Customer Reviews

The Media Monopoly

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

In his book, The Media Monopoly, Ben Bagdikian writes about the increasing centralization of the media by a small number of private organizations. He explains the concept, causes and consequences of the monopoly in the mass media. To begin with, the author points out that only twenty-three corporations own the eighty percent of American media (p. 21). They invest millions in different types of media for primarily two reasons: "money and influence" (p. 5). The power of these conglomerations is such that they can strongly influence the political and social views of the people, mainly through corruption and subtle persuasion techniques.

Monopoly is defined as the exclusive ownership of a service or a commodity. Ben Bagdikian applies the concept of monopoly to the media industry. Giant companies own almost every mass medium: "newspapers, magazines, books, radios, broadcast television, cable systems and programming, movies, recordings [and] video cassettes" (p. xiii). Examples of this phenomenon are Capital Cities/ABC, Gannett and Time Warner corporations, among others (p. 21,22). By buying every different medium, these powerful giants communicate messages based on the owner's interest; thus, narrowing down the available sources of information. For instance, ABC, CBS and NBC networks control the majority of the national television. In addition, another consequence of the media monopoly is that as a result of private ownership, media turned into a business. As Bagidikian says, "now magazines aren't started with the desire of someone to express what he believes; [instead], they become bland to avoid controversy" (p. 112, 85). For example, "newspapers get seventy five percent of their revenues from ads, general circulation magazines fifty percent, and broadcasting almost a hundred percent" (p.115)

The author states that one of the causes of the media monopoly is that publishers and broadcast producers never talk of the present condition of the media ownership. Gannett's editors would state slogans such as "ten choices for the reader" or "Gannett: a world of different ideas where freedom speaks", when actually, the opposite is happening (p. 75). Since 1970, Gannett has been buying local newspapers from many different regions. The strategy is simple: before buying a locally owned newspaper they promise to continue with its local news and values. They also assure that they will make it better. However, after buying it, they reduce its staff and local news, and tell the current publisher "how much he/she must produce in profits"; thus, they turn the community newspaper into one more link of their big chain where money is what counts (p. 78).

However, the media monopoly not only affects people's social views. When talking about politics, as the United States lacks of a national daily press, Bagdikian implies that "no national news medium can, by itself, serve the American voter" (p. 17). Consequently, private media guide every American citizen at the time of elections. Unfortunately, as profit is always the most prominent interest of these corporations, there are some corrupt cases in media and political history. The case Nixon - Berlin is the example he uses to illustrate how not only media depends on politics, but also how politics depends on media. When Richard Berlin was in trouble because of an antimonopoly law, he asked President Richard Nixon to exempt him and his friends from it. He wrote the President a letter in which he clearly stated how his chains would either help or not President Nixon in his political image depending on his cooperation. Of course, Berlin and his friends were quickly released from the antimonopoly law, and "President Nixon was given his political reward, the support of media organizations" (p. 98). Bagdikian's writes a clear critique about the current American media system. The role of the media has turned from an informational and editorial role to a space where to place the greatest possible number of ads in order to increase profitability. Furthermore, the author can certainly explain the serious social and political consequences that the media monopoly can have by using Gannett's and President Nixon's instances. By explaining every part of the American media monopoly, the author develops a tremendous research to prove his thesis: media are able to shape almost every aspect of our society; hence, almost every aspect of people's life.

I consider The Media Monopoly a powerful and convincing statement about the present condition of American media. Being aware of how so few corporations are able to control almost every aspect of our society, is the first step to open people's mind so they can start analyzing media effects with more criticism. At least I've tried to open mine. Also, amazed by some facts the author provides, I've started telling my friends about how the idea of a controversial media we have is now turning into a pyramid were a small top controls everything below it. Disillusion is my feeling after finishing the book. I knew that there are always persuasion techniques in most messages the media transmits; but I wasn't completely aware of how media conglomerates can affect us so powerfully. In order to continue living in a sane democracy, we need reliable and objective information. Otherwise, our citizen's life turns into a fictitious world were we could lose our freedom of thoughts.

With the Universal-Polygram, Viacom-CBS and AOL-Time Warner merger/acquisitions in progress, one read of Ben Bagdikian's "The Media Monopoly" and the author's stunning vision of the world's media conglomerates dwindling in size and scope of unbiased content, becomes a grim reality. Without any legal or regulatory intervention, this merging of Old and New Media companies can only hurt free enterprise and ultimately the consumers. With the recent news, Bagdikian's logic remains to be true. "The Media Monopoly" is a masterpiece as Bagdikian explicitly details what drives the modern mass media machine: capitalism via advertising as opposed to content.

This book completely cured me of activism. It explains all of societies problems so clearly that you will be dumbfounded as to the amazing simplicity of the solutions. With far less sophisticated and pervasive technology, Hitler was able to convince the so called aryans that Jews were infact rodents. How could this be? Media Molopoly explains it all very simply. People form opinions based on the information that they receive. Edward Bernays figured that out in the 20's and coined the term "Public Relations". Hitlers propaganda minister had all of Bernays books on his book shelf. The process is simple and effective. Our system of gov't is based on the transmission of misinformation. This book reveals things like that, and quite frankly, the book is just about as valuable as a 4 year college degree. It's the most important book i've ever read.

When Bagdikian wrote his first edition of "The Media Monopoly" in 1983, noting that just 50 corporations controlled over half of the media outlets in the United States, many called him an alarmist. Now in its fifth edition, Bagdikian is able to give (uhappily, I'm sure) his critics a resounding "I told you so" by noting that the number of media-monsters dominating over half of America's media landscape has shrunk from 50 to ten. The situation that Bagdikian describes is so dire that it makes one wistful for the good old days of those orginal 50 corporations in 1983. Bagdikian makes a clear and effective case demonstrating how this media concentration subverts democracy. "The Media Monopoly" is an important book that deserves to be read by anyone who thinks that our 500-channel cable universe and the Internet mean that we are living in a fully-informed, democratic society. I look forward to any potential sixth edition of "The Media Monopoly" with dread. Review by Richard Huffman

When a book reaches its fifth edition, it's usually got something to say. In two prefaces, an introduction, 13 chapters and an afterword, Bagdikian sounds an alarm against the dangerous influences that corporations have had on the media landscape. He argues that concentrated control of the media amounts to a "new kind of central authority over information" (p.xiv). The book provides anecdotal insight into some instances where corporate control has negatively impacted the content of various media outlets. Pointing out that the majority of corporate leaders are economically conservative, Bagdikian states that if their corporate interests are at stake, the leaders will use the power over their media holdings to exact influence in the situation:"Some intervention by owners is direct and blunt. But most of the screening is subtle, some not even occuring at a conscious level, as when subordinates learn by habit to conform to owner's ideas" (p.45). He adds: "The quiet alteration of news...may seem preferable to placing corporate money and reputation in jeapordy" (p.37). In one chapter, the author includes detailed information on how newspaper owners once influenced then President Nixon to support passage of the Newspaper Preservation Act; effectively allowing newspapers special status to shield them from anti-trust, monopoly regulations. For his role, "In 1972 Richard Nixon received the highest percentage of newspaper endorsements of any candidate in modern times" (p.99). Bagdikian does a fine job highlighting a very important issue that could benefit from further research. Indeed, perhaps empirical rather than anecdotal evidence would bolster many of the claims eluded to in the book. In writing this book, however, Bagdikian has created a seminal work in the field dealing with increasing corporate control of news sources and the potentially negative effects this can have on the overall structure and operations of media outlets throughout the world.

Now you have a map: it's up to you to decide where to go. "The Media Monopoly" gives you all the elements you need to understand how the mass media "world" works. Your decisions are now informed ones.

The author kept his writing short and simple. Well and clearly written, this book raises questions that are to be addressed, sooner or later (you'll find plenty). It explains you why media companies merge; why they have so much power and how they exploit it (to pay less taxes, for instance). How they select editors and journalists: who they fire, who they keep, why - with real cases examined -. It also explains why their big size is dangerous, and it reports a few uncelebrated examples of self-serving behaviour (after p. 39). Here is their power: "In 1949, for example, William Randolph Hearst, head of one large publishing empire, and Henry Luce, chief of another, Time, Inc., were both worried about communism and the growth of liberalism in the United States." Enter "Billy Graham, an obscure evangelist holding poorly attended tent meetings in Los Angeles. (...) Hearst and Luce interviewed the obscure preacher and decided he was worthy of their support. Billy Graham became an almost instantaneous national and, later, international figure preaching anticommunism. In late 1949, Hearst sent a telegram to all Hearst editors: "Puff Graham". The editors did - in Hearst newspapers, magazines, movies, and newsreels. Within two months Graham was preaching to crowds of 350,000." A hint: don't dismiss this example because it took place so many years ago and because it involved an anticommunist: mass media "puff" products, persons, politicians every day.

I have to say that here and there I don't agree with the suggestions or with the opinions of the author. As an example (see p. 41) Mr. Bagdikian somewhat condemns intervention of owners into the content of news. I'm an owner of a (small) publishing house, and of course I do intervene in the content of news! It's my job to do that! I also elsewhere don't agree with the author - alas, this is a review and not a critical essay. My point is: please, as you always should do, keep your critical thought well awake when you read this book. That said, it tells you truths that are awkward for you to deal with. If you want to live better your time, this book is a must.

Note: I'm Italian, so I'm not able to wander through US bookshops and see what's new, what's hot and what's not. I bless Amazon for its software suggested me this book, and fellow readers for their fair reviews helped me buy it.

A classic book on the subject -- and it is time I read the latest edition. It will change the way you think about the media. Be prepared for a lot of thinking, and much of it will be depressing. All of it will be enlightening.

Like the old saying goes, freedom of the press is only for the man who owns one.

You know, it's interesting if not frightening, at the concentration of ownership of the mainstream media, and that one of the owners ,Dan Quayle, (see Indiana and Arizona Newspapers and radio stations) commentted, upon return from a Latin American junkett, that he wished he would have studied Latin more in school. I think the only salvation of our liberties, in this day and age may be in the simplicities of the Dan Quayles, running the corporate medias, truly, without a clue. One hopes, that, with the merger mania, there is not some evil plan to merge until there is one corporate feudal company, and our job description is, SLAVE. But we are entertained! Truly Brave New World is upon us. Keep the Net free. It may be the last bastion of freedom of the press, let alone the mind.

Interesting and worthwhile book needs a major update. Many things that were facts in 1977 - 1982 are no longer true. This hurts the book. Please - Beacon Press - don't let something be called a "new edition" if it is only slightly updated!

The cover of this book reports that when Bagdikian published the first edition in 1983, it was dismissed as "alarmist." But he has been vindicated, as the book has reached its sixth edition and the problems he first articulated have become far worse in the ensuing years. The media monopoly problem is far from alarmist. It's alarming. Bagdikian deserves major credit for first publicizing the troubling trend of consolidated media ownership by huge mega-conglomerate corporations. Now we are down to six major media owners. Bagdikian proves that the media have been enslaved to the will of advertisers for decades anyway, as most forms of media make far more money from selling ads than from the members of the public who consume their offerings. But the problem is currently worse than ever as the focus is no longer the public interest, but boosting short-term profits, which has just about eliminated the search for truth or any long-term social focus.

The problem with this edition of the book is that the only current portions are the foreword and afterword, in which Bagdikian outlines where things stand today (that is, worse than ever). Otherwise, the main body of the book appears to be mostly the third edition from 1990. This leads to outdated information and conclusions that are a serious problem for such a quickly developing subject. Although Bagdikian is now more than eighty years old, this work would benefit significantly from a thorough re-write of the main text, rather than the piecemeal additions to the foreword and afterword that supposedly indicate a "new" edition. (Note that plenty of other more modern books have stolen Bagdikian's thunder and cover the issue equally well.) Also, Bagdikian is frequently guilty of attention-grabbing polemics and sarcasm while making his points. This is unnecessary as the facts can speak for themselves.

Regardless, this book is monumentally important not only for its investigation into inequitable corporate control of the media, but also Bagdikian's great insights into the ensuing political and cultural effects on society. This includes everything from the greater costs of goods caused by excessive advertising (a direct contradiction of classic capitalist theory), to the dumbing down of public knowledge of important social issues. In fact, the modern America media is not liberal, despite what close-minded politicians tell you. It's libertarian in its rush for total profit-driven focus and financial control of those same politicians. The general increase in social apathy and malaise among citizens indicates what is wrong with the mainstream media, and the culprit is the relentless and cruel rush for short-term profitability. Public knowledge is the key to a healthy democracy, and corporations have destroyed that for much of America. Worship your new corporate masters. [~doomsdayer520~]