Oligopoly In Media 4u47a

Media mergers are a result of one media related company buying another company for control of their resources in order to increase revenues and viewership. As information and entertainment become a major part of our culture, media companies have been creating ways to become more efficient in reaching viewers and turning a profit. Successful media companies usually buy out other companies making them more powerful, profitable and able to control the media that is being received by more viewers. Media Mergers have become more prevalent in recent years, which has people wondering about the negative effects that could be caused by media ownership becoming more concentrated. Such negative effects that could come into play are lack of competition and diversity as well as biased political views.

Media oligopoly An oligopoly is when a few firms dominate a market.[5] When the larger scale media companies buyout the more smaller-scaled or local companies they become more powerful against other companies. As they continue to do this they have eliminated their business competition by either buying them out or forcing them out because they lack the resources or finances that these now powerful media mergers have. When there is lack of competition and only a few media companies remain due to merging, power and dominance is inevitable. The companies left dominate the media industry and create a media oligopoly.

Elimination of net neutrality Net neutrality is also at stake when media mergers are occurring. Big businesses that campaigns financially tend to have influence over political issues, or are ing the campaigns because they also stand for the same platform as those running. These big businesses that also have control over internet usage or the airwaves could possibly make the content available biased from their political stand point or they could restrict usage for conflicting political views, therefore eliminating Net Neutrality.

Debates Concentration of media ownership is very frequently seen as a problem of contemporary media and society.[8][9][10] When media ownership is concentrated in one or more of the ways mentioned above, a number of undesirable consequences follow, including the following: Commercially driven, ultra-powerful mass market media is primarily loyal to sponsors, i.e. rs and government rather than to the public interest. • If only a few companies representing the interests of a minority elite control the public airwaves of 300 million US citizens, then calling them "public airwaves" is only lip service. • Healthy, market-based competition is absent, leading to slower innovation and increased prices. •

It is important to elaborate upon the issue of media consolidation and its effect upon the diversity of information reaching a particular market. Critics of consolidation raise the issue of whether monopolistic or oligopolistic control of a local media market can be fully able and dependable in serving the public interest. If, for example, only one or two media conglomerates

dominate in a single market, the question is not only that of whether they will present a diversity of opinions, but also of whether they are willing to present information that may be damaging to either their rs or to themselves. This despite the fact that before deregulation there were only the Big Three television networks. On the local end, reporters have often seen their stories refused or edited beyond recognition, in instances where they have unearthed potentially damaging information concerning either the media outlet's rs or its parent company. An example would be the repeated refusal of networks to air "ads" from anti-war advocates to liberal groups like MoveOn.org, or religious groups like the United Church of Christ, regardless of factual basis. Journalists and their reports may be directly sponsored by parties who are the subject of their journalism leading to reports which actually favor the sponsor, have that appearance, or are simply a repetition of the sponsors opinion. Consequently, if the companies dominating a media market choose to suppress stories that do not serve their interests, the public suffers, since they are not adequately informed of some crucial issues that may affect them. If the only media outlets in town refuse to air a story, then the question becomes, who will? Concern among academia rests in the notion that the purpose of the first amendment to the US constitution was to encourage a free press as political agitator evidenced by the famous quote from US President Thomas Jefferson, "The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure." Critics of media deregulation and the resulting concentration of ownership fear that such trends will only continue to reduce the diversity of information provided, as well as to reduce the ability of information providers to the public. The ultimate consequence of consolidation, critics argue, is a poorly-informed public, restricted to a reduced array of media options that offer only information that does not harm the media oligopoly's growing range of interests. For those critics, media deregulation is a dangerous trend, facilitating an increase in concentration of media ownership, and subsequently reducing the overall quality and diversity of information communicated through major media channels. Increased concentration of media ownership can lead to the censorship of a wide range of critical thought. Another concern is that consolidated media is not flexible enough to serve local communities in case of emergency. This happened in Minot, North Dakota, in 2002, after a train filled with anhydrous ammonia derailed (see Minot train derailment). None of the leading radio stations in Minot carried information on the derailment or evacuation procedures, largely because they were all owned by Clear Channel Communications and received automated feeds from the corporate headquarters in San Antonio, Texas. 1600 people were injured and one died.

Determinants of media pluralism

Pluralism is a very complex issue that cannot be secured by creating one panacea solution. According to Gillian Doyle, the following have to be investigated in order to decide what sort of acts or policies are the best for any given country that want to media pluralism: size and wealth of the market; diversity of suppliers; consolidation of resources; and diversity of output.

Size and wealth of the market “Within any free market economy, the level of resources available for the provision of media will be constrained principally by the size and wealth of that economy, and the propensity of its inhabitants to consume media.” [Gillian Doyle; 2002:15] Those countries that have relatively large market, like the United Kingdom, or Spain have more financial background to diversity of output and have the ability to keep more media companies in the market (as they are there to make profit). More diverse output and fragmented ownership will, obviously, pluralism. In contrast, small ones like Ireland or Hungary suffer from the absence of all those that are given in bigger countries. It means that “ for the media through direct payment” and “levels of consumers expenditure”, furthermore “the availability of advertising ” [Gillian Doyle; 2002:15] are less in these countries, due to the low number of audience. Overall, the size and wealth of the market determine the diversity of both media output and media ownership.

Diversity of suppliers/owners From the previous paragraph can be assumed that size/wealth of the market have a very strong relation to the diversity of supplier. If the first is not given (wealthy market) then it is difficult to achieve fragmented supplier system. Diversity of suppliers refers to those heterogeneous independent organizations that are involved in media production and to the common ownership as well. The more various suppliers there are, the better for pluralism is. However, “the more powerful individual suppliers become, the greater the potential threat to pluralism.”

Consolidation of resources The consolidation of cost functions and cost-sharing. Cost-sharing is a common practice in monomedia and cross media. For example, “for multi-product television or radio broadcasters, the more homogeneity possible between different services held in common ownership (or the more elements within a programme schedule which can be shared between ’different’ stations), the greater the opportunity to reap economies.” [13][verification needed] Though the main concern of pluralism is that different organization under different ownership may buy the same e.g. news stories from the same news-supplier agency. In the UK, the biggest news-supplier is The Press Association (PA). Here is a quoted text from PA web site: “The Press Association supplies services to every national and regional daily newspaper, major broadcasters, online publishers and a wide range of commercial organisations.” Overall, in a system where all different media organizations gather their stories from the same source, then we can’t really call that system pluralist. That is where diversity of output comes in

Concentration of media ownership in particular nations Australia Further information: Media ownership in Australia Controls over media ownership in Australia are laid down in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992,[15] istered by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA). Even with laws in place Australia has a high concentration of media ownership. Ownership of national and the newspapers of each capital city are dominated by two corporations, Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation, (which was founded in Adelaide) and John Fairfax Holdings.These two corporations along with West Australian Newspapers and the Harris Group work together to create Australian Associated Press which distributes the news and then sells it on to other outlets such as the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Although much of the everyday main stream news is drawn from the Australian Associated Press all the privately owned media outlets still compete with each other for exclusive Pop culture news. Rural and regional media is dominated by Rural Press Limited which is owned also by John Fairfax Holdings, with significant holdings in all states and territories. Daily Mail and General Trust operate the DMG Radio Australia commercial radio networks in metropolitan and regional areas of Australia. Formed in 1996, it has since become one of the largest radio media companies in the country. The company currently own more than 60 radio stations across New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland and Western Australia. There are rules governing foreign ownership of Australian media and these rules were being considered for loosening by the former Howard Government. According to Reporters Without Borders in 2004, Australia is in 41st position on a list of countries ranked by Press Freedom; well behind New Zealand (9th) and United Kingdom (28th). This ranking is primarily due to the limited diversity in media ownership. The problem has even created a show in itself - Media Watch on a government funded station Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) which is one of two government istered commercial channels the other being Special Broadcasting Service (SBS). In Britain and Ireland, Rupert Murdoch owns best-selling tabloid The Sun as well as the broadsheet The Times and Sunday Times, and 39% of satellite broadcasting network BSkyB. BSkyB in turn owns a significant part of ITV plc and 5% of Shine Limited. [36] In March 2011, the United Kingdom provisionally approved Murdoch to buy the remaining 61% of BSkyB[37], however this has yet to be finalised and the matter will be voted on by MPs on 12 July 2011[38]. In July 2011 the Murdoch-owned tabloid News of the World was shut down. Daily Mail and General Trust (DMGT) own The Daily Mail and The Mail on Sunday, Ireland on Sunday, and free London daily Metro, and control a large proportion of regional media, including through subsidiary Northcliffe Media, in addition to large shares in ITN and GCap Media.

Richard Desmond owns OK! magazine, Channel 5, the Daily Express and the Daily Star. The Evening Standard and The Independent are both owned by Russian businessman and ex KGB agent Alexander Lebedev

United States Main article: Media cross-ownership in the United States In the United States, movie production is known to be dominated by major studios since the early 20th Century; before that, there was a period in which Edison's Trust monopolized the industry. The music and television industries recently witnessed cases of media consolidation, with Sony Music Entertainment's parent company merging their music division with Bertelsmann AG's BMG to form Sony BMG and TimeWarner's The WB and CBS Corp.'s UPN merging to form The CW. In the case of Sony BMG, there existed a "Big Five" (now "Big Four") of major record companies, while The CW's creation was an attempt to consolidate ratings and stand up to the "Big Four" of American network (terrestrial) television (this despite the fact that the CW was, in fact, partially owned by one of the Big Four in CBS). In television, the vast majority of broadcast and basic cable networks, over a hundred in all, are controlled by nine corporations: News Corporation (the Fox family of channels), The Walt Disney Company (which includes the ABC, ESPN and Disney brands), CBS Corporation, Viacom, Comcast (which includes the NBC brands), Time Warner, Discovery Communications, E. W. Scripps Company, Cablevision, or some combination thereof (examples including the aforementioned The CW as well as A&E Networks, which is a consortium of Comcast and Disney). There may also be some large-scale owners in an industry that are not the causes of monopoly or oligopoly. Clear Channel Communications, especially since the Telecommunications Act of 1996, acquired many radio stations across the United States, and came to own more than 1,200 stations. However, the radio broadcasting industry in the United States and elsewhere can be regarded as oligopolistic regardless of the existence of such a player. Because radio stations are local in reach, each licensed a specific part of spectrum by the FCC in a specific local area, any local market is served by a limited number of stations. In most countries, this system of licensing makes many markets local oligopolies. The similar market structure exists for television broadcasting, cable systems and newspaper industries, all of which are characterized by the existence of large-scale owners. Concentration of ownership is often found in these industries. In the United States, data on ownership and market share of media companies is not held in the public domain. Academics, for example at MIT Media Lab and NYU, have struggled to find data that show reliably the concentration of media ownership.

By corporation Among other assets, Disney owns ABC, Buena Vista Motion Pictures Group, and ESPN; it is a partner in A&E Networks, which includes History, A&E, and Lifetime. •

CBS Corporation owns CBS, CBS Radio (formerly Infinity Broadcasting), Simon & Schuster editing group, a 50% ownership stake in The CW, etc. Though technically separate companies, CBS and Viacom (owners of MTV Networks and several mostly cable television stations) have a large portion of common ownership through Sumner Redstone's National Amusements. •

Comcast owns a controlling stake in NBC Universal (51%), The Weather Channel, G4, Versus, style., E!, a share of A&E Networks, Comcast SportsNet, the Philadelphia Flyers and the Philadelphia 76ers. •

Time Warner owns CNN, TBS, TNT, Sports Illustrated Time, and a 50% ownership stake in The CW. It previously owned Time Warner Cable, but spun off that company in 2009. •

Bertelsmann owns Arvato, Direct Group, RTL Group (which in turn owns VOX and Five, a part in M6 TV channel, and FremantleMedia North America), and several other companies. •

Bain Capital and Thomas H. Lee Partners own Clear Channel Communications, one of the largest radio station ownership groups in the United States, its syndication wing Premiere Networks (which controls several of the most popular U.S. radio programs), and a share in The Weather Channel. •

Rupert Murdoch, the media magnate, a part of News Corp., also owns British News of the World, The Sun, The Times, and The Sunday Times, as well as the Sky Television network, which merged with British Satellite Broadcasting to form BSkyB, and SKY Italia; in the US, he owns the Fox Networks, The Wall Street Journal and the New York Post. Since 2003, he also owns 34% of DirecTV Group (formerly Hughes Electronics), operator of the largest American satellite TV system, DirecTV, and Intermix Media (creators of myspace.com) since 2005. See also Murdoch Newspaper List. •

Oaktree Capital Management's Triton Media Group owns Dial Global, Waitt Radio Networks, Westwood One and Jones Radio Networks, three major satellite music radio providers; they also own Townsquare Media (itself a consolidation of Regent Communications, Double O Radio and Gap Broadcasting, the last of which has mainly bought radio stations away from Clear Channel Communications). •

Companies tied to the Dolan family and Cablevision (either AMC Networks or Madison Square Garden, Inc.) own AMC, IFC, Sundance Channel, WE tv, News 12 Networks, MSG Network, Fuse TV, SportsTime Ohio, the New York Rangers, the New York Knicks, and the Cleveland Indians •

E. W. Scripps Company owns fourteen newspapers, nine broadcast television stations, HGTV, Food Network, DIY Network, Cooking Channel, GAC, and the National Spelling Bee. •

Gannett Company owns USA Today and a large number of local newspapers and television stations. •

Lagardère Group owns Hachette Filipacchi Médias, which is the largest magazine publisher in the world, 100% of Lagardère Media, 34% of CanalSat, and Hachette Livre (as well as parts in the European military aerospace EADS company). •

•

Vivendi owns Canal + Group and Universal Music Group.

•

Edouard de Rothschild has 37% of French left-wing daily Libération since 2005.

Arms company Dassault owns 82% of the Soresse, which controls conservative Le Figaro (in which the Carlyle Group previously had a 40% stake), as well as L'Express. •

Le Monde is owned by La Vie Le Monde, which also controls Télérama and other publications of La Vie Catholique, as well as 51% of Le Monde diplomatique. •

French Bouygues company owns 42.9% of TF1 TV channel, and is the parent company of Bouygues Télécom. •

Modern Times Group, quoted on the Stockholm Stock Exchange, owns Viasat TV network and Metro International, which is the world's largest chain of free newspapers, publishing 57 daily Metro editions in 18 countries. •

In the UK, Daily Mail and General Trust plc owns newspapers including the Daily Mail, Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC, has a 29.9% stake in GCap Media (the owner of Classic FM and other radio stations), and a 20% stake in ITN, and also owns regional publisher Northcliffe Media. •

Bolloré, owned by Vincent Bolloré, who is Havas's main share-holder and president and UK group Aegis' first share-holder. Bolloré owns Direct 8 French TV channel. •

Arnoldo Mondadori Editore, controlled by Fininvest, the family holding company of Silvio Berlusconi, possesses a large share of the magazine publishing industry in Italy. •

Mediaset, also controlled by Silvio Berlusconi's Fininvest, owns 3 out of 7 national TV channels in Italy. Mr Berlusconi in his function of prime minister also exerts great influence over 3 more channels (RAI-owned), thus directly or indirectly controlling almost 90% of Italy's mass media. •