global media: menace or messiah? part ii. are the critics right? according to demers, critics of...

Global Media: Menace or Messiah?

Part II

Are the Critics Right?

• According to Demers, critics of global media have failed to:

1. Provide empirical evidence for their claims.

2. Account for social changes that have benefited oppressed groups.

3. Resolve the “approved contradiction”


• The “approved contradiction”– “How can organizations managed and

controlled on a daily basis by professional managers rather than the owners (i.e., corporate organizations) be expected to maximize rewards for others (owners) but not themselves?”


• The problem with most critical models:– “…the main problem with those models is that

they generally overstated the social control part of the equation and understated the social change component.”


• Demers points out that corporate media organizations…

1. Pay higher salaries

2. Allow for more autonomy

• Due to..1. Division of labor

2. Specialization and expertise


• The problem with global media critics’ failure to account for social changes:– “The problem with this antichange position is that it is

inconsistent with history and a large body of empirical research. During the last century in particular, newspapers have played an important role in legitimating and sometimes promoting (though rarely initiating) the goals of many social movements, which in turn have led to a number of social changes” (94).


• The Managerial Revolution

• “The ‘managerial revolution’ holds that as organizations become more corporatized, power and control over day-to-day operations shifts from the owners to the professional managers” (p. 95).


• As a result of the managerial revolution, Demers contends that

1. Corporate employees are actually less profit-motivated than non-corporate employees.

2. Corporate employees place more emphasis on the growth of the organization.

3. Corporate employees place more emphasis on product quality.

Global Media and Social Control

• Three basic principles behind Western journalism’s “ethic of objectivity”:

1. Journalists should keep their personal opinions and the opinions of their organization out of their stories.

2. All sides to a story should be covered and reported.

3. All sides to a story should be given an equal amount of coverage.


• The ethic of objectivity came from the “penny press” (one cent newspapers intended for purchase by the general public) which stood in contrast to older partisan newspapers which were attempting to appeal only to the members of their own interest group.


• Conservatives tend to argue that corporate media have a liberal bias.

• Liberals tend to argue that corporate media have a conservative bias.

• Journalists tend to argue that corporate media is neither liberal nor conservative.


• Demers argues that corporate media have a “mainstream bias.”– Mainstream ideology in America is best

described as the ideals endorsed by Republicans and Democrats.


• Mainstream Bias is best described as follows:– “the more extreme the group, the less coverage

it will receive and the less favorable the coverage will be. Conversely, as a rule, the more the group’s goals fall within mainstream values and norms, the more coverage it tends to get and the more favorable that coverage [is]” (103).


• Mainstream Values in the News (according to H. J. Gans):– Ethnocentrism– Altruistic democracy– Responsible capitalism– Small-town pastoralism– Individualism– Strong leadership


• Mainstream Values in Entertainment– Crime doesn’t pay– Successful careers– Education/Skills– Romance and love


• Mainstream bias comes from– Corporate media’s dependence upon profits.– Corporate media’s reliance upon political and

economic elites for news.


• Relative Objectivity– The incorporation of a diversity of views while

still maintaining the dominant values and social institutions.


• Long-term effects of global media:– Promotion of Western values (i.e. democracy

and capitalism).– Reduction of elite power.

Global Media and Social Change

• Media as “watch dog”– The idea that media serve as a check on powerful social

institutions, especially for the weak and powerless.

• Media as “lap dog”– The idea that media are tools of the rich and powerful

• Media as “guard dog”– Demers’ notion that the media act as a mechanism to

maintain the current system and promote the status quo.


• “A social system may be defined as two or more people or organizations who depend upon each other to achieve their goals” (119).

• Problems that are individual in nature can be remedied by dealing with the particular person, whereas problems that are systemic in nature require system-wide changes.

• Big media tend to portray most problems as individual rather than systemic in order to protect the status quo.


• An early example of how media have facilitated social change is the “muckraker” journalists in the early 20th century who opposed corruption in the senate and poor working conditions in factories, among other things.


• Investigative reporting is part of the modern legacy of the muckrakers.

• Investigative reporting is most effectively conducted by big media: “corporate media organizations are the only ones with enough power to challenge big business and massive governmental bureaucracies” (123).


• What distinguishes a corporate group?1. They are “consciously created instruments of

self-governance designed to promote the interests of their members.”

2. They exist apart from the individual(s) who created them and/or who are a part of them. That is, they are a legal entity unto themselves.


• The advantages of the corporate form of organization:

1. Permanence (it survives beyond the individual members)

2. Risk limitation (investors cannot be sued for the actions of the corporation)


• Demers claims that corporate media are more critical of the status quo (than entrepreneurial media) for two reasons:

1. Because they are a product of pluralism.

2. They are less susceptible to special interests because they are insulated from ownership and community concerns.

The Global Managerial Revolution

• Managerial Revolution Hypothesis:– “Control of corporate organizations in modern

societies has been shifting from the owners, or capitalists, to professional managers and highly skilled technocrats” (138).


• Managerial Revolution Rationale:– As opposed to owners, who have a direct and

vested interest in the profitability of a company, professional managers have no such (direct) interest because they are salaried employees and, therefore, are more interested in professional standards, prestige, and job security.


• Factors that have promoted the Global Managerial Revolution:

1. The dispersion of wealth owing to the death of major capitalists and stockholders.

2. Organizational growth which requires multiple sources of funding.

3. Increasing complexity and specialization of workers which forces owners to leave many tasks in the hands of employees.

4. Pension, Insurance, Mutual, and Trust funds.

global media: menace or messiah? part ii. are the critics right? according to demers, critics of...

Documents

critics of global media

global media critics

social controlconservatives

social controldemers

social movements

corporate organizations

social controlmainstream

number of social changes