John Keane (1991) suggested,

Authors Avatar

John Keane (1991) suggested, “ power and influence are shifting away from elected national governments towards un-elected supernational bodies.” Discuss this statement with reference to at least one multi-national organisation.

In this essay, I firstly intend to define the terms ‘power’ and ‘influence’, in relation to those who are in ‘power’ and ‘influencing’, and those who are subject to this power and are being influenced; examine the relationship between media and the government with reference to the BBC, and media conglomerates; the Broadcasting Act of 1990 will be examined to understand the governments intentions as to what power they hold over media conglomerates; globalisation of media industries with a close look at News Corporation; lastly, I will examine a possible framework for media ownership regulation, and examine what the government would have to do to stop too much ownership.

“Power is not the property of, say, a ruling class; power is a strategic terrain,

the site of an unequal relationship between the powerful and the powerless;

‘where there is power, there is resistance’.”

(Foucault.M,  Introduction to Cultural Theory. (Pg 97))

As Foucault says, power is a two-way relationship yet one side of the relationship is the dominant and the other the inferior. Influence ties in well with ‘power’ as, if you were powerless you would be ‘influenced’ by people within power. This is probably an obvious statement but many of the ‘audience’ probably doesn’t realise the subliminal power the media holds. In relation to those that are under this power and are being influenced, the audience could be compared to a huge vacuum. Audiences just suck in what we are given and not that many people realise this is all part of the influence and power the media hold. Those parties that hold the supposed power (government and media companies) know all to well that they have the power to create laws and decide what information the country takes in and whether or not things are relevant to our lives.

        The government have always struggled with media on power relations, yet the media has always had the option of ‘free speech’. The BBC has been the company that has been linked with the government on numerous occasions, with suggestions that it is the government that controls the BBC. It is in fact, a ‘State broadcasting monopoly’, with the principles, that it should, have independence from the government in its own internal affairs, yet the government should appoint a board of governors. The independence factor seems to succeed, but more often than not tensions appear.

Join now!

“There has been continued tension between the BBC and the government of the day because of the expectations of governments, whether Conservative or Labour, that the BBC, as a national organisation should support uncritically and without reservation the governments policies.”

(O’Sullivan, Dutton and Rayner, Studying the Media, (pg 51))

This tension has emerged due to the coverage of ‘wars’ between Britain and other countries, by the BBC. They believe that they should be free to report in their own ‘balanced’ way. However, the BBC has always been dependent on the Government to provide the license fee it uses to ...

This is a preview of the whole essay