The dangers of media consolidation

I used to watch the news all the time. I was a bona fide news junkie, and loved my nightly fix. But slowly, it started to feel like all the coverage was the same. As it turns out, it wasn't just my imagination playing tricks on my nightly update-addled brain. Over the past few decades, media outlets have been consolidated at an alarming rate into the hands of a few parent companies.

Don't believe me? Try this on for size. Did you know CBS owns MTV? Did you know that CNN owns Sports Illustrated? Did you know that the heads of ABC and ESPN both report to the same boss, who is also the head of Disney? Did you know that The New York Times owns The Boston Globe, whose chief competition, the Boston Herald, is owned by the same corporation that controls more than 50 local newspapers in the Boston area? Did you know that the same guy who owns Fox News Channel owns TV Guide, not to mention over 130 newspapers worldwide?

But so what? It doesn't matter who owns the news outlet, because it's the individual reporters and editors who are actually presenting the news, not the fat cats in the boardroom, right? Wrong. While it's true that Michael Eisner doesn't have direct control over programming decisions for Disney's Saturday morning lineup, so much power in the hands of so few is gradually creating a monopoly on media. And, as you know if you've ever taken Economics 001, monopolies are inherently good for the producer (read: Rupert Murdoch) and inherently bad for the consumer (read: you).

The damage caused by media consolidation is only too apparent. In the fall of 2003, the majority of people who received their news from Fox held incorrect beliefs about Saddam's link to al Qaeda, international support for the war in Iraq, or whether we ever found those slippery weapons of mass destruction.

Fahrenheit 9/11 was only released because its producers set up their own independent distribution network after Miramax (which is owned by Disney) refused to disburse the film to theaters.

The Dixie Chicks were banned on radio stations all across the country, not just in one local Texas market, after Cumulus Media, Inc., which owns more than 250 radio stations nationwide, decided that it didn't like the message of the band.

Media consolidation has been an issue for lawmakers and a few highly informed Americans for a while now, and some minor victories have been won. In fact, Congress recently passed a new law saying that it would not relax the rules on media consolidation. However, the issue remains far outside the consciousness of average Americans, so it has rarely been addressed in a widely known medium.

Most Americans are unaware that what they watch, read, and hear is in the hands of very few people. However, in this case ignorance should not be bliss. Luckily, over the summer, the first chink in Big Media's armor was removed.

A new documentary, Outfoxed, was released a few months ago. While the film focused mainly on the less-than-honest journalism of the Fox News corporation, it dealt at least in part with the shocking number of stations owned by Fox's founder, Rupert Murdoch. One scene in particular shows a number of TV anchors from local affiliated stations describing how they received memos from corporate headquarters dictating what news they should cover and how they should spin certain stories.

Besides the revelation that some news outlets purposefully spin stories to serve their own agendas (which shouldn't be too shocking for any cynical American), Outfoxed is one of the first and only pieces of pop culture to shed light on the growing problems of media consolidation and the fact that Big Media can assert nationwide control over issues.

If you've never heard of Outfoxed, you are not alone. Even the manner in which Outfoxed was presented to the world is indicative of the abhorrent power of Big Media. Robert Greenwald, the film's creator, kept production a secret and did not advertise its debut. Instead, they released the film straight to DVD and sold it over the internet, relying on MoveOn.org house parties and word of mouth to circulate their important message. Why such Spy vs. Spy antics? Because Greenwald knew that if he advertised his movie, Fox would sue him to stop its release.

Now that Outfoxed has opened the dam, the river of criticism and doubt should come flooding through. Other independent journalists, authors, and directors should take up the same cause, but focus more centrally on the question of what effect media consolidation has on society. The truth is, Outfoxed is not much more than a minor blip on the pop culture radar. Mainstream movies and books receive much more press than this particular movie, and are also seen by millions more people than Outfoxed. Something akin to the anti-Big Tobacco movie "The Insider" or the consumer safety book "Unsafe at Any Speed" is needed before the public really wizens up to the Big Media reality.

For now, all we can do is buy independent documentaries on the Internet and hope the likes of Rupert Murdoch don't start buying big chunks of that, too.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.