Assignment task:
Topic: Concentration of media ownership: Private censorship of information?
We all know that the state severely controls mass media in totalitarian countries. We are used to assuming that private conglomerates' mass media won't censor the free flow of information. Besides, corporate media told us that we should not worry about media ownership concentration in a few media conglomerates because the bigger the media conglomerate, the cheaper the media products. Besides, there are always multiple media outlets and a variety of media products for us to choose from "the marketplace of ideas." Yet, our textbook tells us we should really worry about the conglomeration of media started from the 1980s, especially we should worry about the content diversity under the conglomerate. Media scholar Bagdikian argued that the United States has a "private ministry of information," which means that those small number of media conglomerates have at least the potential to wield a great deal of political power by controlling what can appear on the screen. Is Bagdikian slandering against our free media? Can you give me some examples to show that corporate media exercise censorship makes us ignorant of critical information? Is it right to call media conglomerates a "buffet of bullshit?" (I mean, we might have much content from many outlets, but all those content gear toward earning advertising dollars and, thus, all of those content are cheap bait just for hooking up our eyeballs)
I do not know anything about the media other than we should have a right to the First Amendment of Free Speech. I do not know the deontological or teleological sides to a private ministry of information. Please help!