<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: good idea, poor execution
Review: Bagdikian manages to take an important subject -- deserving of sober and careful analysis -- and buries it in a shrill, overwrought and largely useless diatribe. His general thesis, that the mass media are undergoing consolidation antithetical to consumer interests, is beyond serious debate. Yet the book is so bereft of serious analysis and scholarship that the case is hardly to be made out. For the wholly naive this book may, perhaps, open some new vistas. But for anyone who regularly gets past the sports pages and comics there is little here of interest.
Rating: 
Summary: It makes you understand "how it all works".
Review: Now you have a map: it's up to you to decide where to go. "The Media Monopoly" gives you all the elements you need to understand how the mass media "world" works. Your decisions are now informed ones.The author kept his writing short and simple. Well and clearly written, this book raises questions that are to be addressed, sooner or later (you'll find plenty). It explains you why media companies merge; why they have so much power and how they exploit it (to pay less taxes, for instance). How they select editors and journalists: who they fire, who they keep, why - with real cases examined -. It also explains why their big size is dangerous, and it reports a few uncelebrated examples of self-serving behaviour (after p. 39). Here is their power: "In 1949, for example, William Randolph Hearst, head of one large publishing empire, and Henry Luce, chief of another, Time, Inc., were both worried about communism and the growth of liberalism in the United States." Enter "Billy Graham, an obscure evangelist holding poorly attended tent meetings in Los Angeles. (...) Hearst and Luce interviewed the obscure preacher and decided he was worthy of their support. Billy Graham became an almost instantaneous national and, later, international figure preaching anticommunism. In late 1949, Hearst sent a telegram to all Hearst editors: "Puff Graham". The editors did - in Hearst newspapers, magazines, movies, and newsreels. Within two months Graham was preaching to crowds of 350,000." A hint: don't dismiss this example because it took place so many years ago and because it involved an anticommunist: mass media "puff" products, persons, politicians every day. I have to say that here and there I don't agree with the suggestions or with the opinions of the author. As an example (see p. 41) Mr. Bagdikian somewhat condemns intervention of owners into the content of news. I'm an owner of a (small) publishing house, and of course I do intervene in the content of news! It's my job to do that! I also elsewhere don't agree with the author - alas, this is a review and not a critical essay. My point is: please, as you always should do, keep your critical thought well awake when you read this book. That said, it tells you truths that are awkward for you to deal with. If you want to live better your time, this book is a must. Note: I'm Italian, so I'm not able to wander through US bookshops and see what's new, what's hot and what's not. I bless Amazon for its software suggested me this book, and fellow readers for their fair reviews helped me buy it.
Rating: 
Summary: Attack of the Libertarian Media
Review: The cover of this book reports that when Bagdikian published the first edition in 1983, it was dismissed as "alarmist." But he has been vindicated, as the book has reached its sixth edition and the problems he first articulated have become far worse in the ensuing years. The media monopoly problem is far from alarmist. It's alarming. Bagdikian deserves major credit for first publicizing the troubling trend of consolidated media ownership by huge mega-conglomerate corporations. Now we are down to six major media owners. Bagdikian proves that the media have been enslaved to the will of advertisers for decades anyway, as most forms of media make far more money from selling ads than from the members of the public who consume their offerings. But the problem is currently worse than ever as the focus is no longer the public interest, but boosting short-term profits, which has just about eliminated the search for truth or any long-term social focus. The problem with this edition of the book is that the only current portions are the foreword and afterword, in which Bagdikian outlines where things stand today (that is, worse than ever). Otherwise, the main body of the book appears to be mostly the third edition from 1990. This leads to outdated information and conclusions that are a serious problem for such a quickly developing subject. Although Bagdikian is now more than eighty years old, this work would benefit significantly from a thorough re-write of the main text, rather than the piecemeal additions to the foreword and afterword that supposedly indicate a "new" edition. (Note that plenty of other more modern books have stolen Bagdikian's thunder and cover the issue equally well.) Also, Bagdikian is frequently guilty of attention-grabbing polemics and sarcasm while making his points. This is unnecessary as the facts can speak for themselves. Regardless, this book is monumentally important not only for its investigation into inequitable corporate control of the media, but also Bagdikian's great insights into the ensuing political and cultural effects on society. This includes everything from the greater costs of goods caused by excessive advertising (a direct contradiction of classic capitalist theory), to the dumbing down of public knowledge of important social issues. In fact, the modern America media is not liberal, despite what close-minded politicians tell you. It's libertarian in its rush for total profit-driven focus and financial control of those same politicians. The general increase in social apathy and malaise among citizens indicates what is wrong with the mainstream media, and the culprit is the relentless and cruel rush for short-term profitability. Public knowledge is the key to a healthy democracy, and corporations have destroyed that for much of America. Worship your new corporate masters. [~doomsdayer520~]
Rating:
Summary: What would you promote if you owned the media!?
Review: This book completely cured me of activism. It explains all of societies problems so clearly that you will be dumbfounded as to the amazing simplicity of the solutions. With far less sophisticated and pervasive technology, Hitler was able to convince the so called aryans that Jews were infact rodents. How could this be? Media Molopoly explains it all very simply. People form opinions based on the information that they receive. Edward Bernays figured that out in the 20's and coined the term "Public Relations". Hitlers propaganda minister had all of Bernays books on his book shelf. The process is simple and effective. Our system of gov't is based on the transmission of misinformation. This book reveals things like that, and quite frankly, the book is just about as valuable as a 4 year college degree. It's the most important book i've ever read.
Rating:
Summary: A frightening picture of increasing media concentration
Review: When Bagdikian wrote his first edition of "The Media Monopoly" in 1983, noting that just 50 corporations controlled over half of the media outlets in the United States, many called him an alarmist. Now in its fifth edition, Bagdikian is able to give (uhappily, I'm sure) his critics a resounding "I told you so" by noting that the number of media-monsters dominating over half of America's media landscape has shrunk from 50 to ten.The situation that Bagdikian describes is so dire that it makes one wistful for the good old days of those orginal 50 corporations in 1983.Bagdikian makes a clear and effective case demonstrating how this media concentration subverts democracy. "The Media Monopoly" is an important book that deserves to be read by anyone who thinks that our 500-channel cable universe and the Internet mean that we are living in a fully-informed, democratic society. I look forward to any potential sixth edition of "The Media Monopoly" with dread. Review by Richard Huffman
<< 1 >>
|
