Concentration and Conglomeration in the Mass Media Industry

Concentration and Conglomeration are ownership patterns which are and have been changing drastically in mass media industry. 

Introduction

Concentration in the mass media industry is a pattern of ownership whereby fewer and fewer hands own more and more of the assets of that industry.  This increasing concentration is a result of buyouts and mergers.  For example, in 1998 “the sales leader in trade books, Random House, was acquired by the German company Bertelsmann,” (Croteau & Hoynes 35).  Most industries have been increasing in concentration.  For example the newspaper industry which is, as more newspapers are being sold and purchased to larger companies, increasing in concentration.  Though other industries have been decreasing in concentration, though not necessarily becoming un-concentrated or truly diverse.  An example of this is the television industry which became “somewhat less concentrated in the 1990s, moving from three to four major networks, along with two other fledgling networks” (Croteau & Hoynes 35).

Conglomeration in the mass media industry are patterns of ownership across a multitude of media industries.  It simply “means that fewer corporations own the media” (Croteau & Hoynes 35).  The main difference between conglomeration and concentration is that a media conglomerate may own newspapers, television stations, music outlets, and radio stations – and many do.  One of the results of conglomeration is integration within these corporations.  Integration has two forms, horizontal and vertical.  Horizontal integration “refers to a process by which one company buys different kinds of media, concentrating ownership across different types of media rather than “up and down” through one industry” (Croteau & Hoynes 40).  On the other hand, Vertical Integration “refers to the process by which one owner acquires all aspects of production and distribution of a single type of media product” (Croteau & Hoynes 40).

Impact of Concentration and Conglomeration

Reduced Internal Boundaries

One result of concentration and conglomeration in the mass media industry is that the boundaries within corporations between sales and content are becoming porous or non-existent.

Political Power

Another result of concentration and conglomeration is that the mass media industry begins to wield heavy political power.  As media coverage plays a major role in the success of a political campaign, it is often in the favor of politicians to please the mass media industry.  In addition it can indirectly, and sometimes directly, influence the public political consensus by choosing what it presents and what it does not.  

Content Diversity

A third result of concentration and conglomeration is that content diversity may suffer.  Content diversity is a measure of the assortment of media products produced.  This concern is often called the Homogenization Hypothesis and it was put forward by Ben Bagdikian, it concludes that "the absence of competition in the media industry will lead inevitably to homogenous media products that serve the interest of the increasingly small number of owners" (Croteau and Hoynes 51).  We can already begin to see this very clearly in the popular music industry, music industry sensations like Britney Spears, Hillary Duff, and Christina Aguilera all seem to present very similar styles and qualities.

Theoretical Concerns

In, what Jean Baudrillard would call, a Hyper Real world where image precedes the real the ones who control the image control power.  In this case we can see that the media industry strongly controls power, whether it be through what political candidate it shows or how they show a certain event it is able to control our image of reality. 

This power was first recognized as an ability to dictate the ruling ideology by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.  Marx and Engels stated that the "ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relations, the dominant material relations grasped as ideas; hence of the relations which make the one class the ruling one, therefore, the ideas of its dominance.  Essentially what they are saying is that the ruling class asserts its influence through making their ideas the dominant one.

Furthermore thinkers like Donald Matheson have pointed out that newspapers have changed from simply being reporters of events to becoming "meaning-brokers" (Matheson 571).  What this means is that newspapers, and other forms of mass media, not only report events but interpret them for us in light of their ideologies.  Matheson points out that this change has gone unnoticed by most; additionally, this interpretation is taken for granted.

Antonio Gramsci recognizes the power of ideologies, especially when we begin to think that these ideologies are separate of the structures that produce them.  In this case the ideologies are produced of the media industry which is profit driven and its interpretive ideology is naturally one that will preserve the status quo which has brought them profits. 

This idea is also voiced by Theodor W. Adorno and Max Horkhiemer who believe that popular culture, in this case the media industry who produces a great deal of popular culture, acts this way to support the status quo by creating passive audiences simply consume anything it puts out.  They would see the media industry as creating goods which are filled with sameness and monotony.

Conclusion

What is found through a closer examination of all of these theoretical concerns is that a great deal of the concerns facing media concentration and conglomeration is rooted in the structures of the corporations themselves.  Often these corporations promote, not directly but through their actions, the domination of one classes ideals over another.  The reason for this domination is not, as some might believe, political but rather economical.  There is a clear motive for these corporations as they concentrate and conglomerate to make more and more profits in order not to be consumed themselves.  This pressure to make profits leads to the kind of situations where media products promote a single ideology, reproduce that ideology in their products, and promote a need for their products.