Page 85 - Myths for the Masses An Essay on Mass Communication

Mass Communication and the Promise of Democracy

Likewise, books continue to be banned from public libraries for
similar reasons.
Industry responses have mostly been political gestures that typi-
cally result in voluntary censorship, rating systems for film and tele-
vision, or controls on computers, but rarely discourage producers of
mass communication – even after a religious, conservative public has
continued to pursue its agenda for the moral and physical well-
being of young adults, and society in general. On the other hand,
sponsors have regularly interfered in programming since the time
when television programs were controlled by single companies; for
instance, after public protests and sufficient publicity, depictions of
violence have led advertisers to pulling commercials off the air.
A democratic vision of society must address the more fundamen-
tal and politically important relationship between mass communica-
tion and democracy, however, beyond these border skirmishes on
the outskirts of mass communication issues. American democracy,
specifically, relies on mass communication to reproduce a feeling of
familiarity, and an atmosphere of mutual trust and shared knowledge
to promote consent and create conformity rather than empower-
ment.A renewed battle for democratic communication, often antici-
pated but never undertaken, must be conducted to help clarify
notions of participation, access, and control of the means of mass
communication while insisting on freedom of the press as a uni-
versal right rather than a particular property right.
At the center of this struggle resides the issue of mass communi-
cation as a finite or limited societal resource with potential benefits
for all of society, that is, equality of opportunity for participation in
the process of mass communication, not as subject, but as citizen.
While the former symbolizes the condition of inequality, the latter
personalizes a sense of a rationalized social and political equality
between media and individual, for instance.
Not unlike natural resources – such as air, water, or oil – media,
too, are limited in their availability. Their numbers are determined
by economic constraints – loss of profitability in the case of too
many competitors, overpricing and shrinking markets – or physical
limitations – a shortage of broadcast frequencies or a scarcity of
forests for paper production. Also, the performance of self-defined
tasks, such as informing and entertaining society, may be restricted

73