p and m

Desensitisation and undermining a fair and democratic, passionate society can accumulate from censoring and restricting the news which may generate opinions and perspective. Therefore, when people in countries where there is no involvement and production of the media, people cannot question the political , economic and social conventions of society. Similarly Alain de Botton's argues that too much information has an indistinguishable notion too as having an excess of information forcing us to accept the status quo too, it also influences people to the social expectations that are promoted in a way that forcing the public to conform to the norms of the elite and powerful through big media conglomerates. Alain also says that in the media 'neutrality is impossible' in some media corporations and some journalists created the 'best kinds of bias' though a 'woefully limited agenda'. People who question the norms will be labelled a 'radical', so how is this any different to oppressing the public from knowledge about the world or how their country is run. 


Pluralist would proclaim that ‘the internet in an empowering tool.. and exciting and revolutionary prospect’ (Al Gore) which amplifies how digital media has become more engaging and collaborative through the years, accentuating the notion that it is an absolute necessity for our society to improve as a diverse classless and ultimately equal society. The fact that the ‘top 5% of all websites accounted for almost 75% of user volume’ (Lin and Welsh 2012) strengthens the argument of new and digital media empowering its audiences, as they are the ones inputting there perspective, experiences and thoughts into the World Wide Web. Furthermore.

 Rupert Murdoch a powerful and influential managing dealer of conglomerates has quoted himself ‘that the internet has given readers much more power’ this is undoubtedly  portrayed through the audiences ability to utilise software’s and programs such as Twitter, Instagram, Facebook ect, which ultimately allows and encourages user generated content, ultimately empowering the audience. A well-known example is the Eric Garner incident which occurred on the 17^th July 2014, when a bystander recorded the police brutality, had not been recorded at the time people would have been unaware of the truth amid the speculations, causing an uproar for equality and justice.

In contrast, a Marxist view would argue that we are enjoying the illusion of autonomy, through the media. Rupert Murdoch says that ‘the expression of state sponsored journalism is a threat to the plurality and independence of news provision’ his accentuates that notion of the media being mediated. Furthermore, this also portrays how the public are being ‘injected’ by cherry picked ideologies by huge media conglomerates (hypodermic needle theory).

 Moreover, Pereto’s law suggests that ‘a minority of (media) producers always serve a majority of consumers’, highlighting that there is a class system and the elite people at the top guide and influence people who are less ‘important’ in their eyes. They focus on providing their text to either cater dominant elite and wealthy people, or change the view of the working and lower classes, turning them against each other, forgetting it is the elite making theses decisions and ‘not everyone taking their jobs’ This strengthens the hegemonic view by Gramsci as the media positively represents and promotes a certain way of living and ideology, making the audience less powerful.

A Marxist would also argue that new and digital media has allowed class conflict to create disunity and divide in our society. The Guardian had recently released an article on the rise of Marxism in July 2012, it advocates the notion that young people are often led to critically develop the media industry, as they it helps them again better understanding of their capitalist surroundings. We as audiences are being ‘dumbed down’ and view the news from a mediated and article view point, although user generated content has emerged, it is still not taken seriously and the powerless majority still have no voice, it as though we are ‘enjoying the illusion of autonomy’.

Furthermore, regression is befalling us as we are to a certain extent, and undoubtedly being censored. This is because of political and social influences from gate keepers who decide what actually get to be published to the media. The use of bold headings and cherry picked, out of context quotes and terminology also plays a role in making the audiences and consumers further away from democracy as possible, and by allowing this to be pressured on different platforms and sources a digital media creates a perpetual cycle of biased information.

Freedom of expression is one of the essential foundations of the European Union. But freedom of expression can only be exercised in a free and pluralistic media environment, including through independent media governance. A pluralist would believe that the media promotes the notion of social equality and develops democracy in our society. Digital disruption has impacted audiences and consumers in a position way as they can collaboratively create a global village with people across the world, and additionally contribute to the news, distorting any so called agenda’s. A prime and popular example is vice news, this is because it makes the public more powerful by capturing clips and providing articles from alternative perspectives (Hall).

 Digital media has opened the doors for challenging views, which ‘levels’ (Aleks Kerovski BBC 2012) out the news from dominant ideologies. This idea is strengthened by Castells, who in 1996 said that technologies are in favour of the interests of the individuals’. This is because they can portray and describe their experiences and views on social media sites easily accessible to anyone. Ultimately portraying the fact that the media allows the public to voice their own autonomy.

Conversely, questions about how transparent the media is may arise. Vint Cerf from Google says that ‘privacy may be on anomaly, now over. This is because of the fact that a lot of our information in being withheld on the internet and networks, which can not only be hacked but also be followed up by Government officials. Marxist theory emphasizes the importance of social class in relation to both media ownership and audience interpretation of media texts: this remains an important factor in media analysis.

Whilst content analysis and semiotics may shed light on media content, Marxist theory highlights the material conditions of media production and reception. 'Critical political economists' study the ownership and control of the media and the influence of media ownership on media content cannot be ignored. It also remains important to consider such issues as differential access and modes of interpretation which are shaped by socio-economic groupings. Marxist media research includes the analysis of representation in the mass media (e.g. political coverage or social groups) in order to reveal underlying ideologies. We still need such analyses: however oppositional it may sometimes be, audience interpretation continues to operate in relation to such content. Because of the distribution of power in society, some versions of reality have more influence than others.