Columbia Journalism Review actually gives all the companies which Murdoch owns that come under the news corp banner. I didnt realise there was so much!
http://www.cjr.org/resources/
Its not only newspapers its televsion, books; organisations and childrens book groups, magazines, films, online sources such as myspace and others like Mushroom records.
The whole list can be found at the above link, along with a veriety of other companies and what they own in a drop down list. Its all very interesting to see who actually owns what and how much.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Chapter 15: The Media is the Message
Chapter by Suellen Tapsall
The convergence of communications and information technologies (CIT) the growth of online media and the relative decline of both print and broadcast news journalism in Australia have encouraged prophetic statements about the future - or lack thereof - of 'tradition' news media.
While the talk of death of traditional news is seemingly everywhere and circulation is in fact down this is not a new entity. "They've heard it before. The newspaper industry has a deeply sado-masochistic streak. It goes to extraordinary lengths, and sometimes even great expense to arrange for speakers to dump on newspapers and pronounce their downfall, even as they go to greater lengths to take little or none of the advice they get". Katz 1999
while newspapers may be on the decline there are still new technologies which are being tests all the time which may be able to save some of what we know of traditional news. Some such idea is a computer based notion. What it is is a computer style plastic type board which you plug in daily to your computer and thus it downloads the news. It has the same tangible aspects that newspaper have except it would be a single screen with interactive features such as touch screens, changing ads etc. It is this kind of innovation which may be the way of traditional daily news for the future.
Convergence seems to be a solution for some in terms of the supposed print media death. as with Rupert Murdoch and the down Jones take over which finally occurred on the 31st of July this year we may soon be at risk of loosing distinct voices within the media. Its conceivable with Murdoch owning such a large portion of media in different mediums its not such a far fetched idea to one day have our news coming from TV Internet and print all being controlled by one conglomerate. It wouldn't be unrealistic in this sense to listen to a news crop television broadcast, sit down and read all news corp daily news story go online and chat to some friends on myspace then finally onto some fix sport - all of which are now controlled by Murdoch.
In this sense of of our news and even recreational activities are being controlled by one corporation. It may seem far fetched but its happening.
Technological determinists adhere to a central tenet that technology, in and of itself, causes social and cultural change.
Convergence may seem like a worthwhile option as ideally it looks to address issues of credibility within journalists in theory they would have more time to research and investigate stories but realistically it seems what would occur would be a dilution of news and current affairs where the same story would be told in multiple papers as well as television and in online news.
The convergence of communications and information technologies (CIT) the growth of online media and the relative decline of both print and broadcast news journalism in Australia have encouraged prophetic statements about the future - or lack thereof - of 'tradition' news media.
While the talk of death of traditional news is seemingly everywhere and circulation is in fact down this is not a new entity. "They've heard it before. The newspaper industry has a deeply sado-masochistic streak. It goes to extraordinary lengths, and sometimes even great expense to arrange for speakers to dump on newspapers and pronounce their downfall, even as they go to greater lengths to take little or none of the advice they get". Katz 1999
while newspapers may be on the decline there are still new technologies which are being tests all the time which may be able to save some of what we know of traditional news. Some such idea is a computer based notion. What it is is a computer style plastic type board which you plug in daily to your computer and thus it downloads the news. It has the same tangible aspects that newspaper have except it would be a single screen with interactive features such as touch screens, changing ads etc. It is this kind of innovation which may be the way of traditional daily news for the future.
Convergence seems to be a solution for some in terms of the supposed print media death. as with Rupert Murdoch and the down Jones take over which finally occurred on the 31st of July this year we may soon be at risk of loosing distinct voices within the media. Its conceivable with Murdoch owning such a large portion of media in different mediums its not such a far fetched idea to one day have our news coming from TV Internet and print all being controlled by one conglomerate. It wouldn't be unrealistic in this sense to listen to a news crop television broadcast, sit down and read all news corp daily news story go online and chat to some friends on myspace then finally onto some fix sport - all of which are now controlled by Murdoch.
In this sense of of our news and even recreational activities are being controlled by one corporation. It may seem far fetched but its happening.
Technological determinists adhere to a central tenet that technology, in and of itself, causes social and cultural change.
Convergence may seem like a worthwhile option as ideally it looks to address issues of credibility within journalists in theory they would have more time to research and investigate stories but realistically it seems what would occur would be a dilution of news and current affairs where the same story would be told in multiple papers as well as television and in online news.
Chapter 14: Journalism and The Global Village
Chapter by Rhonda Breit.
The term global village was first used in the 1960's to describe the 'linking of humanity in all parts of the world' (Kirby 1998:3) Developments such as cheap print, electricity, radio, TV, satellites, direct-dial phones and mobile phones have helped to break down boarders to create a global media audience. The Internet has even further accelerated this process.
Technology has given the media a global audience but corporatisation has given them power.
“Paradoxically, while the digital revolution has extended the frontiers of the global village, the vast majority of the world remains unhooked from this unfolding phenomenon. With the ever-widening gulf between knowledge and ignorance, the development gap between the rich and the poor among and within countries has also increased. It has therefore become imperative for the world to bridge this digital divide and place the MDGs on the ICT-accelerated speedway to achievement.” WSIS (World summit on Information Society)
“The reference to ‘society’ inspires good old sociological questions of power, profit and participation: who benefits, who decides, who participates, and who is accountable?” (Hamelink, n.d) It would appear that in theory this kind of situation would be beneficial to different communities, even in the situation of less developed nations however, it fails to address poverty, hunger, poor health and exploitation all of which are associated with less devolved nations.
There is still a huge distinction made between the have and the have nots in terms of a global village or a global infomation society. How can we expect everyone to be connected globally to an information society via the internet or mobile phone systems while some countries barely have the money for food and clean water. There is continuously the questions of “How to preserve fundamental human values in the face of economic or technological pressures tending to undermine them” (Samuelson n.d) “There are undoubtedly ‘informational developments’ in modern societies and through interaction with other social developments these will have an impact on how the future of such societies shape up in different ways dependent upon different historical circumstances.” (Hamelink, n.d) From this position it would be easy to say that the development of modern Western society in relation to a global information society would ultimately be beneficial to improving the living standards of less developed nations. We need to question, however, whether the information which is being spread globally by largely western countries is going to be beneficial to poorer or disadvantaged countries. Is there really much we can offer them in relation to technological regulation which they do not even have?
Not only this but concentration of media ownership threatens the integrity of of journalism.
The consolidation of news corporations both in terms of daily news and television news means a dilution of reporting in news stories. Instead of receiving two separate news stories we are seeing the same ones rehashed on television as we have already read in our daily newspapers. Consolidation works under the premise that because there are more people working under the same production then journalists can work harder on stories giving us better quality news but in reality I'm not sure this is how it works. There of course would be the temptation to simply reuse what has gone before.
"Not one global body has the power to impose change, so any steps to restore public confidence in these institutions much take place in the individual nation states. The must be a global corporation if changes are to have any real affect." I think this statement from the text is true yet highly idealistic it is all well and good to say we need to have a global regulation body but realistically how could this work. How could it govern over ever state with ever law and be fair and objective. It seems unrealistic.
The term global village was first used in the 1960's to describe the 'linking of humanity in all parts of the world' (Kirby 1998:3) Developments such as cheap print, electricity, radio, TV, satellites, direct-dial phones and mobile phones have helped to break down boarders to create a global media audience. The Internet has even further accelerated this process.
Technology has given the media a global audience but corporatisation has given them power.
“Paradoxically, while the digital revolution has extended the frontiers of the global village, the vast majority of the world remains unhooked from this unfolding phenomenon. With the ever-widening gulf between knowledge and ignorance, the development gap between the rich and the poor among and within countries has also increased. It has therefore become imperative for the world to bridge this digital divide and place the MDGs on the ICT-accelerated speedway to achievement.” WSIS (World summit on Information Society)
“The reference to ‘society’ inspires good old sociological questions of power, profit and participation: who benefits, who decides, who participates, and who is accountable?” (Hamelink, n.d) It would appear that in theory this kind of situation would be beneficial to different communities, even in the situation of less developed nations however, it fails to address poverty, hunger, poor health and exploitation all of which are associated with less devolved nations.
There is still a huge distinction made between the have and the have nots in terms of a global village or a global infomation society. How can we expect everyone to be connected globally to an information society via the internet or mobile phone systems while some countries barely have the money for food and clean water. There is continuously the questions of “How to preserve fundamental human values in the face of economic or technological pressures tending to undermine them” (Samuelson n.d) “There are undoubtedly ‘informational developments’ in modern societies and through interaction with other social developments these will have an impact on how the future of such societies shape up in different ways dependent upon different historical circumstances.” (Hamelink, n.d) From this position it would be easy to say that the development of modern Western society in relation to a global information society would ultimately be beneficial to improving the living standards of less developed nations. We need to question, however, whether the information which is being spread globally by largely western countries is going to be beneficial to poorer or disadvantaged countries. Is there really much we can offer them in relation to technological regulation which they do not even have?
Not only this but concentration of media ownership threatens the integrity of of journalism.
The consolidation of news corporations both in terms of daily news and television news means a dilution of reporting in news stories. Instead of receiving two separate news stories we are seeing the same ones rehashed on television as we have already read in our daily newspapers. Consolidation works under the premise that because there are more people working under the same production then journalists can work harder on stories giving us better quality news but in reality I'm not sure this is how it works. There of course would be the temptation to simply reuse what has gone before.
"Not one global body has the power to impose change, so any steps to restore public confidence in these institutions much take place in the individual nation states. The must be a global corporation if changes are to have any real affect." I think this statement from the text is true yet highly idealistic it is all well and good to say we need to have a global regulation body but realistically how could this work. How could it govern over ever state with ever law and be fair and objective. It seems unrealistic.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)