POWER AND BETRAYAL IN MAINSTREAM MEDIA

Omolabake Ogundele

Business, Communication, and Society 04/06/2012

2 Mass media plays a significant role in democratic societies. Arguing from a Marxist view, they raise public concerns over issues that serve their own interests, which are usually interests of the dominant class. Therefore, the media manipulates the public by providing them with information that supports the dominant ideologies of the ruling class. According to Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky, in Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, the media is at the center of disseminating propaganda in society and claim that class interests have multilevel effects on massmedia interests and choices. 1 The discussion that follows will defend the view that unless state action is taken, the structural factors identified by Herman and Chomsky will narrow our access to the information we need as citizens in a democratic society and damage our capacity to shield ourselves against capitalist propaganda calculated to turn us into passive consumers. Thus, what are the structural factors that make it possible for propaganda to shape the way the media operates in a Western democratic society such as Canadas? Herman and Chomskys propaganda model hinges on the way the public is manipulated and consents to the socio-economic and political policies that are constructed in the mind of the public.2 The model takes into account five structural factors that influence what is broadcast by the mass media. The five are: i) ownership, ii) funding, iii) sourcing, iv) flak, and v) anti-communism. However, only the first three of the factors mentioned in that list deserve special attention, as they are more applicable to

Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky, The Propaganda Model. In Herman, Edward S. (Ed.): Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (New York: Pantheon Books, 1988), 3.
1 2

Herman and Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent, 4.

3 the media scene in Canada. If these structural factors influence the operations of the media, and if those operations are in conflict with the ideals of a democratic society, then it becomes imperative for government intervention in the interest of consumer protection and true democracy. Concentration of Media Ownership Media ownership concentration has been an important issue in media policies in Canada. This nation has the highest least competitive record of media ownership with about five companies dominating the media scene, namely Bell media, Rogers Communications, Shaw Communications, Astral Media and Quebecor. In order for us to fully appreciate the relevance of economics to the political character of the media, we must first be aware of the principal characteristics of the economic system within which mass media operate. That economic system is capitalism, which promotes free enterprise and deregulation, because it calls for non-interventionist policies on the part of government. An essential factor of capitalism, obviously, is capital. A capitalist economic system functions on the foundation of material possession, which can be in the form of goods and services, raw materials or money. As Nesbitt- Larking asserts, the progress of capitalism is achieved through the progressive consolidation of corporations, through takeovers and acquisitions of less efficient competitors. 3 This tendency gives the lie to the capitalist motto of free enterprise and competition. Those who own the media operate it within the ideological assumptions of a capitalist economy that prioritizes free- market competition, possessive individualism, and value relativism.4 Thus, media corporations

Paul Nesbitt-Larking, Politics, Society, and Media (Peterborough: Broadview Press, 2007), 106. 4 Nesbitt-Larking, Politics, Society, and Media, 107.

4 do not just act on behalf of a capitalist society; but are themselves capitalist organizations. Canada, with its oligopoly of five media companies, all serving the same capitalist interests, leaves its consumer population more vulnerable than most countries, including the U.S., to manipulation through T.V networks. The ownership of the media and the control of their operations reflect the political will of the owners. According to Ralph Miliband, a handful of powerful media owners, in collaboration and conspiracy with other members of the corporate and political class, use their media properties to nurture and sustain a pro-capitalist viewpoint. 5 The owners of media corporations choose employees that agree with their point of view, and those who challenge them are immediately fired. Also, these same owners will from time to time interfere with editorial content. For example, Izzy Asper of now bankrupted media corporation CanWest Global claimed that owners are responsible for every statement in their newspapers; both on national and international issues, arguing that there should be only one editorial position should exist and not several.6 In other words, Canadians across the country should agree to one view of national and international issues, especially the way Asper sees it. CanWest epitomizes both the risks of concentration of media, whereby the control of media lie in the hands of a few individuals who controls much of what is disseminated to the public, and of a media convergence, which calls for the same content being used across various media outlets owned by one media company. Concentration of media ownership restricts the diversity of media content, which is important when community viewpoints are ignored for those favored by the owners.

5 6

Ralph Miliband, The State in Capitalist Society, (London: Quartet Books, 1973), 52. Augie Fleras, Mass Media Communication in Canada, (Scarborough: Nelson, 2003), 119.

5 Those who own media corporations through editorial policies can spread propaganda. News Corp, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch, with several cable networks, television and publishing media across different media platforms predominates the media scene, especially newspapers in Australia and Britain. The Fox News channel, which is also owned by Murdoch, is known for its relentless pro-war propaganda. According to Beste, Rupert Murdoch's newspapers and TV channels have supported all the US-UK wars over the past 30 years, from Margaret Thatcher and the Falklands war in 1982, through George Bush Senior and the first Gulf War in 1990-91, Bill Clinton's war in Yugoslavia in 1999 and his undeclared war on Iraq in 1998, George W. Bush's wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, with Tony Blair on his coat tails, and up to the present, with Barack Obama continuing the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and now adding Libya to his tally of seven wars.7 Murdoch admitted in an interview in 2003, that he used his media corporation such as the Fox news channel to support the war in Iraq and to shape public opinion in support of the War.8 Murdochs stance on the war in Iraq was that former President George Bush acted morally and correctly and former Prime Minister Tony Blair was full of guts and courageous.9 Thus, Murdoch made sure his views about the war echoed through the news content presented by his media outlets. In order to reduce the influence owners have over editorials in their media outlets and the spread of propaganda, the CRTC mandated the Royal Commission to find solutions to this problem.10 The commission was assigned to examine the nature and

Robin Beste, Rupert Murdoch: Gotcha, Stop the War Coalition, last modified July 8, 2011, http://www.stopwar.org.uk/index.php/iraq/621-rupert-murdoch-gotcha. 8 Beste, Rupert Murdoch: Gotcha 9 Julia Day, Murdoch backs courageous Blair over Iraq, The Guardian, last modified February 11, 2003, http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/feb/11/iraqandthemedia.news. 10 Paul Nesbitt-Larking, Politics, Society, and Media (Peterborough: Broadview Press, 2007), 31.
7

6 consequences of corporate concentration in the Canadian economy. Through its findings, the Royal Commission advised that strengthening competition law might prove to be a useful check on curbing concentration, and that the CRTC should be empowered to prevent the owners of broadcasting stations from owning newspapers.11 Although, the CRTC heeded the solution given by the Royal Commission, the reduction of concentration is yet to take effect. Advertising Prior to the emergence of advertising to the media scene, the cost of newspapers had to cover business operations. With the arrival of advertising, newspaper companies who drew in advertisements could afford to sell their newspapers below production costs. Newspaper companies who did not have the advantage to secure advertisements, had to sell their newspapers at a higher price to cover business operations with less revenue to improve the stability of the newspapers. According to Herman and Chomsky, For this reason, an advertising-based system will tend to drive out existence or into marginality the media companies and types that depend on revenue from sales alone.12 In order not to go under, newspapers tried as much as possible to secure advertising as additional revenue to supplement profit gotten from sales. Those media companies that are being patronized by advertisers have a competitive edge over other media companies that are not patronized. The media, in a visible and direct manner, are instruments for certain advertisements. According to Curran and Seaton, the increase in advertising determined the capital realized by the company, because it is a factor allowing the market to
11 12

Nesbitt-Larking, Politics, Society, and Media, 32. Herman and Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent, 18.

7 accomplish what state taxes and harassment failed to do, as advertisers acquired a de facto licensing authority since, without their support, newspapers ceased to be economically viable.13 The decisions by businesses on where to advertise and how much to spend, affects the fortunes of individual media enterprises. To capture the attention of advertisers; executives of media companies make sure that the advertisers message does not conflict with the media content. An example of such conflict could be; a program or article that is highly critical of an advertisers product or descriptions of a non- consumer or anti- consumer lifestyle. As a matter of routine, airline commercials are rarely placed anywhere near stories of an airline hijacking or of an airplane crash. Drug abuse stories will not be found next to drug company advertisements. Advertisements for designer clothes will not be found next to stories on the exploitation of offshore labor. As a result, commercial media cannot be trusted to tell the whole truth about companies who advertise on their pages or during their programming. One of the problems that media corporations face, even when they attempt to be ethical and consumer sensitive in their editorial policy, is that advertisers often threaten to cancel the contract they have with them. So, fear of losing advertising revenue could put pressure on media managers to change their editorial content that the advertiser finds offensive. An example of this is of an American car producer who wrote to a number of magazine companies, stating: In an effort to avoid potential conflicts, it is required that Chrysler corporation be alerted in advance of any and all editorial content that encompasses sexual, political, social issues or any editorial content that could be

13

James Curran and Jean Seaton, Power without Responsibility: The Press and Broadcasting in Britain, 2nd ed. (London: Methuen, 1985), 24.

8 construed as provocative or offensive.14 It is not uncommon for the media to notify advertisers, through their advertising agency, that they might not want to advertise in a particular issue (because of an editorial message that conflicts with their product). The control advertisers have over media content comes from the premise that they are the ones the media gets most of their revenue from. As such, every media company is constantly competing for advertisers and anxious to reassure them that its own agenda fits in with their needs. Advertisers have turned into what William Evan describes as normative reference organizations,15 whose needs and wants have to be satisfied by the media if they are to survive. However, media companies that offer alternatives to mainstream media, or are radical in nature find it impossible to secure advertising funds because of their political stance. These media outlets may refuse advertisements whose interests are not in-line with their goals or views. An example of this case is of teens/ youth magazine Shameless, which refuses to publish beauty or fashion advertisements targeted at women in their magazines. According to editorial director, Sheila Sampath, mainstream beauty and fashion advertisements discredits who we are and what we promote such as; the aim to inspire, inform, and advocate for young women and trans youth.16 As a result, this shows that Shameless recognizes the possible effect and influence of advertisers to control the content presented in their magazine, which might weaken the power readers
14

Dan Schiller, Digital Capitalism: Networking the Global Market System (Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2000), 125. 15 William Evan, Indices of the Hierarchical Structure of Industrial Organizations, Management Science 9, no. 3 (1963): 470, http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.library.yorku.ca/docview/205848369/1370B92A0007 EB5B0D9/1?accountid=15182#. 16 Sheila Sampath, e-mail message to editorial director, February 25, 2012.

9 have to shield themselves from being targeted as consumers. Thus, advertisers will avoid media outlets or products such as Shameless with serious complexities or radical viewpoints that will contradict their advertisements. They will rather advertise in other media outlets that can get them access to a target market that accepts their values or business aims. Sourcing The Canadian media rely on important sources such as corporations and the government for information. The media need a constant inflow of news to meet their daily news goals. As a result of the high costs involved in having reporters bringing news from around the globe; media corporations focus their resources where important news occur and where consistent press meetings are held. Parliament Hill in Canada is at the center of such news activity. However, in sourcing for local news, reporters frequent places such as police departments, hospitals, business enterprises, or city halls (i.e. Toronto city hall). Information is made easily available to the reporter. The government and business corporations are also recognized as credible sources. As Mark Fishman argues,

News workers are predisposed to treat bureaucratic accounts as factual because news personnel participate in upholding a normative order of authorized knowers in the society. Reporters operate with the attitude that officials ought to know what it is their job to know. . . In particular, a news worker will recognize an official's claim to knowledge not merely as a claim, but as a credible, competent piece of knowledge. This amounts to a moral division of labor: officials have and give the facts; reporters merely get them.17

17

Mark Fishman, Manufacturing News, (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1980), 144145.

10 The reliance on official sources is for media corporations to affirm their status as an objective distributor of news. For example, the belief that the president is always newsworthy because he or she has the interests of the state at heart, so news coming from him/her is the truth. In contribution to maintaining an objective image, they rely on these sources to avoid charges of prejudice and the possibility of libel lawsuits. Thus, they need information that can be presented as correct or authentic. However, they can sometimes fall prey as instruments of propaganda, as the government can use its position as the provider of news to manipulate the media. To maintain their status as sources for mass media, government and business corporations make sure the process involved in obtaining news is made easy. According to Chomsky and Herman, they provide the media organizations with facilities in which to gather; they give journalists advance copies of speeches and forthcoming reports; they schedule press conferences at hours well geared to news deadlines.18 However, these official sources (government and business corporations) can use their power to influence or control the media. To avoid displeasing their patrons, the media may be compelled to carry questionable material or be less critical of the material given to them. It is tough criticizing the authorities that provide news content for media outlets, as these very authorities might deny the media access to other news. In a federal state like Canada, more than one level of government influence is at work. The flow of information from the government to the mass media benefits both parties. To inform the general public of its program and expenditures, the government needs access to media outlets. Also, the mass media themselves need the information
18

Herman and Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent, 21.

11 supplied by the governments as a readily usable source for news, current affairs, and public affairs. However, the relationship between the media and the government has its drawbacks. For instance, because of the deadlines and lack of resources, media professionals tend to rely heavily on the news releases and handouts prepared by the government, but by failing to look behind these announcements, media outlets run the risk of acting as the propaganda arm of the government.19 The government also influences the media through its power to regulate and control them. For example, during the Vietnam War, reporters were given free access to report about the war and the United States government believed that the free access cost them the public support they wanted for the war. With the Iraq war, the government preferred to update journalists about the war and those journalists that were in Iraq were updated by the military, thus avoiding any conflict of interests that could arise, especially with information that the government wanted to keep away from the public. This made it easy for the U.S government to spread propaganda information through the media, especially since they were the ones providing the news content. Conclusion In readdressing the question (What are the structural factors that make it possible for propaganda to shape the way the media operates in a Western democratic society such as Canadas?), the evidence suggests that the government, advertisers, and media owners use the media to spread propaganda. In putting across a limited range of ideas and analysis, these institutions present different manifestations of the same basic political perspective and thus reinforce existing power relations and ideology. In short, the media
19

Lorimer et al., Mass Communication in Canada, 6thed. (Don Mills: Oxford University Press, 2008), 121.

12 reflect the interests of their capitalist owners in maintaining a politically stable society. Operating according to the constraints and possibilities generated as commercial organizations in capitalist societies, the media repeats and reshapes those forces that stem from the wider socio-economic and political process. The micro-politics of media organizations tend overwhelmingly to reproduce social forces, and the consequences of this are evident in the political character of the media texts they produce. At the heart of all capitalist media is advertising. The outcome of advertising has far reaching effects than the promotion of particular products. What is being sold is not just a product or a service; it is the whole system of control or rule, as well as a restricted set of guidelines on our desire and expectations. The most troubling consequence of concentrated media ownership according to a Marxist view is the direction of media content on the basis of the personal whim of a few very rich and powerful individuals. Also, from the evidence given, we cannot rely on the government to restrict or control the way propaganda is disseminated, since they themselves are involved in it. Finally, freedom from the influence of owners over editorial policies has become a disputable issue in Canada.

13 Bibliography Beste, Robin. Rupert Murdoch: Gotcha. Stop the War Coalition. Last modified July 8, 2011. http://www.stopwar.org.uk/index.php/iraq/621-rupert-murdoch-gotcha. Curran, James, and Jean Seaton. Power without Responsibility: The Press and Broadcasting in Britain. 2nd ed. London: Methuen, 1985. Day, Julia. Murdoch backs courageous Blair over Iraq. The Guardian. Last modified February 11, 2003. http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/feb/11/iraqandthemedia.news. Evan, William. Indices of the Hierarchical Structure of Industrial Organizations. Management Science 9, no. 3 (1963): 4768- 77. http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.library.yorku.ca/docview/205848369/1370B9 2A0007EB5B0D9/1?accountid=15182#.

Fishman, Mark. Manufacturing News. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1980. Fleras, Augie . Mass Media Communication in Canada. Scarborough: Nelson, 2003. Herman, Edward, and Noam Chomsky. The Propaganda Model. In Herman, Edward S. (Ed.): Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. New York: Pantheon Books, 1988.

Lorimer, Rowland, Mike Gasher, and David Skinner. Mass Communication in Canada. 6thed. Don Mills: Oxford University Press, 2008. Miliband, Ralph. The State in Capitalist Society. London: Quartet Books, 1973. Nesbitt-Larking, Paul. Politics, Society, and Media. Peterborough: Broadview Press, 2007. Schiller, Dan. Digital Capitalism: Networking the Global Market System. Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2000.