Media management theories PDF

Preview

Summary

These theories are related to media, marketing and management, that will help you to understand all the theories in different ways....

Description

Media management theories Media companies are profit-making businesses. Those who commission and plan programmes or decide newspaper or magazine content, usually play safe by excluding anything that might offend or upset readers or viewers. No media company would like to lose revenue and profit by losing readers, or viewers, because they were offended by ‘extreme’ views. OWNERSHIP Media ownership (also known as media consolidation) is a commonly used term that refers to the majority of the media outlets being owned by a small number of corporations. Media ownership may refer to states of monopoly in a given media industry. Large media conglomerates include, National Amusements, CBS Corporation, Time Warner, News Corp, Sony, and General Electric. The print media display the greatest diversity of all, in both ownership and content. They range from daily to weekly newspapers, from news magazines to a range of special interest publications. The print media are usually in private hands. The main exceptions are likely to be authoritarian or dictatorial systems under which free elections are unlikely to be on the agenda. But there are also countries, such as some in northern Europe, where a public subsidy is paid to newspapers to ensure the political diversity of the press. By and large, however, newspapers derive their income from advertising and sales revenue (with the former usually much more significant than the latter). The ideal of the "Fourth Estate" - the media keeping a check over government - is perhaps more effective in the print media than broadcasting. At least some newspapers in any country are likely to conduct serious news investigations and comment in a reasonably sophisticated manner on political developments. The same is not always true of broadcasters. Types of media ownership There are four major types of ownership of mass media. Chain, cross media, conglomerate and vertical integration. These types of media ownership can be described as follows: Chain ownership In chain ownership, the same media company owns numerous outlets in a single medium, a chain of newspaper, a series of radio stations, a string of television stations or several book publishing companies. Chain ownership in India applies mostly to newspapers. There are many publishing groups in which have chain ownership.

Cross media ownership, when an organization owns more than one type of Media Company, for example a newspaper, a magazine and a television station it is called Cross Media Ownership. Conglomerate ownership Conglomerate ownership means the ownership of several business operations, one of which is a media business. For example when a publishing company owns a newspaper along with chemical, fertilizer, cement rubber and plastics factories. This pattern is conglomerate. In a conglomerate, there will be interlocking of directorships, which means the same persons will be director of a media company as well as of manufacturing industries or financial corporations. Their main business will be a high profit industry, but they tend to run a media company for prestige or to exercise social and political influence on decision makers in the private or public sector and in the government of the day. However, there are already at least six states where a single media house has a clear and growing dominance. These are media groups that are emerging as national conglomerates. They are all in the news business as well as in entertainment, media distribution and network business. They own newspapers, magazines, radio, cable TV and television channels, to name their key businesses. Theories of media ownership and control Examination of ownership and control pattern is important for two reasons. It helps to understand all points of view need to be heard if society is to be truly democratic. And free media will thrive as it will keep the abuses of power and influence by elites under check. Factors that affect the nature of media ownership To acknowledge the factors that affect the nature of media ownership, let us first understand about the normative theories of mass media (1956). Each theory is connected with the kind of political system in which the society has to conduct its socio-economic political affairs. a) Authoritarian Theory b) Free press theory c) Social responsibility theory d) Communist media theory e) Development communication theory f) Democratic participant media theory

Authoritarian Theory: Here the press is under the state power or ruling class. The chief function is to propagate what the owner wants to establish and sustain his rule. The message disseminated to the audience is suitable according to the owner; other opinions can barely reach the people at large. Free press theory: Otherwise known as the “Libertarian theory,” here the press is owned by both private and public organization. The major function is to let many voices and views find their ways for public consumption. The fundamental rights of each and every citizen are safeguarded. Social responsibility theory: Social Responsibility theory of mass media is relatively a new concept. It started around the mid-20th century and is used mostly by developing and least developed countries. The model was designed formally by Siebert, Peterson and Schramm in 1956 in their book. It encourages total freedom to press and no censorship, but it should be regulated according to social responsibilities and external controls. Content is also filtered through public interference. Press is supposed to be owned privately. The government does not own the press. The private owners should publish within the ethical guidelines and in a responsible way. It helps democracy prosper as this media helps in maintaining democracy and does not encourage authoritarianism or communism. The chief function is to be pluralist and all national voices, views and interests find ways for accurate expression. People find out alternative views and thus society as a whole benefits. The Communist media theory: This is also known as Soviet media theory. Russian media was reorganized around this theory. This theory is derived from the basic tenets of Marx and Engels. The media as per this theory are not subject to arbitrary interferences as in case of authoritarian theory. The chief functions are to safeguard and propagate the interests of the working class. The society moves in one direction to achieve certain set of values. Development communication theory: Here the state is usually the owner of the press. Major functions are to support the policies of development by the government. The limited resources are better utilized for nation building. The freedom of press and the journalists is curbed to an extent. Democratic participant media theory: Here, press is owned by state and private organization. There is multiplicity of media communication at all levels. It encourages small scale operation of media. People may have a better chance to interact more or local and relevant issues. And theorist can substantiate how this theory may weaken the national fabric.

Pluralist theory of media Pluralists argue that media owners are responsible for their ways of handling information because media content is mainly shaped by consumer demand in the marketplace. They therefore only give the buying public what they want. Moreover, editors, journalists and broadcasters have a strong sense of professional ethics which act as a system of checks and controls on potential owner abuse of the media. They feel mass media are an essential part of the democratic process because the people today get most of their knowledge of the political process from newspapers and television. They are also of the opinion that owners, editors and journalists are trustworthy managers and protectors of this process. Furthermore, pluralists argue that media audiences are the real power holders because they can exercise the right to buy or not to buy. If they did not like the choices that media owners are making available to them, or if they suspected that the media product was biased, such audiences would respond by not buying the product. The media, therefore, supply what the audience wants rather than what the owner decides. It merely reflects what the audience wants or views as important. Structural Theories The primary approach in organizational studies to the study of issues of organizational structure. Structural theories describe the relationships between organizational structures and performance outcomes. Structural theory argues that organizations will adopt structures that maximize efficiency and optimize financial performance according to the specific contingencies that exist within the organization’s market environment. Consequently, there is no single organizational structure that will be equally effective for all companies. Within media management research, structural contingency theory in its classic form has been little used. That research concerns the effects of media ownership structures on media content and organizational priorities. This research stream first emerged in the 1970s in response to consolidation in the newspaper industry and today continues to be a major focus of research. It concentrates mainly on the effects of newspaper chain ownership on media content as compared to independent ownership. The types of effects on content that have been studied have included endorsements of political candidates, editorial positions on current issues, hard news and feature news coverage, and coverage of conflict and controversy in the community. Although there have been some contradictory findings, most studies have concluded that ownership structures do affect content, although the mechanism by which that influence occurs continues to be debated. More recently, the focus of media management research on ownership structures has shifted from comparing the effects of chain and independent ownership to comparing the effects of public and private ownership. This research suggests pressure from financial markets to maximize investor returns is reducing the resources publicly owned media corporations invest in newsrooms and content production. That, in turn, is presumed to reduce the quality of the news and entertainment products those companies produce, although the connection between reduced newsroom resources and reduced content quality has not yet been fully established. Finally, another related area of research concerning the impact of media ownership structures focuses on the effects of such structures on news managers’ professional values and priorities,

which are assumed to shape news decisions and the organizational resources invested in news coverage. Important to note is that the majority of research on the effects of ownership structures on media content has focused on newspaper content. Relatively few structural studies have examined broadcast content. This, no doubt, has much to do with the affordability and accessibility of newspapers. However, in the face of the rapid consolidation in the electronic sectors of the media industry since 1996, the increase in television and radio duopolies, and the development and diffusion of central casting models among broadcasters, there is a clear need to expand the samples used in media structure content research to include broadcast organizations. Transnational Media Management Theory In the past two decades, the rapid movement of media companies into the global markets has spurred a corresponding surge in research on transnational media management and economics. The topic has attracted interest for a number of reasons. There are many unanswered questions about how the kinds of consolidation and diversification involved in the global expansion affect corporate financial returns; how globalization impacts the content and quality of news, films, and other media products produced for a corporation’s home market; how media management structures and practices shape the products and content produced for audiences in foreign markets; and, subsequently, how that content then impacts the politics, economics, cultures, and public interest in the countries that receive it. One of the challenges of transnational media management research is developing theoretical or conceptual frameworks through which the phenomenon can be studied. Because transnational management includes so many different management topics, there is no single theoretical base for approaching research. This problem is characteristic of international business research in general. Indeed, perhaps the only unifying conceptual element in transnational organizational research is the assumption that having operations in multiple national markets will affect organizations or organizational outcomes in some way. Research has tended to cluster around issues of organizational structure, strategy, and policy. Relatively few studies have addressed specific issues of functional management such as finance, cross-cultural personnel management, leadership, product development, and operational coordination. And few scholars have yet ventured into studies of human agency in transnational media management such as how leadership, social networks, and decisions influence global media expansion, product development, and outcomes. The use of such a variety of conceptual and theoretical frameworks has created a rich and wide-ranging view of transnational media management issues. However, it also has created a smorgasbord of only marginally related findings that offer little in-depth understanding of any particular issue or phenomenon. Far more systematic, programmatic research in specific areas of organizational structure, strategy, function, and leadership Organizational Culture Theory

Culture is a powerful force within organizations. Organizational cultureshapes decisions, determines priorities, influences behaviors, and impacts outcomes. It can be a source of organizational strength or a factor in organizational weakness. In media management, organizational culture became a topic of widespread research interest in the late 1990s and the early 21st century at least in part because journalists and financial analysts blamed organizational culture clashes for many of the problems that developed in major media corporations during that period. The concept of organizational culture has its roots in anthropology. Although the term culture has been defined in many ways, most definitions recognize that culture is historically and socially constructed; includes shared practices, knowledge, and values that experienced members of a group transmit to newcomers through socialization; and is used to shape a group’s processes, material output, and ability to survive. Organizational cultures are the product of a number of influences including the national culture within which the organization operates, the long-term influence of the organization’s founder or early dominant leaders as well as its current leadership, and the organization’s operating environment. The company’s primary line of business, the technologies of production it employs, and the market environment in which it competes are components of the operating environment. Thus, in the media industry, companies operating in the same industry sector, such as television stations, would be expected to share some characteristics of organizational culture because of the similarities in their products, markets, and technologies, while they would be expected to differ culturally from newspapers and radio stations for the same reasons. Within most media organizations, there also exist multiple professional and occupational subcultures. Professional cultures unite individuals within the same occupation, even though they work for different organizations. The presence and mix of professional subcultures within an organization influence the culture of the overall organization, while the interaction between competing occupational subcultures within the company influences organizational behavior and climate. Research suggests that conflict between organizational and professional cultures is common. In general, organizational cultures are viewed by professionals as impinging upon professional norms, freedom of action, and commitment to service of the publicinterest. Similar tensions occur between coexisting occupational subcultures within an organization. Examination of media management research suggests that the application of organizational culture theory as a base for studying media organizations and management practices is relatively new, and the number of media management studies clearly grounded in culture theory remains small. An important example of these studies is an examination of the influence of corporate culture on the ability of news organizations to adapt to changing market conditions. In subsequent years, the underlying constructs of organizational and professional culture theory have infiltrated a wide range of media studies such as news construction, gatekeeping, ownership effects, and organizational innovation. News construction research is the study of how variables such as newsroom structures, news routines, the demographic profile of journalists, and journalists’ relationships with sources affect the selection and framing ofnews stories. Within the news construction research tradition, research onnews routines examines the processes journalists use in their work and the way those routines—or professional cultural norms—influence story and source

selection. Another related area of study has been how the technologies of media production, a factor in organizational culture, influence the professional norms of news routines. Transnational Media in Globalized and Hybridized Environment People have been talking about globalization for a long time. The meaning and impact of globalization cannot be only limited to its economic impact, but cultural impacts. Understanding the culture hybridity in current media practices will help us better explore the future trend of media industry. Transnational media transcends beyond the traditional models of cross-national corporations by highlighting the process of media delivery to specific audiences using production exporting, importing, sponsoring and localizing in different nations in recent era. In addition, transnational media also use strategies like re-licensing popular products for new cultures, adapting popular genre for exportation for new countries, adaption of production to recognizable locations by audience, co-production and talent exchanging to optimize the cultural influence and profits, merchandising strategies. Globalization influences the content and style of media, the pace of media, and the flow of culture among different geographical areas. Globalization of media also change audiences’ habits of media consumption and has created an atmosphere that both demand and support hybridized content in media. It is significant to understand the strategies of creating transnational media outlets, the impacts of culture exporting and importing in a globalized environment, and how audiences react to transnational media contents. The central concern is to discuss how global audiences react to the hybridized and transnational media content on both regional and local scales through the analysis of recently evolved media practices. Transnational media relates to globalization from a media perspective in several ways. Globalization has managed to shrink time and space in producing both media content and new environment that operates across different markets and dynamics. Interactions of people and exchanges in economic markets are the most significant factors in the process of globalization. The success of the globalization of media in popular culture has been impacted by the use of transnational media to create new cosmopolitan communities that quickly influence the local media habits and culture. While the argument against globalization is that transnational results in cultural imperialism with the aim of bringing populations into commercial subjugation so as to perpetuate Western economic and ideological hegemony. Transnational media creates a space for the growth of a cosmopolitan mindset allowing individuals to hold international loyalties while remaining ...