Media Concentration and Democracy: Why Ownership MattersFirmly rooting its argument in democratic and economic theory, the book argues that a more democratic distribution of communicative power within the public sphere and a structure that provides safeguards against abuse of media power provide two of three primary arguments for ownership dispersal. It also shows that dispersal is likely to result in more owners who will reasonably pursue socially valuable journalistic or creative objectives rather than a socially dysfunctional focus on the 'bottom line'. The middle chapters answer those agents, including the Federal Communication Commission, who favor 'deregulation' and who argue that existing or foreseeable ownership concentration is not a problem. The final chapter evaluates the constitutionality and desirability of various policy responses to concentration, including strict limits on media mergers. |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
advertising aims Amendment antitrust laws audience benefits blogs broadcast cable systems chapter Chicago School economic choice claim communicative power Compaine Compaine's companies competition comScore concern constitutional consumer consumer sovereignty corporate costs create Daily Kos democracy democratic distribution democratic role discourse dispersal of media diversity economic editorial editorial independence effect egalitarian empirical evaluate example exist favor goal incentives increase individual intermediate scrutiny Internet issue journalism journalistic limits marketplace of ideas mass media media concentration media conglomerates media entities media markets media mergers media owners media products media-specific ment Miami Herald monopoly newspaper objections ownership dispersal papers percent perspective political possible potential power over price predictably Press Clause press freedom problem profit maximization profit-maximizing profits prohibited public sphere purchase purposes reason reduce relevant reported requires rules scrutiny significant speech stations structural regulation subsidies Supreme Court tion
Popular passages
Page 124 - Amendment rests on the assumption that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public, that a free press is a condition of a free society.
Page 124 - It is the right of the viewers and listeners, not the right of the broadcasters, which is paramount.
Page 124 - Thus we consider this case against the background of a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.
Page 5 - Burke said there were Three Estates in Parliament ; but, in the Reporters' Gallery yonder, there sat a Fourth Estate more important far than they all. It is not a figure of speech, or a witty saying ; it is a literal fact,— very momentous to us in these times.
Page 124 - Amendment; it presupposes that right conclusions are more likely to be gathered out of a multitude of tongues, than through any kind of authoritative selection. To many this is, and always will be, folly; but we have staked upon it our all (US v.
Page 132 - Surely a command that the government itself shall not impede the free flow of ideas does not afford non-governmental combinations a refuge if they impose restraints upon that constitutionally guaranteed freedom.