:Media conglomerate
{{short description|Large company involved in mass media industry}}
{{pp-pc1}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=August 2020}}
A media conglomerate, media company, media group, or media institution is a company that owns numerous companies involved in mass media enterprises, such as music, television, radio, publishing, motion pictures, video games, amusement parks, or the Internet. The weekly magazine The Nation commented, "Media conglomerates strive for policies that facilitate their control of the markets around the world."{{cite magazine |last1=Moglen|first1=Eben |first2=Michael|last2=Pertschuck |first3=Scott|last3=Sherman |year=1999 |title=Editorials |magazine=The Nation |volume=269 |issue=18 |page=12 |issn=0027-8378}}
Terminology
A conglomerate is a large company composed of a number of companies (subsidiaries) engaged in generally unrelated businesses.
Some media conglomerates use their access in multiple areas to share various kinds of content such as: news, video and music, between users. The media sector's tendency to consolidate has caused formerly diversified companies to appear less diverse to prospective investors in comparison with similar companies that are traded publicly and privately. Therefore, the term media group may also be applied, however, it has not yet replaced the more traditional term.{{cite web |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228419679|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160216021348/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228419679_A_Distinction_between_Business_Groups_and_Conglomerates_The_Limited_Liability_Effect |archive-date=16 February 2016|title=A distinction between Business Groups and Conglomerates:The Limited Liability Effect |publisher= SSRN Electronic Journal 01/2009; DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.134299 |date=1 January 2009 |access-date=16 February 2016}}
Criticism
{{Main|Concentration of media ownership}}
Critics have accused the large media conglomerates of dominating the media and using unfair practices. During a protest in November 2007, critics such as Jesse Jackson spoke out against consolidation of the media.{{Cite news|date=1 November 2007|title=Critics Turn Out To Protest Media Consolidation|journal=The Washington Post and Times-Herald|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/31/AR2007103102915.html|access-date=5 August 2018|issn=0190-8286|archive-date=12 January 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190112221009/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/31/AR2007103102915.html|url-status=live}} This can be seen in the news industry, where corporations refuse to publicize information that would be harmful to their interests. Because some corporations do not publish any material that criticizes them or their interests, media conglomerates have been criticized for limiting free speech or not protecting free speech.{{cite journal|last1=Stoll|first1=Mary Lyn|date=June 2006 |title=Infotainment and the Moral Obligations of the Multimedia Conglomerate |journal=Journal of Business Ethics |volume=66 |issue=2–3 |pages=253–260 |doi=10.1007/s10551-005-5590-2 |s2cid=153666046}} These practices are also suspected of contributing to the merging of entertainment and news (sensationalism{{cite journal|last1=Kenix|first1=Linda Jean|title=Independent Websites Not So Different from Group-Owned|journal=Newspaper Research Journal|volume=35|issue=2}}) at the expense of the coverage of serious issues. They are also accused of being a leading force behind the standardization of culture (see globalization, Americanization) and are frequently criticized by groups that perceive news organizations as being biased toward special interests of the owners.
Because there are fewer independent media, there is less diversity in news and entertainment and therefore less competition. This can result in the reduction of different points of view as well as vocalization about different issues.{{Cite web|last=Shah|first=Anup|title=Media Conglomerates, Mergers, Concentration of Ownership|url=http://www.globalissues.org/article/159/media-conglomerates-mergers-concentration-of-ownership|website=Global Issues|access-date=10 November 2017|archive-date=7 October 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181007081942/http://www.globalissues.org/article/159/media-conglomerates-mergers-concentration-of-ownership|url-status=live}} There is also a lack of ethnic and gender diversity as a majority of those in media are white, middle-class men.{{cite web |title=Diversity in Media Ownership |url=https://www.freepress.net/issues/media-control/diversity-media-ownership |website=Free Press |language=en |access-date=27 September 2022 |archive-date=27 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220927102619/https://www.freepress.net/issues/media-control/diversity-media-ownership |url-status=live }}{{cite web |title=The Abysmal State of Media Ownership Diversity in America |url=https://civilrights.org/blog/the-abysmal-state-of-media-ownership-diversity-in-america/ |website=The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights |language=en |access-date=27 September 2022 |archive-date=27 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220927102618/https://civilrights.org/blog/the-abysmal-state-of-media-ownership-diversity-in-america/ |url-status=live }}{{cite web |last1=Beresteanu |first1=Arie |last2=Ellickson |first2=Paul B. |title=Minority and Female Ownership in Media Enterprises |url=https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-07-3470A8.pdf |website=docs.fcc.gov |access-date=12 June 2007 |archive-date=22 January 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190122200610/https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-07-3470A8.pdf |url-status=live }} There is a concern that their views are being shared disproportionately more than other groups, such as women and ethnic minorities.{{cite journal |last1=Gamson |first1=Joshua |last2=Latteier |first2=Pearl |author1-link=Joshua Gamson |title=Do media monsters devour diversity? |journal=Contexts |date=Summer 2004 |volume=3 |issue=3 |pages=26–32 |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1525/ctx.2004.3.3.26#page=5 |quote=Studies routinely find that the individuals appearing in mass media are disproportionately white, middle-class men between the ages of 20 and 60. ... the rapid consolidation of deregulated media companies makes it even less likely that companies and stations will be minority-owned today. |access-date=March 9, 2022 |publisher=American Sociological Association |doi=10.1525/ctx.2004.3.3.26 |s2cid=62715815 |s2cid-access=free |archive-date=9 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220309033650/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1525/ctx.2004.3.3.26#page=5 |url-status=live |doi-access=free }} Women and minorities also have less ownership of media. Women have less than 7 percent of TV and radio licenses, and minorities have around 7 percent of radio licenses and 3 percent of TV licenses.{{cite web|title=Diversity in Media Ownership|url=https://www.freepress.net/diversity-media-ownership|access-date=6 November 2017|website=Free Press|archive-date=22 November 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171122115017/https://www.freepress.net/diversity-media-ownership|url-status=dead}}
Examples by country
{{Further|Media cross-ownership in the United States|:Category:Mass media companies}}
In the 2024 Forbes Global 2000 list, Comcast is the world's largest media conglomerate, in terms of revenue, with The Walt Disney Company, Warner Bros. Discovery, & Paramount Global completing the top four.{{cite web |last1=Kochkodin |first1=Brandon |title=The World’s Largest Media Companies 2024: Disney, Charter Communications And Warner Bros. Discovery All Fall |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/brandonkochkodin/2024/06/13/the-worlds-largest-media-companies-2024-disney-charter-communications-and-warner-bros-discovery-all-fall/#:~:text=The%20World's%20Largest%20Media%20Companies%202024%3A%20Disney,Charter%20Communications%20And%20Warner%20Bros. |website=Forbes |access-date=13 June 2024 |language=en}}
In 1984, fifty independent media companies owned the majority of media interests within the United States. By 2011, 90% of the United States's media was controlled by six media conglomerates: GE/Comcast (NBC, Universal), News Corp (Fox News, Wall Street Journal, New York Post), Disney (ABC, ESPN, Pixar), Viacom (MTV, BET, Paramount Pictures), Time Warner (CNN, HBO, Warner Bros.), and CBS (Showtime, NFL.com).{{Cite news |last=Lutz |first=Ashley |date=14 June 2012 |title=These 6 Corporations Control 90% of the Media in America |work=Business Insider |url=http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6 |access-date=2 June 2020 |archive-date=11 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200911210201/https://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6 |url-status=live }}{{cite web |title=Timeline |url=http://www.pbs.org/moyers/moyersonamerica/net/timeline.html |website=Moyers on America |publisher=PBS |date=2006 |access-date=27 October 2017 |archive-date=16 December 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171216062315/http://www.pbs.org/moyers/moyersonamerica/net/timeline.html |url-status=live }}
Between 1941 and 1975, several laws that restricted channel ownership within radio and television were enacted in order to maintain unbiased and diverse media. However under the Reagan administration, Congress and the Federal Communications Commission, then led by FCC Chairman Mark S. Fowler, began a concerted deregulation over the years 1981 and 1985. The number of television stations a single entity can own increased from seven to 12 stations.{{Citation needed|date=June 2020}}
The industry continued to deregulate with enactment of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Signed by President Bill Clinton on 8 February 1996, it was considered by the FCC to be the "first major overhaul of telecommunications law in almost 62 years".{{cite web|title=Telecommunications Act of 1986|url=https://www.fcc.gov/general/telecommunications-act-1996|website=Federal Communications Commission|date=20 June 2013|publisher=FCC|access-date=27 October 2017|archive-date=6 December 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181206014337/https://www.fcc.gov/general/telecommunications-act-1996|url-status=live}} In the radio industry, the 40-station ownership cap was lifted, leading to an unprecedented amount of consolidation. Since this period, IHeartMedia grew from 40 stations to 1200 stations, in all 50 states, while Viacom grew to owning 180 stations across 41 markets.{{Citation needed|date=June 2020}}
As media consolidation grew, some in the nation began to speculate how it might negatively impact society at large. In the case of Minot, North Dakota,{{cite news|last1=Fisher|first1=Marc|title=Sounds Familiar for a Reason|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2003/05/18/sounds-familiar-for-a-reason/d8b48d41-422c-4efe-a697-82c0bf07bde8/|newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=27 October 2017|archive-date=19 November 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171119203414/https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2003/05/18/sounds-familiar-for-a-reason/d8b48d41-422c-4efe-a697-82c0bf07bde8/|url-status=live}} the concerns regarding media consolidation is realized. On 18 January 2002, a train containing hazardous chemicals derailed in the middle of the night, exposing countless Minot residents to toxic waste. Upon trying to get out an emergency broadcast, the Minot police were unable to reach anyone. They were instead forwarded to the same automated message, as all the broadcast stations in Minot were single-handedly owned by IHeartMedia. As the FCC reviews media ownership rules, broadcasters continued to petition it for the elimination of all rules, while those who are against this easing would often cite the incident in Minot as how consolidation could be harmful.{{Citation needed|date=June 2020}}
Canada, Australia, the Philippines, and New Zealand{{cite journal|last1=Hope|first1=Wayne|last2=Myllylahti|first2=Merja|title=Financialisation of Media Ownership in New Zealand|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282649753|journal=New Zealand Sociology|volume=28|issue=3}} also experience the concentration of multiple media enterprises in a few companies. This concentration is an ongoing concern for the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, the Australian Communications and Media Authority, the Philippine National Telecommunications Commission, and New Zealand's Broadcasting Standards Authority. Other countries that have large media conglomerates with impacts on the world include: Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, France, China, Mexico and Brazil. Media conglomerates outside of the United States include Fujisankei Communications Group (Fuji Television), Yomiuri Shimbun Holdings, Hubert Burda Media, ITV, ProSiebenSat.1, Mediaset, Axel Springer, JCDecaux, China Central Television, Alibaba Group, ABS-CBN Corporation, GMA Network, MediaQuest Holdings, Radio Philippines Network, Aliw Broadcasting Corporation, Advanced Media Broadcasting System, People's Television Network, Intercontinental Broadcasting Corporation, Presidential Broadcast Service, Viva Communications, Prasar Bharati, The Asahi Shimbun, Grupo Televisa, TV Azteca, Grupo Imagen, Grupo Globo, Baidu, GMM Grammy and Bertelsmann.{{cite web|last1=O'Reilly|first1=Lara|title=The 30 Biggest Media Companies in the World|url=http://www.businessinsider.com/the-30-biggest-media-owners-in-the-world-2016-5/#30-time-inc--287-billion-in-media-revenue-1|website=Business Insider|access-date=10 November 2017|archive-date=1 June 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160601121131/http://www.businessinsider.com/the-30-biggest-media-owners-in-the-world-2016-5/#30-time-inc--287-billion-in-media-revenue-1|url-status=live}}