Page 64 - Myths for the Masses An Essay on Mass Communication

Mass Communication and the Promise of Democracy

what it wants, because, the process of mass communication is also
anticipatory and suggestive in its efforts to attract and retain a
responsive audience.
Although this marketing strategy pertains to the essence of mass
communication, journalistic practice is particularly affected by its
dependence on the commercial aspirations of its medium at the
expense of public service. For instance, the Commission of Freedom
of the Press concluded as early as 1947 that if schools improved the
standard of people’s education, media responsibility to raise the level
of American culture, or to supply citizens with correct political, eco-
nomic, and social information, would be materially altered. Con-
sidering society a working system of ideas, the Commission insisted
that people have available to them as many ideas as possible, even
those not shared by the owners of the means of mass communica-
tion. Almost 60 years later the same observations hold true; what
has become worse, however, is the complacency of a more power-
ful media industry, the increasing alienation of its workers, and the
loss of a historical perspective among the public regarding the
promises of a vigorous and independent press.
The current conditions of mass communication raise more fun-
damental questions, however, than the issue of press freedom alone,
since the boundaries of press freedom may always remain con-
tentious on legal territories such as pornography, defamation, or
sedition. For example, if, as John Keane suggests, democracy is rule
by publics who make their judgment in public, mass communica-
tion must not only supply expert knowledge to come to sound
decisions, but it must provide the public with opportunities for
sharing such judgments. It is doubtful whether most individuals are
served well by the media, which rarely meet such expectations,
although they may operate on the presumption of constituting a
foundation of democracy. Instead, they may well be informed by
selective, expert judgments, which typically appear as statements of
fact rather than as contributing opinions to a public discussion.
Indeed, contemporary mass communication practices demonstrate
the decline of public debate in favor of expert pronouncements,
which are often reduced to politically motivated soundbites that
become facts. When opinion is reproduced as fact, mass communi-
cation simply serves to confirm, reinforce, or sell ideologically

52