Page 232 - Critical Political Economy of the Media

Media power, challenges and alternatives 211

market can be trusted to realise digital plenitude and create an equitable environ-
ment for cultural and democratic exchange. There is undeniably increased digital
communication but claims for media pluralism need to be carefully qualified and
assessed in regard to the continuing dominance of ‘vertical’ media content provision
and consumption, contractions in public service media and the scarcity and
resource limitations of alternatives. While source diversity has undoubtedly
increased, understanding which sources are actually used by audiences (exposure
diversity) has grown in importance (Napoli 2011; Karppinen 2009). The myth of
digital abundance is problematic because it is mobilised to suggest that market
mechanisms can secure by themselves what have been formerly recognised as
goals for public policy – balancing private and public interests in communications;
fostering and safeguarding media pluralism and diversity. For citizens’ media to
flourish requires financial and regulatory support through public policies.

Media reform and protest

Democratic media activism takes four main forms. Integration involves reforming
the media internally. Alternative media means creating new and parallel media
activities. Protest involves criticism, action and awareness raising about media
problems. Media reform involves efforts to change the conditions in which
media operate. As with other categories discussed above the division between
protest and media reform is blurred and many media reform strategies and tactics
involve both. Media reform is characterised by efforts to ensure communication
resources are used for social purposes and shaped by democratic involvement. Pro-
tests against media power may not share confidence in or support for such solutions
by virtue of critiques of statism (libertarianism, culturalism), majoritarianism, or
orderings of mainstream cultural values (some activism on sexuality, race, gender
and disability).These are fruitful and important areas of debate within the creation
of progressive coalitions. On the whole the CPE tradition has advocated media
reform as the logical outcome of a critique both of dominant media and the mar-
ginalisation and structured insufficiency of radical media to provide a satisfactory
alternative. Writing in a US context, McChesney and Nichols argue (2002: 123):

It is the result of relentless lobbying from big business interests that have
won explicit government policies and subsidies permitting [corporate media]
to scrap public interest obligations and increase commercialization and
conglomeration. It is untenable to accept such massive subsidies for the
wealthy, and to content ourselves with the ‘freedom’ to forge alternatives
that only occupy the margins.

Media reform agendas were outlined in chapter eight. In the context of the dis-
cussion here critical issues include which modes of contesting media power are
more feasible, desirable and capable of mobilising the necessary support to make
gains. That must be debated and answered within and across media systems.