Media Ownership

Posted on Updated on

In lectures covered, the concept of ideology was introduced as “the way we imagine the world to be”. As this varies from person to person, the power associated to controlling who listens to your version of how things should operate often come back to media ownership.

The thought I was left with was “Does it matter who owns the media” and in relation to the media I use does it make a difference? The best comparison I can relate this topic to is the recent state election in NSW, and thus elections in general. For news and events my use has changed dramatically since moving to university, to that of when I lived at home. Originally Channel 9 was my source of news and current affairs on television, Channel 9 isn’t owned by any one person, instead private equity firm CVC Asia Pacific has control through its holding of Nine Entertainment yet since becoming more independent and the introduction to a smart phone, my primary source of news is Facebook and Twitter. This is due to the ease of access and the ability to filter what news is brought to me through following providers and hashtags. Facebook is owned by Mark Zuckerberg, and Twitter,  Jack Dorsey.

In relation to the election coverage, I believe the media can sway voters in which ever way they choose. This can be the “idealogical” position of those in ownership, the ties they have with the candidate or simply how they appeal to those on different platforms. The recent one is an example due to how each party was represented on social media, which then appeals to me who uses this service as a news source.

Memes from the NSW election campaign.

Memes from the NSW election campaign. Photo: Supplied

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-state-election-2015/nsw-state-election-2015-the-battle-for-likes-on-social-media-20150313-141whl.html

So, in this particular example, yes. I do believe that this makes a difference about who owns the media, as they display content in relation to news and events that is consumed by a target audience such as a state election.

An interesting link that was in the lecture, covers another election in 2013, this time federal, and how the media was able to sway an entire party shift led by Rupert Murdoch’s Daily Telegraph. He released a less then convincing post on Twitter (To perhaps reach in another perspective of his opinion)

“Tele wot won it”! No, Australians just sick of Gillard-Rudd incompetence and infighting wrecking great county.”

— Twitter, @rupertmurdoch, 7th September, 2013

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3844761.htm

Out of a total of 293 political stories we scored only six as pro Labor. While 43 were pro coalition. On the negative side there were just five articles which we judged to be anti Coalition. While a remarkable 134 were anti Labor. The rest we scored as neutral

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3844761.htm

If this continues to be the case, politicians will not only have to sway the public, they’ll also have to be in terms with media owners so that they may be presented in the media in a positive light, or effectively be cast out and be shamed in the press.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Media Ownership

    alissanicolaidis said:
    April 7, 2015 at 12:03 pm

    I really like the way you looked at the issue of media ownership and how you added in extra reading materials that were relevant to the topic as well as your point of view. I totally agree, it does matter who owns the media! The media sways the public’s opinion on different issues and has led to us becoming more of an active audience, we identify on a more personal level with the issues and it’s due to headlines and what we think we have to believe as it is the ‘news’. I really like the way you presented your argument for why it really does matter who owns the media but I think it doesnt really make a difference when so many people are connected with social media where there as so many different peoples opinions on issues etc. Good post!

    Liked by 1 person

    nickmoses18 said:
    April 20, 2015 at 12:10 pm

    I strongly agree with your post. The media is a very effective tool when used by powerful people. They may choose to use it for its purpose or they may choose to use it as a device of persuasion and manipulation in order to assist them personally. Say if someone who owned the media was against the liberal party in Australia, whats to stop them manipulating relevant information and displaying it to the public in order to alter their opinions. A good example of this can be seen in Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s recent incident. He skolled a beer at a pub with the local football club (http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/why-tony-abbotts-skol-doesnt-sit-quite-right-20150419-1mobju.html). This may or may not have been appropriate but the media blew it out of proportion. The motives behind this may be because the person who owns the media may want to see Tony Abbott out of power. The question that arises when dabbling in such thoughts and philosophies is, why do the power need to manipulate the media?
    Excellent post!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s