration
  • Editorial process disconnected from the funding structure (3)
  • Introducing the notion of "public service"

Consolidation

• Most media sectors (music, books, etc) owned by just a few corporations (3-4)
  • Similarly retail outlets (theaters, bookstores) (4)

Conglomeration

• Media firms begin to have major holdings in two or more distinct sectors (e.g., books + music) (5)
• Between 1988/1998, astonishing rise in revenue accompanying conglomeration (6)

"the option of being a small or middle-sized media firm barely exists any longer." (6)

• Largest firms are interdependent
• Their products appear across multiple channels with multiple owners

Vertical integration

Single organization owns (7)

• Content and production
• Channels of distribution

TV is a good place to start vertically integrating

Cross-promotion

Brand integration, marketing (8)

• ESPN begets ESPN radio, magazine, bar&grille, etc. (9)
• "synergy" (10)
• Media companies sell retail products (10)

Profitability of cross-promotion very high

• Thus difficult for media corps to compete without engaging in cross-promo, branding (11)
• "It only makes sense to be a player if you are a very, very big player with a broad stable of media assets to exploit." (13)

Rebound of independents

• Some proliferation of independent record labels, book publishers
• Is concentration easier to work around? (12)
• Independents make products, services "too risky" for the "big firms" (12)
  • But if its successful, they may be imitated or bought out

"The notion that independents might sprout up to challenge the existing giants is dead." (12)

Competition (lack of)

• Competition at this level hurts profitability
• Cooperation among "oligarchic" stakeholders is better strategry (14)
  • See: annual meeting in Idaho, "a cartel" (14)
• Risk is spread among competitiors via "equity joint ventures"
• Multiple "direct links" or board members who sit on multiple media corp's boards (15)

Looking at this phenomenon institutionally

"By any known theory of democracy, such a concentration of economic, cultural, and political power into so few hands [...] is absurd and unacceptable." (16)

Long standing "moguls" and "strong CEOs"

• But it's not about the personalities of individual CEOs
• They are behaving rationally according to the marketplace (16)

"It may be understandable why most politicians effectively whore for powerful media and communication firms, but it is still a violation of public trust. And when we no longer expect elected officials to meet even rudimentary standards of public integrity, then, indeed, our use of the term "democracy" to describe this system becomes almost Orwellian." (17)

• This approach can only rarely provide a detailed understanding of specific media content
• Effect of institution on content is difficult to locate in a single predictive variable (17)

Analyzing content

"The real way to assess the content of the media system is to judge it in its entirety." (18)

• Content is "woeful" in light of massive resources
• McCh suggests that the "good" productions happen in spite of the structure
  • Outliers like Bulworth or Michael Moore movies demonstrate this possibility
• "Extent of [individual creative] freedom is unclear." (18)
  • Plenty of participants "internalize the dominant comercial mores" (18)
• Why does anything "good" get made at all?
  • Audiences demand it (18)

Audience demand

• Audiences may demand "quality fare" (18)
• But, McCh suggests that "supply creates demand" (19)
• There is "little incentive in the system to develop public taste over time." (19)
• After hearing the same 5 songs, people (apparently) want nothing but those 5 songs.

Trend incorporation

• Corporations seek trends to exploit before they can "establish any artistic integrity" (20)

Hypercommercialism

• Spice Girls' album release coordinated with production of various other branded materials (20)
• Such branding "mandatory for commercial success in the music industry." (20)
• Advertising as a vehicle for cross-promoting pop music (21)

What does this mean for the art of *making?

• Quoting an unnamed industry analyst, "the movie is almost incidental." (23)

Advertising innovations

• Product placement
• In-store
• Grocery tie-ins (stickers on apples) (24)
• New kinds of street advertising, signage (25)
  • "Wraps"
• Sponsorship, co-production (26)

"Clutter"

• Consumer "believability" in advertising dropping from 87-97 (24)

Blurring boundary between editorial and advertising

• Viacom distribution requires certain amount of ad buying (27)
• Return of "payola" to radio (27)

Commercialization of U.S. childhood

• A generation of "world-class shoppers" and "couch potatoes" (30)
• Cross-promotion in textbooks, lunchrooms (30)
  • Schools need money
  • Tied to free-market economics and the right-wing resistance to public schooling (31)

Commercialism v hypercommercialism

• Commercialism has been "an important theme" throughout US history (32)
• McCh is concerned with the scale of hypercommercialism

Farewell to journalism

• "Decline and marginalization of any public service values among the media" (32)
• History of journalism as "public service" throughout 20th c. (33)

History of journalism

• In practice, PJ is "far from politically neutral" (34)
• Professional journalism emerged as a response to commercial limits of partisan journalism (33)
  • Advertisers upset
• PJ relies on "news hooks", "events to justify publication" (34)
  • Difficult to report on-going non-events, ambient or systemic phenomena
• Less emphasis on historical or ideological context (34)
• PJ "internalizes" business priorities as natural

"Blackouts" of coverage

• On labor, anti-war, scandal that would embarass wealthiest stakeholders (34)
• Are there not similar blackouts of other issues?
• Are blackouts always tied to commercialism?
• Why no coverage examining military spending with same scrutiny afforded public schooling?
• Professional journalism had unusual freedom in the postwar years that gradually faded toward the 1990s
  • McCh links this decline to the increase of commercial pressure (35)
  • Esp. "conflict-of-interest" between news org and its conglomerate owners (36)

How to make journalism profitable

• Lay off reporters, staff (38)
• Concentrate on stories that are inexpensive, easy to cover (e.g. celeb gossip)
  • Crime coverage is way up
• e.g. Local TV news is 40% crime/war/disaster, 25% fluff (38)

"Attack on journalism"

• Less staff, more temp/freelance (39)
• Forging connections between editorial + business areas (40)

"It would be highly irrational business conduct for the dominant media firms to approach journalism in any manner other than the way they presently do." (42)

Chilling effects

• Self-censorship in light of advertiser interest (41)
• Fear of reprisal based on libel (42)
  • Chiquita sues Enquirer out of business (42)
• Critical journalism discredited by peers (44)

Quashing public debate

• Fatalistic sense that pro-business is "the way it must be" (47)
• Media policymaking has been "singularly undemocratic" (48)
• Considerable lobbying power among oligarchic media institutions (48-9)
• Politicians beholden not just for money but for access and representation in news/pop media (49)
• Citizens represented by comparatively puny lobbies
• "Market-friendly" reforms are too limp to inspire popular support (51)

History of regulation

• FCC empowered to regulate based on scarcity of broadcast spectrum
• However, "profitability" standard has been maintained (52)
• Efforts to introduce notion of "public service" are rebuffed by Congresspeople (52)
• "Commercial broadcasters have become the de facto owners of the public airwaves." (53)
• Public service commitments satisfied by branded PSAs by the Ad Council (54)
• V-chips, ratings systems deflect responsibility from content producers to ineffective technologies (55)

Regulation process

• Industry interest in keeping things low-key, no Congressional debate (56)

Telecommunications Act of 1996

• Rushed through quietly to avoid discussion in the Presidential election/campaign season (57)
• Intentionally vauge in many parts for further elaboration by FCC (57-8)
• Promise of deregulation: increased competition, improved service, lower prices (58)
• But firms organize themselves such that there is not this kind of competition in certain market segments (58)

Superopolies

• Extreme consolidation, massive ownership in a single market (Clear Channel) (59)
• Such robust ownership in a single market that a radio company can effectively compete for advertisers with TV

Telecomm Act ruinous for radio

• Superopolies destroy local programming
• Max out advertising
• Radio becomes an extremely low cost, high margin

Jump offs

• Bagdikian, Ben. (1983) The media monopoly.
  • Updated edition in 1997 lists only 10 major media owners
• Arthur Kent, exposé of GE censoring news

Open questions

• Even these numbers are out of date. Increasing consolidation in the last 10 years. As expected based on McChesney's description of market stability, horizontal integration. What does this critique look like today?
• Small or medium-sized web businesses? Or is the Google/Yahoo/Microsoft buyout the only viable growth path?
• Vertical integration in internet services: Hulu/NBC/Universal/Comcast/GE
• Is a highly integrated, conglomerated industry easier to subvert, disrupt with new tech, new models?
  • Napster is affirmative example
  • FM radio a negative example
• Must media artifacts be explicitly political in the most conventional sense to be considered "good"
  • Beatty, Moore (18)
  • ESPN's exposé on sweatshop labor (37)
• Theory of audiences demanding the same thing over and over (19)
  • If so, is it sinister or is it evidence of an unsatisfied/unsatisfiable desire?
  • Pleasure in novelty, different from pleasure in recall?
• Some of these numbers are not clear. E.g. percentages of foreign film theaters. Are there simply MORE screens than there were? Megaplexes count as one theater or 30? (19)
  • Certainly, I witnessed theaters go out of business but does that account for the percentages?
• Description of 1970s punk, reggae, and hiphop as "movements" fundamentally misrepresents their relationship to the music industry (20)
  • In fact, all of the pop music examples demonstrate limited understanding of the forces at play
• Patti Smith, "rock'n'roll belongs to business." (21) When did it ever not belong to business??
• "Difficult to see how it has improved the sport experience" (29) Have you watched an NFL game on TV?
• Discursive turn toward children on p29 is straight out of the censor's playbook. The critique may be valid but it's not a good way to argue to me...
• Is McCh history of journalism apocryphal? Is it the history of all journalism from Manhattan to Mayberry or is it the ideal of major newspapers and an elite group of practitioners?
• Is this a decline? Or is the history imagined and this is merely a continuation of a shitty state of affairs. Can it be improved?
  • "Do not wish to exaggerate [but] notable shift" (46)
• Thinking regulation, "public"-ness of a natural resource is not a settled matter, cannot be assumed (53)