Observations

         “To think without facts, is as ineffectual as to think without principles” (Flink 154). A free and informed public in a democratic society was the aim of the United Sates of America. The pillars of this ideology are journalist and news outlets charged with the responsibility of presenting informed and non-bias coverage of those in power and the public, the Fourth Estate. Even in her genesis the United States established the importance of regulation of government by a non-governmental outlet. The need for fair, and honest reporting is so crucial to the fabric of a functioning society that it is protected by law, “Congress shall pass no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” And to its credit Congress has not done so but what they have allowed may be more sinister and detrimental to the American public than a law. Indeed, in the climate of mega conglomerates and an astounding concentration of media ownership the rule has become, if you can’t abridge it buy it. The Fourth Estate has been put up for sale to the highest bidder, therefore, facts, honesty, relevancy, and non-bias truths are no longer innate to news reporting, and what is reported should be ingested under subjectivity rather than as objective, and poignant news. “In its role as sentinel over all our liberties, the press [is] …a public utility” (Flink 155) that has become indubitably privatized, and the reporting glossed and sanitized for the benefit of the owners and not the public. A public influenced by media, controlled by a conglomerate, is no free or informed public at all and its governing is no longer by a democracy but by a corporation. Leading to a society of uninformed, misguided thinkers, making ineffective decisions from illegitimate truths and a press succumbed to the weights of obligation to conglomerates now subsidiaries of a company rather than the keepers of fairness and balance.

             Looking to the past for the expectations of synergy between mass media and private companies is an effective and sure way to depict with accuracy the future of news reporting. Media, specifically news media in its modern inception was “brief, factual accounts and [were] the precursor of what became known several decades later as objective reporting” (Flink 155). This began to change as editorial pieces grew and involved a more popularity-seeking mix of printed matter. This occurred when media outlets gained in readers/viewers, profitability, and their influence was not only on the public but on the political process. With affluence and popularity comes investors and one of the earliest depictions of compromise of the Fourth Estate as a news business rather than a public utility was “its long and profitable love affair that was not always platonic” (Flink 156) between The Western Union Company and the Associated Press (AP.) It was admitted that Western Union found its best customer and natural ally in the AP which in turn “positioned the business aspect of journalism far above any ethical responsibility to the public or the political process” (Flink 156). This symbiotic relationship between press and private company renders “the success of each depends mainly on the aid of the other” (Flink 156) meaning the success of a news outlet is only productive if it is to the benefit of the company it is partnered to. By this logic, megamergers becoming conglomerates, no longer as partners to media but owning and controlling news outlets will only invest into the success of that media outlet if it is conducive to the benefit and success of the company. How does this practice, in any democratic state, suggest a free and informed press, and not a capitalistic driven society under the rule of corporations? As time progress and the emergence of more megamergers becoming owners of media, the ring bearers and watchdogs of truth, less and less truth may be produced and agenda driven reporting and sensationalism will become the norm, “a deterioration of editorial standards” (Flink 156) and a decrease of diversity and innovation in reporting.

       The Fourth Estate in essence becoming privately owned is a suppression of media, and with that comes homogenized viewpoints. Monopolization by super mergers of companies purchasing news and media outlets “lead to lack of diversity in media.. and few points of view represented in our news coverage and stories” (CrashCourse 6:53.) The public being informed of what only the corporation that owns the media deems as relevant or to cause little to no harm to the conglomerate, the media has become a subsidiary like any other business bought and monopolized. This is detrimental to a society that ought to grow and thrive by relying on the diversity of opinions and the collaborative creativity that sparks innovation. But journalism has become a for profit business. Manned by corporate advertising greed and agendas, news outlets should have fairness and balance at the core of its reporting as it is the nucleus. We have seen over the past 30 years the conglomerate monster of media platforms and “while it may seem like you have limitless options, most of the media you consume is owned by one of six companies” (WebFx) who owns the agency of information and broadcast, the ISP providers? Six companies. We are closer to the collapse of the freedom to access information and ingest fair, accurate, and diverse media than we may be willing to admit. With the United States becoming a Banana Republic, dominated by economic and political corruption in media and government. Leaving the media to operate with little to no regard to the correlation of information distributed and those that own media distribution agencies.

             Freedom of the press does not exist in the United States. The press may be free from laws passed by congress abridging its reporting, but it is not free from media conglomerates that own it suppressing information they deem non-profitable.  As much as the country decries totalitarian dictatorship and censorship, and swear to uphold democracy, America’s capitalist fuel suppression of the press is one of the few instances where its crack in democracy is wide and clear. Of all the outlets and mediums for media and information “the major outlets are almost all owned by…six conglomerates” (WebFx). What free, fair, and just, accounting of cries from its citizens will be reported if ‘The Big 6,’ aptly titled, rule the media?  Billionaires, and their toys, that is our form of ingesting and receiving information. The relationship between media ownership and new media has evolved exponentially as technology and megamergers persist. We now cannot treat mainstream media as an unbiased entity. They are companies ran by CEO’s and owned by real-life billionaires who put nothing before their profit margins, not even the truth, “profit seeking, and social responsibility are extremely uneasy partners” (Flink). News media now is reported to and from the objective of the bottom line for the parent company. The level of responsibility for fair and accurate reporting solely depends on the level of profit for the Big 6 and other media conglomerate. The Big 6 include National Amusements, Disney, Time Warner, Comcast, News Corp, and Sony; the press belongs to media managers and their owners. And as tech companies grow, their stretch into media consumption grows as well. Why on earth should Jeff Bezos the owner of Amazon, and a space firm, Bule Origins, also own a news outlet, The Washington Post. What could be the social responsibility to the public Bezos feels so indebtedly obligated to that he must own a media outlet. Therefore, I repeat “profit seeking, and social responsibility are extremely uneasy partners” (Flink).

       “The media is beholden to ownership which prioritizes profit first” (Contreras.) The Fourth Estate, the fourth branch of government has literally been put up for sale establishing a new relationship between information release, distribution, and ownership. The menace of owning astounding amounts of news platforms cannot be underrepresented as a plight to control the public and public perception. Ownership of new media and being able to control the narrative lends to positive definitions of actions and situations that are objectively negative, “with regard to news programing, journalists depend on access to those in power which can encourage complicity. This complicity can lead to how news is primarily defined” (Contreras.) It is no coincidence that the biggest media platforms are “also the largest advertisers in the United States” (Contreras.) How that does not scream conflict of interest, I’m unsure. In fact, “the philosophy is simple: You keep the news, and the ads separate because otherwise readers can't trust you” (Vane). But we’re seeing more and more media platforms negating away from that truth. And in doing so creating mounds, and mounds, of information that consumers now must sift through endlessly to determine what is legitimate and what is agenda driven. Having more information, due to a rise of tech and new media, especially when not factual does not ensure a society capable of making informed decisions. Decisions made based on ill-informed and bias reporting will never be effective, “the sheer amount of information available today is a double-edged sword..this wealth of information is also a curse. How can we tell if that is trending is fact or fantasy? Most people need help, and that’s the job of journalist” (Carroll). When journalists and their reporting can be bought and sold under the weight of obligation to conglomerates, where does an informed, self-governing public emerge, if at all?

       “Freedom of expression is always in jeopardy because those in power will want to suppress views contrary to their own” (Flink 21) therein is the reminder of why conglomerates formed by megamergers strive to own media outlets. There can be no contrary or opposing views if they own the institutions obliged with sharing the truth. At the sum and substance, the core of journalism and news reporting, fairness and balance should exist as “the ultimate function of a responsible press is to act as sentinel over abuses of power, public or private. The sentinel stands guard for the freedom of press, speech, and expression-artistic, religious, or political—protects not only liberty in the form of knowledge but all our other liberties as well” (Flink 212) does this really sound like a task for Amazon, Disney, or Sony? The societal contractually obligated, constitutionally protected, role of The Fourth Estate is to relay information to the public, accurately, to guide society as self-governing, conglomerates are not tasked to do this, and they never will.

       The concentration of media ownership no longer subjects news outlets to the ethics of journalism. Because of this divergence from the ethics of journalism, “Be Accountable: Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other” (SPJ) it is unfortunately now the viewers burden to decipher the facts from propaganda. And news, information media meant to guide our decisions as a mass must be considered subjective, and not objectively informative for the furtherance of society. Whilst “ethics are collectively an abstraction… particularly in terms of a free and responsible press—[they] are principles defined by what we ought to do rather than what we think we can get away with” (Flink 234) mega conglomerates operate on the latter. A responsible and free press operates on the ethics of reporting that which is right, not what pleases or profits mega conglomerates or political parties. A free press is responsible for the self-governing of the nation, to be fair and just. It is a requirement that the press be “surrogates and advocates for their readers, journalists are supposed to provide the information a society needs to be free and self-governing” (Carroll). Think of how absurd it is to render Disney, Amazon, Time Warner, or Sony as facilitators in the role of The Fourth Estate, a role “that is important to a functioning democracy” (Gill 2020). Conglomerates ran by billionaires with set and bias agendas should not be equipped to significantly control the media, they should not be charged with the responsibility of establishing a free and informed public. Buying the public to purposefully misinform, omit, or conform information to one’s own benefit is not the foundation of a free and responsible press and certainly is not that of a democracy.

 References

Carroll, B.S. (2017). Journalism in a Digital Age. Writing & Editing for Digital Media. 3rd Edition. New York: Routledge

 Contreras, Maya. (2020). It’s Time to Dismantle the Media Conglomerate. Dame Magazine. https://www.damemagazine.com/2020/06/17/its-time-to-dismantle-the-media-conglomerate/

 Cornell Law. (1992). First amendment. Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment.

 Crash Course. (2016). Media Regulation: Crash Course Government and Politics #45. YouTube. https://youtu.be/f6LKl4RKIew.

 Flink, Stanley E. (1997). Sentinel under siege: the triumphs and troubles of America’s free press. Westview Press.

 Gill, Kathy. (2020). What Is the Fourth Estate? ThoughtCo. https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-the-fourth-estate-3368058

 Vane. S. (2002). Taking Care of Business. American Journalism Review.

 WebFx. (2016). The 6 Companies That Owns (Almost) All Media. https://www.webfx.com/blog/internet/the-6-companies-that-own-almost-all-media-infographic/