<<

4sem 5 unit notes Manufacturing :by Edward S. Herman and The Political Economy of the is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky, in which the authors propose that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive function, by reliance on market forces, internalised assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the of communication.The title derives from the phrase "the manufacture of consent," employed in the book (1922), by (1889– 1974).The consent referred to is . The book was revised 20 years after its first publication to take account of developments such as the fall of the Soviet Union. There has been debate about how the Internet has changed the public's access to information since 1988. model for the manufacture of public consent

The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are applied to the reporting of news in mass communications media: 1. Size, Ownership, and Profit Orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as corporations and controlling investors. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers. 2. The License to Do Business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority".Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers. 3. Sourcing Mass Media News: Herman and Chomsky argue that “the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidise the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media’s costs of acquiring and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers.” Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and governmental news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavour from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. Consequently, it loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimise such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favour government and corporate policies in order to stay in business.[5] 4. Flak and the Enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defence or defines of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organised by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.[5] 5. Anti-Communism: This was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the (1945–91) anticommunism was replaced by the "" as the major social control mechanism. Authorship According to Chomsky, "most of the book" was the work of Edward S. Herman.Herman describes a rough division of labor in preparing the book whereby he was responsible for the preface and chapters 1–4 while Chomsky was responsible for chapters 5–7.According to Herman, the propaganda model described in the book was originally his idea, tracing it back to his 1981 book Corporate Control, Corporate Power.The main elements of the propaganda model (though not so called at the time) were discussed briefly in volume 1 chapter 2 of Herman and Chomksy's 1979 book The Political Economy of Human Rights, where they argued, "Especially where the issues involve substantial U.S. economic and political interests and relationships with friendly or hostile states, the mass media usually function much in the manner of state propaganda agencies." Further developments • In 2006, the Turkish government prosecuted Fatih Tas, owner of the Aram editorial house, two editors and the translator of the revised (2001) edition of for "stirring hatred among the public" (per Article 216 of the Turkish Penal Code) and for "denigrating the national identity" of Turkey (per Article 301), because that edition's introduction addresses the Turkish news media's reportage of governmental suppression of the Kurdish populace in the 1990s; they were acquitted. • In 2007, at the 20 Years of Propaganda?: Critical Discussions & Evidence on the Ongoing Relevance of the Herman & Chomsky Propaganda Model (15–17 May 2007) conference at the University of Windsor, Ontario, Herman and Chomsky summarized developments to the propaganda model on the occasion of the twentieth anniversary of publication of Manufacturing Consent. Film adaptation Four years after publication, Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media was adapted as Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media (1992), a documentary film that discusses the propaganda model of communication and the politics of the mass-communications business, as well as a biography of Chomsky. The film was directed by Mark Achbar and Peter Wintonick.

Media regulation

A Media regulation are rules enforced by the jurisdiction of law. Guidelines for media use differ across the world.This regulation, via law, rules or procedures, can have various goals, for example intervention to protect a stated "public interest", or encouraging competition and an effective media market, or establishing common technical standards. The principal targets of media regulation are the press, radio and television, but may also include film, recorded music, cable, satellite, storage and distribution technology (discs, tapes etc.), the internet, mobile phones etc.

Principal foundations • Balance between positive and negative defined liberties. The negative defined liberties, legislating the role of media institutions in society and securing their freedom of expression, publication, private ownership, commerce, and enterprise, must be balanced by legislation ensuring the positive freedom of citizens of their access to information. • Balance between state and market. Media is at a position between the commerce and democracy. These require the balance between rights and obligations. To maintain the contractual balance, society expects the media to take their privilege responsibly. Besides, market forces failed to guarantee the wide range of public opinions and free expression. Intend to the expectation and ensurance, regulation over the media formalized. By each countries:

Egypt Egypt’s regulation laws encompass media and journalism publishing. Any form of press release to the public that goes against the Egyptian Constitution can be subject to punishment by these laws.This law was put in place to regulate the circulation of misinformation online. Legal action can be taken on those who share false facts. Egypt's Supreme Council for Media Regulations (SCMR) will be authorised to place people with more than 5,000 followers on social media or with a personal blog or website under supervision. More than 500 websites have already been blocked in Egypt prior to the new law in 2018. Websites must go through Egypt’s “Supreme Council for the Administration of the Media” to acquire a license to publish a website. China

The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (October 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) At the early period of the modern history of China, the relationship between government and society was extremely unbalanced. Government held power over the Chinese people and controlled the media, making the media highly political. The economic reform decreased the governing function of media and created a tendency for mass media to stand for the society but not only authority. The previous unbalanced structure between powered government and weak society was loosed by the policy in some level, but not truly changed until the emergence of Internet. At first the regulator did not regard Internet as a category of mass media but a technique of business. Underestimating the power of the internet as a communications tool resulted in a lack of internet regulation. Since then, the internet has changed communication methods, media structure and overthrown the pattern of public voice expression in China. Regulators have not and would not let the Internet out of control. In recent years, the strategy when approaching the Internet has been to regulate while developing.[citation needed] The internet regulation in China generally formed by: • Legislation China is the one who owns the greatest amount of legislation in the world. According to statistics, up to October 2008, 14 different departments such as the NPC of China, the Publicity Department of the Communist Party of China, and the State Council Information Office, had been published more than 60 laws related to internet regulation. • Administration Internet regulation departments in China have respective distribution of work. Ministry of Industry and Information Technology is responsible for the development and regulation of the industry, Ministry of Public Security regulates security and fights crimes, and the Propaganda Department leads the system where departments of culture, broadcasting, journalism, education, etc. regulates the information contents • Technical control The Internet regulation departments restrain the wrongful expression and behaviors by techniques such like blocking information negative to social stable and carrying out real name system through Internet. • Agenda control It requires communicators to set up the relationship between expected information targets and the real targets, guide the direction of information to reach the expectation. • Structure adjustment Traditional media affiliated into government strives to develop Internet with relatively flexible administrating system to increase the communicating power of mainstream media of authority to compete with social communication. • Training Regulator delivers the expectation of Internet environment to the population through training and educating to intense people’s conscious about behavior norms. The European Union Most EU member states have replaced media ownership regulations with competition laws. These laws are created by governing bodies to protect consumers from predatory business practices by ensuring that fair competition exists in an open-market economy. However, these laws cannot solve the problem of convergence and concentration of media. Norway The media systems in Scandinavian countries are twin-duopolistic with powerful public service broadcasting and periodic strong government intervention. Hallin and Mancini introduced the Norwegian media system as Democratic Corporatist.Newspapers started early and developed very well without state regulation until the 1960s. The rise of the advertising industry helped the most powerful newspapers grow increasingly, while the little publications were struggling at the bottom of the market. Because of the lack of diversity in the newspaper industry, the Norwegian Government took action, affecting the true . In 1969, Norwegian government started to provide press subsidies to small local newspapers.But this method was not able to solve the problem completely. In 1997, compelled by the concern of the media ownership concentration, Norwegian legislators passed the Media Ownership Act entrusting the Norwegian Media Authority the power to interfere the media cases when the press freedom and media plurality was threatened. The Act was amended in 2005 and 2006 and revised in 2013. The basic foundation of Norwegian regulation of the media sector is to ensure freedom of speech, structural pluralism, national language and culture and the protection of children from harmful media content.Relative regulatory incentives includes the Media Ownership Law, the Broadcasting Act, and the Editorial Independence Act. NOU 1988:36 stated that a fundamental premise of all Norwegian media regulation is that news media serves as an oppositional force to power. The condition for news media to achieve this role is the peaceful environment of diversity of editorial ownership and free speech. White Paper No.57 claimed that real content diversity can only be attained by a pluralistically owned and independent editorial media whose production is founded on the principles of journalistic professionalism. To ensure this diversity, Norwegian government regulates the framework conditions of the media and primarily focuses the regulation on pluralistic ownership. United Kingdom Following the Leveson Inquiry the Press Recognition Panel (PRP) was set up under the Royal Charter on self-regulation of the press to judge whether press regulators meet the criteria recommended by the Leveson Inquiry for recognition under the Charter. By 2016 the UK had two new press regulatory bodies, the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO), which regulates most national newspapers and many other media outlets, and IMPRESS, which regulates a much smaller number of outlets but is the only press regulator recognised by the PRP (since October 2016). Ofcom also oversees the use of social media and devices in the United Kingdom. BBC reports that Ofcom analyzes media use of the youth (ages 3 to 15 years old) to gather information of how the United Kingdom utilizes their media. Broadcast media (TV, radio, video on demand), telecommunications, and postal services are regulated by Ofcom. United States The First Amendment to the United States Constitution forbids the government from abridging freedom of speech or freedom of the press. However, there are certain exceptions to free speech. For example, there are regulations on public broadcasters: the Federal Communications Commission forbids the broadcast of "indecent" material on the public airwaves. The accidental exposure of Janet Jackson's nipple during the halftime show at Super Bowl XXXVIII led to the passage of the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005 which increased the maximum fine that the FCC could level for indecent broadcasts from $32,500 to $325,000—with a maximum liability of $3 million. This is to shield younger individuals from expressions and ideas that are deemed offensive. The Supreme Court of the United States has yet to touch the internet, but that could change if net neutrality comes into play. Criticism Anthony Lowstedt and Sulaiman Al-Wahid suggested that the authority need to issue diverse media laws centering at anti-monopoly and anti-oligopoly with democratic legitimacy since media outlets are important for national security and social stability. The global regulation of new media technologies is to ensure the cultural diversity in media content, and provide a free space of public access and various opinions and ideas without censorship. Also, the regulation protects the independence of media ownership from dominance of powerful financial corporations, and preserves the media from commercial and political hegemony. In China, the possibility that a film approved by Central Board of Film Censors can be banned due to the disagreement of a specific leading cadre has never been eliminated. The Chinese screenwriter Wang Xingdong stated that regulation over literature and art should be based on laws and not the preference of some individuals. In the field of media, relative legislation must be introduced as soon as possible and applied strictly to avoid the case that some leaders overwhelm the law with their power to control the media content. References 1. Freedman, Des. "Media Regulation - Communication - Oxford Bibliographies - obo". Oxford Bibliographies. 2. "What is media regulation?". Media Regulation. Leicester: University of Leicester. Retrieved 29 November 2012. 3. Sjøvaag, H. (2014). "THE PRINCIPLES OF REGULATION AND THE ASSUMPTION OF MEDIA EFFECTS". Journal of Media Business Studies: 5–20. 4. EL-SADANY, MAI. "The Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy". 5. Cairo, Bureau. "Ruters".

6. Harcourt, Alison; Picard, Robert (2009). "POLICY, ECONOMIC, ANDBUSINESS CHALLENGES OFMEDIA OWNERSHIP REGULATION". Journal of Media Business Studies. Jönköping International Business School. 6 (3): 1–17. doi:10.1080/16522354.2009.11073486. Retrieved 26 April 2015. 7.Hallin, D.; Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. Cambridgeshire: Cambridge University Press. 8."Medienorge". MiediaNorway. Retrieved April 5, 2015. 9.Syvertsen, T. (2004). "Eierskapstilsynet – en studie av medieregulering i praksis [Ownership oversight: A study of media regulation in practice]". 10.Krumsvik, Arne (2011). "Medienes privilegier – en innføring i mediepolitikk [Media Privileges: An Introduction to Media Politics]". 11. "Panel Gives Alternative Press Regulator Royal Charter". Press Gazette. 2016-10-25. 12."BBC News". 2019-01-29. 13."What is Ofcom?". Ofcom. Retrieved 2018-01-19. 14.Biagi, Shirley. Media/Impact: An Introduction to Mass Media. Cengage Learning. p. 319. 15.Löwstedt, Anthony; Al-Wahid, Sulaiman (2013). "Cultural diversity and the global regulation of new media technologies". International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics. 9(2): 195–200. doi:10.1386/macp.9.2.195_3.