Political Economy & the Media Industries

Why Power is Everything

Matthew Handy 10/16/2013 Political Economy of Media SN: 100820716

Political economy can best be defined as the study of power. Although that concept may be vague, it can be grounded in many of the ideas outlined in the relevant literature that has been discussed in class. Power structures are the most important part of understanding how economies and politics tie in with the media industries. Understanding these power structures and the effect they have on the media industries is paramount in the study of political economy in media. Mosco outlines that political economy is the study of control and survival in social life (Mosco, p. 3). The communication and media industries are at the centre of debates surrounding political economy as part of this social life the Mosco discusses. This is because these industries are different than any other industries in the economy. When regulatory agencies were first formed in the United States around the turn of the 20th century, they emerged around the communications industry. The media industries main product is information, which is a special kind of product because it is non rivalrous and can be consumed an infinite amount of times. Mosco defines the study of political economy in terms of history and a holistic approach. Using these two ideas to study power structures is beneficial in the study of political economy. It is very important to use a historical approach because the economy is dynamic and evolves over time. Research projects such as the CMCR project paint a very clear picture of the communications economy because it takes a historical approach to analyzing the industry. It allows for power structures to be analyzed over time, revealing how industry players control the economy. The holistic approach Mosco outlines is also very useful when studying political economy. In order to fully understand how the media industries work, taking a holistic approach is important. The holistic approach, or totality as Mosco describes it, outlines that the media industries must be analyzed within the larger context of the economy, not in isolation. Mosco

says that political economists aim to building on the unity of the political and the economic by accounting for their mutual influence and for their relationship to wider social and symbolic spheres of activity (Mosco, p. 4). Analyzing the media industries within the wider social, economic and political contexts they reside in is a very important strategy in understanding how they work. One more important point Mosco makes is that power is not equally distributed. This phenomenon opens up a myriad of questions around the media industries, since the content involved in these industries are very involved in notions of democracy. If power is not equally distributed in the media industries, then they cannot be purely democratic. This is where the holistic approach becomes very important, because in order to make sense of how the media industries can be part of a democratic system, they must be analyzed in the larger context of the economic and political spheres. Looking at power structures in media is important because the media industries control and distribute information. Those that are in power in the media industries have seen a dramatic rise in significance of information distribution and creation since the proliferation of the internet. According to Babe, Technological change in industries associated with the creation and movement of information has been extensive and rapid over the past several decades. (Babe, p. 9). This change in technology is important for political economy because it is a good indicator of how the economy is intertwined with the communications and media industries. Having the use of new technologies means that media industries have power in utilizing these technologies and whatever advantages they may grant. Power is not only an important concern in terms of information creation. The infrastructure that information flows through is also a very important consideration. The media

infrastructure industries (i.e. mobile, fixed telecoms and internet access) increasingly constitute the centre of gravity around which the rest of the media universe revolves (Winseck, p. 1) Vertically integrated companies such as Bell and Rogers in Canada hold power over other players in the industry because they own the only infrastructure that all media companies in Canada are able to use. The most practical study of political economy is analyzing how these power structures play out in contemporary scenarios. History can give scholars an important angle in which to situate these scenarios, but for students, relating these theory heavy readings to the contemporary world is very helpful. Discussing recent news and events create a significantly better learning experience than simply consuming and regurgitating theory, and this approach to studying political economy makes it the most enjoyable.

Works Cited Babe, R. E. (1995). Communication and the Transformation of Economics. Boulder, CO: Westview. Accessed online at:
https://libares01.carleton.ca/ares.dll?SessionID=U062635440E&Action=10&Type=10&Value=63535

Mosco, V. (2009). The Political Economy of Communication. London: Sage. Accessed online at:
https://libares01.carleton.ca/ares.dll?SessionID=U062635440E&Action=10&Type=10&Value=63507

Winseck, D. (2011). Political Economies of the Media and the Transformation of the Global Media Industries: An Introductory Essay. In Winseck, D. & Jin, D. Y. (eds.). Political Economies of the Media: the Transformation of the Global Media Industries. London: Bloomsbury (Updated version from Email).