“Is the dominance of a few global media organisations a good thing or dangerous?”

a. How is it possible to have the domination of a few global media organisations? Does the word ‘domination’ not suggest that these organisations entirely rule the media scene? How is this possible if there are only a few of them?

b. Well, take for example big organisations such as newspapers. The newspapers are dominated by The Sun and The Mirror.

a. I see. But I don’t see how this can be dangerous.

b. Well, if these global organisations are in the hands of one person then that gives him/ her unlimited power to choose what he/she wants in these organisations. This allows him/her to sometimes manipulate the media and present bias views.

a. Like Rupert Murdoch. I understand. So in some ways this is a bit like ‘cultural imperialism.’ This is currently the case with the US. Today, many critics argue that the current US media domination amounts to cultural imperialism whereby their culture is forced on us through our own media consumption.

b. Yes, and that can be dangerous for smaller organisation because it undermines their position in the media. Similarly, this is threatening to national media organisations and especially for smaller independent organisations.

a. That reminds me of a term called “McDonaldisation.” This refers to the growth and profound influence of the largest media organisations who are supplying us constantly with lots and lots of this media that is sometimes politically incorrect.

b. And this can be even more dangerous through ‘cultural homogenisation’ because it means that our cultural perceptions, -which are naturally and unconsciously formed through the media, are constructed through the ideologies and values from the media texts we consume.

a. However, is there really a true domination of these organisations? I mean, we still have these smaller media organisations. The thing with the dominance of these larger organisations instantly suggests that its audience are passive, when this cannot be said for all its readers. I believe in the end it comes down to the actual interpreter. If he/ she plays a passive role to the texts it consumes then surely this domination can be a dangerous thing. But, if you have an active audience that draws its opinions from a range of media texts then this is not necessarily a bad thing.