Government therefore has some control or influence in the content of the television and radio, but is by no means in complete control, it also has no direct influence on the content of the press. So who else has some control over media content? 87% of the national daily and Sunday press are owned by four major publishing companies, themselves part of larger companies with interests in other areas. The people who own the papers, which inevitably reflect their views, are predominantly wealthy people, 70% of the UK press is thought of as politically right of centre. Newspapers are of course commercial ventures and their sources of revenue are from subscriptions and sales, and from advertisers. It is in their interest therefore to try and attain the highest circulation possible, so it follows that their content must reflect the views of the majority or largest minority of people in its' target audience.
Commercial television and radio are in a similar situation, they need to sell advertising space and, in the case of satellite and cable stations, subscriptions in order to maximise their profit, so audience size is a large factor in deciding the content of programmes.
Of course the people who generate the content of the media, journalists, actors, scriptwriters, producers, directors etc. have an influence over what is included in our papers, television and radio. All these people ultimately answer to someone. In extreme cases people can of course strike if they disagree strongly with the viewpoint they are asked to convey, but technology has eliminated the need for much of the skilled labour once needed. With new technology employed by most major newspapers, it is now possible to write a story, set the page and produce the plastic plate for the presses all via a computer. With the cuts in union power and the current state of the employment market, people cannot risk losing their job over ideology, at present people are too easy to replace. So the whom to which the question refers is not just one person or organisation, but an array of influences, some more profound than others, the government, media barons, advertisers, market forces and of course the consumer.
If social power is the ability to influence the actions and opinions of others, despite resistance, how far does media technology achieve this? In 1938 one radio broadcast frightened or disturbed over one million listeners. Orson Welle's radio play of H.G. Wells' 'War of the Worlds' caused such widespread panic that it precipitated a change in the laws governing broadcasting in the United States of America to prevent it happening again. It is thought that about one sixth of the audience of that programme were influenced by the broadcast, most of these having tuned in late and missed the introduction. It is thought to be the realism of the broadcast (much of it broadcast as news bulletins, with expert opinion from politicians and military leaders) and the nation's situation at the time, i.e. mentally preparing itself for war, were the key factors in what happened. In short it was the lifelike quality of the broadcast combined with the social and cultural situation of the listeners that brought about such a panic. This is an extreme example of the power of the media and its’ potential for influence. Most people regard the television news as the ‘ultimate truth’ and rarely doubt its’ content. A media owner who may want to influence public opinion about a matter could misuse this trust to great extent.
Other effects may be less obvious, created for example by ‘over reporting’. For example the 'Mods and Rockers' incident (Clacton, Easter 1964) which provoked such headlines as 'Day of terror by scooter groups' (Daily Telegraph), and 'Seaside violence, 97 leather jackets arrested' (Daily Mail). The reports failed to mention that only a minority of those involved were riding scooters, or that of the ninety-seven arrests made most were released without charge and only two were charged with crimes of violence. This kind of exaggeration and distortion as well as other kinds of over reporting, prediction and symbolisation, leads to the formation of stereotypes amongst the media audience; they label a particular image of culture as delinquent. A more contemporary example is that of the 'New Age Traveller’, branded by the media as smelly, lazy vandals who are generally undesirable and were effectively outlawed. Of course, not everyone subscribes to these images portrayed by the media; my own personal experience of travellers is generally good. The influence of media must therefore be dependent upon the experience of the audience and upon how subjective or objective a program or report is.
Advertising is another way in which the media is used to influence our opinions and actions.
Whether it is transmitted via radio, TV or the Internet, advertisers try to influence our decision about their product. They spend millions of pounds each year conducting market research to find out how to influence the public more efficiently. Even the most basic of media technology can have a powerful influence over public opinion. For example, the billboard at a football ground will only have room to display sponsor’s restaurant name. But when a person is thinking of a place to eat, this familiar name will usually appear first.
Audiences themselves are of course sceptical of what they hear and read, (especially when it comes to reporting politics or advertising washing powder) and they are fickle. There is such a wide choice available to people, if they don't like what they are watching or listening to they can switch stations. If they don't like the paper they read they could buy a different one. People also vary in the way in which they use media, some are looking for entertainment, others for up to date information, others may just have the radio on for background noise or even use the Internet for education. The extent to which media is effective as a tool of social power is dependent on the wants and needs of the audience itself.
In conclusion, the degree of social power wielded by media technology is dependent on many factors, the audience itself being chief amongst these. The influence it has over its' audience depends on both their social background and experience; how the audience uses the media; and of course the content of the media itself. The same program or report will have different effects on some than on others. The different types of media will also have varying degrees of effectiveness. Some individuals or groups have a greater degree of control over media technology than others. This will inevitably influence the effectiveness of media technology as a tool of social power: A man who owns an on-line journal will have much less social influence than a man who owns a television network.
It is impossible to measure the effects of media technology, but it would be fair to say that the media will at sometimes affect our actions and opinions. It would also be fair to say that some are more vulnerable to the influence of media than others.
(Frank Webster) Theories of the information society. 1995.
(Robin Roy, Nigel Cross) Technology and society. 1975
(Stanley A. Hetzler) Technological growth and social change : achieving modernization. 1969.
(Esther Dyson) Release 2.1: A design for living in the digital age. 1995
FSS 122 essay
Paul Shepherd
FC137640
BABJ1
Word count = 1,574
