Is the Media an independent political actor?

Four large corporations control 80% of the press in Britain and the context in which they are circulated in is a competitive one.  Mark Curtis corroborates this statement agreeing, “The most influential mainstream media outlets are mainly large corporations in the business of maximising profits.”  Given their financial assets they are independent of government control, as they are privately owned, however Jones and Kavanagh duplicate this information and continue, “It is widely asserted that because the press is owned by big business concerns which exist to make a profit, the press is bound to favour the party of capitalism.”  Politics UK corroborates this statement questioning, “Does it seem likely that such organisations will give a fair hearing to political viewpoints hostile to the capitalist system of which they are an important part?”      

Before 1997 the majority of daily newspapers reported in a pro-Conservative manner, influencing their readers to vote Conservative at elections.  Rupert Murdoch enjoyed a close relationship with Margaret Thatcher and Given Murdoch’s right-wing political leanings it wasn’t a surprise that the headline “If Kinnock Wins today will the last person to leave Britain please turn out the lights” filled the front page of the Sun on the morning of Election Day 1992.  Coverage of the 1997 General Election saw an unprecedented shift of support away from the Conservative Party as John Major’s leadership suffered severe criticism in the press and they lost support from The Times, The Telegraph, The Daily Mail and of course the Sun to Tony Blair.  The Murdoch-owned Sun turned on the Tory’s, personally attacking Major with headlines such as “NOW WE’VE ALL BEEN SCREWED BY THE CABINET”, in light of the economic crisis with the Exchange Rate Mechanism.  Since 1997 the Sun has generally supported Blair and Murdoch has regularly been seen making visits to Downing Street.  Critics argue that Murdoch switched his support in exchange for agreed favours from Blair once in office, but a BBC article describes how since the Sun moved into the New Labour Camp “its heart has not really seemed in it.”  Nonetheless this is a prime example of how the concentration of press ownership has led to partisan publishing in the papers. The Tories and Labour are guilty as charged for attempting to and apparently succeeding in using the media to aid their political ambitions, a charge which ultimately compromises the primary function of the press in a liberal democracy.

Those who believe in the idea that we live in a pluralist democracy would argue that the participation of the media as the “watchdog of the public interest” acknowledge the crucial role that the mass media plays in the political process.  It is a vital necessity then, that in order for the media to fulfil this role it must be independent from state control, and this independence, promoters of the pluralist view say, is provided by the “free market organization of the media” and its financial independence from government institutions.  Television is described by most reliable publications as the populations’ main source of political information.  Around 65% of participants in a survey published by the Guardian in November 2002 cited television as their main source of news.  Furthermore 60% cited that they trusted television most, BBC1 scoring highest and Trevor MacDonald topping a poll of the most trusted newscasters.

The broadcasting market has in recent years become a much more competitive one, companies constantly competing for audience retention, and the growing abundance of channels emerging on the cable and satellite scene pose a significant challenge to the existing dominance that the four major terrestrial channels currently exert.  It is argued that the deregulation of British broadcasting, caused by the recent explosion of choice in the television industry, “ ensures broadcasting's independence of the state” and arguably enhances the practice of a pluralist democracy in Britain.  On the contrary BBC One and Two still retain around 40% of the audience, and together with ITV and Channel 4, make up over 80% of the broadcasting market in Britain, giving these major broadcasters the most influential positions in the British media.  

Broadcasting faces similar problems to the press in that both compete in a market that exists to maximise profits by increasing audiences.  Mark Curtis addresses the chief pitfall and consequence of competition in the mainstream media, stating, “Stories have to attract audiences to sell to advertisers in competition with soap operas and game shows.”  Curtis also provides analysis of the role of the media with a rather condemning quote from a study conducted by Brian McNair of Stirling University, that concludes, “The news media of society tend to construct accounts of events which are structured and framed by the dominant values and interests of that society, and to marginalize (if not necessarily exclude) alternative accounts.”  The implications of this quote cast serious doubt upon the impartiality of broadcasted and published news in Britain, illustrating that the mass media ultimately fails as a bipartisan political actor in so much as if it does not already have interests in particular political parties or isn’t violently obsessed with boosting circulation and ratings then it is inherently tied to the “stratified social system” that it helps make up and therefore restricted from fulfilling the role that pluralist thinkers assign it to.  What is created by the continuing power struggle of media corporations in their attempts to scrutinise the government whilst at the same time maintain audience retention is what Blumler and Gurevitch call “a crisis of civic communication.” 

There is a deep-rooted consensus in Britain that the BBC acts as an impartial newscaster, neutral and independent of state control and it is described in Politics UK as being “an organisation with a worldwide reputation for excellence and for accurate, current affairs coverage.”  The BBC gathers it’s funding from the licensing fee that all those who use a television pay annually and so due to its financial independence some argue the BBC is protected from government regulation and control.  Although the government can change the licensing system if they wish, politics UK cites that “former Home Secretary, Willie Whitelaw, knew of no occasion when this threat had been used” and the Peacock Commission of 1986 demonstrated the difficulty Mrs Thatcher faced when in office she had been partial to proposing the use of advertising to fund the BBC.  On the other hand the BBC does face pressures from the government because the power of patronage invested in the Prime Minster extends to the board of governor’s for the BBC.  The post of chairman has been frequently seen as controversial and previous governments have been attacked for assigning chairmen with alleged partisan views to ensure effective government regulation of broadcasting, for example, Gavyn Davies and Greg Dyke were accused of being too close to Labour soon after being appointed to their senior positions.  The government attempts to influence broadcasting further by its unwillingness to allow certain issues to be reported for “security reasons”, a prime example of this being the refusal by the government to allow an independent inquiry into the events of 7th July 2005.  Although the BBC prides itself on its neutrality, there are significant grounds to argue the complete dismissal of that claim, and recent events such as the Hutton Report illustrate how the BBC is influenced greatly by government pressures.  Furthermore the BBC appears to be failing in its pluralist role of challenging the government or holding it to account, favouring the promotion of the status quo, or what Curtis describes as “an ideological system working to support elite interests.”

There is a growing concern in Britain that the government is becoming over-powerful from the lack of effective checks and balances exercised by opposition parties, Commons debate, Prime Ministers Question Time, Committees, the Lords, and the medias failure to challenge the government and inform the population of potentially damaging evidence harmful to government image, particularly in foreign affairs.  The demotion of hard-hitting current affairs programs away from peak-time viewing and the dilution of news programs by focusing more on ‘human interests’ stories and natural disasters has led to claims that the “medias educative role is being diminished” and subsequently its role as an independent political actor is increasingly being compromised.  Competition for audiences has seen coverage of current affairs on ITV reach an all time low, the ITV News at Ten being taken from air altogether and foreign coverage having virtually disappeared on ITV.  Mark Curtis goes further to report that “The BBC reports on Britain’s foreign policy in ways that resemble straightforward state propaganda organs” backing up his claims with the findings of Glasgow University who claim that the news is “a sequence of socially manufactured messages which carry many of the culturally dominant assumptions of our society.”  A study by Cardiff University concludes that “The BBC displayed the most pro-war agenda of any British broadcaster” during the Iraq War and its allocation of just 2% of foreign affairs coverage to opposition views (views that arguably represented the majority of British public) helps to corroborate that statement.  

The media, it seems, is constantly influenced in some way, whether by political pressures, editorial constraints, or market demands, and these influences prevent the media from functioning properly as an independent political actor.  Corporate interests that increasingly interfere with the impartiality of the press demonstrate how newspapers are more a tool of their private owners, whose intent is less the impartial reporting of current affairs and increasingly more an effort to boost circulation and increase profits.  Ministerial dealings with Press Barons such as the Blair-Murdoch affair, display how the political leanings of the owner hampers the independence of most newspapers.  Similarly on television, with the exception of the BBC, the desire to maximise audiences and increase profits has seen a drastic decline of news broadcasting at peak times, replaced increasingly so by soaps, game shows, and Richard and Judy.  The replacement of hard-hitting and informative news in favour of more human-interest productions, along with the government’s ability to intimidate broadcasters, like in 1986 when a Conservative report “almost certainly had some effect on the BBC’s subsequent news and current affairs presentation,” displays how “the pluralist analysis of the medias role is inappropriate.”  Although the odd Channel 4 program and selective reporters for the Independent and the Guardian seek to uncover some of the darker secrets that the government wish to keep secret, their efforts seem to fall on deaf ears as their reports are only picked up by a minority of viewers and therefore never seem to generate the desired effect.  Journalistic mavericks use the Internet to uncover truths and construct arguments that openly question and challenge British foreign policy but their efforts are swamped by mainstream spin and government propaganda and so the truth remains untold.  The medias role in society is to produce clear, impartial accounts of current affairs and scrutinise or even challenge the actions of the government in order to contribute to a pluralist democracy.  However the British media today reflects more a government institution, controlled to create a façade of democracy and quell any challenges, in essence creating a system that preserves the status quo and the interests of the elite.  “The news is not a neutral and natural phenomenon; it is rather the manufactured production of ideology.” 

Bibliography

M. Curtis., Web of Deceit, (Britain, 2003), pp.374-386.

P. Dunleavy, A. Gamble, I. Holliday, G. Peele., Developments in British Politics 6, (London 2000), pp. 169-183.

B. Jones, D. Kavanagh., British Politics Today 7, (Manchester 2003), pp. 103-118.

B. Jones, D. Kavanagh, M. Moran, P. Norton., Politics UK 4, (Essex 2001), pp.177-204.

Websites

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=1316. - Accessed on 15:03:06 at 18:30.

http://www.goldsmiths.ac.uk/departments/media-communications/pdfs/davidmiller-paper.pdf - Accessed on 15:03:06 at 19:00.

 http://www.cultsock.ndirect.co.uk/MUHome/cshtml/media/4estate.html - Accessed on 14:03:06 at 17:15.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/vote2001/hi/english/features/newsid_1378000/1378202.stm - Accessed on 16:03:06 at 21:30.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3654446.stm - Accessed on 17:03:06 at 22:45.

 

           

                     

---