Journalism at the crossroads as media ownership varies

Media has been so commercialized that news has sometimes more in common with product promotion than journalism, writes author Norman Solomon in this Inter Press Service special report.

NEW YORK: Politicians in the United States have been calling for campaign finance reform, but they keep raising as much cash as possible.

Likewise, although with less fanfare, journalists are complaining that their craft has become a mere chase after money, and they must run to keep up.

The media consumer, meanwhile, is left like the proverbial frog in a pan of water apt to be boiled to death before the gradual increase in temperature causes sufficient alarm. As they have become accustomed to a steady rise in the commercialization of the media, few Americans take a leap toward active opposition.

Constant commercial intrusions often laced with 'sexploitation' seem normal and acceptable because they're so routine. Many news reports have more in common with product promotion than with journalism.

With the boom in cyberspace, it's difficult to predict exactly how media technology will change but it's become the main guessing game for industry analysts who speculate about technical advances and fierce battles for market share.

Numerous key questions, however, are ignored or get short shrift:

Will media coverage be diverse in the future?

Prospects are bleak. Consolidation of media ownership has been so rapid in recent years that a mere 10 corporations now control the majority of this country's news and information flow. Top spot belongs to Time Warner, followed by Disney, Viacom, News Corp (Rupert Murdoch), Sony, TCI, Seagram, Westinghouse, Gannett and General Electric.

Those conglomerates are in business to maximize profits and they are hardly inclined to provide much media space for advocates of curtailing their power.

Who will have access to the glut of media programming?

For the most part, the people who can pay for it. Consider television. In most cases, channels on local cable TV are selected by big national cable system firms that function as "gatekeepers". Not only is the range of programming limited, the service is available only to viewers who can afford it and costs can be hundreds of dollars per year.

Who will control the huge institutions running the mass media show?

The brief answer is: millionaires and billionaires.

Who will decide what news is important and what information should be widely disseminated?

In theory, journalists play their part but, in practice, editors are accountable to media executives who, in turn, are accountable to management.

Ultimately, therefore, owners set the tone and priorities.

In the media nation that looms on the horizon, what role will democracy end up playing?

The sad truth is likely to be, a very small one.

"Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one," critic A.J. Liebling quipped several decades ago. Though the presses are a small part of the news media picture today, the logic of Liebling's remark holds true:

Already, a tiny number of companies including General Electric (which owns NBC), Westinghouse (CBS), Time Warner (CNN and cable systems), TCI (cable systems) and America Online largely determine what makes it onto screens throughout the United States.

Moreover, there's no sign that this trend is going to slow down. On the contrary, it has accelerated since the landmark Telecommunications Act became law in February 1996. Now, to a great extent, a few mammoth firms are programming America's media.

A hundred years ago, the writer Anatole France commented: "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

Today, in its majestic equality, the federal government allows you, me and billionaires like Rupert Murdoch, the right to buy as many newspapers, magazines, TV networks and satellite communication systems as we can.

The notion that a "free market" equals free speech is comforting but misleading especially when a few bloated corporations have the economic weight to sit on the windpipe of the First Amendment.

We must get realistic about the obstacles blocking democratic discourse in our society. Only then will it be possible to summon the determination to fight for the media diversity that future generations deserve.

Norman Solomon is a syndicated columnist and co author of Wizards of Media Oz: Behind the Curtain of Mainstream News.

-- Inter Press Service