Concentration of media ownership

Concentration of media ownership

Concentration of media ownership (also known as media consolidation or media convergence) refers to a process whereby progressively fewer individuals or organizations control increasing shares of the mass media.[1] Contemporary research demonstrates increasing levels of consolidation, with many media industries already highly concentrated and dominated by a very small number of firms.[2][3]



Media mergers are a result of one media related company buying another company for control of their resources in order to increase revenues and viewership. As information and entertainment become a major part of our culture, media companies have been creating ways to become more efficient in reaching viewers and turning a profit. Successful media companies usually buy out other companies to make them more powerful, profitable, and able to reach a larger viewing audience. Media Mergers have become more prevalent in recent years, which has people wondering about the negative effects that could be caused by media ownership becoming more concentrated. Such negative effects that could come into play are lack of competition and diversity as well as biased political views.[4]

Media oligopoly

An oligopoly is when a few firms dominate a market.[5] When the larger scale media companies buyout the more smaller-scaled or local companies they become more powerful within the market. As they continue to eliminate their business competition through buyouts or forcing them out (because they lack the resources or finances) the companies left dominate the media industry and create a media oligopoly.[6]

Elimination of net neutrality

Net neutrality is also at stake when media mergers are occurring. Net neutrality involves a lack of restrictions on content on the internet, however, with big businesses supporting campaigns financially they tend to have influence over political issues, which can translate into their mediums. These big businesses that also have control over internet usage or the airwaves could possibly make the content available biased from their political stand point or they could restrict usage for conflicting political views, therefore eliminating Net Neutrality.[7]

Debates and issues

Concentration of media ownership is very frequently seen as a problem of contemporary media and society.[8][9][10] When media ownership is concentrated in one or more of the ways mentioned above, a number of undesirable consequences follow, including the following:

  • Commercially driven, ultra-powerful mass market media is primarily loyal to sponsors, i.e. advertisers and government rather than to the public interest.
  • Only a few companies representing the interests of a minority elite control the public airwaves
  • Healthy, market-based competition is absent, leading to slower innovation and increased prices.

Diversity of viewpoints

It is important to elaborate upon the issue of media consolidation and its effect upon the diversity of information reaching a particular market. Critics of consolidation raise the issue of whether monopolistic or oligopolistic control of a local media market can be fully accountable and dependable in serving the public interest.

Freedom of the press and editorial independence

On the local end, reporters have often seen their stories refused or edited beyond recognition. An example would be the repeated refusal of networks to air "ads" from anti-war advocates to liberal groups like, or religious groups like the United Church of Christ, regardless of factual basis. Journalists and their reports may be directly sponsored by parties who are the subject of their journalism leading to reports which actually favor the sponsor, have that appearance, or are simply a repetition of the sponsors opinion. [3][unreliable source?]

Consequently, if the companies dominating a media market choose to suppress stories that do not serve their interests, the public suffers, since they are not adequately informed of some crucial issues that may affect them.

Concern among academia rests in the notion that the purpose of the first amendment to the US constitution was to encourage a free press as political agitator evidenced by the famous quote from US President Thomas Jefferson, "The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure." [4]. Freedom of the press has long been combated by large media companies, but their objections have just as long been dismissed by the supreme courts. [11]


One explanation for the cause of the concentration of media ownership is a shift to neoliberal deregulation policies, which is a market-driven approach. Deregulation effectively removes governmental barriers to allow for the commercial exploitation of media. Motivation for media firms to merge includes increased profit-margins, reduced risk and maintaining a competitive edge. In contrast to this, those who support deregulation have argued that cultural trade barriers and regulations harm consumers and domestic support in the form of subsidies hinders countries to develop their own strong media firms. The opening of borders is more beneficial to countries than maintaining protectionist regulations.[12]

Critics of media deregulation and the resulting concentration of ownership fear that such trends will only continue to reduce the diversity of information provided, as well as to reduce the accountability of information providers to the public. The ultimate consequence of consolidation, critics argue, is a poorly-informed public, restricted to a reduced array of media options that offer only information that does not harm the media oligopoly's growing range of interests.[13]

For those critics, media deregulation is a dangerous trend, facilitating an increase in concentration of media ownership, and subsequently reducing the overall quality and diversity of information communicated through major media channels. Increased concentration of media ownership can lead to the censorship of a wide range of critical thought. [14]


Another concern is that consolidated media is not flexible enough to serve local communities in case of emergency. This happened in Minot, North Dakota, in 2002, after a train filled with anhydrous ammonia derailed (see Minot train derailment). None of the leading radio stations in Minot carried information on the derailment or evacuation procedures, largely because they were all owned by Clear Channel Communications and received automated feeds from the corporate headquarters in San Antonio, Texas. 1600 people were injured and one died [15][unreliable source?]

Determinants of media pluralism

Size and wealth of the market

“Within any free market economy, the level of resources available for the provision of media will be constrained principally by the size and wealth of that economy, and the propensity of its inhabitants to consume media.” [Gillian Doyle; 2002:15] Those countries that have a relatively large market, like the United Kingdom, France or Spain have more financial background to support diversity of output and have the ability to keep more media companies in the market (as they are there to make profit). More diverse output and fragmented ownership will, obviously, support pluralism. In contrast, small markets like Ireland or Hungary suffer from the absence of the diversity of output given in countries with bigger markets. It means that “support for the media through direct payment” and “levels of consumers expenditure”, furthermore “the availability of advertising support” [Gillian Doyle; 2002:15] are less in these countries, due to the low number of audience. Overall, the size and wealth of the market determine the diversity of both media output and media ownership.

Diversity of suppliers/owners

From the previous paragraph can be assumed that size/wealth of the market have a very strong relation to the diversity of supplier. If the first is not given (wealthy market) then it is difficult to achieve fragmented supplier system. Diversity of suppliers refers to those heterogeneous independent organizations that are involved in media production and to the common ownership as well. The more various suppliers there are, the better for pluralism is. However, “the more powerful individual suppliers become, the greater the potential threat to pluralism.” [16][verification needed]

Consolidation of resources

The consolidation of cost functions and cost-sharing. Cost-sharing is a common practice in monomedia and cross media. For example, “for multi-product television or radio broadcasters, the more homogeneity possible between different services held in common ownership (or the more elements within a programme schedule which can be shared between ’different’ stations), the greater the opportunity to reap economies.” [17][verification needed] Though the main concern of pluralism is that different organization under different ownership may buy the same e.g. news stories from the same news-supplier agency. In the UK, the biggest news-supplier is The Press Association (PA). Here is a quoted text from PA web site: “The Press Association supplies services to every national and regional daily newspaper, major broadcasters, online publishers and a wide range of commercial organisations.” Overall, in a system where all different media organizations gather their stories from the same source, then we can’t really call that system pluralist. That is where diversity of output comes in.[18]

Concentration of media ownership globally

Globally, large media conglomerates include, National Amusements, Viacom, CBS Corporation, Time Warner, News Corp, Bertelsmann AG, Sony, General Electric, Vivendi SA, The Walt Disney Company, Hearst Corporation, Organizações Globo and Lagardère Group.[8][9][10]

As of 2010, The Walt Disney Company is the world's largest media conglomerate, with News Corporation, Time Warner and Viacom ranking second, third and fourth respectively.[19]

Concentration of media ownership in particular nations


Controls over media ownership in Australia are laid down in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992,[20] administered by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA). Even with laws in place Australia has a high concentration of media ownership. Ownership of national and the newspapers of each capital city are dominated by two corporations, Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation, (which was founded in Adelaide) and John Fairfax Holdings.These two corporations along with West Australian Newspapers and the Harris Group work together to create Australian Associated Press which distributes the news and then sells it on to other outlets such as the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Although much of the everyday main stream news is drawn from the Australian Associated Press all the privately owned media outlets still compete with each other for exclusive Pop culture news. Rural and regional media is dominated by Rural Press Limited which is owned also by John Fairfax Holdings, with significant holdings in all states and territories. Daily Mail and General Trust operate the DMG Radio Australia commercial radio networks in metropolitan and regional areas of Australia. Formed in 1996, it has since become one of the largest radio media companies in the country. The company currently own more than 60 radio stations across New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland and Western Australia.

There are rules governing foreign ownership of Australian media and these rules were being considered for loosening by the former Howard Government.

According to Reporters Without Borders in 2004, Australia is in 41st position on a list of countries ranked by Press Freedom; well behind New Zealand (9th) and United Kingdom (28th). This ranking is primarily due to the limited diversity in media ownership. The problem has even created a show in itself - Media Watch on a government funded station Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) which is one of two government administered channels the other being Special Broadcasting Service (SBS).

New Zealand


Independent Newspapers Limited (INL) formerly published the Wellington-based newspapers The Dominion and The Evening Post, in addition to purchasing a large shareholding in pay TV broadcaster Sky Media Limited in 1997. These two newspapers merged to form the Dominion Post in 2002, and in 2003, sold its entire print media division to Fairfax New Zealand. The remainder of the company officially merged with Sky Media Limited in 2005 to form Sky Network Television Limited.

When INL ceased publishing the Auckland Star in 1991, the New Zealand Herald became the Auckland region's sole daily newspaper. The New Zealand Herald and the New Zealand Listener, formerly privately held by the Wilson & Horton families, was sold to APN News & Media in 1996. As of April 2011, Fairfax New Zealand and APN News & Media have a near duopoly on newspapers and magazines in New Zealand, with Fairfax announcing the closure of the long-running news agency NZPA.

Radio and television

Commercial radio stations are largely divided up between MediaWorks New Zealand and the APN/Clear Channel-owned The Radio Network, with MediaWorks also owning TV3 and C4. Television New Zealand, although 100% state-owned, has been run on an almost entirely commercial basis since the late 1980s, in spite of previous attempts to steer it towards a more public service-oriented role. Its primary public-service outlet, TVNZ7, is to cease broadcasting in 2012 due to funding cuts, and the youth-oriented TVNZ6 has been rebranded as the commercial channel TVNZ U.

Sky Network Television has had an effective monopoly on pay TV in New Zealand since its nearest rival Saturn Communications (now part of TelstraClear) began wholesaling Sky content in 2002. However, in 2011, TelstraClear CEO Allan Freeth warned it would review its wholesale agreement with Sky unless it allowed TelstraClear to purchase non-Sky content. [5]


Broadcasting and telecommunications in Canada are regulated by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), an independent governing agency that aims to serve the needs and interests of citizens, industries, interest groups and the government. The CRTC does not regulate newspapers or magazines.[21]

Apart from a relatively small number of community broadcasters, media in Canada are primarily owned by a small number of companies, including Bell Media (formerly CTVglobemedia), Rogers Communications, Shaw Communications, Astral Media, Quebecor, and the government-owned Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (Radio-Canada). Each of these companies holds a diverse mix of television, cable television, radio, newspaper, magazine and/or internet operations. In 2007, Bell Media (then CTVglobemedia), Rogers Media and Quebecor all expanded significantly through the acquisitions of CHUM Limited, CityTV and Osprey Media, respectively. In 2010, Canwest Global Communications, having filed for bankruptcy, sold its television assets to Shaw Media and its newspaper holdings to Postmedia Network.[22]

Between 1990 and 2005 there were a number of media corporate mergers and takeovers in Canada. For example, in 1990, 17.3% of daily newspapers were independently owned; whereas in 2005, 1% were. These changes, among others, caused the Senate Standing Committee on Transport and Communications to launch a study of Canadian news media in March 2003. (This topic had been examined twice in the past, by the Davey Commission (1970) and the Kent Commission (1981), both of which produced recommendations that were never implemented in any meaningful way.)[23][24]

The Senate Committee’s final report, released in June 2006, expressed concern about the effects of the current levels of news media ownership in Canada. Specifically, the Committee discussed their concerns regarding the following trends: the potential of media ownership concentration to limit news diversity and reduce news quality; the CRTC and Competition Bureau’s ineffectiveness at stopping media ownership concentration; the lack of federal funding for the CBC and the broadcaster’s uncertain mandate and role; diminishing employment standards for journalists (including less job security, less journalistic freedom, and new contractual threats to intellectual property); a lack of Canadian training and research institutes; and difficulties with the federal government’s support for print media and the absence of funding for the internet-based news media.[23][24]

The report provided 40 recommendations and 10 suggestions (for areas outside of federal government jurisdiction), including legislation amendments that would trigger automatic reviews of a proposed media merger if certain thresholds are reached, and CRTC regulation revisions to ensure that access to the broadcasting system is encouraged and that a diversity of news and information programming is available through these services.[23][24]

European Union

European institutions

While the European Union enforces a common regulations for environmental protection, consumer protection and human rights, it has none for media pluralism.[25]

After concerns raised in the European Parliament and by NGOs about concentration of media ownership in Europe, and its repercussion on pluralism and freedom of expression, in 2007 the European Commission released a three phase plan.[25][26][27] The plan is supposed to produce an official communication to state members by the end of 2010.[25]

In October 2009, a European Union Directive was proposed to set for all member states common and higher standards for media pluralism, right to information and freedom of expression. The proposal was put to a vote in the European Parliament and rejected by just three votes. The directive was supported by the liberal-centrists, the progressives and the green party, and was opposed by the European People's Party.[25] Unexpectedly, the Irish liberals made exception by voting against the directive, and later revealed that they had been pressured by the Irish right-wing government to do so.[25]

Czech Republic

In the Czech Republic about 80% of the newspapers and magazines are owned by German and Swiss corporations.[28]
The two main press groups (Vltava-Labe-Press and Mafra) are (completely or partly) controlled by the German group Rheinisch-Bergische Druckerei- und Verlagsgesellschaft (Mediengruppe Rheinische Post).

  • Vltava-Labe-Press (that owns the tabloids ŠÍP and ŠÍP EXTRA, 73 regional dailies Deník and other 26 weeklies[29][30] and that is major shareholder of publishing houses Astrosat, Melinor[31][32] and 100% owner of Metropol[33] and also partly controls the distribution of all the prints through PNS, a.s.[34]) is part of the German Verlagsgruppe Passau[35] (that controls also the German Neue Presse Verlags, the Polish Polskapresse and the Slovak Petit Press[36]).
  • Mafra (that owns the centre-right dailies Dnes, Lidové noviny[37], the local edition of the freesheet Metro, the periodical 14dní, the weekly music magazine Filter, several monthly magazines, the TV music channel Óčko, the radio stations Expresradio and Rádio Classic FM, several web portals[38][39] and partly controls, together with Vltava-Labe-Press, the distribution company PNS, a.s.[34]) is owned by the German Rheinisch-Bergische Drückerei- und Verlagsgesellschaft. This, in turn, owns 20% of the Verlagsgruppe Passau's shares, creating in this way a sort of cartel within the two corporations Vltava-Labe-Press and Mafra, controlling more than 50% of Czech print distribution through PNS, a.s. (26% by Mafra, 26,1% by Vltava-Labe-Press).
  • Ringier the Swiss group, controls in Czech Republic 16 daily tabloids and weeklies (such as 24 hodin, Abc, Aha!, Blesk, Blesk TV Magazin, Blesk pro ženy, Blesk Hobby, Blesk Zdravi, Nedělní Blesk, Nedělní Sport, Reflex, Sport, Sport Magazin) as well as 7 web portals, reaching approximately 3.2 million readers.

Czech governments, anxious not to be seen as placing any obstacles in the way of the country's path to EU membership, have defended foreign newspaper ownership as a manifestation of the principle of the free movement of capital.[40]
The centre-left newspaper Právo is currently the only non-foreign owned Czech newspaper.[40]
The weekly Respekt is published by R-Presse, the majority of whose shares are owned by former Czech Minister of foreign affairs Karel Schwarzenberg.[40]
The national television market is dominated by 4 terrestrial stations, two public (Czech TV1 and Czech TV2) and two private (NOVA TV and Prima TV), which draw 95% of audience share.[41]
Concerning the diversity of output, this is limited by a series of factors: the average low level of professional education among Czech journalists is compensated by "informal professionalization", leading to a degree of conformity in approaches;[42] political parties hold strong ties in Czech media, especially print, where more than 50% of Czech journalists identify with the Right, while only 16% express sympathy for the Left;[42] the process of commercialization and "tabloidization" has increased, lowering differentiation of contents in Czech print media.[42]


Axel Springer AG is one of the largest newspaper publishing companies in Europe, claiming to have over 150 newspapers and magazines in over 30 countries in Europe. In the 1960s and 1970s the company's media followed an aggressive conservative policy (see Springerpresse). It publishes Germany's only nationwide tabloid, Bild and one of Germany's most important broadsheets, Die Welt. Axel Springer also owns a number of regional newspapers, especially in Saxony and in the Hamburg Metropolitan Region, giving the company a de-facto monopoly in the latter case. An attempt to buy one of Germany's two major private TV Groups, ProSiebenSat.1 in 2006 was withdrawn due to large concerns by regulation authorities as well as by parts of the public. The company is also active in Hungary, where it is the biggest publisher of regional newspapers, and in Poland, where it owns the best-selling tabloid Fakt, one of the nation's most important broadsheets, Dziennik, and is one of the biggest shareholder in #2 private TV company, Polsat.

Bertelsmann is one of the world's largest media companies. It owns RTL Group, which is one of the two major private TV companies in both Germany and the Netherlands and also owning assets in Belgium, France, UK, Spain, Czech and Hungary. Bertelsmann also owns Gruner+Jahr, Germany's biggest popular magazine publisher, including popular news magazine Stern and a 26% share in investigative news magazine Der Spiegel. Bertelsmann also owns Random House, a book publisher, #1 in the English-speaking world and #2 in Germany.


In Ireland Independent News & Media (CEO: Tony O'Reilly) owns many national newspapers: the Evening Herald, Irish Independent, Sunday Independent, Sunday World and Irish Daily Star. It also owns 29.9% of the Sunday Tribune.


Silvio Berlusconi, the Prime Minister of Italy, is the major shareholder of - by far - Italy's biggest (and de facto only) private free TV company, Mediaset, Italy's biggest publisher, Mondadori, and Italy's biggest advertising company Publitalia. One of Italy's nationwide dailies, Il Giornale, is owned by his brother, and another, Il Foglio by his wife. Berlusconi has often been criticized for using the media assets he owns to advance his political career.

United Kingdom

In Britain and Ireland, Rupert Murdoch owns best-selling tabloid The Sun as well as the broadsheet The Times and Sunday Times, and 39% of satellite broadcasting network BSkyB. BSkyB in turn owns a significant part of ITV plc and 5% of Shine Limited. [43] In March 2011, the United Kingdom provisionally approved Murdoch to buy the remaining 61% of BSkyB[44], however this has yet to be finalised and the matter will be voted on by MPs on 12 July 2011[45]. In July 2011 the Murdoch-owned tabloid News of the World was shut down.

Daily Mail and General Trust (DMGT) own The Daily Mail and The Mail on Sunday, Ireland on Sunday, and free London daily Metro, and control a large proportion of regional media, including through subsidiary Northcliffe Media, in addition to large shares in ITN and GCap Media.

Richard Desmond owns OK! magazine, Channel 5, the Daily Express and the Daily Star.

The Evening Standard and The Independent are both owned by Russian businessman and ex KGB agent Alexander Lebedev.


In India a few political parties also own media organizations, for example Kalaignar TV is owned by Tamil Nadu's Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi


In Israel, Arnon Mozes owns the most widespread Hebrew newspaper, Yediot Aharonot, the most widespread Russian newspaper Vesty, the most popular Hebrew news website Ynet, and 17% of the cable TV firm HOT. Moreover, Mozes owns the Reshet TV firm, which is one of the two operator of the most popular channel in Israel, channel 2.


In Mexico there are only two national broadcast television service companies, Televisa and TV Azteca. These two broadcasters together administer 434 of the 461 total commercial television stations in the country (94.14 %).[46]

Though concern about the existence of a duopoly had been around for some time, a press uproar sparked in 2006, when a controversial reform to the Federal Radio and Television Law, seriously hampered the entry of new competitors, like Cadena Tres.

Televisa also owns subscription TV enterprises Cablevisión and SKY, a publishing company Editorial Televisa, and the Televisa Radio broadcast radio network, creating a de facto media monopoly in many regions of the country.

United States

In the United States, movie production is known to be dominated by major studios since the early 20th Century; before that, there was a period in which Edison's Trust monopolized the industry. The music and television industries recently witnessed cases of media consolidation, with Sony Music Entertainment's parent company merging their music division with Bertelsmann AG's BMG to form Sony BMG and TimeWarner's The WB and CBS Corp.'s UPN merging to form The CW. In the case of Sony BMG, there existed a "Big Five" (now "Big Four") of major record companies, while The CW's creation was an attempt to consolidate ratings and stand up to the "Big Four" of American network (terrestrial) television (this despite the fact that the CW was, in fact, partially owned by one of the Big Four in CBS). In television, the vast majority of broadcast and basic cable networks, over a hundred in all, are controlled by nine corporations: News Corporation (the Fox family of channels), The Walt Disney Company (which includes the ABC, ESPN and Disney brands), CBS Corporation, Viacom, Comcast (which includes the NBC brands), Time Warner, Discovery Communications, E. W. Scripps Company, Cablevision, or some combination thereof (examples including the aforementioned The CW as well as A&E Networks, which is a consortium of Comcast and Disney).

There may also be some large-scale owners in an industry that are not the causes of monopoly or oligopoly. Clear Channel Communications, especially since the Telecommunications Act of 1996, acquired many radio stations across the United States, and came to own more than 1,200 stations. However, the radio broadcasting industry in the United States and elsewhere can be regarded as oligopolistic regardless of the existence of such a player. Because radio stations are local in reach, each licensed a specific part of spectrum by the FCC in a specific local area, any local market is served by a limited number of stations. In most countries, this system of licensing makes many markets local oligopolies. The similar market structure exists for television broadcasting, cable systems and newspaper industries, all of which are characterized by the existence of large-scale owners. Concentration of ownership is often found in these industries.

In the United States, data on ownership and market share of media companies is not held in the public domain. Academics, for example at MIT Media Lab and NYU, have struggled to find data that show reliably the concentration of media ownership.

Recent media merges

Over the years there have been many Merger attempts, some successful, others not. Over time the amount of media merging has increased and the amount of media outlets have increased. That translates to fewer companies owning more media sources, increasing the concentration of ownership.[47]

Viacom buys out CBS

In 1999, Viacom made CBS an offer of $37 billion to buy them out. This buyout cause a lot of hype around the time and worried many that this merge would not be for the better. People anticipated that this merge would decrease diversity and the quality of journalism because of the increased political influence.[48]


By corporation

  • Among other assets, Disney owns ABC, Buena Vista Motion Pictures Group, and ESPN; it is a partner in A&E Networks, which includes History, A&E, and Lifetime.
  • Bertelsmann owns Arvato, Direct Group, RTL Group (which in turn owns VOX and Five, a part in M6 TV channel, and FremantleMedia North America), and several other companies.
  • In the UK, Daily Mail and General Trust plc owns newspapers including the Daily Mail, Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC, has a 29.9% stake in GCap Media (the owner of Classic FM and other radio stations), and a 20% stake in ITN, and also owns regional publisher Northcliffe Media.
  • Mediaset, also controlled by Silvio Berlusconi's Fininvest, owns 3 out of 7 national TV channels in Italy. Mr Berlusconi in his function of prime minister also exerts great influence over 3 more channels (RAI-owned), thus directly or indirectly controlling almost 90% of Italy's mass media.

See also


  1. ^ Steven, 2009: p. 19
  2. ^ Downing, John, ed (2004). The SAGE Handbook of Media Studies. SAGE. p. 296. ISBN 9780761921691. 
  3. ^ Lorimer, Rowland & Scannell, Paddy (1994). Mass communications: a comparative introduction. Manchester University Press. pp. 86–87. ISBN 9780719039461. 
  4. ^ Shah, Anup. “Media Conglomerates, Mergers, Concentration of Ownership.” Global Issues, Updated: 02 Jan. 2009. Accessed: 21 Mar. 2011. <>
  5. ^ Straubhaar, Joseph, Robert LaRose, and Lucinda Davenport. Media Now: Understanding Media, Culture, and Technology. Wadsworth Pub Co, 2008. Print.
  6. ^ Shah, Anup. “Media Conglomerates, Mergers, Concentration of Ownership.” Global Issues, Updated: 02 Jan. 2009. Accessed: 21 Mar. 2011. <>
  7. ^ Straubhaar, Joseph, Robert LaRose, and Lucinda Davenport. Media Now: Understanding Media, Culture, and Technology. Wadsworth Pub Co, 2008. Print.
  8. ^ a b New Internationalist (April 2001). "Global Media". New Internationalist. Retrieved 2009-10-10. 
  9. ^ a b New Internationalist (April 2001). "Ultra Concentrated Media - Facts". New Internationalist. Retrieved 2009-10-10. 
  10. ^ a b Katharine Ainger (April 2001). "Empires of the Senseless". New Internationalist. Retrieved 2009-10-10. 
  11. ^ Template:Citation book
  12. ^ McChesney, R. (2001). "Global media, neoliberalism and imperialism". Monthly Review 52 (10). 
  13. ^ Template:Citation book
  14. ^ Template:Citation journal
  15. ^[unreliable source?]
  16. ^ Doyle, 2002: p. 18
  17. ^ Doyle, 2002: p. 22-23
  18. ^ Template:Citation journal
  19. ^ - Fortune 500
  20. ^ The full text of the act, Australasian Legal Information Institute, Retrieved 2009-10-24
  21. ^ Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission. "About the CRTC". Retrieved 23 October 2011. 
  22. ^ CBCNews. "Media convergence, acquisitions and sales in Canada". Retrieved 24 October 2011. 
  23. ^ a b c The Globe and Mail (June 22, 2006). "Review media mergers - Senate group urges Grant Robertson and Simon Tuck". The Globe and Mail - republished by Friends of Canadian Broadcasting. Retrieved 10 October 2009. 
  24. ^ a b c Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications (June 2006). "FINAL REPORT ON THE CANADIAN NEWS MEDIA". Parliament of Canada. Retrieved 10 October 2009. 
  25. ^ a b c d e Pisanò, Alessio (2010) Se il pluralismo scivola in fondo all’agenda Ue, Il Fatto Quotidiano, August 16, 2010
  26. ^ [1]
  27. ^ [2] by the Council of Europe
  28. ^ Commission of the European Communities, Commission staff working document - Media pluralism in the Member States of the European Union, Brussels, 16.1.2007 SEC(2007) 0032, p.9
  29. ^ "Independent periodicals", Website of VLTAVA-LABE PRESS a.s.: CV Týden, Tachovská Jiskra, Týdeník Domažlicko, Týdeník Chebsko, Týdeník Karlovarska, Týdeník Klatovska, Týdeník Sokolovska, Týdeník Vysočina, Týden u nás, Vyškovské noviny, Nový život, Slovácko, Znojemské noviny, Týdeník Ostrava, Region - Bruntálský, Region - Krnovské noviny, Region - Opavský a Hlučínský, Region - Karvinsko, Region - Havířsko, Region - Týdeník okresu Nový Jičín, Region - Frýdecko-Místecko, Prostějovský týden, Nové Přerovské, Hranický týden, Moravský sever, Slovácké noviny plus
  30. ^ Company structure on VLTAVA-LABE-PRESS's website
  31. ^ Czech: Website of VLTAVA-LABE PRESS a.s., "About us"
  32. ^ Czech: Město Brno pohledem lidí z různých oborů BA thesis by Michal Kárný
  33. ^ Vltava Labe Press' profile on the Czech Publishers Association
  34. ^ a b Vltava-Labe-Press AS acquires a minority stake in Prvni Novinova Spolecnost from Czech Republic Thomson Financial Mergers & Acquisitions. 08-06-2001
  35. ^ Website of VLTAVA-LABE PRESS a.s.
  36. ^ Company structure on Verlagsgruppe Passau's website
  37. ^ The Czech media landscape - print media
  38. ^ Web page of MAFRA
  39. ^ Company profile. Czech Publishers Association, 2008
  40. ^ a b c "The press in the Czech Republic". BBC news. December 10, 2005. Retrieved 2008-12-13. 
  41. ^ Pre-workshop Report, Robert Schumann centre for Advanced Studies
  42. ^ a b c Jaromír Volek. «The market takes all - Czech Republic: Playing the game of media trumps». Eurozine 2009-03-20
  43. ^
  44. ^ "Rupert Murdoch BSkyB takeover gets government go-ahead". BBC News. 2011-03-03. 
  45. ^ "Ed Miliband will urge MPs to halt Murdoch's BSkyB takeover". The Guardian. 2011-07-09. 
  46. ^ Permisos y concesiones de televisión en México
  47. ^ Shah, Anup. “Media Conglomerates, Mergers, Concentration of Ownership.” Global Issues, Updated: 02 Jan. 2009. Accessed: 21 Mar. 2011. <>
  48. ^ Shah, Anup. “Media Conglomerates, Mergers, Concentration of Ownership.” Global Issues, Updated: 02 Jan. 2009. Accessed: 21 Mar. 2011. <>


Further reading


External links

Supporting Media Deregulation:

Opposing Media Deregulation:

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Игры ⚽ Нужна курсовая?

Look at other dictionaries:

  • Media ownership in Canada — is governed by the CRTC. The CRTC does not regulate ownership of newspapers or Internet media, although ownership in those media may be taken into consideration in decisions pertaining to a licensee s broadcasting operations. Contents 1 Small… …   Wikipedia

  • Media ownership in Australia — is distributed between commercial, national public broadcasters and not for profit community broadcasters. Australian media ownership has been described as one of the most concentrated in the world.[1] For example, 11 of the 12 capital city daily …   Wikipedia

  • Media cross-ownership in the United States — Media cross ownership refers to the ownership of multiple media businesses by a person or corporation. These businesses can include broadcast and cable television, radio, newspaper, book publishing, video games, and various online entities. Much… …   Wikipedia

  • Media democracy — is a set of ideas advocating reforming the mass media, strengthening public service broadcasting, and developing and participating in alternative media and citizen journalism. The stated purpose for doing so is to create a mass media system that… …   Wikipedia

  • Media of Australia — Media in Australia is an important component of the Australian economy. Australian media is widely accessible and caters to a wide variety of audiences. Ninety nine percent of Australian households have a television, and all households have at… …   Wikipedia

  • Media in Colombia — refers to Media available in Colombia consisting of several different types of communications media: television, radio, cinema, newspapers, magazines, and Internet based Web sites. Colombia also has a national music industry.Many of the media are …   Wikipedia

  • Media ethics — is the subdivision of applied ethics dealing with the specific ethical principles and standards of media, including broadcast media, film, theatre, the arts, print media and the internet. The field covers many varied and highly controversial… …   Wikipedia

  • Media imperialism — is a theory based upon an over concentration of mass media from larger nations as a significant variable in negatively affecting smaller nations, in which the national identity of smaller nations is lessened or lost due to media homogeneity… …   Wikipedia

  • Media manipulation — is an aspect of public relations in which partisans create an image or argument that favours their particular interests.[1][2] Such tactics may include the use of logical fallacies and propaganda techniques, and often involve the suppression of… …   Wikipedia

  • Media of Canada — Culture of Canada This article is part of a series History Canadians Canadian identity …   Wikipedia

Share the article and excerpts

Direct link
Do a right-click on the link above
and select “Copy Link”