A Quick Review of the United States Media Ownership Essay

This paper is an affirmation that I support the criticism of McChesney that the United States is remotely close to a democratic society in terms of the many making the core political decision. Many key decisions are the province of the corporate sector and most decision made by the government are influenced by powerful special interests with little public awareness or input. According to Wellstone, the media is no ordinary channel of communication between the government and the public (Wellstone, 2008, p. 1). He also affirmed that the media is lifeblood of democracy in America (Wellstone, 2008, p. 1). It is not denied that without the media, the free flow of important news and information relating to the democratic process will be affected. It will weaken the democratic chain of the country and eventually affect the economic, political and cultural development of the country. In connection with these, it is evident that during the 21st century, there were many instances that media mergers occurred in the political and social arena of the United States (Wellstone, 2008, p. 1). Because of that, the fast and dynamic concentration of domination over the United States, media mergers posed a troubling issue for American  system  of  representative  democracy  (Wellstone,  2008,  p.  1).  Scheisel mentioned that the news and information that SBC Communications Incorporated would take and own the Ameritech Corporation greatly shifts the equilibrium relating to power in the United States telecommunications industry (Scheisel, 2008, p. 1). As a result, some political analysts predicted that such announcement, which was motivated by the exploration for savings and financial power, would attach fuel to the already shattering engine of mergers in the communications industry (Scheisel, 2008, p. 1). Moreover, Shah added that traditionally, the media is the foundation of information anticipated to let the public recognize on how the government was operated by their chosen public officials. If there is any hint of bias and chaos in the operation of these means of communication, the democratic chain of the society will weaken. In short, the people will no longer know the exact claims and actuations of the representatives they intended to govern for their welfare. Our awareness of the issue must include the fact that media omissions, distortion, inaccuracy and bias is a little recognized by many people outside the USA, and is gradually understood more and more within the American nation (Nadir, 2005. p. 1). This is an alarming report because in the first place our primary concern should rest on the effective communication between the government and the governed. Essentially, giant telecommunication companies like the AT&T, Pacific Telesis Group, and others that works within a democratic society can greatly stir the way we live. Since we are used to listen, ponder, debate, comment and criticize the different conduct and activities of our political leaders, genuine and exact public information is vital to us. Yet, would that be possible if there will be bias in sending information out of private interests kept by these giant companies? The answer is in the negative. Ordinary citizens, that depends on proper governmental exercise of power need to know that it is merger in the media and entertainment industries that should alarm us most. We affirm that we depend on the media greatly because we need to have access to every idea, opinions, comments, criticisms and many other things that our political leaders profess in public (Wellstone, 2008, p. 1). It is also affirmed that our dependence on the media is due to the necessity of holding concentrated power, it may be public or private, to be accountable to the people in general (Wellstone, 2008, p. 1). As explained by Wellstone what we need then is a wide diversity of ownership and control of the media since it will result to proper performance of the aforementioned functions. Mizruchi discussed a very important topic in support of the claim that the democratic strength of the country can be affected on media merger including the dominion of giant corporations in the government control. It was stated that a few groups of people known as interest groups performing greater functions as heads of enormous organizations existed nowadays (Mizruchi, 2008, p. 60). These people have the power to build, and destroy communities as well as to generate great productivity and wealth (Mizruchi, 2007, p. 60). Yet, unfortunately they also exist to control the distribution of that wealth without regard for those who elected them like the stockholders or those who depended on them like the larger public (Mizruchi, 2008, p. 60). I line with that, post-capitalist society is a new system that is known as a further extension of democracy. In this system, there was a widespread dispersal of stockholders and corporations are publicly controlled (Mizruchi, 2008, p. 60). As such Misruchi found in his study of political behavior among huge companies in the US that inter-firm connections shaped by such factors as economic interdependence, common ownership were associated with the extent to which firms engaged in similar political behavior. This scenario is hoped to be maintained so that the people could be freed from bias operation of telecommunication companies. Shah shared to us that for a democratic country to succeed; people must be given the best opportunity to participate in decision-making and policy at least by means of their public opinion (Shah, 2007, p. 1). Yet, what is happening today as viewed by Shah is the increasing denial by giant telecommunication industry of true and accurate information in favor of the general public (Shah, 2007, p. 1). Most likely, if there is merger in giant telecommunication companies, the tendency is that they are not going to give accurate information if it will hurt or affect the elite owners and operators of the same (Shah, 2007, p. 1). Finally, in order to maintain the strength of our democratic processes, we must see to it that there is a wide diversity of ownership and control of the media. Governmental policies aimed to solve this problem must be formulated and implemented in such a way that it reflects that move.   References Mizruchi, M. (2008). Berle and Means Revisited: The Governance and Power of Large U. S. Corporations. United States of America: Univesity of Michigan. Nadir, R. Common Dreams. Org: News Center. (2005 April 26). Lack of Democracy in the United States. Retrieved June 19, 2008, from http://www.commondreams.org  /views05/0426-30.htm. Schiesel, S. The New York Times. . (2008, June 19). Telephone Giant: The Deal; $ 62 Billion Deal To Shift Balance in Phone Industry. Retrieved June 19, 2008, from http://query.nytimes.com./gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE2D81630F931A25756C0A96E958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all> Shah, A. (2007 April 1). Global Issues. Media in the United States. Retrieved June 19, 2008, from http://www.globalissues.org/HumanRights/Media/USA.asp. Wellstone, P. RobertMcChesney.Com. (2008). Media and Democracy. Retrieved June 19, 2008, from http://www.robertmcchesney.com/wellstone.html.