Monopolies have been in the news a lot lately. Last month, a US district court judge ruled that Google had violated antitrust law by negotiating exclusive contracts that made its search engine the default on countless smartphones and web browsers, and the US Department of Justice has accused Apple of similar behavior. Over the past several decades, we’ve seen successful companies aggressively leveraging their success to crowd out (or buy up) competitors. But this isn’t just a tech problem. There’s been a similar trend toward ever-greater consolidation in the media sector, too, leaving consumers with the illusion of choice. 

The rise of mass media: From local to global

For much of human history, most people’s horizons rarely extended beyond their immediate surroundings. They ate locally grown food, worked locally available jobs, and consumed local media. But technological change made it possible to consume media from other locations. First, the emergence of railroads in the early 19th century allowed major metropolitan newspapers to reach beyond their core audience, a trend that would be accelerated by the growing popularity of motor vehicles in the 20th century. Later, the advent of radio and television opened the door to even wider audiences.

Early media tycoons and the birth of regulation

As mass media grew in prestige and influence, news outlets became tempting targets for acquisition by wealthy magnates. William Randolph Hearst was an early example of a media tycoon, growing his audience from 15,000 subscribers to 20 million. There was little the US government could do to stop press barons like Hearst from buying up papers thanks to the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press. 

The golden age of media pluralism

Radio and television were a different story. These could be regulated, and in 1934 Congress created the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and authorized it to grant licenses for the use of the broadcast spectrum. Moreover, the FCC was supposed to be guided by “public convenience, interest, or necessity” when granting licenses. 

Deregulation and its consequences 

The FCC traditionally championed media pluralism, reasoning that the public benefited from diverse viewpoints. In 1949, the FCC established the “fairness doctrine” which held that broadcasters were supposed to discuss controversial issues and do so in a way which accurately reflected differing viewpoints. And in 1975, the FCC instituted a rule which prohibited a single entity from owning newspapers and broadcast stations in the same community. But the late 20th-century shift to deregulation saw the erosion of these guardrails. The FCC repealed the fairness doctrine in 1987, and in 2007 they loosened ownership restrictions. 

At the same time, the newspaper industry was in the midst of a period of prolonged turbulence. Buoyed by success in the 1960s and 70s, many newspapers were eager to purchase other publications, and Wall Street was all too happy to help since the news industry seemed like a guaranteed money maker. The industry relied heavily on classified ad revenue, and when that dried up, newspapers found themselves in dire straits.  

In a world where fewer publications are making less money, local newspapers, radio stations, and television channels can be left with an unpalatable choice between acquiring a corporate overlord or going bust. This creates a vicious cycle that often ends in consolidation. The results are stark. In 1983, 50 companies owned 90% of American media; by 2011, that same percentage was owned by just 6 companies.  

The illusion of choice in modern media and why it matters

One of the most pernicious aspects of media consolidation is that the average person doesn’t always see it. This creates the illusion of choice.  At first glance, ABC, ESPN, Pixar, Miramax, and Marvel Studios may seem like they have little in common. But in fact, they’re all owned by Disney. 

The impact on journalism and content quality

These conglomerates aren’t shy about flexing their muscles. A 2019 study found that television stations owned by the right-leaning Sinclair Broadcast Group adopted a much more conservative slant after their acquisition and often cut coverage of local politics in order to focus on national issues. 

Even if a conglomerate isn’t trying to push a particular ideology, their hegemonic control over the media still hurts the consumer. Rebecca Strong notes that, after BostInno was acquired by American City Business Journals, management focused on quantity over quality. Obsession with lofty traffic goals fostered a clickbait culture, and thoughtful, nuanced reporting became all but impossible when journalists were expected to produce at least 3 or 4 stories a day. In other words, the worst excesses of online marketing are becoming increasingly normalized. 

Navigating the consolidated landscape: solutions for content creators

In an environment like this, it can be difficult for independent content creators to be seen amid the vast amounts of dreck. But Newstex can help even the score. We’re an industry leader in content syndication, and we partner with heavy hitters such as ProQuest and LexisNexis. Countless professionals in academia, business, and law rely on information databases like these because they know they’re a rich source of high-quality content, and Newstex can help you get a space on their rosters. Media consolidation can make it a lot harder to disseminate content since it has led to fewer outlets and stronger gatekeepers. But Newstex can help you circumvent these limitations and reach your audience directly.

Fewer choices, worse options

The recent history of the media has been one of consolidation. What started as a robust, pluralist environment in the 19th and early 20th centuries gradually gave rise to monopolistic tendencies. And while regulators such as the FCC once worked to check these tendencies, the push to deregulate at the end of the 20th century saw those safeguards weakened, paving the way for a system where a small subset of companies controls a large segment of the media. This was further exacerbated by an increasingly challenging financial situation for local media of all types. 

This monopolistic world we now live in is terrible for consumers. While there is the illusion of choice, it’s just that: an illusion. It has also led to worst practices such as clickbait becoming increasingly prevalent, much to the detriment of the people who rely on local media outlets for vital information.

‍