[HN Gopher] These 15 Billionaires Own America's News Media Compa...
___________________________________________________________________
These 15 Billionaires Own America's News Media Companies (2016)
Author : AndrewBissell
Score : 110 points
Date : 2021-02-14 18:55 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.forbes.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.forbes.com)
| naveen99 wrote:
| Do billionaires have religion or politics ? Or are they all on
| the same team ? And do they have a solution to self custody of
| wealth ?
| fatsdomino001 wrote:
| That America and other countries have allowed the consolidation
| of media companies to such a degree is a large part of the reason
| why we're having so many problems today.
| breck wrote:
| Yes. #EndImaginaryProperty #EndCopyright #EndPatents
| 11thEarlOfMar wrote:
| Moreover, that these media companies are not able to make
| profitable revenue by conveying factual news reports. They have
| a growing footprint through the consolidation and influence the
| public discourse and keep it focused on (seemingly) the most
| inflammatory topics, statements and events in order to drive
| clicks, views, likes & shares.
|
| Hence, they've devolved into entertainment while the public at
| large still perceives them as news sources. I am sure this has
| been going on to some degree for centuries. More than
| consolidation, the unprecedented reach to now 5 billion humans
| actually should be concerning enough to raise a hue and cry for
| oversight.
|
| Did he call the neo-Nazi's and white supremacists fine people?
| Did Biden launch his campaign on that claim? How can our news
| sources call themselves news when a few seconds of research
| (literally) can show such an inflammatory claim as false?
|
| This has to stop.
| duxup wrote:
| How do you connect that to 'why we're having so many problems
| today'?
| dd36 wrote:
| Reduced diversity of opinion. Financial incentive to not
| cover or obfuscate news that would undermine their power.
| Case in point, Occupy Wall Street.
| azinman2 wrote:
| Occupy Wall Street was hardly not covered. If anything, it
| probably got a disproportionate amount of coverage given
| the small numbers of people and the lack of coherent
| demands.
| threatofrain wrote:
| Is it obvious that we have reduced diversity of opinion?
| keiferski wrote:
| https://youtu.be/hWLjYJ4BzvI
| 542458 wrote:
| To clarify, these are all stations owned by Sinclair
| Broadcast Group, which is the largest television station
| conglomerate in the United States. They've been pretty
| aggressive in buying up local stations, and have a
| reputation for exerting fairly strong editorial control
| and enforcing "must-run" opinion segments.
|
| One study found that local stations bought by Sinclair
| reduce coverage of local events, increase coverage of
| national politics, and shift rightward in tone compared
| to other stations of the same area.
| http://joshuamccrain.com/localnews.pdf
|
| To be honest, I'm not sure this shows lack of diversity
| of opinion - but it does show how consolidation of news
| media allows a handful of people to use local stations as
| sockpuppets for their beliefs in a way that hides the
| origin of the message.
| redis_mlc wrote:
| - fewer platforms means it was possible to deplatform a
| sitting President
|
| - leftst MSM means the left did not see reporting on 2020
| election fraud, and very little on CCP malfeasance, so kept
| repeating endlessly the narrative keywords "debunked" and "no
| widespread election fraud." Visible exampls are cnn.com and
| NY Times, but those were commonly used on HN also.
| danielscrubs wrote:
| Not the op, but I think any consolation of media will make
| people care less about their neighborhood and more about the
| world, which might be a good and a bad thing. Bad in that
| local news are often a tiny bit more actionable and social
| building, and good in that it makes progress faster.
|
| I remember when I moved to another country and was absolutely
| shocked that they had local restaurant reviews on the news
| channels. Really appreciated it instead of all the doom and
| gloom. I visited quite a lot of them!
| dfmooreqqq wrote:
| To be fair, lots of local nightly news shows in America
| have local restaurant reviews. My parents live outside of
| Asheville, NC, and their local nightly news on all the
| broadcast channels carries restaurant reviews and lots of
| "around town" happenings.
| medlazik wrote:
| It's the #1 reason why so many people have been voting
| against their own interest for the past 20 years
| refurb wrote:
| Most of the major media companies have a pro-Democrat bias.
| Is that what you mean?
| astura wrote:
| Can you explain?
| saiya-jin wrote:
| Not OP but generally poorer folks in US especially in
| rural parts vote for right which protects much more the
| rich. Its sold to them for generations under guise of
| 'American dream' and if you are not yet rich, well you
| just didn't work hard enough and should be ashamed and go
| back to work more and harder. Which is bullshit on many
| levels. Everybody in society benefits when poor are
| helped a bit and not kept poor and desperate. But that
| would require skimming a bit off the top, reshuffling few
| things and bottom jobs would still have to be paid
| livable wages without exception.
|
| Compared to places where social inequality is much lower
| (ie some parts of Europe), US has some deep societal
| issues that I don't see going away soon, in contrary.
| Marketing has been very effective in branding any other
| idea as socialism/communism. And here is the media role,
| be it Hollywood, news etc - resist any change, our way is
| the best, it was and always will be. Don't think hard if
| its best for you, or you are not a true American.
|
| Or it could be the opposite - from US conservative
| viewpoint those leaning left are harming themselves and
| US society in the long run (not that I agree with this,
| but I can understand why certain people would hold this
| opinion).
|
| (I don't have a personal stake at this, just presenting
| an outsider's, potentially flawed view. When deciding
| where to settle around the globe US went quickly off the
| list for quite a few reasons, overall not a place I
| wanted to raise my kids in but that's another topic. That
| was despite obvious strengths of US society and location,
| as strengths don't cancel out weaknesses in my opinion).
| dillondoyle wrote:
| I look at Rupert Murdoch here as complicit with an
| intentional political goal he achieved through his vast
| media network. Think all the conservative outlets. Fox
| news changing news to opinion not based in the same
| reality, not even accepting base facts - while most of
| their viewers take it as actual news and fact.
| medlazik wrote:
| The deregulation frenzy that started with Reagan/Thatcher
| and all over the world is responsible for the insane
| inequalities we have today. The billionaire owned media
| has a neoliberal agenda against regulation.
|
| Of course they don't have to call journalists to tell
| them what to say, they recruit heads of HR who recruit
| neoliberal journalists/editorialists.
|
| 90% of people haven't seen their wages progressing that
| much in 20 years, yet they keep voting for the
| Biden/Trump/Macron/Bolsonaro of the world whom appeal is
| 100% created by the media.
|
| Deregulation is also responsible for leaders doing
| nothing about global warming and so many other things
| that make the world a particularly shitty place right
| now.
| jollofricepeas wrote:
| Actually.
|
| Unregulated social media and the traditional consolidation of
| media are resulting in not much different than what occurred
| right after the US civil war.
|
| Not only did "unchecked" freedom of the press and speech result
| in the US Spanish War between countries but it also resulted in
| white terrorism against black, brown, and Asian people in the
| US throughout the period of Reconstruction from 1860's-1930.
|
| - https://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/yellow-
| journa...
|
| - https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/historyrawleyconference/31/
|
| It's no different than what happens now except it's truly
| global and even more centralized.
|
| - https://www.salon.com/2021/01/16/despite-parler-backlash-
| fac...
|
| - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-46105934
| xtracto wrote:
| A very long time ago (15 years maybe?) there was a great
| internet site (I don't remember the name anymore) which showed
| a graph of top ~100 largest companies in the USA, their CEOs
| and their boards.
|
| When expanding the graph you could basically see that the same
| 30 or 40 people where in the boards of major companies, from
| Pepi to Johnson&Johnson to Microsoft to Fox and other
| communication companies.
|
| It showed a really interesting picture of how really
| consolidated the control was at the top.
| DerDangDerDang wrote:
| Wow I was surprised it was so long ago! Assuming you were
| thinking of theyrule - seems it's sort of still online but
| requires flash
|
| http://www.theyrule.net/2001/
| imgabe wrote:
| I believe it was http://theyrule.net Unfortunately, it looks
| like it's no longer up. You can find the home page on the
| Wayback machine[1] but it looks like the data was all in
| Flash.
|
| http://web.archive.org/web/20080901010712/http://www.theyrul.
| ..
| RGamma wrote:
| Not treating journalism as public utility/service with high
| standards for integrity has something to with it.
|
| Compared to German standards, most journalism in the US is a
| joke (an unfunny one, watching Fox News feels like a fever
| dream for instance). Too much bias and pollution with opinion
| and entertainment (opinions are fine, but only if clearly
| demarcated and from someone who has skin in the game and knows
| what's up, not random shrill plastic lady), too little self-
| reflection/introspection, too much clickbait, too short memory,
| blatant disregard for journalistic best practices. That said,
| the harsh financial environment there is at odds with sober,
| analytical (=boring) reporting.
|
| Too bad "offentlich-rechtlicher Rundfunk" (or information about
| it for that matter) basically isn't available in English, it
| would do well to lead by example (I've seen dw mentioned but
| that's a drop in the ocean really).
|
| That said current US societal problems have a more complex
| etiology than just media consolidation, but it really doesn't
| help to have the "mirror of society" blunted as much.
| spicyramen wrote:
| Nothing new here, the fourth power.
| eznzt wrote:
| I find this post to be extremely antisemitic.
| ilikedthatone wrote:
| freedom of speech is mostly not about the who owns media company
| etc! its mostly about who owns naming, addressing people,,, if it
| is not easy to publish anything, own name and ip to share
| whatever I have then its never possible to be free ( as in free,
| not in beer[social media deceive people])
| ipsocannibal wrote:
| Id like to see how this number has changed since 2016. Has the
| march toward media company consolidation increased during the
| Trump period?
| marshmallow_12 wrote:
| uniformity of thought in the media has increased. media
| consolidation cannot be blamed on trump. EDIT:my first
| statement is unqualified and based on personal feeling. the
| bitter partisanship i'm confronted with whenever i tune in to
| american news outlets form my opinion. i cannot present a
| historical decline in journalistic diversity. my second point
| is the main one. consolidation of an industry is a more symptom
| of capitalism than the actions of one man.
| duxup wrote:
| >uniformity of thought in the media has increased.
|
| Has it? How do you measure that?
| josho wrote:
| Read about the Overton window.
|
| As an example of uniformity of thought in media. Have you
| considered why we aren't having debates about open sourcing
| the vaccine? We just take for granted that the right thing
| to do is lock it up behind a couple companies and never
| consider the lives we could be saving by making its
| production immediately accessible to the entire world.
| marshmallow_12 wrote:
| strange that it hasn't been discussed. i think the answer
| may be that open sourcing wouldn't speed up manufacturing
| as the issues are supply-chain based. not sure if that's
| strictly true i'm just suggesting. and open sourcing this
| vaccine will make it less profitable which will actually
| slow down the development.
| kypro wrote:
| I've never understood how I'm supposed to feel about this.
| Successful businessmen are always going to own successful media
| companies in a capitalist society.
|
| Perhaps there is room in the US for a national media company like
| we have here in the UK, but even here most successful media
| companies are still owned by successful businessmen.
| guerrilla wrote:
| I think it would help you see where people are coming from if
| you assume media ownership is power and consider that
| consolidation of power is undemocratic.
| HenryBemis wrote:
| Somehow to add to what guerilla is writing..
|
| Example: I have lots of money. Media is a profitable business.
| I buy some media companies because 'more profit'.
|
| I accept and welcome the above. BUT.. I have lots of money, I
| made it selling heroin, and now the media are on to me, so I
| will 'buy a couple of media companies to counter the noise', is
| completely different game.
|
| I am thinking of Italy's Berlusconi. He had sex parties, some
| had minor(s) [0][1], but it's all good. He owned media
| companies, ad companies, he was the prime minister, he was
| untouchable. He used all this power and control to have sex
| with minors? He wasn't Epstein-grade, but he wasn't a clean guy
| either.
|
| So.. media consolidation helps or not the 'evils'?
|
| [0]:
| https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=195272...
|
| [1]: https://www.smh.com.au/world/second-minor-at-berlusconi-
| part...
| kypro wrote:
| I agree with this and I think you seem to be acknowledging
| that the word "billionaire" in this article is irrelevant? My
| issue is that it's being used here as if the reader should
| care that rich people own media companies.
|
| Perhaps the article should be titled, "These 15 [bad people]
| Own America's News Media Companies", because as you point
| out, it's okay for rich people to own successful media
| companies, but that sometimes people with bad motives who are
| rich enough to own a media company do so.
|
| I was being critical of the framing of the article - I
| understand why people are critical of the individuals and the
| motivations of those who own media companies.
| A12-B wrote:
| Media should not be centralised
| er4hn wrote:
| I think this is the correct answer. Any business where there
| is a lack of competition tends towards negative monopolistic
| behaviors. Monopolies tend to not be good for consumers with
| knock-on effects for society. If gas (standard oil, for
| example) is a monopoly then consumers experience inflated
| prices. If media has a lack of competition consumers are told
| a point of view that they believe over time due to a lack of
| alternatives.
| rogerdickey wrote:
| Do we know how much control owners of media companies have over
| the media they produce, in practice?
| jimmytidey wrote:
| It's not that they march into the news room and tell everyone
| what to write.
|
| That's not how power works. The point is that people will write
| in a particular way if they believe it 's what the owner wants.
| guerrilla wrote:
| They have complete control since they hire the people ... who
| hire the people who make those decisions. They won't hire
| people ... who hire people who don't do what they want. You can
| bake the bias right into the company without ever having to
| issue an editorial order.
| [deleted]
| paul7986 wrote:
| After seeing what Theil did it made me look at the world slightly
| differently in a more open way that money and those with a lot of
| it could be behind so many things in our society from politics to
| whatever. Everything can be bought/manipulated/etc based on the
| desires of the richest people whether they are open about it or
| not. Thus, I don't believe much of what I see and read especially
| in politics.
| chrispeel wrote:
| The Salt Lake Tribune was turned into a 501(c)(3) non-profit a
| couple of years ago. Obviously the Salt Lake market will be
| ignored by people such as the author of this article; it would be
| super interesting if a major market media company went this
| route.
| cj wrote:
| NPR comes to mind.
| duxup wrote:
| I'd like to see how this has or hasn't changed over time and how
| much 'media' there is to own and etc...
| idownvoted wrote:
| _" In Russia or China the state runs the media, in the US the
| media runs the state"_
|
| Apart from Sheldon and Rupert not a single name strikes me as
| significantly non-progressive. Sheldon has passed away, Rupert is
| going to be not to far in the future and his heir is decidedly in
| the opposite camp (maxed out his legal spending cap for donations
| to Biden's campaign).
| AndrewBissell wrote:
| Perhaps if you equate "progressive" with "supporting the
| Democratic Party," but that's about the extent of the bona
| fides of most of the others.
| relieferator wrote:
| What about Turner/Warner & cnn?
| mtmail wrote:
| Which billionaire is behind WarnerMedia (now AT&T)?
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| https://www.investopedia.com/articles/insights/052516/top-4-.
| ..
| dnissley wrote:
| No billionaires here, interestingly enough.
| Gupie wrote:
| Putin controls Russian media for the same reasons billionaires
| control American media. Neither are democratic. Whoever controls
| the media controls the electorate.
| breck wrote:
| Agreed. We need to pass an amendment and
| #AbolishImaginaryProperty (#EndCopyright and #EndPatents).
| #LiberateIdeas so the people can exchange information p2p, we
| stop subsidizing lies, and we can have decentralized
| intelligence.
| BalinKing wrote:
| I could be convinced that intellectual property shouldn't be
| protected by the government, but how does that help with the
| current consolidation of media?
| vmception wrote:
| That's pretty cool. I want that power. New stretch goal!
| naebother wrote:
| While social media is owned by what 5-6 billionaires?
| azinman2 wrote:
| Difference is they don't create or license the content.
| pstrateman wrote:
| If you have enough users writing enough content then you
| don't need to write the content yourself.
|
| Simply delete the things you disagree with to control the
| narrative.
|
| It's barely different then writing it yourself.
| Lichtso wrote:
| But they select it. Which, in today's world were almost
| everything that is imaginable is created, is basically the
| same.
| fsflover wrote:
| This is why it's important to support distributed alternatives:
| https://the-federation.info/.
| jC6fhrfHRLM9b3 wrote:
| Not user friendly = nobody is going to use this
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-02-14 23:01 UTC)