BBC, CNN, ABC...etc. I think many large medias are controlled by big business from China or western countries....in order to let the angles of the medias are favor to them and drive the public not to concern what are really important. I don't think PEOPLE enjoy the freedom of speech/press that much... I wanna share this... in the past, people who fight against with totalitarian regime were called 'free fighter', it used to be a noble mission. yet now, big media projects them as radical, or worse, terrorists.... - - - Updated - - - this pic credit : https://www.facebook.com/TaiwanExplorerBlog?fref=ts Taiwan situation also become difficult....
China is not a good example. I don't believe they enjoy either freedom of speech or the press. I agree that news outlets are owned by corporations, but as corporations, their sole interest is profit.
In seeking that profit they have a strong incentive to provide accurate information. So do bloggers, many of whom run their sites for advertising revenue. I'm unsure what you're suggesting. That we make it illegal to spread "untrue" news? That's a recipe for tyranny if I've ever seen one. The solution is simple: read whatever news you prefer. There is no such thing as impartial reporting, it's a myth: all reporting requires interpretation.
With just a tiny bit of searching I found this: http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6
The BBC is funded by the public. Not that they have a say in the matter. Every household pays the equivalent of $225.00 per year and nobody gets away without paying.
yay! that's exactly what I want to say... even in western world....medias concentrate in few cooperation. so nowadays those big medias are easy to manipulate the information, try to lead people's thoughts, they are even trying to make their audience stupid, not smarter, not to say China or Hong Kong....
I'm beginning to wonder if this doesn't break anti trust laws. Those laws were designed to prevent corporations from becoming so big and powerful.
Wanna hear real paranoia? Ive always said if dig deep enough you will find out that EVERYTHING is owned by proctor & gamble.
Actually if you follow conspiracy lore, it's all owned by the bankers in London, led by the Rothschilds. I have no clue how true it is, but while i find conspiracy stuff interesting, I'm not going to believe until I have a lot more than just claims and argumentation.
A few i believe: Marilyn was murdered by the Kennedys annnnnnd jack the ripper was a mason protecting the crown.
It might be a conspiracy but when we know for a fact that media is owned by only a few companies then it's not really a theory anymore.
What a joke! Media has never been so distributed. The moment I realized this was during the Martin Place massacre in Sydney, where a terrorist took people hostage in the Lindt café. I was up all night watching several livestreams of reporters running around following the events. You saw them outside the Lindt store, then when it was over you followed them in their car to the hospital while they set up outside the ER. Really extraordinary to see the journalism in progress. You could see the little snippets the major stations were getting, but you also got all of the stuff in between and all the reporters genuine reactions. More than that, there were small time bloggers running around doing the same thing. You could view the same event from a hundred different perspectives. [hr][/hr] This whole line about the media being consolidated is increasingly irrelevant in today's world. Your choice is overwhelming, some are just unwilling to venture beyond the mainstream TV news. That's fine - all the power to them if that's what they want, but you're easily able to get a dozen different perspectives with a simple Google search. Never before in history has media been so distributed and decentralized. It's a new world; a better world.
I don't see why that's relevant. You're entitled to have your say, not to have people pay attention. People seem to prefer mainstream news, presumably for the convenience and easy-to-understand format. In time that will die away, just as it did with newspapers to TV; and people will use the internet to get most of their news. Seems to me that the relevant metric is access to media, not society's use of media. I am perfectly able to access millions of news sources. Why should I care what others prefer?
Because they would affect the shows you like to watch. That's why there's nothing but reality shows or shows like Ancient Aliens instead of good programming.
The only way to stop media consolidation is with legislation. If this becomes an important issue with voters, I'd expect lawmakers will respond.
Legislation that does what? - - - Updated - - - There's plenty of media out I like, none of it reality shows. Look around. Netflix is the perfect example of how media will evolve in the years to.come: direct access to consumers.
It's been practiced by both parties for more years than I care to remember, although the newly elected majority Conservative party states it is going to do something about it.
