Many news outlets sway one way politically. People may think that by reading or watching different news outlets they are getting the full story, but because of media consolidation, that might not be the case.
Media consolidation happens when a few large corporations own most media outlets. This process is largely driven by deregulation, which allows corporations to own a limitless amount of stations, channels, or publications.
The goal for these corporations is to reduce costs and maximize profits, which comes at the cost of our media’s diversity in news coverage.
The cable industry is known as a “natural monopoly” because it has very high fixed costs, but very low costs to add a new customer. This structure discourages competition and helps large companies dominate the market.
The illusion of choice refers to a situation where a person feels like they have options, but in reality those choices are limited or manipulated.
“While choice of media to consume seems limitless in the age of both streaming and user generated content, a small number of media conglomerates owning a majority of media output combined with media algorithms affecting and curating what user-content we consume, the choice is in fact limited,” librarian Ashley Brockman said.
In other words, as the number of independent outlets decreases, so do the different versions of stories available to the public.
Government deregulations have played a significant role in enabling media consolidation. One major government policy involved was the 1996 Telecommunications Act.
According to the Federal Communications Commission, “The goal of this new law is to let anyone enter any communications business — to let any communications business compete in any market against any other.”
While the intent was to make a positive change in the media industry, this law ultimately made it more difficult for smaller corporations to be successful.
The act allowed big corporations to own multiple assets and enabled mergers, eventually making it nearly impossible for small outlets to compete with them.
Media giants refer to large corporations that own and control multiple media outlets. Some of the biggest examples of this are Comcast, Time Warner, News Corp, ViacomCBS, and Disney. Many of these media giants have monopolized the media since the beginning of the film industry.
“They built all these studios in Hollywood. You had Zucker, you had Paramount Pictures, all of them started there. Eventually, they died off, and then what took over is many of their family members sold to these corporations,” film teacher Jeffrey Beaucar said.
Disney, which began as the small Disney Brothers Studio in 1923, has since expanded far beyond film production and now owns a vast network of companies and platforms.
By acquiring so many outlets, Disney has effectively become a monopoly within the entertainment industry, shaping what much of the public watches and consumes.
Comcast is another major example of media monopoly. Its dominance is sustained largely by a lack of competition.
Some sources suggest that Comcast has influenced state laws to prevent competition and that government regulators have also enabled this situation.
Another major factor of media consolidation is mergers.
The merger between CBS and Viacom, now known as Paramount Global, has majorly increased their domination of the media and press.
Together, they control major assets such as Paramount Pictures, MTV, Nickelodeon, and Showtime.
This consolidation demonstrates how even formerly separate giants continue merging to expand their influence over the media.
Nevertheless, there are some obstacles for corporations to increase media ownership.
News Corp, one of the largest players in the global media, faces challenges to continue expanding its assets.
Although News Corp has come under scrutiny from regulators and lawmakers, it has also been entangled in antitrust lawsuits that could possibly result in the company being broken up.
How does all of this affect the people? Some say it violates the spirit of the First Amendment.
The First Amendment states the freedom of the press. This means the media has the right to publish anything without government censorship.
As ownership becomes concentrated in a few hands, those corporations effectively determine what stories get told.
This undermines the spirit of press freedom by allowing private interests to control public information, even if the censorship isn’t from the government.
At the same time, the First Amendment also prevents the government from passing laws that would limit ownership concentration, since such actions could be interpreted as restricting the press.
This creates a complex tension between protecting free speech and preventing monopolies from dominating it.
“I guess since everything comes from the same places it’s easier to access [information], but it is a disadvantage to the companies that they own because they don’t have much freedom over what they can do,” sophomore Drew Jacobs said.
In contrast, the novelty of media being distributed through the Internet changes the idea of restriction of information.
The internet allows for smaller media and information to be heard, and is information less likely to be distributed by big corporations.
“The Internet vastly changed the way the public interacts with information and put an emphasis on the idea that information should be free,” Brockman said.
Media consolidation has reshaped the way information is produced and consumed.
While deregulation and corporate mergers have increased efficiency and profits for large companies, they have also reduced the diversity of voices in the media.
Understanding who controls the news is essential to protecting the free flow of information and ensuring that the press remains truly independent.