Ownership in Media

“Diverse media are central to a healthy democracy. The media re-present our politics, our social institutions, our governments and ourselves. A plurality of perspectives has been said to be essential in developing an engaged, mutual understanding of the differences and similarities that exist between us as human beings.” This is all true but how are they so diverse if they are all owned by the same people. With 6 companies that pretty much own everything, with their multiple channels aren’t they giving us the same one sided thought processes.

“It has been argued that those who control the media also control the predominant ideology of society” If we learn how a certain product will be good or bad from us from multiple channels yet they are owned by one giant company sending that message it is all a big illusion. 

 An article reads that “the fear that a monolithically owned media will create content that is one-dimensional and therefore lead to a less-informed public. This fear is based on the precept that a multiplicity of outlets will offer a multiplicity of voices” Us as people start thinking up conspiracy theories, are we being told the truth or just lies that the government wants to tell us because all of their regulations also.

We need alternative media organizations or a media source that is outside the mainstream message. I found a list that shows how alternative media organizations can support one another.

• Income differentials among those working in alternative media institutions should steadily decline, and those that persist (if any) should have legitimate justification and not endow some with more power than others.
• The conditions of work in alternative media institutions should not be widely disparate. That is, given the different tasks to be done, the overall quality of work life should be comparable for all workers and to the extent it isn’t (if at all), those with worse work situations should receive offsetting rewards, not vice versa.
• Typical hierarchies of power and influence over decisions should be reduced and, to the extent possible, eliminated. This has a two-fold practical meaning. Means of decision making should be participatory and democratic with the goal, broadly understood, that participants should affect decisions proportionately to the degree they are in turn affected by them. But also, circumstances of work (and training) should empower all participants so that their voting rights are not a formality but instead each participant has the information, confidence, time, and security to develop their opinions, present them, and effectively champion them, when need be.
• There should be steadily diminishing gender and racial divisions of labor, even against difficult obstacles, meaning that the culture of these institutions, their actual populations, and the job roles of the actors should embody feminist and multicultural aims.
• Relations with audience should respect and promote the same values and norms internally pursued, particularly those of openness, dialogue, and full communication. The audience sought should be broad and socially relevant (not merely those with disposable income and attractive to advertisers).
• Relations to other alternative media projects should be supportive. The agenda should not be solely self-preservation, but the advance of the alternative project as a whole.

I believe with the internet we can change how media is being distributed. It is easier to make a blog and have subscribers that follow us in the beliefs that we do. Internet and online news articles have made newspapers decline how they can produce more. “The media crisis we face brings with it tremendous (if deeply challenging) opportunities to revolutionize the industry in this country for the better. In 20 years media will be radically different than it is today. Just as today’s young people have the most at stake in this transformation, so too will they have the biggest role in shaping the future of media.” News is part of the media but will forever be changed because of technology.

Below is a list of TV/Video Outlets and Networks that are probably the top US Independent Media outlets:

Brave New Films – "moving images to . . . empower viewers to take action” TMC

Brave New Foundation – "championing social justice issues” TMC

Democracy Now! – daily TV/radio news program hosted by Amy Goodman/Juan Gonzalez on 850+ stations, “largest public media collaboration in US”

Free Speech TV – "progressive and independent TV/multimedia network" TMC

GritTV with Laura Flanders – daily talk show featuring “people [whom] commercial media ignore” TMC

Link TV – "television without borders" TV channel TMC

Real News Network – viewer-sponsored reporting on national/global issues TMC

The Young Turks – daily webcast on politics, culture, entertainment TMC

One of these is The Young Turks where “The network generates over 30 million views per month and has over a billion lifetime views. The flagship program in the network is The Young Turks, hosted by Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian.” They say they are the“largest online news show in the world, covering politics, economics, pop culture, social trends and lifestyle.” Reading about this show I found out that “On January 2, 2013, Al Jazeera USA (which is owned by the American mass media company Time Warner) purchased Current TV and announced that it would scrap the channel along with its programming lineup. Later that day on the online show, Uygur clarified that Al Jazeera has not bought the TYT online show or its brand, both of which are independent of Current.” For a show that has so many followers and funny how they would try and shut it down.

http://www.tytnetwork.com/

As time goes on I believe it is only going to get worse! It is going to reach a point where we are going to be controlled what we watch and throughout the 100s of channels we are given why are there only 15 channels people watch anyway that are all owned by the same company. Are we being told the truth!?