Whoever Controls the Media, Controls the Mind

One of the goals of this newsletter is to help people see the media through the eyes of a media professor. The other day, I talked to my Mom and said, “You know - I just assume that everyone knows what I know.” I realize that isn’t true, and I teach my students a lot of this regularly, so this is meant to guide every person's media consumption. I want folks to think of the media not as consumers but as media-literate critics. Remember, no media can exist without an audience, and as good critical consumers, we can decide what we give our very powerful attention to.

What is Gatekeeping?

According to the Communication Encyclopedia, gatekeeping is the approach that emphasizes the movement of bits of information through channels, emphasizing decision points (gates) and decision-makers (gatekeepers). Gatekeeping is necessary if it is done ethically. Publications and news editors do it to bring citizens the most important news and ensure it is published according to journalistic standards.

Gatekeeping can have problems; however, because of mass media ownership and those who control what we see, I mentioned in my previous article that this is known as agenda setting. To repeat, the agenda-setting theory states that the mainstream media sets the agenda of public discourse. It does this not so much by telling people what to think but rather what to think about. These agendas are set by those in power who own the media companies. Algorithmic adaptation of social media feeds seems to take this theory to a new level.

Mass Media Ownership

These top six companies control 90% of the media in the United States. Just 37 years ago, 50 companies controlled most American media. Now, 90% of the media in the United States is controlled by just six corporations: AT&T, CBS, Comcast, Disney, Newscorp, and Viacom. In the realm of social media, you have X (owned by Elon Musk), TikTok (which has some national security issues due to its China-based ownership), Facebook, Instagram, and Threads (all under the Zuckerberg / Meta umbrella), and the newest more federated edition Bluesky (not owned by any single entity).

Several data researchers have proven that Musk has created an algorithm on his social media X that depresses left-leaning viewpoints and elevates his viewpoints along with those on the right-wing political spectrum. See the article below:

In traditional mass media and social media, a powerful few oversee what we see and read. The notion of journalistic objectivity, often touted by these elite-run outlets, serves as a façade for balanced reporting. But in truth, unbiased news is a myth. Journalists within these conglomerates answer to their corporate overlords, advancing their agendas. Expecting outlets like The Washington Post to impartially cover stories involving their owner, such as reports on Jeff Bezos’s personal life, is unrealistic.

Another prime example is The Washington Post and the LA Times, which chose not to endorse a Presidential candidate for the 2024 election. The Washington Post experienced a substantial subscriber exodus, which led to an erosion of trust. The mass exodus of subscribers withholding their attention will make a significant dent and certainly send a message. See also—Obeying in advance and how this is something that media does when under an authoritarian slide: https://snyder.substack.com/p/obeying-in-advance.

Sinclair Broadcast Network

Many people do not realize that mass media conglomerates also affect local news stations. According to an article in Stanford Business, media consolidation means less local news and more right-wing slant. Sinclair Broadcasting Group is already one of the most influential media companies in the country. It owns nearly 200 local television stations in almost 100 markets.

In 2018, a whistleblower stitched together a video showing a dystopian script that was strikingly pro-Trump and read across Sinclair news stations. You can watch the video; I embedded it below because you must see it to believe it. Boy, is it disturbing on so many levels. Most recently, CNBC reported that Sinclair is looking to sell some of its local affiliates, which would be great news in the face of a new Trump administration. Great news, depending on who buys them.

Here is a list of all of the stations that Sinclair Broadcast owns. Double-check to see if the one you watch in your market is on the list. https://sbgi.net/tv-stations/

Aside from the fears of gatekeeping and agenda setting mentioned before, when a small number of individuals or corporations control a significant portion of the media landscape, there is a risk that their personal or corporate interests may influence the news content. This can manifest in various ways, such as selective reporting, framing of stories, or omission of specific perspectives. For example, I mentioned the Washington Post and LA Times examples above. Additionally, another classic example is Fox News, which will be the subject of a whole newsletter / post about the propaganda they broadcast and why they continue to hold the cable news market. Fox News claims to be news, but it isn’t news by any objective definition.

Furthermore, media ownership concentration can lead to a lack of diversity in news content. When a few entities control a large portion of the media, there is a risk of homogeneity in the stories and perspectives. This can limit the range of voices and ideas represented in the news, leading to a less informed and diverse public discourse. In a democratic society, having a plurality of voices and perspectives in the media landscape is crucial to ensure a robust and inclusive public sphere.

The influence of media ownership on news content can also have economic implications. Consolidating media ownership can lead to the closure or downsizing of smaller, independent outlets as they struggle to compete with the larger conglomerates. Thus, it is essential to support smaller publications and non-profits. These days, many smart folks are publishing on substack and other newsletter-based formats (Hey! Like this one!).

To sum up, our news media ecosystem is owned by a few wealthy corporations, which have much control over what we see as news and the entire information ecosystem. We must keep our critical thinking skills sharp and know who controls the messaging.

Finally, I want to devote the end of my newsletter to “things I am reading.” I will pick out some particularly influential things I read this week to share with you. The things that I think stand out and that are important. I read through a lot of stuff, so this will serve as sifting through all of it and giving you the stuff that stood out to me. You can read them or not, but I thought sharing would be beneficial.

First - Taylor Lorenz left the Washington Post this year because she felt too constrained. She has written an article on a Pew research report on content creators. Today, she released this startling report on her new independent mag.

Timothy Snyder wrote this sobering piece on his substack this weekend.

And this last one is about the election's impact on young women. Get some tissues.

I plan to cover things related to this topic in upcoming newsletters.

• Media Bias - left / center / right biased publications and how to know

• Sanewashing - especially in the case of Donald Trump and Authoritarianism- is addressing both sides the goal of journalism and news?

• Changing your media diet to include more independent, non-profit journalism and media defending democracy. Who should you support? I will tell you who I am supporting (subscribing to).

• What would you like to learn about? Let me know in the comments!