FOLLOWING THE MONEY: HOW SALIENT IS MEDIA OWNERSHIP INFORMATION TO U.S. CITIZENS? A Thesis presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School at the University of Missouri-Columbia ____________________________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts ___________________________________________ by ASHLEY MOORE Dr. Timothy Vos, Thesis Supervisor DECEMBER 2010 The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the thesis entitled FOLLOWING THE MONEY: HOW SALIENT IS MEDIA OWNERSHIP INFORMATION TO U.S. CITIZENS? presented by Ashley Moore, a candidate for the degree of master of journalism, and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. ______________________________________ Professor Timothy Vos ______________________________________ Professor Victoria Johnson _______________________________________ Professor Charles Davis _______________________________________ Professor Paul Bolls As with all things I do, that work towards the edification of the Truth, I dedicate this research to THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, ISAAC, AND JACOB ~AND~ HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON “…Blessed is that man that maketh the LORD his trust, and respecteth not the proud, nor such as turn aside to lies…but I am poor and needy; yet the Lord thinketh upon me: thou art my help and my deliverer; make no tarrying, O my God.” -Psalm 40: 4, 17 _______________ I would like to first thank the most High God and His only begotten Son for the inspiration and ability to have conducted and written this research. Through the Son who strengthens me, all things are possible. Tawada, Abba. To my patient and encouraging mother, thank you. You always know what to say to keep me going. I love you. To my uncle, thank you. Your support has never let me down and is undoubtedly there whenever I need it. To my sisters and brother, thank you. At times when I began to doubt myself and my ability, you never did. I‟ll never forget that. To my Hebrew Israelite family, thank you. Iron sharpens iron. Thank you for sharpening me. To my friends, near and far, thank you. Your warm voices, kind words, and generosities are forever appreciated. ________________ …Shalom! ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Professor Timothy Vos. You, as well as the vast amounts of knowledge you‟ve shared with me during my time at Mizzou, have played an integral part in my education. Your enthusiasm and passion for educating is contagious. Oftentimes we go through life unaware of how we affect others‟ lives. I hope you truly understand, and never forget, how you have touched mine. And to my committee, thank you. ii FOLLOWING THE MONEY: HOW SALIENT IS MEDIA OWNERSHIP INFORMATION TO U.S. CITIZENS? Ashley Moore Dr. Timothy Vos, Thesis Supervisor ABSTRACT This qualitative study seeks to assess how significant media ownership information is to citizens‟ lives and to understand on what bases this information is salient for some citizens and not others. Ten respondents were recruited from the cities of St. Louis and Columbia, Missouri. In-depth interviews were conducted along with a short, written quiz to evaluate individuals‟ bases for salience (expectancy, frequency/recency, emotional valence, and involvement) and levels of knowledge regarding media ownership. For the respondents of this study, results show higher levels of media ownership salience and knowledge correspond to those who perceive objectivity in news as a process while lower levels of salience correspond to respondents who perceive objectivity in news as an end-product. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................. ii ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................. vi Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................. 4 2.1 Theoretical Perspectives .................................................................... 12 2.2 Salience .............................................................................................. 13 2.3 Political Economy .............................................................................. 24 2.3.1 Hegemony and Exploitation ....................................................... 25 2.3.2 Commodity Fetishism, False Consciousness, and Reification. .. 30 3 RESEARCH DESIGN ............................................................................... 38 4 RESULTS .................................................................................................. 45 4.1 Prior Knowledge ................................................................................ 45 4.2 Expectancy ......................................................................................... 49 4.3 Frequency and Recency ..................................................................... 57 4.4 Emotional Valence ............................................................................. 61 4.5 Involvement ....................................................................................... 64 5 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................ 69 iv APPENDIX ...................................................................................................... 82 1 INTERVIEW GUIDE ................................................................................. 82 2 QUIZ .......................................................................................................... 86 3 TABLE OF INTERVIEW RESPONSES .................................................... 88 4 INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPTS ................................................................... 89 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................... 228 v LIST OF TABLES Figure Page 1. Table of Interview Responses……………………………………………………………87 vi 1 INTRODUCTION “To expect to be free and ignorant is to expect what never was and never will be.” – Thomas Jefferson Karl Marx asserts economic processes underlie all other social processes. Agreeably, economic historian and media theorist Harold Innis maintains, “Throughout the course of human history, cultures, cultural artifacts, and cultural processes have generally supported, and were supported by, their society‟s predominant mode of economic and political organization” (Babe, 2009, p. 4). Journalism is such a cultural artifact and within the United States, it supports and is supported by capitalism. However, when operating within a capitalistic framework, the role of journalism is threatened and undermined by the very exploitative nature that defines capitalism – a nature engendered by a few, the elite, to maintain power over subjugated groups. The exploitative nature of capitalism and unequal class relations it breeds are possible for one reason: it is often masked by the fetishism of the visible exchange relation between commodities (Onimode, 1985). Marx likens this fetishism to religious worship. He contends the religious world, like the commodity world, is no more than a reflex of the real world and that, The religious reflex of the real world can, in any case, only then finally vanish, when the practical relations of every-day life offer to man none but perfectly intelligible and reasonable relations with regard to his fellowmen and to Nature (Marx, 1887, p. 79). 1 Commodity fetishism transforms social relations between individuals into exchange relations between commodities, and falsely portrays capital-labor relations as natural and inevitable (Onimode, 1985). Such a false portrayal or false consciousness is a hegemonic inculcation by which the elite rob the working class of their class consciousness, thereby forcing them to accept a reality detached of their actual social experience. For these reasons, it is in the best interest of media corporate owners to perpetuate a false consciousness whereas media ownership information is downplayed or nonexistent. Consequently, who controls the U.S. media system and for what purposes is left out of political debate and public discussion while the attitude of profit-seeking, concentrated commercial media is accepted as rational and natural (McChesney, 1999). Knowing the nature of the U.S. corporate media system is critical when judging the impartiality of news or when determining how free media systems are throughout various countries. In light of the level of importance of media and communication to any society, knowing how the U.S. media system is owned is of equal importance because it can help reveal the presence of hegemony and indicate the effectiveness of democracy and press systems within given societies. This research seeks to understand how salient media ownership information is to citizens, specifically, citizens of Columbia and St. Louis, Missouri. The researcher contends the vast majority of citizens are unaware. But for what reasons do some individuals find media ownership information salient for various facets of their lives? How do individuals differ in degree to which they are psychologically oriented to media ownership information? 2 The ability to assess the extent to which people are aware of media ownership and attach significance to it may contribute to an understanding