concentration of media ownership

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

kobayashi

Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Joined
Aug 16, 2001
Messages
5,142
Location
the ether
one of the biggest growing concerns amongst journalists around the world is the concentration of media ownership.

i have studied the extent to which this concentration is true and how much it affects citizens.

i have my own thoughts and opinions on how this affects a democracy, but i often hear little more than silence from american's on the issue.

i was wondering if anyone here has any thoughts on the concentration of media, not just within america but around the world?

a good explanation of global media companies and the outlets which they control is available here.

------------------
itsyourworldyoucanchangeit
 
I think that the quality of journalism in the US has more to do with logistical constraints (time and money) than with corporate censorship, but that's just my opinion.
 
Seeing is that I work for one of the "beasts" this is a topic close to my heart. I don't think people realize how this touches their lives. And it's not only in the journalistic side of the business. I love explaining to people why a local newscasts will play a report from VH-1 once a week (the station is owned by CBS/Viacom which owns VH-1). It can be scary, especially if you don't know about it.

Follow the relationships.....

[This message has been edited by zonelistener (edited 01-05-2002).]
 
Originally posted by speedracer:
I think that the quality of journalism in the US has more to do with logistical constraints (time and money) than with corporate censorship, but that's just my opinion.

Of course you could argue that the logistics are a practical expression of, perhaps not 'censorship', but corporate priorities. Like the budget a media organisation might be inclined to allocate to its foreign news bureaus, for example.


------------------
"I could walk into this room
and the waves of conversation
are enough
to knock you down
with the undertow

soooo alone..."
 
Originally posted by Kieran McConville:
This could be a really interesting topic. Isn't anybody interested?

I'm interested.
smile.gif
I just don't know much about it and I hate to jump in when I can't speak with at least a little knowledge on the subject at hand. lol.
 
Jumpstart and education:

I'll explain on AOL Time Warner first -
Warner Music Group
Warner Bros. studios
the WB Network
Turner (CNN, TBS, TNT, Cartoon Network, etc.)
Turner Sports (Braves, Hawks, Thrashers)
Time Warner Cable
HBO
Time Magazine Group
New Line Cinema
America Online

So....

When you see a Harry Potter AOL cd offering 1000 free minutes, you shouldn't be suprised.

When you see an AOL pop-up window promoting Entertainment Weekly promoting Ocean's 11, you shouldn't be suprised.

If you see three AOL commercials every hour on Time Warner Cable, you shouldn't be suprised.

Anyone one to take on Viacom/CBS or ABC/Disney?
 
You guys are right it is an interesting topic as well as cause for concern.

The biggest issues revolving around the topic, imo, are the synergistic cross-promotions that occur such as what zonelistener pointed out: a multinational acquires various media holdings(broadcast networks, cable channels, film houses, distribution channels, theater chains, magazines, publishing houses, video rental outlets, record comps, and so on and so forth).

The second biggest concern is the influence and filtration, or lack thereof, that may occur as a result of the sheer amount of control possessed by these companies. This effect has been seen in Canada to a geat extent. The formerly informative and reliable Global Televiosion Network, providing good local news to various areas, has become little more than an advertisement for CanWest Global's main web portal, www.canada.com , and their recently acquired national news daily(one of Canada's 2) the National Post, www.nationalpost.com .
When an opinion is expressed it is almost always of a conservative nature.
This same story is replicated in the Sun Media empire, Thomson News Corp, and Bell Globemedia and perhaps (my employer) Rogers Communications.

Right there, with just four-five companies are the primary sources, are the mainstream media for Canadians-this in no way a documented number but we calculated that 75% of 'media' is consumed in Canada from the first four companies(this was based on things like daily circulation, viewership, attendance).

This is why the TW-AOL deal was brilliant, within TW is a traditional distribution network as well as a whole lot of movies, magazines, books, music and 'news'. AOL brought to the table a tremendously large distribution network with great possibilities for growth as well as some very diverse content offerings. The deal married content and distribution channels.

The effect of these large companies is far reaching as well. The National Post, the daily news anchor of the aforementioned CanWest Global network, sponsors a Chair of Journalism at the School of Journalism and Communications of which I am a student. They distribute free papers throughout the school.
 
Originally posted by zonelistener:
Anyone one to take on Viacom/CBS or ABC/Disney?

I'll do a Canadian one which is more media rather than content based:
Bell Globemedia
Bell Telephone(residential and biz)
Bell Mobility
Bell Sympatico(internet access with both lo & hi speed services as well as a virtual monopoly on DSL and future xDSL services)
ExpressVu DB Satellite Network(much like DirecTV)
Canadian Television(nations biggest non-publicly funded TV network)
The Sports Network(biggest and oldest cable sports network in Canada)
uncountable number of digital specialty channels backed by CTV and TSN including RaptorsTV, NHL Network, various ESPN holdings(who own a part of TSN)
The Globe and Mail(Canada's oldest and most established national daily)

So you get 'high speed' DSL internet savings if you have Bell long distance(you have no choice but Bell for home or business local access)
You are then encouraged to use www.sympatico.ca as your portal and start page
You recieve mailings on Bell Mobility offerings on cell phones, Expressvu programming with preferential treatment given to Bell Globemedia holdings, and most news content shown on CTV, it's various cable offshoots, and sympatico is provided by or shared with the globe and mail. It is pure homogenization of information.
 
yeah, Kobayashi, ever heard about Clear Channel Communications?
Well anyway the Industry is facing high losses in profits... they forgot to jump the internet train... too many A&R without fantasy... too many rip off producers...
the Industry is going to hell.
They should definitely hire some think tankers, but who cares?
Hope everyone is feeling well with that.
 
Clear Channel Seeks Direct Connection to Record Labels
Media: Its plan to cut ad, research deals with the companies reflects a shift in power. Critics say it's an attempt to sidestep payola laws
By CHUCK PHILIPS, Times Staff Writer

Clear Channel Communications, the nation's largest radio broadcaster, wants a share of the tens of millions of dollars in record company promotional funds that go to independent promoters--and sometimes smack of payola.

The move is sending a shudder through the major labels, which see legal and ethical problems with paying money directly to broadcasters to help get their artists on the air.

The initiative, which the company expects to roll out around May, reflects a fundamental shift of power in the record business. In the past, powerful record labels were accused of bribing deejays operating at small, independent radio stations to influence what songs got airplay.

Industry mergers have moved the balance of power to radio groups, which today have the clout to launch a song simultaneously in scores of markets across the country--or consign it to oblivion.

Clear Channel, which controls 1,200 radio stations and owns the world's biggest concert promoter, hopes to generate more than $20 million annually by selling chainwide advertising packages, research and a variety of airplay data to labels whose songs are played on its stations.

Clear Channel plans to sell ads to labels that would air immediately after the station plays the latest song by one of their artists. The brief ad would identify the artist who performed the preceding song, a practice that many stations have dropped.

Clear Channel said it would sell such an ad only if programmers had already determined the song was a hit. Sources say the company is pitching ads at $1,000 a pop that would run on 60-some stations.

Critics contend that the broadcast giant is using its newfound leverage as the nation's largest chain to extract deals from record labels that appear to sidestep payola laws.

. . .Radio industry sources say there is another reason: Record companies could lose the power they already have to influence airplay at Clear Channel stations under the current system with independent agents.

And a direct play-for-pay arrangement between record company and radio broadcaster could be illegal. . .

Record labels have long skirted payola laws by shelling out millions of dollars each year to independent consultants. . . Independent promoters, who function as a buffer between labels and radio personnel, typically do not pay cash for airplay of specific songs but circumvent payola law by providing stations with annual promotion budgets.

Last fall, Clear Channel issued an internal edict barring programmers at its stations from renewing any contracts with independent promoters. As the company began kicking around ideas for its music initiative, Clear Channel initially considered installing an in-house promotion czar who would act as the radio giant's exclusive liaison with the music industry, Michaels said.

In recent weeks, however, Michaels said the company has backed away from running its own record promotion arm and is now contemplating cutting an exclusive promotion pact with a third party. Michaels confirmed that at least two independent promoters have put in bids that could add more than $20 million to its bottom line.

The bet in the industry is that Clear Channel will ultimately cut an exclusive pact with Cincinnati-based Tri-State Promotions, which is run by Michaels' longtime friends Bill Skull and Lenny Lyons. . .

. . .Michaels said the company's think tank has come up with a variety of revenue-generating ideas, including selling research to labels based on reaction to records played on its stations. Clear Channel currently owns several research firms that monitor the response of listeners and program directors to new songs in most major Top 40, urban and adult contemporary radio markets across the nation. The company hopes eventually to charge labels for access to that information. . .

. . .Michaels acknowledged that the think tank has even considered selling late-night commercial time directly to labels for the purpose of promoting new songs.

"The argument would go like this: Would you rather hear a couple used-car commercials and carpet store ads in a row or a song that the record companies believe has hit potential?" Michaels said. "If we do it, of course we would run all the appropriate announcements required by law so that everyone would realize we got paid to play the record.". . .
 
that's a fascinating article hiphop. it seems that clear channel is correctly positioning themselves for long term success. however i personally don't see that great a future in broadcast radio. are digital subscription channels not progressing as fast as they are supposed to be?


------------------
itsyourworldyoucanchangeit
 
Originally posted by zonelistener:
Kobayashi -

We are in the same business (your internship and my job)!

Clear Channel scares me.

oh it's not an internship. unfortunately my school, which is hailed as one of the premier communications schools in the country, has NO internship or co op program for it's communications students.
i had to get the job myself.
which one of the 'beasts'(hehehehe) are you with zonelistener?

------------------
itsyourworldyoucanchangeit
 
Gak! That Clear Channel article scares me. Music is already pre-packaged and spoon-fed to the masses for consumption as it is, but this sort of thing would clearly push anyone who doesn't have the money or the ambition to "commercialize" their music to the sidelines of obscurity.
frown.gif
Blah, that's just evil. As if we don't have enough Britneys, N'Syncs, et al.
 
Well said, Kobayashi. The article is, in fact, already half a year old. The digital radio world is growing fast, but remember that you might compare it with downloads vs. CD?s. CC Communications themselves express it like that:

Our Internet-only radio sites offer our consumers an opportunity to enjoy interactive radio like they have never experienced it before, with unique, high quality offerings in select music formats unavailable anywhere else. They can see our DJ?s live via video streams and chat them up in our ?chat-rooms,? giving them instant feedback on their likes, dislikes, requests, and creating unique and loyal music-driven on-line communities.

The Internet, combined with the reach and promotional power of terrestrial radio stations and live entertainment, is a powerful, synergistic tool, providing our sponsors with highly targeted marketing opportunities and a platform for consumer interaction in the context of their favorite entertainment brands, artists, entertainment venues and music.

Local radio provides ongoing marketing outreach to consumers, constantly building our brand?s awareness to drive site traffic, consumer excitement and loyalty through promotions and interaction with on-air personalities.

As the premiere live entertainment Internet destination, CC.com is the consumer?s interactive authority on what?s happening in the world of music, concerts, entertainment destinations, artists and tickets.

The Internet provides an interactive platform through which we can serve and learn more about our consumers to customize their entertainment experience and provide them with compelling content and reasons to keep them coming back. Our sponsors benefit from this intelligence through the effective targeting of messages and offers.

Coordinated cross-platform efforts allow CCI, Clear Channel Entertainment and Clear Channel Radio to create relevant, customized, interactive programs for sponsors to reach and promote goods and services to current and potential customers and markets.

Copyright 2002 Clear Channel Communications,
see also the website, www.clearchannel.com

So I guess that they are thinking long termed... and the influence of "old" radio may not be underestimated...
 
After working in the radio industry for a short time, none of this really surprises me. I've been hearing about communications merges, etc. for a long time. Working in radio was VERY eye opening...the things you don't know about when you're on 'this side' just listening...I learned there were two guys (brothers or cousins or something) who started the whole thing where radio stations had to follow a precise formats, what songs to play, WHEN to play them (traffic) and lots of other crap. American radio--and the whole communications industry in general--is extremely limited and limiting to the music and events of the world.

I also remember reading a rather disturbing article in Newsweek a couple years ago - one of those "It's My Turn" articles, written by a journalist who was basically complaining about all the rules, regulations and limits filtered down to him by the communications company he was employed by and the industry in general. One particular line said this (paraphrased) "I wish I had the freedom to say ____, but I am compelled to stay within the guidelines enforced by the Trilateral Commission...." I was like, the Trilateral Commission? WTF? http://trilateral.org:9999/about.htm Why would the Trilateral Commission care about the communications industry??

Well, here's what that website has to say about that:
The members of the Trilateral Commission are about 350 distinguished leaders in business, media, academia, public service (excluding current national Cabinet Ministers), labor unions, and other non-governmental organizations from the three regions.

The first word that popped into my head was 'conspiracy,' of course, as far fetched as that sounds. I don't know what to think about all of the media concentrations, but I think it's leading up to something not very good....there's a bunch of interesting stuff out there on the Trilat. Commission...they seem like a *very* shady group...

[This message has been edited by Discoteque (edited 01-09-2002).]
 
Originally posted by kobayashi:
oh it's not an internship. unfortunately my school, which is hailed as one of the premier communications schools in the country, has NO internship or co op program for it's communications students.
i had to get the job myself.
which one of the 'beasts'(hehehehe) are you with zonelistener?


The one I detailed above (lol). I think I saw somewhere you work with the HSD product. If so, same here.
 
Originally posted by zonelistener:
The one I detailed above (lol). I think I saw somewhere you work with the HSD product. If so, same here.

i see.
what do you make of the recent troubles announced?
is it just conflicts of interest in meshing the two corporate cultures or is there some professional opposition from within amongst the employees? or something else entirely?


------------------
itsyourworldyoucanchangeit
 
good point hiphop. it is my opinion that 'old' radio will serve as a feeder into the new digital and subscription radio services that are coming both in terms of the talent pool available(though a fair majority seem to be going sans dj) and the style in which they broadcast(top 40, c+w, 'alternative). this is similar to the process undertook by conglomerates consisting of any two media are slowly converging and homogenizing their content(print daily paper and web for instance)

------------------
itsyourworldyoucanchangeit
 
it's funny. i had a discussion with one of my professors this morning and i was telling him about this discussion and my analysis of bell globemedia. he told me of an article he read from the US that expressed admiration for bell globemedia.
the article said an american equivalent of bell would be the same company owning 1. at+t for landline phone use, 2. aol for internet, 3. nbc as one of the major networks in a nation, 4. DirecTV as the biggest DB satellite network, 5. the new york times as one of the nations premier daily newspaper and finally 6. sprint wireless or verizon wireless(i'm not sure which is the biggest but bell mobility is definetely top 2 in wireless communications in canada.
the existence of such a company would be considered unacceptable in the u.s. however that is the stranglehold bell globemedia has grabbed on canada.

------------------
itsyourworldyoucanchangeit
 
Originally posted by sulawesigirl4:
They're not boys. They're postermen.
tongue.gif

the best postermen.

the best jerry,
the best.

------------------
i was born for your magazine
i am trapped in the society page of your magazine
 
Back
Top Bottom