Media corporations and consumer relationships

Media conglomerates have resulted in monotony in news and in entertainment. When one corporation owns a series of seemingly independent news sources, editorial decisions start to reflect the political agenda of the CEOs. Self-censorship can result, keeping the public in the dark about key political issues or events. For example, one of the newspapers owned by a conglomerate might hire an upstart reporter who wishes to write a weekly piece about the abuses at Guantanamo Bay, but the corporate heads of the conglomerate, in collusion with the Bush administration, pressure the paper's editor to refuse the reporter's request. The editorial boards answerable to the media conglomerate corporation end up including and excluding the same information. As a result, all the news sources owned by a conglomerate will end up delivering the same basic information even though they may appear different. Political pressure is not the only reason media conglomerates inhibit freedom of expression and heterogeneity in the media. Advertisers also pressure the media to maintain content standards, under the threat of spending their advertising dollars elsewhere. If Ford or Budweiser don't want their ads placed during a documentary on Bin Laden, then the media corporation will happily say no. In the absence of alternative media outlets, independent journalists have no means of getting their ideas out to the public.

If media corporations are not limited in how many outlets they can own in a particular market or medium, then consumers suffer from a homogenous media. Moreover, American citizens do not enjoy their full First Amendment rights. Alternative media sources are not only hard to find and expensive to acquire, but many consumers don't have time to search for alternative media websites or magazines. With television news one of the only options for current event information, consumers deserve a plethora of sources, not just a handful, owned by the same few corporations. Similarly, corporate-owned media conglomerates usually neglect the voices of minorities and of women because the heads of the corporations are too far distanced from minority issues and points-of-view.