Media Ownership and Its’ Influence on Editorial Policy
Chapter One
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
- This work is aimed at highlighting ways by which media ownership influences the editorial policy of newspapers.
- To give some information on the extent (based on research influence) an editorial policy has gone into destroying journalistic principles. Vis-à-vis the consequences of such cases.
- It would also act as a meditating factor and would go as far as proffering solutions forward checking these excesses.
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
The contribution made by journalist in providing the public with accurate and timely information on the affairs of government, business, social and special interests has undoubtedly aided governments and societies in better decision-making and improved governance. That the media must be able to access information in order to play its role is widely appreciated today. Consequently, media freedom has experienced significant growth in different parts of the world. Serious challenges that limit freedom of the press however exist in various parts of the world and vary in depth and seriousness. With increased liberalization of the airwaves, privatization of media outlets and the concentration of media ownership in the hands of a few people, the issue of media ownership undermining editorial independence have come up in various forums. This chapter will be interrogating media ownership and the influence it bears on editorial content. The researcher will be attempting to review current and previous literature existing on the topic Media Ownership Structure. Hart (2008) argues that media dynasties are among the most powerful organizations on earth. Referring to the case of media mogul Rupert Mudorch, Hart explains why media pluralism is extremely important to the entire well being of a society. In 2007, the Bulletin magazine named Mudorch as the most influential Australian, far more influential than politicians, sport heroes, scientists, doctors, humanitarian workers, activists and other artists. The concentration of media ownership has been a raging debate because of its ability to control and limit freedom of expression. Whoever owns the media, owns the message (Hollifield, 1999). Even if media proprietors may not always wish to control the message, they can limit free discussions through the traditional media anytime they have an interest in any particular public issue (Hart, 2008).
Concentration of media ownership has a great potential of undermining editorial independence (Hart, 2008). According to a Survey conducted by Roy Morgan survey in 2006, media workers were influenced by the political and commercial agendas of their employers. More than 37% had been instructed to “toe the commercial line” and take into account their employer’s political position.
Lister (2007), referring to the state of press freedom in Namibia states that ownership is crucial to editorial independence. Media needs income to guarantee independence and sustain itself. She opposes the ownership of media by government or political parties who tend to use the media to drive their own interest through propaganda.
Chomsky (2002) argues that there is no conspiracy theory needed to analyze how media ownership interferes with editorial independence. He notes that today it is almost impossible for any government to stay in power without the support of the media and that media owners use their media to promote and disseminate their own political views and exploit politicians to achieve their own corporate goals. By answering the question of who owns the media, we also answer the question of who holds the reins of power, he argues.
Hrvatin and Petkovic (2004) argue that it is necessary to have regulations on media ownership because media owners are in a position to influence media content and the mere possibility that they would exert pressure on certain issues justifies the regulation. Their motive may be political, ideological social or commercial but the outcome is always the same. Rooting for a diverse media through pluralism in ownership, the two contend that a decentralized media ownership leads to diversity in opinion. If the independence of both the media and journalists rests in the hands of a few media owners, consequently so does the freedom of expression of every individual (Hrvatin &Petkovic, 2004)
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHDOLOGY
Introduction
This chapter gives an explanation of the research design and methodology and justification for having used this research design. It also describes the characteristic of the population which were used in the study, detailed description of sampling methods to be used and procedures, data collection instruments and the procedure of data collection, finally it describes the appropriate data analysis method which will be used to generate the data.
Research design
According to Zikmund (2003) research design is a master plan/framework or blue print specifying the methods and procedures for collecting and analyzing the needed information. The study adopted the descriptive research design. This type of research design reports things the way they are and attempts to describe such things as possible behavior, attitudes, values and characteristics. The study aimed at investigating media ownership influence on editorial content and how it may have been used by media owners to undermine editorial independence
Population and sample
Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) define population as an entire group of individuals, events or objects having common observable characteristics. The population of this research was editors and reporters from Standard Group, Nation Media Group, and Royal media.
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
The purpose of this section is to present and analyses data from the interview. Below is a question by question analysis of the interview results
CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
This project work has found that the elitist control of the media is one of the biggest threats to media independence. This control needs to be broken for this independence to be realised. The paper recommends a number of measures that can be taken to reduce the elitist control of the media. Most media houses are run as business empires that have an elitist hierarchical system of administration. At the top of this hierarchy is the owner who wields a lot of power and control. The owner also have some senior executive officers who oversee the editorial and commercial operations of the media business. Newsrooms that have such hierarchical structures and a bureaucratic chain of command are less likely to be objective and make decisions independently. The chain of command disempowers the editors who are supposed to decide on the content that needs to reach the public. At the end of the day, what reaches the public is content that is not of public interest but content that is in line with the interests of the media owners. Media owners in most cases are not trained journalists or media personalities. However, they dictate the content that media houses should generate to serve their personal and business interests (Demers, 1996). There is a need for the editorial and advertising departments to consult continuously to ensure that content that is of public interests is not relegated to the sidelines. There is also a need for the media owners top realise that the major function of a media house is to serve the public through provision of information and give editors the independence they need to serve the public diligently and with fairness and objectivity. They should not limit journalists to small areas and use their expertise to further their business and personal interests and relegate public interest to the sideline. Furthermore, there is a need for a change in production processes and structures to allow the public have a say regarding what reaches them. This is possible through creation of relational processes that encourage citizen participation in news gathering and content creation. Furthermore, journalist associations and editors guild should dialogue with the media owners to ensure that their independence is not overwhelmed by their personal and business interests. The bodies should protect journalist and editors who are victimised because of their objective service to humanity. It is important for journalists and editors to form strong trade unions that would give them the power to serve the public objectively without the interference of the media owners. Strong unions would help journalists and editors have a bigger say in the creation of the editorial policy of a media house and prevent media owners from eroding their independence.
REFERENCES
- Akhavan-Majid, R., Rife, A. & Gopinath, S. (1991). The Effect of Chain Ownership on Editorial Independence: a Case Study of Gannett Newspapers. Journalism Quarterly, 68(1/2), 59-66.
- Akhavan-Majid, R. & Boudreau, T. (1995). Chain Ownership, Organizational Size, and Editorial Role Perception. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 72(4), 863-873.
- Bagdikian, B. (1997). The Media Monopoly. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
- Busterna, J. & Hansen, K. (1990). Presidential Endorsement Patterns by Chain-Owned Newspapers, 1976-84. Journalism Quarterly, 67(2), 286-294.
- Bogart, L. (1995). Commercial Culture: the Media System and the Public Interest. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Croteau, D. & Hoynes, W. (2001). The Business of Media: Corporate Media and the Public Interest. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
- Demers, D., (1996). Corporate Newspaper Structure, Profits, and Organizational Goals. Journal of Media Economics, 9(2), 1-23.
- Donohue, G., Olien, C. & Tichenor, P. (1985). Reporting Conflict by Pluralism, Newspaper Type and Ownership. Journalism Quarterly, 62(3), 489-499.
