Embedded Files
Comparing Traditional News Outlets to Self-Published Sources
Comparing Traditional News Outlets to Self-Published Sources
In 1988, Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman published Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, where they detail the framework for analyzing the function of media and how it shapes public opinion through a political lens. Mass media, by definition, is a means of communication aimed at reaching a large number of people in a short amount of time. While the goal of mass media is to communicate information to the masses, it also plays a role in shaping public opinion.
The outlets of consuming mass media have expanded beyond major news networks over the past 36 years, as social media has become deeply ingrained in our daily lives. We now look to platforms such as YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, Facebook for information and entertainment.
YouTube alone has proven to be a powerful media entity that many turn to for more information on current events. A 2020 Pew Research Center study revealed that 26% of Americans get their news from YouTube.
This analysis aims to examine YouTube through the lens of Noam Chomsky's Five Filters of Mass Media to compare and contrast YouTube to major media outlets and identify evidence of these filters and how they influence what is created.
Image Source: Pew Research Center, September, 2020, “Many Americans Get News on YouTube, Where News Organizations and Independent Producers Thrive Side by Side”
According to Noam Chomsky, media operates through five filters: ownership, advertising, the media elite, flack, and the common enemy.
1. Ownership
Mass media outlets are usually large corporations that strive to protect their image in the eyes of the general public. The information they disseminate may be filtered out before reaching the general public. The situation becomes even more complex when examining the interests or political affiliations of major shareholders or advertisers, as these factors may also shape what information is distilled to viewers.
YouTube is owned by one of the world's most powerful and influential corporations, Google. This ownership structure has the potential to influence what content is permitted and promoted on the platform through the use of community guidelines and ever-evolving algorithms. While some policies may be aimed at controlling the spread of misinformation, YouTube (or Google) is ultimately deciding what content is permissible on the site.
2. Advertising
Advertising revenue is the operational foundation for mass media outlets, fueling their growth and ability to succeed. Networks need to offset production costs while staying competitive with other news outlets. Rather than relying on viewers to pay more for their product through paywalls, exclusive content, or higher subscription fees, networks sell their viewership to advertisers. As suggested in the previous section on ownership, this filter naturally expands to safeguard the image and interests of advertisers as news outlets rewrite narratives that could be potentially damming to advertisers.
YouTube's Partner Program, a required partnership with Google's AdSense, proves that advertising is the backbone of YouTube (and ultimately Google's) business model.
For content creators aspiring to monetize their channel, there is an incentive to create videos that elicit high views. How do you drive traffic your channel? You play the algorithm game. Although there is not a definitive strategy for success, almost by design, these video formats tend to result in higher viewership:
Flood feeds with videos on trending topics
Do something completely unfathomable (think MrBeast)
Spark controversy to boost sharing and engagement in the comments
To play the algorithm game, engagement is key.
But who is the real winner? Sure, popular creators will generate revenue from views but consider all of the views these 'popular' videos are bringing to the platform. Google is able to capitalize on high viewership, using those metrics to sell ad space to advertisers. Therefore, reinforcing the idea that what we watch shapes what is created.
3. The Media Elite
Influential entities like governments and large corporations are skilled at shaping media narratives to their advantage. The "media elite" understand news cycles and are adept at managing the narrative before negative press emerges. By providing the media with scoops, interviews, and press releases, these powerful sources are often the first to break the news, therefore controlling the narrative.
When applying this filter to YouTube, let's examine the influence that popular creators on the platform. Since the algorithm tends to promote trending content, creators with a large viewer base and higher engagements have more influence on shaping the messages that are received by the masses, dwarfing the outreach of smaller channels. This is applicable to political views, controversial current events, and even product recommendations like Apple's Vision Pro.
4. Flack
Should a mass media outlet choose to stray away from the general consensus, they open themselves up to the possibility of receiving backlash, or flack, from influential partners. It is in the media's best interest to maintain a good relationship with influential leaders, politicians, and advertisers, as such media outlets may choose to minimize or filter messaging to avoid any negative repercussions.
YouTube, as a corporate entity, is susceptible to public backlash, most notably when removing videos that do not adhere to their community guidelines. In 2020, during the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, YouTube removed 11.4 million videos over the course of a 3-month period that violated their Community Guidelines. While this typically polices content such as pornography, hate speech, and potential scams, they also addressed misleading content.
Instead of reviewing videos one by one, which would result in greater accuracy but be incredibly time consuming, YouTube opted to use an automated system to remove videos quickly with a greater margin of error. This resulted in the removal of some videos that did not violate their policies. There is a system of checks and balances in play, as creators can appeal the removal. However, these processes take time and illustrates how YouTube's Community Guidelines shape what is acceptable and accessible on the platform.
5. The Common Enemy
This filter was originally titled "Anit-Communism" but has since evolved, broadening its classification to anything that incites fear into the general public. The mechanics of this filter relies on tapping into basic human instinct of survival. Media outlets may position a topic, figure, movement as a "threat" to their viewer base, shaping public perception. This filter tends to deepen echo chambers, creating an "us vs. them" mentality among viewers, who may not examine the validity of the network's claims, accepting them at face value.
Another way content creators boost engagement is by identifying common enemies or threats to engage their audience. Based on what we know about the algorithm, it will suggest videos based on the ones viewers have watched, creating a confirmation bias within a viewer's feed. This can create polarizing views, negatively impacting public perception on important topics such as politics, current events, and pop culture trends (Selena vs. Haley, Stanly vs. Owala) as viewers dig their heels into their beliefs and limit their exposure to other viewpoints.
Page updated
Report abuse