Media Diversity: Essential to the Welfare of the Public

Of the countless company names that broadcast news and entertainment, you may suppose that the companies are separately owned and kept running by a wide variety of managers and supervisors unconnected to one another. However, while most companies were founded individually and by people unconnected to other brand names, larger brands often jump at the chance to buy out newly successful programs, and this repeatedly happening leads to media consolidation. Media consolidation is the process by which the number of organizations that control the increasing shares of mass media decreases, leaving the same few corporations owning, running, and profiting from all of the individual programs of which they would now own. From the 1930s to the 1970s, the Federal Communications Commission was created and set forth in efforts of the government to attempt at preserving media diversity and preventing media consolidation. The government included regulations in this act that encouraged media corporations to avoid owning too many television stations or newspapers. If the same people are directing and running many of the stations and articles that a diverse world of people are consuming, the media which, would normally consist of variation, begins to consist of the same types of programs. Not only would the consumers watching programs for entertainment be upset by this, but also the consumers watching news stations. Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black argued that dissemination of news and information should be coming from a diverse selection of sources. This ensures that the people watching can be enlightened by contrasting opinions and viewpoints, and media consolidation would interrupt this process. Hugo Black believes the diversity of news broadcasters is essential to the welfare of the public. This being said, the public has recognized that the media does not accurately represent their views, and media consolidation is responsible.