The proverbial fourth pillar of democracy after legislature, executive and judiciary, is a free and flourishing media, also known as the fourth estate. So much so, that no country today can claim to be democratic if it doesn’t include a free media. Interestingly, in free market capitalist economies most of which are democracies, there are oligarchies that control certain sectors of the economy that often includes the media. Could it then be said that such systems are truly democratic? Barring those who are connected to the oligarchies controlling the media in such economies both as employers and as employees, most people would conclude that there is a serious drawback in the democratic system in such countries.
For media to function optimally, it is important that there are no vested interests either in the form of the government of the day or big business oligarchies or monopolies controlling it in any way. As a vital pillar of democracy, media itself has to be free from all forms of control wherein every media outlet has enough internal democracy within its own organization to uphold its integrity and interface its audience without fear or favor (Hind, Dan. 12 Jul. 2011. OpenDemocracy.net.) While it is true that media outlets have to survive harsh economic realities to stay in business they can successfully resist pressure or interference by big businesses and powerful elements within the government on the strength of their revenue model. The media outlets themselves have a responsibility in this respect.
Why democracy in media is critical
The basic objective of the media is to engage the general population through the 2 streams of mass media – news and entertainment as well as a contemporary innovation that has come to be known as infotainment. The entire process is highly creative, research oriented, and intellectually demanding in many instances. It is in fact, a very sensitive pillar of democracy and the enormity of its place in the system of democracy should be understood well by the people running the media outlets. One of the main challenges for people running a media outlet is a well-defined approach to profit-making. An overt and indiscriminate profit motive is bound to lead the media outlet into the waiting embrace of big business oligarchies.
Therefore, a media outlet would do well to focus on producing content that serves the consuming public at large, use the power of technology to reach out to the maximum number of people as well as promote citizen journalism and alternate journalism to enrich and consolidate democratic functioning within the organization. The media should also act as a watchdog against misdemeanors by those in power including both political as well as business leaders, since powerful people tend to misuse their positions and the power they hold. There is no other way for the people at large, to know what the government and big businesses are doing or not doing in their country (Murphy, Patrick. “Media and Democracy in the Age of Globalization.” SunnyPress.edu.)
How the “Imperial Presidency” of Nixon fell
One of the enduring stories of how relentless media exposure brought down a powerful group of men running America under the leadership of President Nixon, is that of Daniel Ellsberg in 1971. As a Pentagon insider, Ellsberg knew all that was going on in the name of fighting a just war in Vietnam where millions had already died including tens of thousands of American servicemen. He was convinced that the Vietnam War had to end, and decided to expose the lies, deception and misuse and abuse of power by at least 7 presidents including the then president, Nixon to justify their actions in Vietnam.
Ellsberg’s revelation shook the whole country’s conscience and led to the disgraceful exit of President Nixon but it also underlined firmly and forever, the critical role that media can play in checking those in power from going too far beyond their mandate. It led the then secretary of state, Henry Kissinger to dub Ellsberg as “the most dangerous man in America.” Years later, a feature film titled, ‘The Most Dangerous Man in America’ vividly told us the story and reminded us to honor the role of media as a vital pillar of democracy.
Objective of a democratic media system
One of the main objectives of a democratic system in the media is that media outlets should be more oriented toward public service and less toward a profit motive. However, the profit motive should not be lost altogether, for they have to survive in an increasingly competitive market with the threat of being taken over by big businesses, always looming. The media outlets need to evolve more as institutions than as businesses; the business end of their organizations ought to be more in the nature of social enterprises where profit motive is not the over-riding objective. The strangle hold of a few oligarchies in media ownership has to be ended for the greater good of society and the media itself.
It is not always just the big businesses that hijack the media outlets to drive their own selfish and greedy agenda as there are many media professionals who indulge in disgraceful practices that dilute the media’s credibility and make them easy prey for takeover by the big businesses. Media outlets have to guard against sensationalizing events by going on overkill and ‘doing a story to death’ so to say. Many profit driven media outlets resort to such tricks and gimmicks to leverage the higher ratings resulting from such make believe coverage and reap unfair and unethical gains in their advertising revenues (McChesney, Robert. “Making Media Democratic.” 1998. BostonReview.net.) The discipline among media professionals have to be impeccable if media has to sustain its credibility.
3 Decades after exposing Nixon, media is misled by Bush & Co.
After 9/11 a vengeful President George W. Bush was looking for an opportunity to make a point about how America intended to respond to the ghastly crime. For reasons best known to him and his advisers Bush decided to attack Iraq, then under the repressive rule of the dictator, Saddam Hussein. What followed was a sustained propaganda campaign linking the 9/11 outrage to Hussein and his regime and gradually covering it with a convenient caveat – WMDs or weapons of mass destruction that were supposedly hidden by Hussein. Later events would prove that these were lies and concoctions meant to fool the media at a sensitive time in the nation’s history.
In the highly popular TV documentary, “Buying the War”, host Bill Moyers, analyzed how easily mainstream American media bought the Bush administration’s WMD excuse to wage war in Iraq before taking in the baseless allegations of that country’s role in helping the 9/11 perpetrators, hook, line and sinker. As the war in Iraq keeps draining the US treasury when the country’s overall debt is said to exceed its GDP, the same media is introspecting how it literally partnered Bush and his team in going to war against Iraq. It shows that 3 decades after Vietnam, the media forgot what those in power can do if they are allowed overreach themselves.
How journalism and flow of information should evolve
As a vital pillar of democracy, media has to be closer to the people it interacts with, more than those that try to control and use it to serve their own selfish interests. Advances in technology have made it possible to involve the consumer more closely and intensively than ever before. Today, citizen journalism is an integral part of all media outlets of any value and if the trend continues as it is expected to, it won’t be long before the consuming audience realizes its stake in media. Just as the citizens are serious about their stake in the legislature, executive and judiciary, they would take their stake in the media with equal if not more seriousness. The media is truly a primary institution of democracy and is probably the most interactive of all other institutions that support democracy.
Prevent corporate ownership of media outlets
There is no way, the oligarchies and monopolies should be allowed to continue to take advantage of an evolving media and make money to meet their selfish goals. The interactivity, that citizen journalism offers, has the potential of making media a truly representative striking arm of democracy. Questions have been raised in the past and are being raised now about the role of big business conglomerates in manipulating media to present distorted, untrue and misleading content to pursue their selfish aims. Citizen journalism, by its very reach and empowerment of the ordinary citizen, offers the best hope toward establishment of a truly democratic media system.
Strict enforcement regulations by the government
The government should have no ownership of media outlets in any manner just as big businesses should be prevented from owning media of any kind. The role of the government should be confined to legislating laws forbidding ownership of media outlets by the government or any arm of the government as well as by big business conglomerates directly or indirectly. This should be followed by strict enforcement of the regulations with heavy penalties for those who dare to violate such regulations. At the same time, the government should enlist the support of the smaller media outlets to spread the word around that media will be best sustained in the hands of smaller enterprises operating not merely for profit but also to fulfill a social responsibility within the democratic framework.
1. Hind, Dan. “A blueprint for a democratic media system.” 12 Jul. 2011. OpenDemocracy.net. 10 Dec. 2012 <http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/dan-hind/blueprint-for-democratic-media-system>
2. Murphy, Patrick. “Media and Democracy in the Age of Globalization.” P. 6. SunnyPress.edu. <http://www.sunypress.edu/pdf/61516.pdf>
3. McChesney, Robert. “Making Media Democratic.” 1998. BostonReview.net. <http://www.bostonreview.net/BR23.3/mcchesney.html>
For media to function optimally, it is important that there are no vested interests either in the form of the government of the day or big business oligarchies or monopolies controlling it in any way. As a vital pillar of democracy, media itself has to be free from all forms of control wherein every media outlet has enough internal democracy within its own organization to uphold its integrity and interface its audience without fear or favor (Hind, Dan. 12 Jul. 2011. OpenDemocracy.net.) While it is true that media outlets have to survive harsh economic realities to stay in business they can successfully resist pressure or interference by big businesses and powerful elements within the government on the strength of their revenue model. The media outlets themselves have a responsibility in this respect.
Why democracy in media is critical
The basic objective of the media is to engage the general population through the 2 streams of mass media – news and entertainment as well as a contemporary innovation that has come to be known as infotainment. The entire process is highly creative, research oriented, and intellectually demanding in many instances. It is in fact, a very sensitive pillar of democracy and the enormity of its place in the system of democracy should be understood well by the people running the media outlets. One of the main challenges for people running a media outlet is a well-defined approach to profit-making. An overt and indiscriminate profit motive is bound to lead the media outlet into the waiting embrace of big business oligarchies.
Therefore, a media outlet would do well to focus on producing content that serves the consuming public at large, use the power of technology to reach out to the maximum number of people as well as promote citizen journalism and alternate journalism to enrich and consolidate democratic functioning within the organization. The media should also act as a watchdog against misdemeanors by those in power including both political as well as business leaders, since powerful people tend to misuse their positions and the power they hold. There is no other way for the people at large, to know what the government and big businesses are doing or not doing in their country (Murphy, Patrick. “Media and Democracy in the Age of Globalization.” SunnyPress.edu.)
How the “Imperial Presidency” of Nixon fell
One of the enduring stories of how relentless media exposure brought down a powerful group of men running America under the leadership of President Nixon, is that of Daniel Ellsberg in 1971. As a Pentagon insider, Ellsberg knew all that was going on in the name of fighting a just war in Vietnam where millions had already died including tens of thousands of American servicemen. He was convinced that the Vietnam War had to end, and decided to expose the lies, deception and misuse and abuse of power by at least 7 presidents including the then president, Nixon to justify their actions in Vietnam.
Ellsberg’s revelation shook the whole country’s conscience and led to the disgraceful exit of President Nixon but it also underlined firmly and forever, the critical role that media can play in checking those in power from going too far beyond their mandate. It led the then secretary of state, Henry Kissinger to dub Ellsberg as “the most dangerous man in America.” Years later, a feature film titled, ‘The Most Dangerous Man in America’ vividly told us the story and reminded us to honor the role of media as a vital pillar of democracy.
Objective of a democratic media system
One of the main objectives of a democratic system in the media is that media outlets should be more oriented toward public service and less toward a profit motive. However, the profit motive should not be lost altogether, for they have to survive in an increasingly competitive market with the threat of being taken over by big businesses, always looming. The media outlets need to evolve more as institutions than as businesses; the business end of their organizations ought to be more in the nature of social enterprises where profit motive is not the over-riding objective. The strangle hold of a few oligarchies in media ownership has to be ended for the greater good of society and the media itself.
It is not always just the big businesses that hijack the media outlets to drive their own selfish and greedy agenda as there are many media professionals who indulge in disgraceful practices that dilute the media’s credibility and make them easy prey for takeover by the big businesses. Media outlets have to guard against sensationalizing events by going on overkill and ‘doing a story to death’ so to say. Many profit driven media outlets resort to such tricks and gimmicks to leverage the higher ratings resulting from such make believe coverage and reap unfair and unethical gains in their advertising revenues (McChesney, Robert. “Making Media Democratic.” 1998. BostonReview.net.) The discipline among media professionals have to be impeccable if media has to sustain its credibility.
3 Decades after exposing Nixon, media is misled by Bush & Co.
After 9/11 a vengeful President George W. Bush was looking for an opportunity to make a point about how America intended to respond to the ghastly crime. For reasons best known to him and his advisers Bush decided to attack Iraq, then under the repressive rule of the dictator, Saddam Hussein. What followed was a sustained propaganda campaign linking the 9/11 outrage to Hussein and his regime and gradually covering it with a convenient caveat – WMDs or weapons of mass destruction that were supposedly hidden by Hussein. Later events would prove that these were lies and concoctions meant to fool the media at a sensitive time in the nation’s history.
In the highly popular TV documentary, “Buying the War”, host Bill Moyers, analyzed how easily mainstream American media bought the Bush administration’s WMD excuse to wage war in Iraq before taking in the baseless allegations of that country’s role in helping the 9/11 perpetrators, hook, line and sinker. As the war in Iraq keeps draining the US treasury when the country’s overall debt is said to exceed its GDP, the same media is introspecting how it literally partnered Bush and his team in going to war against Iraq. It shows that 3 decades after Vietnam, the media forgot what those in power can do if they are allowed overreach themselves.
How journalism and flow of information should evolve
As a vital pillar of democracy, media has to be closer to the people it interacts with, more than those that try to control and use it to serve their own selfish interests. Advances in technology have made it possible to involve the consumer more closely and intensively than ever before. Today, citizen journalism is an integral part of all media outlets of any value and if the trend continues as it is expected to, it won’t be long before the consuming audience realizes its stake in media. Just as the citizens are serious about their stake in the legislature, executive and judiciary, they would take their stake in the media with equal if not more seriousness. The media is truly a primary institution of democracy and is probably the most interactive of all other institutions that support democracy.
Prevent corporate ownership of media outlets
There is no way, the oligarchies and monopolies should be allowed to continue to take advantage of an evolving media and make money to meet their selfish goals. The interactivity, that citizen journalism offers, has the potential of making media a truly representative striking arm of democracy. Questions have been raised in the past and are being raised now about the role of big business conglomerates in manipulating media to present distorted, untrue and misleading content to pursue their selfish aims. Citizen journalism, by its very reach and empowerment of the ordinary citizen, offers the best hope toward establishment of a truly democratic media system.
Strict enforcement regulations by the government
The government should have no ownership of media outlets in any manner just as big businesses should be prevented from owning media of any kind. The role of the government should be confined to legislating laws forbidding ownership of media outlets by the government or any arm of the government as well as by big business conglomerates directly or indirectly. This should be followed by strict enforcement of the regulations with heavy penalties for those who dare to violate such regulations. At the same time, the government should enlist the support of the smaller media outlets to spread the word around that media will be best sustained in the hands of smaller enterprises operating not merely for profit but also to fulfill a social responsibility within the democratic framework.
References
1. Hind, Dan. “A blueprint for a democratic media system.” 12 Jul. 2011. OpenDemocracy.net. 10 Dec. 2012 <http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/dan-hind/blueprint-for-democratic-media-system>
2. Murphy, Patrick. “Media and Democracy in the Age of Globalization.” P. 6. SunnyPress.edu. <http://www.sunypress.edu/pdf/61516.pdf>
3. McChesney, Robert. “Making Media Democratic.” 1998. BostonReview.net. <http://www.bostonreview.net/BR23.3/mcchesney.html>
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments using using abusive language would be deleted