The role of the media in democracies is to connect decision makers and voters. The media should thus fulfil a basic position and serve as a foundation for the democratic process. In Rich Media, Poor Democracy R.W. McChesney argues that the media, far from providing a bedrock for freedom and democracy, have become a significant antidemocratic force in the United States and, to varying degrees, worldwide. The variables that have caused this development are the corporate media explosion and the corresponding implosion of public life and culture. M.C. Miller (2001) even states that “the generated monoculture, endlessly and noisily triumphant, offers, by and large, a lot of nothing, whether packaged as ‘the news’ or ‘entertainment’”. Whereas the major beneficiaries are wealthy investors, advertisers and the few leading media conglomerates, this concentrated corporate control is disastrous for any notion of participatory democracy.
The text contrasts the two fundamentally different positions of the media’s role in democracy, which are the media in the desirable position as provider of a public sphere in a Habermasian sense, and the media’s role in a liberal theory understanding. By focussing largely on the US media, the prototype of privatization, section two names the most influential corporate powers and presents the influence they exert. Following the description of their independence from any controlling instances, such as the FCC, the text finally points out alternatives which are basically derived from D.W. Mazzocco.
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- Introduction
- The role of the media in democracy
- The public sphere in context of its contemporary relevance
- Liberal press theory
- Privatization and commercialisation
- The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the infiltration of the First Amendment
- Conservative informational control
- The influence of PR and advertising
- Alternative models
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This text analyzes the media's role in democracy, contrasting two distinct perspectives: the media as a public sphere in a Habermasian sense and the media's role within a liberal theory framework. It primarily focuses on the US media as a prime example of privatization, outlining the influential corporate powers and their impact. It examines the media's independence from control mechanisms like the FCC and proposes alternative models.
- The media's role in democracy and its impact on public life
- The contrasting perspectives of Habermasian public sphere theory and liberal press theory
- The influence of corporate media and its consequences for democratic participation
- The limitations of the public sphere in the context of commercialization and market forces
- The role of the state and the media in a democratic society
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
- Introduction: This chapter introduces the debate surrounding the media's role in democracy, contrasting the ideal of a public sphere with the reality of corporate control and its antidemocratic tendencies. It highlights the impact of commercialization and the concentration of media ownership in the hands of a few conglomerates.
- The role of the media in democracy: This section examines two contrasting approaches to the media's role in democracy: the Habermasian public sphere and liberal press theory. The Habermasian perspective emphasizes the media's function as a platform for open and free discourse, while liberal theory stresses the media's watchdog role in checking the state. The chapter explores the limitations of both perspectives in the face of corporate dominance and commercialization.
- The public sphere in context of its contemporary relevance: This section dives deeper into Habermas' theory of the public sphere and its relevance in today's context. It examines the key characteristics of a Habermasian public sphere, including independence from state and corporate influence, openness to all participants, and equal power distribution. The chapter analyzes how the media's commercialization and corporate dominance have undermined these principles, leading to a diminished public sphere and knowledge gaps.
- Liberal press theory: This section explores the liberal theory approach to the media's role in democracy, emphasizing its watchdog function in monitoring state activity. It critiques the liberal theory's reliance on the free market as a solution, arguing that it leads to further privatization and a decline in diversity, freedom of speech, and public interest. The chapter highlights the dangers of a media system controlled by a small group of powerful corporations.
Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
The text focuses on the interplay between media, democracy, and power. It explores key concepts such as the public sphere, liberal press theory, media commercialization, corporate control, and the role of the state in regulating the media. The work also touches upon themes of public interest, freedom of speech, and the implications of information inequality for democratic participation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Habermasian concept of the public sphere?
It refers to an ideal space for open, free discourse where citizens can discuss matters of public interest independent of state and corporate influence.
How does corporate media control affect democracy?
Concentrated corporate control can lead to a "monoculture" where news and entertainment serve the interests of wealthy investors rather than participatory democracy.
What is Liberal Press Theory?
This theory emphasizes the media's role as a "watchdog" that monitors the state, but it often relies on the free market, which can lead to excessive commercialization.
What role does the FCC play in the US media landscape?
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is a regulatory body, but critics argue it has allowed for significant privatization and corporate consolidation.
Are there alternatives to the current corporate media model?
Yes, alternative models often focus on non-profit structures, community-based media, and stronger public funding to ensure diverse perspectives.
- Quote paper
- Anonym (Author), 2003, The democratic illusion: Liberal theory and the public sphere as approaches to understand the media's role in democracy, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/17408
