Media Monopoly RE P/B (Beacon Paperback) [Paperback]

Monopoly is defined as the exclusive ownership of a service or a commodity. Ben Bagdikian applies the concept of monopoly to the media industry. Giant companies own almost every mass medium: "newspapers, magazines, books, radios, broadcast television, cable systems and programming, movies, recordings [and] video cassettes" (p. xiii). Examples of this phenomenon are Capital Cities/ABC, Gannett and Time Warner corporations, among others (p. 21,22). By buying every different medium, these powerful giants communicate messages based on the owner's interest; thus, narrowing down the available sources of information. For instance, ABC, CBS and NBC networks control the majority of the national television. In addition, another consequence of the media monopoly is that as a result of private ownership, media turned into a business. As Bagidikian says, "now magazines aren't started with the desire of someone to express what he believes; [instead], they become bland to avoid controversy" (p. 112, 85). For example, "newspapers get seventy five percent of their revenues from ads, general circulation magazines fifty percent, and broadcasting almost a hundred percent" (p.115)

The author states that one of the causes of the media monopoly is that publishers and broadcast producers never talk of the present condition of the media ownership. Gannett's editors would state slogans such as "ten choices for the reader" or "Gannett: a world of different ideas where freedom speaks", when actually, the opposite is happening (p. 75). Since 1970, Gannett has been buying local newspapers from many different regions. The strategy is simple: before buying a locally owned newspaper they promise to continue with its local news and values. They also assure that they will make it better. However, after buying it, they reduce its staff and local news, and tell the current publisher "how much he/she must produce in profits"; thus, they turn the community newspaper into one more link of their big chain where money is what counts (p. 78).

However, the media monopoly not only affects people's social views. When talking about politics, as the United States lacks of a national daily press, Bagdikian implies that "no national news medium can, by itself, serve the American voter" (p. 17). Consequently, private media guide every American citizen at the time of elections. Unfortunately, as profit is always the most prominent interest of these corporations, there are some corrupt cases in media and political history. The case Nixon - Berlin is the example he uses to illustrate how not only media depends on politics, but also how politics depends on media. When Richard Berlin was in trouble because of an antimonopoly law, he asked President Richard Nixon to exempt him and his friends from it. He wrote the President a letter in which he clearly stated how his chains would either help or not President Nixon in his political image depending on his cooperation. Of course, Berlin and his friends were quickly released from the antimonopoly law, and "President Nixon was given his political reward, the support of media organizations" (p. 98). Bagdikian's writes a clear critique about the current American media system. The role of the media has turned from an informational and editorial role to a space where to place the greatest possible number of ads in order to increase profitability. Furthermore, the author can certainly explain the serious social and political consequences that the media monopoly can have by using Gannett's and President Nixon's instances. By explaining every part of the American media monopoly, the author develops a tremendous research to prove his thesis: media are able to shape almost every aspect of our society; hence, almost every aspect of people's life.

I consider The Media Monopoly a powerful and convincing statement about the present condition of American media. Being aware of how so few corporations are able to control almost every aspect of our society, is the first step to open people's mind so they can start analyzing media effects with more criticism. At least I've tried to open mine. Also, amazed by some facts the author provides, I've started telling my friends about how the idea of a controversial media we have is now turning into a pyramid were a small top controls everything below it. Disillusion is my feeling after finishing the book. I knew that there are always persuasion techniques in most messages the media transmits; but I wasn't completely aware of how media conglomerates can affect us so powerfully. In order to continue living in a sane democracy, we need reliable and objective information. Otherwise, our citizen's life turns into a fictitious world were we could lose our freedom of thoughts.