Mass Media and the "Death" of Hard-Hitting Journalism

In today's society, media concentration is an unavoidably present topic. With media moguls such as News Corp.'s Rupert Murdoch at the head ofheading multiple broadcasting stations, many seem to feel that the media is becoming heavily influenced by said giants, leaving little room for smaller, locally owned broadcasting stations and newspapers. This, according to some, is headed up by the United States, who will eventually take over the media. To top it all off, the agenda-setting and gatekeeping done by these massive powerhouses will be the driving force behind the death of hard-hitting journalism. In spite of the fact that the ever-present figure of globalized media can be intimidating, there lies no immediate danger of the death of hard-hitting journalism.

The argument that the larger corporations will eventually eat up the smaller ones is in no way realistic. The larger papers such as the New York Times and the Atlanta Journal Constitution may be some of the most commonly referenced papers, but one must take into account the large amount of local news that takes place every day. The same goes for television stations. It is the job of the mass media to report the more grandiose, wide scale occurrences of our day-to-day lives while the smaller, family-owned papers and broadcasts cater to the local needs of a local community. Just imagine if USA Today attempted to report on global affairs while giving equal focus to the happenings of every city in every state in the nation. It would be impossible and a complete waste of paper.

In all of this, the United States seems to be at the forefront, establishing a westernized media world empire. This is not at all the case. Many countries, such as Japan and India, have every intention of maintaining their culture rather than adopting an American way of life (assuming that American culture would permeate into various nations via the media). For example, the Japanese culture which holds diligence and respect in such high regard might not find the snide antics of Bart Simpson as appealing as the average American family. To allow such contradictory material into the culture would be all but detrimental in their eyes.

This globalized media agenda-setting and gatekeeping will supposedly lead to the demise of hard-hitting journalism. Unfortunately, those who predict this base their stories off of media rulers, such as William Randolph Hearst of the early 20th century, who had their own political agendas. While there are ulterior motives in agenda-setting and gatekeeping, there is nowhere near the amount of intense twisting of news that we seeas is seen in Citizen Kane. At worst, the more biased newspapers and broadcasting stations work at subliminally portraying a politician of the opposite party in a negative light.

All in all, the pressure put on the smaller media by giant corporations is not nearly as large as some make it out to be. Foreign cultures are in no way in danger of being overrun by American corporations. Not only this, but smaller media outlets will remain necessary for the output of local news that larger corporations don't have space to report. Through a bit of careful analysis, it can clearly be seen that this panic about the mass media is little more than self-inflicted mass confusion.