[lbo-talk] The Myth of Media Concentration

Tayssir John Gabbour tjg at pentaside.org
Sat Jun 17 17:18:19 PDT 2006


Doug Henwood wrote:
> The real problem is a media
> system based on competitive profit maximization, which is what
> produces lowest common denominator programming. But that starts
> getting into dangerous territory for liberals, so best to get
> nostalgic for those great old days when Hearst ruled the
> mediascape and the LA Times was a crap paper run by the
> original Chandler.

I think serious critics concerned with media concentration, like Bob McChesney, hold up US media before late-19th century as a better example, when there was greater competition (presumably before technology increased barriers to entry).

B. wrote:
> It isn't just "liberals" who're worried about media control resting
> in relatively fewer hands, unless Chomsky and Zinn are now
> liberals. You can say folks like this wax nostalgic for an era run
> by Hearst and Chandler, but those two don't, and nor do I. Chomsky,
> Zinn, etl. a. often speak of "the lively working class press of
> the 19th century" that with the advent of the 20th century began
> to progressively disappear.

For what it's worth (and I don't think it's a big deal), I recall Chomsky has a lower interest in media concentration than many other leftists:

"However, I should tell you that, personally, I don't regard that as a huge issue. It's true that media concentration is increasing and getting worse and that's a bad thing but the differences are not enormous." http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/19950321.htm

Tayssir



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list