Home  ›  What Are the 6 Corporations That Own 98 Percent of Social Media in 2018

What Are the 6 Corporations That Own 98 Percent of Social Media in 2018

Written By Sunday, May 1, 2022 Add Comment Edit

Control of mass media

Media graphic showing the concentration of media ownership in the U.s.

Concentration of media ownership (also known as media consolidation or media convergence) is a process whereby progressively fewer individuals or organizations command increasing shares of the mass media.[i] Gimmicky enquiry demonstrates increasing levels of consolidation, with many media industries already highly concentrated and dominated by a very small-scale number of firms.[2] [3]

Globally, big media conglomerates include Bertelsmann, National Amusements (Paramount Global), Sony Group Corporation, News Corp, Comcast, The Walt Disney Company, Warner Bros. Discovery, Pull a fast one on Corporation, Hearst Communications, MGM Holdings Inc., Grupo Globo (South America), and Lagardère Group.[4] [five] [half-dozen]

As of 2022, the largest media conglomerates in terms of revenue are Comcast, The Walt Disney Company, Warner Bros. Discovery, and Paramount Global.

Mergers [edit]

Media mergers occur when ane media company buys another.[7] The current mural of corporate media ownership in the U.s. of America can be described as an oligopoly.[viii]

Risks for media integrity [edit]

Media integrity is at adventure when small number of companies and individuals control the media market. Media integrity refers to the ability of a media outlet to serve the public involvement and democratic process, making it resilient to institutional corruption within the media system, economic system of influence, conflicting dependence and political clientelism.[9]

Emptying of net neutrality [edit]

Net neutrality is also at stake when media mergers occur. Net neutrality involves a lack of restrictions on content on the cyberspace, 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 take command over internet usage or the airwaves could maybe make the content available biased from their political stand bespeak or they could restrict usage for conflicting political views, therefore eliminating net neutrality.[8]

Issues [edit]

Concentration of media buying is very ofttimes seen every bit a problem of contemporary media and order.[four] [five] [6]

Freedom of the printing and editorial independence [edit]

Johannes von Dohnanyi, in a 2003 study published by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)'s Part of the Representative on Freedom of the Media, argued market place concentration among media—whether driven by domestic or foreign investors—should be "closely monitored" considering "Horizontal concentration may cause dangers to media pluralism and variety, while vertical concentration may effect in entry barriers for new competitors."[ten] Von Dohnanyi argues that to "safeguard free and independent print media and protect professional journalism as one of the cornerstones of constitutional republic" there should be standards for editorial independence, better labor protections for professional journalists, and contained institutions "to monitor the implementation and observance of all laws and regulations regarding concentration processes, media pluralism, content diversity and journalistic freedoms."[10]

Deregulation [edit]

Robert W. McChesney argues that the concentration of media buying is acquired by a shift to neoliberal deregulation policies, which is a market-driven approach. Deregulation finer removes governmental barriers to allow for the commercial exploitation of media. Motivation for media firms to merge includes increased turn a profit-margins, reduced risk and maintaining a competitive edge. In dissimilarity to this, those who support deregulation have argued that cultural trade barriers and regulations harm consumers and domestic back up 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.[11]

Critics of media deregulation and the resulting concentration of ownership fright that such trends will just continue to reduce the diversity of information provided, also as to reduce the accountability of information providers to the public. The ultimate event of consolidation, critics argue, is a poorly informed public, restricted to a reduced array of media options that offering but data that does non damage the media oligopoly's growing range of interests.[12]

For those critics, media deregulation is a unsafe trend, facilitating an increment in concentration of media ownership, and after reducing the overall quality and diverseness of information communicated through major media channels. Increased concentration of media ownership can pb to corporate censorship affecting a wide range of critical thought.[13]

Media pluralism [edit]

The concentration of media ownership is commonly regarded every bit 1 of the crucial aspects reducing media pluralism. A loftier concentration of the media marketplace increases the chances to reduce the plurality of political, cultural and social points of views.[xiv] Even if ownership of the media is 1 of the main concerns when it comes to assessing media pluralism, the concept of media pluralism is broader as it touches many aspects, from merger control rules to editorial freedom, the status of public service broadcasters, the working conditions of journalists, the relationship between media and politics, representation of local and regional communities and the inclusion of minorities' voices.[14] Also, it embraces all measures guaranteeing citizens' access to diversified sources so to allow the formation of a plurality of opinions in the public sphere without undue influence of dominant powers.

Furthermore, media pluralism has a 2-fold dimension, or rather internal and external. Internal pluralism concerns pluralism within a specific media organisation: in this regard, many countries asking public circulate services to account for a multifariousness of views and opinions, including those of minority groups. External pluralism applies instead to the overall media landscape, for instance in terms of the number of media outlets operating in a given state.[15]

Media ownership can pose serious challenges to pluralism when owners interfere with journalists' independence and editorial line. However, in a free marketplace economic system, owners must take the chapters to decide the strategy of their company to remain competitive in the market. Also, pluralism does non mean neutrality and lack of opinion, as having an editorial line is an integral role of the role of editors provided that this line is transparent and explicit to both the staff and audience.[xv]

Determinants of media pluralism [edit]

Size and wealth of the market [edit]

"Within whatsoever complimentary market economy, the level of resources available for the provision of media will exist constrained principally by the size and wealth of that economic system, and the propensity of its inhabitants to swallow media." [Gillian Doyle; 2002:15] Those countries that accept a relatively large market, similar the United Kingdom, France or Spain have more fiscal background to support diversity of output and have the ability to keep more media companies in the marketplace (as they are there to make profit). More diverse output and fragmented ownership volition, obviously, support pluralism. In contrast, minor markets similar Ireland or Hungary suffer from the absence of the variety of output given in countries with bigger markets. Information technology means that "back up 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 depression number of audience. Overall, the size and wealth of the marketplace determine the diversity of both media output and media ownership.

Consolidation of resources [edit]

The consolidation of cost functions and cost-sharing. Cost-sharing is a common practise in monomedia and cross media. For instance, "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 tin be shared between 'different' stations), the greater the opportunity to reap economies".[16] Though the main business of pluralism is that dissimilar organization under different ownership may buy the aforementioned e.g. news stories from the same news-supplier agency. In the United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland, the biggest news-supplier is The Press Clan (PA). Here is a quoted text from PA spider 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 unlike media organizations gather their stories from the same source, we tin can't really call that system pluralist. That is where diversity of output comes in.[17]

Pluralism in media buying [edit]

Media privatization and the lessening of land dominance over media content has connected since 2012. In the Arab region, the Arab States Broadcasting Union (ASBU) counted one,230 television stations dissemination via Arab and international satellites, of which 133 were state-owned and 1,097 private.[18] According to the ASBU Written report, these numbers serve every bit evidence of a turn down in the percentage of state channels and a rise in national private and strange public stations targeting the Arab region. The reduction of directly authorities buying over the whole media sector is commonly registered as a positive trend, but this has paralleled by a growth in outlets with a sectarian agenda.[19]

In Africa, some individual media outlets take maintained close ties to governments or individual politicians, while media houses owned by politically non-aligned individuals have struggled to survive, oftentimes in the face up of advertizement boycotts by state agencies. In almost all regions, models of public service broadcasting take been struggling for funding. In Western, Central and Eastern Europe, funds directed to public service broadcasting accept been stagnating or declining since 2012.[20]

New types of cross-ownership have emerged in the past five years that take spurred new questions well-nigh where to depict the line between media and other industries. A notable case has been the acquisition of The Washington Mail by the founder of online retailer Amazon. While the motility initially raised concerns near the newspaper's independence, the newspaper has significantly increased its continuing in the online media—and impress—and introduced significant innovations.[19]

The community-centred media ownership model continues to survive in some areas, especially in isolated, rural or disadvantaged areas, and mostly pertaining to radio. Through this model, non-for-turn a profit media outlets are run and managed by the communities they serve.[nineteen]

In item nations [edit]

Australia [edit]

Controls over media buying in Australia are laid down in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992,[21] administered by the Australian Communications and Media Say-so (ACMA). Even with laws in identify Australia has a high concentration of media ownership. Ownership of national and the newspapers of each upper-case letter city are dominated by ii corporations, Rupert Murdoch's News Corp Commonwealth of australia, (which was founded in Adelaide equally News Express) and Nine Entertainment Co. These two corporations along with Vii West Media co-own Australian Associated Press which distributes the news and then sells it on to other outlets such as the Australian Dissemination Corporation. Although much of the everyday mainstream news is drawn from the Australian Associated Press, all the privately owned media outlets nonetheless compete with each other for sectional pop culture news. Rural and regional media is dominated by Australian Customs Media, with significant holdings in all states and territories. Daily Post and General Trust operate the DMG Radio Australia commercial radio networks in metropolitan and regional areas of Commonwealth of australia. Formed in 1996, it has since get i of the largest radio media companies in the country. The company currently own more than 60 radio stations across New Due south Wales, Victoria, S Commonwealth of australia, Queensland and Western Australia.

There are rules governing foreign buying of Australian media and these rules were loosened by the old Howard Government.

Media Lookout man is an independent media watchdog televised on the public broadcaster Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), which is i of two government-administered channels, the other being Special Broadcasting Service (SBS).

In belatedly 2011, the Finkelstein Research into media regulation was launched, and reported its findings back to the federal government in early 2012.[22]

New Zealand [edit]

Independent Newspapers Express (INL) formerly published the Wellington-based newspapers The Rule and The Evening Mail service, in improver to purchasing a big shareholding in pay Telly 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 rest of the visitor 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. The long-running news syndication agency NZPA announced that it would close downward in 2011, with operations to be taken over by 3 dissever agencies, APN's APNZ, Fairfax's FNZN and AAP's NZN, all owned by Australian parent companies.[23] In 2014, APN's New Zealand division officially inverse its proper noun to NZME, in social club to reflect the company's convergence with its radio division The Radio Network. As of early 2015, Fairfax New Zealand and NZME have a well-nigh duopoly on newspapers and magazines in New Zealand. In May 2016, NZME and Fairfax NZ announced merger talks, pending Commerce Committee approval.[24]

Commercial radio stations are largely divided upward between MediaWorks New Zealand and NZME, with MediaWorks likewise owning TV3 and C4 (at present The Edge TV). Telly New Zealand, although 100% state-owned, has been run on an near entirely commercial footing since the late 1980s, in spite of previous attempts to steer it towards a more than public service-oriented role. Its principal public-service outlet, TVNZ7, ceased broadcasting in 2012 due to not-renewal of funding, and the youth-oriented TVNZ6 was rebranded as the curt-lived commercial channel TVNZ U. In addition, the TVNZ channels Kidzone (and formerly TVNZ Heartland) are just bachelor through Sky Network Television receiver and not on the Freeview platform.[25]

Sky Network Telly has had an effective monopoly on pay TV in New Zealand since its nearest rival Saturn Communications (after part of TelstraClear and now Vodafone New Zealand) began wholesaling Sky content in 2002. However, in 2011, TelstraClear CEO Allan Freeth warned information technology would review its wholesale agreement with Sky unless it immune TelstraClear to purchase non-Sky content.[26]

Canada [edit]

Canada has the biggest concentrated Boob tube ownership out of all the G8 countries and information technology comes in second identify for the well-nigh concentrated television viewers.[27]

Dissemination and telecommunication 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.[28]

Apart from a relatively small number of community broadcasters, media in Canada are primarily owned by a small number of groups, including Bell Canada, the Shaw family (via Corus Entertainment and Shaw Communications), Rogers Communications, Quebecor, and the government-owned CBC/Radio-Canada. Each of these companies holds a various mix of television, specialty television set, and radio operations. Bell, Rogers, Shaw, and Quebecor as well engage in the telecommunications industry with their ownership of internet providers, television providers, and mobile carriers, while Rogers is also involved in publishing.

In 2007, 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 (through a new subsidiary, Shaw Media) and spun off its newspaper holdings into Postmedia Network, a new company founded by the National Post'southward CEO Paul Godfrey.[29] Afterward that twelvemonth, Bell besides appear that it would acquire the remaining shares of CTVglobemedia (which was originally majority owned past Bell when it was formed in 2001; Bong had reduced its stake in the following years), forming Bell Media.[30]

Between 1990 and 2005 in that location were a number of media corporate mergers and takeovers in Canada. For example, in 1990, 17.three% of daily newspapers were independently endemic; whereas in 2005, ane% were.[31] These changes, among others, acquired the Senate Standing Committee on Send and Communications to launch a report of Canadian news media in March 2003. (This topic had been examined twice in the past, by the Davey Committee (1970) and the Kent Commission (1981), both of which produced recommendations that were never implemented in any meaningful way.)[32] [33]

The Senate Committee's terminal study, released in June 2006, expressed business about the effects of the electric 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 diverseness and reduce news quality; the CRTC and Contest Agency'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 enquiry institutes; and difficulties with the federal authorities'due south back up for print media and the absence of funding for the internet-based news media.[32] [33]

The Senate report expressed detail concern almost the concentration of ownership in the province of New Brunswick, where the Irving business organisation empire owns all the English-linguistic communication daily newspapers and nearly of the weeklies. Senator Joan Fraser, author of the study, stated, "Nosotros didn't find anywhere else in the developed world a situation like the state of affairs in New Brunswick."[34]

The report provided forty recommendations and x suggestions (for areas outside of federal regime 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.[32] [33]

Public inquires into the concentration of buying and its touch on upon democracy. The Canadian regulatory framework imposes requirements upon the protection and enhancement of Canadian culture (through regulation, subsidies and the functioning of the CBC). Increasing acceptance of media/news as commercial enterprise in 1990s driven by: hegemony of new-liberalism, role of commodified information technology in economic growth, commitment to private sector "champions" of Canadian culture.

Brazil [edit]

In Brazil, the concentration of media ownership seems to take manifested itself very early. Dr. Venício A. de Lima noted in 2003:

in Brazil there is an environment very conducive to concentration. Sectorial legislation has been timid, by limited intention of the legislator, by declining to include directly provisions that limit or control the concentration of ownership, which, incidentally, goes in the opposite direction of what happens in countries like France, Italy and the U.k., which are concerned with the plurality and diverseness in the new scenario of technological convergence.

Lima points to other factors that would make media concentration easier, particularly in dissemination: the failure of legal norms that limit the equity involvement of the same economic group in various dissemination organizations; a short period (five years) for resell dissemination concessions, facilitating the concentration by the big media groups through the purchase of independent stations, and no restrictions to the formation of national broadcasting networks. He cites examples of horizontal, vertical, crossed and "in cross" concentration (a Brazilian peculiarity).[35]

  • Horizontal concentration: oligopoly or monopoly produced within an area or manufacture; television receiver (pay or gratis) is the Brazilian classical model. In 2002 the cablevision networks Heaven and Internet dominated 61% of the Brazilian market place. In the same year, 58.37% of all advertising budgets were invested in Telly – and in this aspect, TV Globo and its affiliates received 78% of the amount.[36]
  • Vertical concentration: integration of the unlike phases of product and distribution, eliminating the work of contained producers. In Brazil, unlike the United States, it is common for a Television set network to produce, advertise, market and distribute well-nigh of its programming. TV Globo is known for its soap operas exported to dozens of countries; it keeps under permanent contract the actors, authors, and the whole product staff. The final product is broadcast by a network of newspapers, magazines, radio stations and websites owned by Globo Organizations.[37]
  • Cross ownership: ownership of different kinds of media (Idiot box, newspapers, magazines, etc.) past the aforementioned group. Initially, the phenomenon occurred in radio, television and print media, with emphasis on the group of "Diários Associados." At a later stage appeared the RBS Group (affiliated to Goggle box Globo), with operations in the markets of Rio Grande exercise Sul and Santa Catarina. Besides being the owner of radio and tv set stations, and of the master local newspapers, it has two Internet portals. The opinions of its commentators are thus replicated by a multimedia organisation that makes it extremely like shooting fish in a barrel to spread the point of view advocated by the grouping.[38] [39]
  • Monopoly "in cross": reproduction into local level, of the particularities of cantankerous ownership. Research carried out in the early 1990s, detected the presence of this singularity in 18 of the 26 Brazilian states.[40] Manifests itself past the presence of a Boob tube channel with a large audience, oft linked to Television Globo and by the existence of 2 daily newspapers, in which the i with the largest circulation is linked to the major television receiver channel and to a network of radio stations, that virtually e'er reproduces manufactures and the editorial line of the newspaper "O Globo".[41] In 2002, another survey (which did not include pay Television), constitute the presence of the "monopoly in cross" in 13 major markets in Brazil.[42]

The UNESCO role in Brasília has expressed its concern over the existence of an outdated code of telecommunications (1962),[43] which no longer meets the expectations generated past the Brazilian Constitution of 1988 in the political and social fields, and the disability of the Brazilian government to establish an independent regulatory agency to manage the media.[44] Attempts in this management take been pointed past the mainstream media as attacks on freedom of expression, the trend of the political left in the unabridged Latin American continent.[45] [46] [47] [48]

Europe [edit]

Council of Europe and European Union [edit]

Since the 1980, a significant fence has developed at the European level concerning the regulation of media buying and the principles to be adopted to regulate media ownership concentration.[49] Both the Council of Europe (CoE) and the European Matrimony (EU) have tried to codify a distinctive and comprehensive media policy, including on the upshot of concentration.[50] All the same, the emphasis of both the organisations was more on strengthening media variety and pluralism than on limiting concentration, even though they have often expressed the demand for common European media concentration regulations.[50] However, the European Union enforces a common regulation for environmental protection, consumer protection and human rights, but it has none for media pluralism.[51]

Although in that location is no specific media concentration legislation at the European level, a number of existing legal instruments such as the Amsterdam Protocol, the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and actions programs contribute directly and indirectly to curbing media concentration at Eu level.[50]

When it comes to regulating media concentration at the common European level, there is a disharmonize between Member states and the European Commission (EC). Even if Member states do not publicly challenge the demand for mutual regulation on media concentration, they push to contain their own regulatory arroyo at the EU level and are reluctant to requite the European Union their regulatory power on the result of media concentration.[fifty]

The Council of Europe's initiative promoting media pluralism and curbing media concentration dates back to the mid-1970s. Several resolutions, recommendations, declarations by the Quango of Europe Commission of Ministers and studies by experts' groups have addressed the upshot since and then.[50] The quango's approach has been mainly addressed at defining and protecting media pluralism, defined in terms of pluralism of media content in guild to allow a plurality of ideas and opinions.[fifty]

Within the European Union, two master standpoints take emerged in the fence: on the one manus, the European Parliament has favoured the idea that, considering the crucial part that media play in the functioning of democratic systems, policies in this field should prevent excessive concentration in order to guarantee pluralism and diversity. On the other hand, the European Commission has privileged the understanding that the media sector should be regulated, as whatever other economical field, following the principles of market place harmonization and liberalization.[49]

Indeed, media concentration issues can exist addressed both by general competition policies and past specific media sector rules. According to some scholars, given the vital importance of contemporary media, sector-specific competition rules in the media industries should be enhanced.[50] Within the EU, the Council regulation 4064/89/EEC on the control of concentrations betwixt undertakings every bit function of European competition legislation covered too media concentration cases.[50] The demand for sector-specific regulation has been widely supported by both media scholars and the European Parliament. In the 1980s, when preparing legislation on cantankerous-border boob tube many experts and MEPs argued for including provisions for media concentration in the EU directive but these efforts failed.[fifty] In 1992, the Commission of the European Communities published a policy document named "Pluralism and Media Concentration in the internal Market – an cess of the need for Community activity" which outlined 3 options on the consequence of media concentration regulation at the Community level, i.e. no specific action to be taken; action regulating transparency; and action to harmonize laws. Out of these options, the start one was called but the argue on this determination lasted for years.[50] Council regulation as a tool for regulating media concentration was excluded and the two proposals on a media concentration directive advanced in the mid 1990s were not backed past the commission. Every bit a result, efforts at legislating media concentration at Customs level were phased out by the end of the 1990s.[l]

Despite a wide consensus over the thought that the vital importance of gimmicky media justifies to regulate media concentration through sector-specific concentration rules going beyond the general competition policy, the need for sector specific regulation has been challenged in recent years due to the peculiar evolution of the media manufacture in the digital environment and media convergence. In practice, sector-specific media concentration rules take been abolished in some European countries in recent years.[l]

As a consequence, scholars Harcourt and Picard argue that "the trend has been to remove ownership rules and restrictions on media ownership within Europe in order that 'domestic champions' can majority up to 'fend off' the US threat. This has been a key argument for the loosening of ownership rules within Europe."[52]

In 2002, the European Parliament tried to revitalize the efforts on regulating media concentration at the European level and adopted a resolution on media concentration which called on the European Commission to launch a broad and comprehensive consultation on media pluralism and media concentration and to set up a Green Paper on the issue by the finish of 2003. The European Commission failed to meet this deadline.[fifty] In the following years, during the process of amending the Televisions Without Frontiers directive, which was adopted by the EP and the Council in 2007, the upshot of media concentration was discussed, but it did not represent the core of the debate.[50] In 2003, the European Commission issued a policy document named "The future of European Regulatory Audiovisual Policy" which stressed that, in order to ensure media pluralism, measures should aim at limiting the level of media concentration past establishing "maximum holdings in media companies and forestall[ing] cumulative command or participation in several media companies at the aforementioned fourth dimension".[50]

In 2007, reacting to concerns on media concentration and its repercussion on pluralism and freedom of expression in the EU member states raised by the European Parliament and by NGOs, the European Commission launched a new three-phase program on media pluralism[51] [53] [54]

In October 2009, a European Spousal relationship Directive was proposed to set for all member states common and higher standards for media pluralism and liberty 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 greens, and was opposed by the European People's Party.[51] Unexpectedly, the Irish liberals made an exception past voting against the directive, and subsequently revealed that they had been pressured by the Irish correct-wing government to practice so.[51]

Following this debate, the European Commission commissioned a large, in depth study published in 2009 aiming to identify the indicators to be adopted to assess media pluralism in Europe.[55]

The "Independent Study on Indicators for Media Pluralism in the Member States – Towards a Chance-Based Arroyo" provided a prototype of indicators and country reports for 27 Eu fellow member states. After years of refining and preliminary testings, the written report resulted in the Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM), a yearly monitoring carried out past the Centre for Media Pluralism and Freedom at the European University Institute in Florence on a variety of aspects affecting media pluralism, including likewise the concentration of media ownership is considered.[56] To assess the risk that media ownership concentration in a given country may actually hinder media pluralism, the MPM takes into account 3 specific elements:

  • Horizontal concentration, that is concentration of media ownership within a given media sector (press, audio-visual, etc.);
  • Cantankerous-media concentration beyond dissimilar media markets;
  • Transparency of media ownership.

In 2015, the MPM was carried out in nineteen European countries. The results of the monitoring action in the field of media market concentration identify v countries equally facing a high risk: Republic of finland, Luxembourg, Lithuania, Poland and Spain. In that location are 9 countries facing a medium risk: Czech Republic, Federal republic of germany, Republic of ireland, Republic of latvia, Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Sweden. Finally, only five countries confront a low risk: Croatia, Cyprus, Malta, Slovenia and Slovakia.[57] In the monitoring carried out in 2014, 7 of ix countries (Kingdom of belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Hungary, Italia, the Uk) scored a loftier risk in audition concentration.[58]

Pan-European groups [edit]

A 2016 written report based on data collected past MAVISE, a free online database on audiovisual services and companies in Europe, highlights the growing number of Pan-European media companies in the field of dissemination and divides them into unlike categories: multi‐country media groups, decision-making "channels that play an important part in various national markets (for example Modernistic Times Grouping, CEME, RTL, a Luxembourg-based media grouping operating in x countries,[59] and Sanoma). These groups generally control a high market place share in the countries in which they operate, and have gradually emerged through the conquering of existing channels or by establishing new companies in countries in which they were non already present.[60] The four groups RTL Grouping, CEME, Mod Times Group and Sanoma are major players (in the top 4 regarding audience share) in 19 European countries (RTL Group, CEME and Modern Times Group are major players in 17 countries).[60] Pan‐European broadcasters operate with a unique identity and well recognized brands across Europe. Most of them are based in the United States and have progressively expanded their activities in the European marketplace. In many cases, these groups evolved from being content creators to as well deliver such contents through channels renamed afterward the original brands.

Examples of such pan-European groups include Warner Bros. Discovery, Paramount Global, and The Walt Disney Company,[lx] pan‐European distribution groups (cablevision and satellite operators), companies that operate at the European level in the distribution sector via cable, satellite or IPTV. The emergence of major actors operating in this field has been made possible mainly thanks to the process of digitalization and benefit of specific economies of scale.[60]

EU Member States [edit]

Czechia [edit]

In the Czech Democracy most 80% of the newspapers and magazines were endemic by German and Swiss corporations in 2007,[61] every bit the 2 master press groups Vltava Labe Media and Mafra were (completely or partly) controlled by the German group Rheinisch-Bergische Druckerei- und Verlagsgesellschaft (Mediengruppe Rheinische Post), simply were both afterward purchased by Czech-endemic conglomerates Penta Investments and Agrofert in 2015 and 2013 respectively. Several major media previously owned by Swiss company Ringier became Czech-endemic through their acquisition past the Czech News Center in 2013.

  • Vltava Labe Media, a subsidiary of Penta Investments, that owns the tabloids ŠÍP and ŠÍP EXTRA, 73 regional dailies Deník and other 26 weeklies[62] [63] and that is major shareholder of publishing houses Astrosat and Melinor [64] [65] and 100% owner of Metropol [66] and too partly controls the distribution of all the prints through PNS, a.s. [67] which was previously part of the German Verlagsgruppe Passau [de] [68] (that controls also the High german Neue Presse Verlags, the Polish Polskapresse and the Slovak Petit Press).[69]
  • Mafra, a subsidiary of Agrofert (that owns the centre-right dailies Dnes, Lidové noviny,[70] the local edition of the freesheet Metro, the periodical 14dní, several monthly magazines, the Goggle box music channel Óčko, the radio stations Expresradio and Rádio Classic FM, several spider web portals[71] [72] and partly controls, together with Vltava-Labe-Press, the distribution company PNS, a.southward.)[67] was previously owned past the German language Rheinisch-Bergische Drückerei- und Verlagsgesellschaft, prior to its acquisition past Agrofert.
  • Czech News Center controls xvi Czech daily tabloids and weeklies (such every bit 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 equally 7 web portals, reaching approximately iii.2 meg readers.

Czech governments have dedicated foreign newspaper ownership as a manifestation of the principle of the free motion of capital.[73]

The weekly Respekt is published by R-Presse, the bulk of whose shares are owned by onetime Czech Minister of Foreign Affairs Karel Schwarzenberg.[73] The national tv set market is dominated by iv terrestrial stations, two public (Czech TV1 and Czech TV2) and two private (NOVA Television and Prima Television), which draw 95% of audience share.[74] Concerning the diversity of output, this is limited by a series of factors: the boilerplate low level of professional person education amidst Czech journalists is compensated by "informal professionalization", leading to a degree of conformity in approaches;[75] political parties hold strong ties in Czech media, particularly print, where more than 50% of Czech journalists place with the Right, while simply 16% express sympathy for the Left;[75] and the procedure of commercialization and "tabloidization" has increased, lowering differentiation of content in Czech print media.[75]

Germany [edit]

Axel Springer AG is one of the largest newspaper publishing companies in Europe, claiming to have over 150 newspapers and magazines in over xxx countries in Europe. In the 1960s and 1970s the visitor's media followed an aggressive conservative policy (see Springerpresse). It publishes Germany's only nationwide tabloid, Bild, and i of Germany's near 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 endeavor to buy ane of Germany's two major private Goggle box Groups, ProSiebenSat.1, in 2006, was withdrawn due to large concerns past regulation regime as well equally past parts of the public. The company is too agile in Republic of hungary, where it is the biggest publisher of regional newspapers, and in Poland, where it owns the acknowledged tabloid Fakt, i of the nation's virtually important broadsheets, Dziennik, and is one of the biggest shareholder in the second-ranked individual Tv company, Polsat.

Bertelsmann is one of the globe's largest media companies. Information technology owns RTL Grouping, which is one of the two major private Television companies in both Frg and the Netherlands and likewise owning assets in Kingdom of belgium, France, UK, Spain, Czech and Republic of hungary. Bertelsmann also owns Gruner + Jahr, Frg'southward biggest pop mag publisher, including popular news magazine Stern and a 26% share in investigative news mag Der Spiegel. Bertelsmann likewise owns Random Firm, a book publisher, ranked start in the English language-speaking world and second in Germany.

Ireland [edit]

In Ireland, the company Independent News & Media owns many national newspapers: the Evening Herald, Irish gaelic Independent, Dominicus Independent, Sunday World and Irish Daily Star. It also owns 29.9% of the Lord's day Tribune. Broadcast media is divided betwixt state owned RTÉ, which operates several radio stations and tv set channels and started digital radio and television services in the early 2010s, TG4, an Irish linguistic communication broadcaster, and TV3, a commercial television operator. Denis O'Brien an Irish gaelic billionaire with a fortune partly accumulated through the Esat Digifone licence controversy, formed Communicorp Group Ltd in 1989, with the company currently owning 42 radio stations in 8 European countries, including Ireland'due south Newstalk, Today FM, Dublin's 98FM, SPIN 1038 and SPIN Due south Westward. In Jan 2006, O'Brien took a stake in Tony O'Reilly's Independent News & Media (IN&M). Every bit of May 2012, he holds a 29.9% stake in the visitor, making him the largest shareholder; the O'Reilly family'due south stake is around thirteen%.

Italy [edit]

Silvio Berlusconi, the former Prime Government minister of Italy, is the major shareholder of – past far – Italy's biggest (and de facto just) individual free Boob tube company, Mediaset; Italy'due south biggest publisher, Mondadori; and Italy'southward biggest ad visitor, Publitalia [it]. 1 of Italy'due south nationwide dailies, Il Giornale, is owned by his brother, Paolo Berlusconi, and another, Il Foglio, by his one-time wife, Veronica Lario. Berlusconi has oft been criticized for using the media assets he owns to accelerate his political career.

U.k. [edit]

In Britain and Republic of ireland, Rupert Murdoch owns best-selling tabloid The Sun likewise as the broadsheet The Times and Sunday Times, in addition having likewise endemic 39% of satellite broadcasting network BSkyB. In March 2011, the United Kingdom provisionally approved Murdoch to buy the remaining 61% of BSkyB;[76] withal, subsequent events (News of the Globe hacking scandal and its closure in July 2011) leading to the Leveson Inquiry have halted this takeover. In 2019, despite the British government granting formal permission for a new take over of Sky (conditional on the divestiture of Sky News), Fox were outbid by American conglomerate Comcast.[77]

Reach own five major national titles, the Daily Mirror, Dominicus Mirror and The Sunday People, and the Scottish Sunday Post and Daily Record as well equally over 100 regional newspapers. They claim to have a monthly digital achieve of 73 1000000 people.

Daily Mail and Full general Trust (DMGT) own the Daily Mail and The Mail on Dominicus, Ireland on Sunday, and costless London daily Metro, and control a big proportion of regional media, including through subsidiary Northcliffe Media, in improver to large shares in ITN and GCap Media.

The Guardian is endemic past Guardian Media Group.

Richard Desmond owns OK! magazine, the Daily Express, and the Daily Star. He used to ain Channel 5; on 1 May 2014 the channel was acquired by Viacom for £450 million (United states$759 million).[2]

The Evening Standard [78] and former print publication The Independent [79] are both partly owned by British-Russian media boss Evgeny Lebedev.

BBC News produces news for its television channels and radio stations.

Independent Television News produces news for ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5.

Contained Radio News, which has a contract with Sky News, produces news for the most pop commercial radio stations.

Bharat [edit]

In India a few political parties also own media organizations, for instance the proprietors of Kalaignar TV are shut aides of Tamil Nadu'due south onetime Chief Minister Thousand. Karunanidhi. So is also the case with Sun Television. SRM university owner Pachamuthu, a member of Parliament, has stakes in Pudhiyathalaimurai News Channel. AMMK General Secretary TTV Dinakaran, MLA'south close aides run Jaya Tv set. Sakshi TV a Telugu channel in Andhra Pradesh is owned past ex-chief government minister's son and family.

Israel [edit]

In State of israel, Arnon Mozes owns the most widespread Hebrew newspaper, Yediot Aharonot, the near widespread Russian newspaper Vesty, the most popular Hebrew news website Ynet, and 17% of the cablevision Goggle box firm HOT. Moreover, Mozes owns the Reshet TV firm, which is ane of the two operators of the most popular channel in Israel, Channel two.[eighty]

Mexico [edit]

In Mexico in that location are merely two national broadcast tv set service companies, Televisa and Azteca. These two broadcasters together administer 434 of the 461 total commercial television stations in the country (94.14%).[81]

Though concern well-nigh the being of a duopoly had been around for some time, a press uproar sparked in 2006, when a controversial reform to the Federal Radio and Idiot box Law, seriously hampered the entry of new competitors, like Cadena Tres.[82]

Televisa too owns subscription Idiot box enterprises Cablevision (Mexico) [es] and Sky, a publishing company Editorial Televisa [es], and the Televisa Radio broadcast radio network, creating a de facto media monopoly in many regions of the land.[ commendation needed ]

United States [edit]

Contempo media mergers in the United States [edit]

An infographic created past Jason at Frugal Dad states that in 1983, 90% of US media was controlled past 50 companies, and that in 2011, 90% was controlled by merely 6 companies.[83] One of the companies listed, News Corporation, was split into 2 split companies on June 28, 2013, with publishing assets and Australian media assets going to News Corp and broadcasting and media assets going to 21st Century Flim-flam.[84]

Picture industry [edit]

In the United States, picture show production has been dominated past major studios since the early 20th century; before that, in that location was a menstruation in which Edison'southward Trust monopolized the industry. The music and idiot box industries recently witnessed cases of media consolidation, with Sony Music Entertainment'southward parent visitor merging their music division with Bertelsmann AG's BMG to form Sony BMG and Tribune'southward The WB and CBS Corp.'south UPN merging to form The CW. In the example 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 to the "Big Four" of American network (terrestrial) television receiver (this despite the fact that the CW was, in fact, partially owned by one of the Big Four in CBS). In telly, the vast bulk of broadcast and basic cable networks, over a hundred in all, are controlled by seven corporations: Play a trick on Corporation, The Walt Disney Company (which includes the ABC, ESPN, FX and Disney brands), National Amusements (which owns Paramount Global), Comcast (which owns NBCUniversal), Warner Bros. Discovery, E. Westward. Scripps Visitor, Cablevision (now known as Altice USA), or some combination thereof.[85]

There may also be some big-scale owners in an manufacture that are not the causes of monopoly or oligopoly. iHeartMedia (formerly Clear Aqueduct Communications), especially since the Telecommunications Human activity of 1996, acquired many radio stations across the U.s., and came to own more ane,200 stations. Even so, the radio broadcasting industry in the United States and elsewhere tin can be regarded as oligopolistic regardless of the existence of such a thespian. Considering radio stations are local in reach, each licensing a specific office of spectrum from the FCC in a specific local area, any local market place is served by a express number of stations. In most countries, this organization 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-calibration owners. Concentration of ownership is ofttimes institute in these industries.[ citation needed ]

Effect of ownership on coverage [edit]

In a 2020 article, Herzog and Scerbinina argued that CNN's coverage in 2017 of a potential merger between its parent visitor Time Warner and AT&T was "self-centered, cocky-promoting, and self-legitimizing."[86]

Venezuela [edit]

Nearly seventy% of Venezuelan Idiot box and radio stations are privately owned, while only nearly v% or less of these stations are currently state-owned. The remaining stations are mostly community endemic. VTV was the only country Telly channel in Venezuela only virtually a decade ago. For the last decade, through the nowadays day, the Venezuelan regime operates and owns v more stations.[87]

Commercial outlets completely rule over the radio sector. However, the Venezuelan government funds a practiced number of radio shows and Television receiver stations. The main newspapers of Venezuela are private companies that are frequently condemning of their government. These newspapers beingness produced in Venezuela do not have a large following.[87]

Run across also [edit]

  • Calendar-setting theory
  • Alternative media
  • Big Three idiot box networks
  • Deregulation
  • Democratic recidivism
  • Freedom of speech
  • Liberty of the press
  • Gleichschaltung
  • Lists of corporate avails
  • Local News Service
  • Mainstream
  • Mainstream media
  • Media bias
  • Media cross-buying in the United States
  • Media democracy
  • Media imperialism
  • Media manipulation
  • Media proprietor
  • Media transparency
  • Monopolies of knowledge
  • Network neutrality
  • Old media
  • Partido da Imprensa Golpista
  • Politico-media circuitous
  • Prometheus Radio Project
  • Propaganda model
  • Retail concentration
  • State controlled media
  • Telecommunications Act of 1996
  • Western media
  • Transparency of media ownership in Europe

Sources [edit]

Definition of Free Cultural Works logo notext.svg This article incorporates text derived from a free content work. License statement/permission. Licensed text taken from World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development Global Report 2017/2018, 202, UNESCO. To learn how to add open license text to Wikipedia articles, please come across this how-to page. For data on reusing text from Wikipedia, delight run into Wikipedia's terms of use.

Notes [edit]

  1. ^ Steven, 2009: p. 19
  2. ^ Downing, John, ed. (2004). The SAGE Handbook of Media Studies. SAGE. p. 296. ISBN978-0-7619-2169-1.
  3. ^ Lorimer, Rowland; Scannell, Paddy (1994). Mass communications: a comparative introduction. Manchester University Printing. pp. 86–87. ISBN978-0-7190-3946-1.
  4. ^ a b "Global Media". New Internationalist. April 2001. Retrieved 2009-10-10 .
  5. ^ a b "Ultra Concentrated Media - Facts". New Internationalist. April 2001. Retrieved 2009-ten-10 .
  6. ^ a b Ainger, Katharine (April 2001). "Empires of the Senseless". New Internationalist . Retrieved 2009-x-x .
  7. ^ Woodhull, Nancy J.; Snyder, Robert W., eds. (2020-03-24). Media Mergers. doi:ten.4324/9781351309363. ISBN9781351309363. S2CID 241334318.
  8. ^ a b Straubhaar, Joseph, Robert LaRose, and Lucinda Davenport. Media Now: Understanding Media, Civilisation, and Engineering. Wadsworth Pub Co, 2008. Print.
  9. ^ Petković, Brankica (2015). Media Integrity Matters: Understanding the Meaning of and Risks to Media Integrity. Ljubljana: Peace Found.
  10. ^ a b von Dohnanyi, Johannes (2003). "The Impact of Media Concentration on Professional Journalism". Arrangement for Security and Co-operation in Europe. pp. 188–89.
  11. ^ McChesney, R. (2001). "Global media, neoliberalism and imperialism". Monthly Review. 52 (10): 1. doi:10.14452/MR-052-10-2001-03_1.
  12. ^ Bakery, C. Edmund (2007). Media concentration and republic: why buying matters . New York; Cambridge: Cambridge Academy Press. p. 3.
  13. ^ Cooper, M. (2004). "Limits on Media Ownership Serve the Public Involvement". Idiot box Quarterly. 34 (3/iv).
  14. ^ a b "Monitoring media pluralism in Europe : testing and implementation of the media pluralism monitor 2014" (PDF).
  15. ^ a b A Free and pluralistic media to sustain European democracy. The study of the High Level Group on Media Freedom and Pluralism, European Commission, January 2013. Retrieved 14 June 2016.
  16. ^ Doyle, 2002: p. 22–23
  17. ^ Doyle, Gillian (2002). "What's "new" near the time to come of communications? An evaluation of recent shifts in UK media ownership policy". 24 (five).
  18. ^ Arab States Broadcasting Union. 2015. Arab Satellite Broadcasting Annual Report 2015. Available at <http://www.asbu.internet/medias/ NewMedia_2016/text/asbu_report_2015. pdf>.
  19. ^ a b c World Trends in Freedom of Expression and Media Development Global Report 2017/2018 (PDF). UNESCO. 2018. p. 202.
  20. ^ European Dissemination Union (EBU). 2015. Funding of Public Service Media 2015. Available at <https://www.ebu.ch/ publications/funding-of-public-servicemedia>.
  21. ^ Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (Cth).
  22. ^ Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economic system - Independent Media Enquiry Archived 2012-03-06 at the Wayback Motorcar
  23. ^ Stone, Andrew (31 August 2011). "Farewell NZPA, hello iii new news services". The New Zealand Herald . Retrieved 31 August 2011.
  24. ^ O'Sullivan, Fran (2016-05-11). "NZME, Fairfax in merger talks". NZ Herald. New Zealand Herald.
  25. ^ Jdrinnan@Xtra.Co.Nz @Zagzigger2, John Drinnan John Drinnan is the Media Writer for the New Zealand Herald (2011-11-11). "TVNZ and Sky TV besides cosy, says industry". The New Zealand Herald . Retrieved nine Jan 2016.
  26. ^ "Heaven Telly adds to customer base - Business organisation - NZ Herald News". NZ Herald. Nzherald.co.nz. 2001-12-22. Retrieved 2013-04-30 .
  27. ^ Howard, Caroline (December 12, 2016). "Media Concentration In Canada Is Worst In G8: Report". The Huffington Post. Daniel Tencer. Retrieved 2016-12-12 .
  28. ^ Canadian Radio-television receiver and Telecommunications Committee. "Nearly the CRTC". Archived from the original on 20 November 2011. Retrieved 23 October 2011.
  29. ^ CBCNews (2011-03-eleven). "Media convergence, acquisitions and sales in Canada". CBC News . Retrieved 24 October 2011.
  30. ^ Marlow, Iain (2010-09-10). "BCE-CTV bargain remakes media landscape". The Globe and Mail. Toronto. Archived from the original on 13 September 2010. Retrieved 2010-09-xi .
  31. ^ McCurry, Lawrence. "Web Sectional: Media Guilty In G-20". Articles – Dec 3, 2010. Canadian Dimension. Retrieved xiv January 2012.
  32. ^ a b c The Earth 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 Oct 2009.
  33. ^ a b c Standing Senate Commission on Transport and Communications (June 2006). "Final written report on the Canadian news media". Parliament of Canada. Retrieved x October 2009.
  34. ^ "CBC: Feds must examine Irving media empire". 2007-10-12. Retrieved 2016-03-24 .
  35. ^ a b Venício A. de Lima (2003-07-01). Observatório da Imprensa (ed.). "Existe concentração na mídia brasileira? Sim" (in Portuguese). Retrieved 2012-04-08 .
  36. ^ Castro, D. (2003-03-10). "TV fatura R$ 5,7 bi e cresce half-dozen% em 2002". Folha de S.Paulo (in Portuguese).
  37. ^ Ortiz, R.; et al. (1989). Brasiliense (ed.). Telenovela-História eastward Produção. São Paulo.
  38. ^ Schenkel, Laura (2006-09-12). Observatório da Imprensa (ed.). "Formação de monopólio da RBS em SC será questionada" (in Portuguese). Archived from the original on 2013-12-12. Retrieved 2012-04-08 .
  39. ^ Mick, Jacques; Lima, Samuel (2006-08-30). Agência Experimental de Jornalismo (ed.). "RBS e AN: os riscos da monopolização" (in Portuguese). Retrieved 2012-04-08 .
  40. ^ Amaral, R.; Guimarães, C. (1994). Journal of Communications (ed.). Media Monopoly in Brazil. Vol. 44 (4, Autumm ed.). pp. 30–32.
  41. ^ Amaral, R.; Guimarães, C. (1994). Journal of Communications (ed.). Media Monopoly in Brazil. Vol. 44 (4, Autumm ed.). p. 30.
  42. ^ Herz, Daniel; Görgen, James; Osório, Pedro Luiz (2002-03-06). CartaCapital (ed.). "Quem são os donos" (PDF) (in Portuguese). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-11-13. Retrieved 2012-04-05 .
  43. ^ Prof. Murilo César Ramos. University of Brasília (ed.). "Communications regulatory framework in Brazil: media, telecommunication, internet". Archived from the original (pdf) on 2013-ten-29. Retrieved 2012-10-xvi .
  44. ^ UNESCO (ed.). "Liberty of Expression in Brazil". Retrieved 2012-10-16 .
  45. ^ Magro, Maira (2011-01-03). Middle for International Media Assistance (ed.). "Brazil'southward New Communications Minister Defends New Regulation". Archived from the original on 2013-ten-29. Retrieved 2012-10-sixteen .
  46. ^ Rosenfield, Denis (2012-03-27). "Liberdade e regulação". O Estado de Southward. Paulo (in Portuguese). Archived from the original on 2012-06-01. Retrieved 2013-01-01 .
  47. ^ Brant, João (2012-05-17). Maior, Carta (ed.). "FHC defende a regulação dos meios de comunicação" (in Portuguese). Archived from the original on 2012-x-22. Retrieved 2012-x-xvi .
  48. ^ Mansur, Vinícius (2012-05-22). "Assusta-me que FHC assuma a bandeira da regulação da mídia" (in Portuguese). Carta Maior. Archived from the original on 2013-01-xviii. Retrieved 2013-01-01 .
  49. ^ a b Harcourt, Alison J. (September 1998). "EU Media Ownership Regulation: Conflict over the Definition of Alternatives". Journal of Common Market Studies. 36 (iii): 369–389. doi:10.1111/1468-5965.00115.
  50. ^ a b c d eastward f k h i j one thousand l one thousand northward o Gálik, Mihály (2010). "Regulating Media Concentration within the Council of Europe and the European Wedlock". Media Freedom and Pluralism: Media Policy Challenges in the enlarged Europe [online]. CEUP drove. Budapest: Central European University Printing. pp. 229–244. ISBN9786155211850.
  51. ^ a b c d Pisanò, Alessio (2010) Se il pluralismo scivola in fondo all'agenda Ue, Il Fatto Quotidiano, August sixteen, 2010
  52. ^ Alison Harcourt & Robert Yard. Picard (2009). "Policy, Economic, and Business organisation Challenges of Media Ownership Regulation". Journal of Media Business Studies. 6 (3): 1–17. doi:10.1080/16522354.2009.11073486. S2CID 167929232.
  53. ^ "European Journalism - Written report :Statistical review of journalism and media sector in the European Union". Ec.europa.eu. Retrieved 2013-x-06 .
  54. ^ "Council of Europe". Retrieved nine Jan 2016.
  55. ^ Independent Study on Indicators for Media Pluralism in the Member States – Towards a Risk-Based Approach (PDF). 2009.
  56. ^ "Monitoring Media Pluralism in Europe: Results of the second pilot-test implementation of the Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM2015)". Archived from the original on 2017-03-23. Retrieved 2017-03-23 .
  57. ^ "MPM 2015 Market Plurality Domain". March 2016. Archived from the original on xv March 2017. Retrieved 12 March 2017.
  58. ^ [1] [ permanent dead link ]
  59. ^ Rtlgroup - About Us
  60. ^ a b c d Media ownership: towards Pan-European groups?. MAVISE.
  61. ^ Commission of the European Communities, Commission staff working document - Media pluralism in the Fellow member States of the European Union, Brussels, 16.one.2007 SEC(2007) 0032, p.9
  62. ^ "Contained periodicals", Website of VLTAVA-LABE Press a.s. Archived February 6, 2010, at the Wayback Machine: 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
  63. ^ Company structure on VLTAVA-LABE-Printing'due south website Archived Feb seven, 2010, at the Wayback Machine
  64. ^ Czech: Website of VLTAVA-LABE PRESS a.southward., "About us"
  65. ^ Czech: Město Brno pohledem lidí z různých oborů BA thesis by Michal Kárný
  66. ^ "Ročenka Unie vydavatelů 2007". Archived from the original on 17 October 2015. Retrieved 9 January 2016.
  67. ^ a b Vltava-Labe-Press As acquires a minority stake in Prvni Novinova Spolecnost from Czech Republic Thomson Financial Mergers & Acquisitions. 08-06-2001
  68. ^ Website of VLTAVA-LABE PRESS a.s. Archived 2009-04-30 at the Wayback Auto
  69. ^ "Verlagsgruppe Passau". Retrieved nine January 2016.
  70. ^ The Czech media landscape - print media Archived 2011-03-25 at the Wayback Machine
  71. ^ Web page of MAFRA
  72. ^ "Ročenka Unie vydavatelů 2008". Retrieved 9 January 2016.
  73. ^ a b "The press in the Czech republic". BBC News. Dec 10, 2005. Retrieved 2008-12-13 .
  74. ^ Pre-workshop Report, Robert Schumann centre for Avant-garde Studies Archived September 29, 2011, at the Wayback Machine
  75. ^ a b c "Eurozine - The market place takes all - Jaromír Volek Czechia: Playing the game of media trumps". 2009-03-xix. Archived from the original on 5 January 2016. Retrieved nine January 2016.
  76. ^ "Rupert Murdoch BSkyB takeover gets government get-ahead". BBC News. 2011-03-03.
  77. ^ Rajan, Amol (2018-09-24). "Why Comcast wanted Sky so badly". BBC News . Retrieved 2020-08-22 .
  78. ^ Brook, Stephen; Sweney, Mark (2009-01-21). "Alexander Lebedev'southward Evening Standard takeover: Dacre announces sale to staff". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 2009-01-21 .
  79. ^ "The Independent bought by Lebedev for £one". BBC News. 2010-03-25. Retrieved 2010-03-25 .
  80. ^ Verter, Yossi (Feb 10, 2015), Israel election's biggest battle being fought by newspaper tycoons, Haaretz, retrieved Oct 19, 2015
  81. ^ Permisos y concesiones de televisión en México Archived 2011-08-24 at the Wayback Car
  82. ^ Howard, Caroline (Dec 12, 2016). "Telecommunication: Mexico's New Reform | Americas Quarterly". americasquarterly.org . Retrieved 2016-12-12 .
  83. ^ Lutz, Ashley (14 June 2012). "These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America". Business concern Insider . Retrieved ix Jan 2016.
  84. ^ "News Corp officially splits in ii". BBC News. 2013-06-28. Retrieved June 29, 2013.
  85. ^ Steiner, Tobias. "Under the Macroscope: Convergence in the The states Television Market betwixt 2000 and 2014". academia.edu . Retrieved 4 Aug 2015.
  86. ^ Herzog, C; Scerbinina, A (2020). "'Self-centered, cocky-promoting, and cocky-legitimizing': CNN's portrayal of media ownership concentration in the US". Atlantic Journal of Communication. 29 (5): 328–344. doi:10.1080/15456870.2020.1779725. S2CID 225628947.
  87. ^ a b Howard, Caroline (2012-10-03). "In depth: Media in Venezuela". BBC News . Retrieved 2016-12-12 .

Bibliography [edit]

  • Doyle, Gillian (2002). Media buying: the economics and politics of convergence and concentration in the United kingdom and European media. SAGE. ISBN978-0-7619-6680-7.
  • Harcourt, Alison (2005). European Institutions and the Regulation of Media Markets. Manchester Academy Press. ISBN978-0-7190-6645-0.
  • Harcourt, Alison; Picard, Robert (2009). Policy Economic and Business organisation Challenges of Media Ownership Regulation. Journal of Business organization Media Studies. Archived from the original on 2011-07-23. Retrieved 2011-09-05 .
  • Steven, Peter (2004). The No-nonsense Guide to Global Media. Verso. ISBN978-i-85984-581-iii.
  • Amelia Arsenault & Manuel Castells (2008) The Structure and Dynamics of Global Multi-Media Business organization Networks. International Journal of Communication.
  • Bagdikian, Benjamin H. (2004). The new media monopoly . Beacon Printing. ISBN978-0-8070-6187-ix.
  • Baker, C. Edwin (2007). Media concentration and republic: why ownership matters. Cambridge University Printing. ISBN978-0-521-86832-vii.
  • Compaine, Benjamin M.; Gomery, Douglas (2000). Who owns the media?: competition and concentration in the mass media manufacture. Psychology Printing. ISBN978-0-8058-2936-5.
  • Croteau, David; Hoynes, William (2006). The concern of media: corporate media and the public interest. Pino Forge Press. ISBN978-1-4129-1315-seven.
  • Dwyer, Tim (2010). Media Convergence. McGraw-Hill International. ISBN978-0-335-22873-7.
  • Harper, Joe; Yantek, Thom, eds. (2003). Media, turn a profit, and politics: competing priorities in an open up society. Kent Country Academy Press. ISBN978-0-87338-754-5.
  • Hassan, Robert; Thomas, Julian, eds. (2006). The new media theory reader. McGraw-Hill International. ISBN978-0-335-21710-half dozen.
  • Herman, Edward Due south.; Chomsky, Noam (2002). Manufacturing consent : the political economy of the mass media. (Updated version of the 1988 original). New York. ISBN0-375-71449-ix. OCLC 47971712.
  • McChesney, Robert West. (1997). Corporate Media and the Threat to Commonwealth. 7 Stories Press. ISBN978-1-888363-47-0.
  • Noam, Eli Thou. (2009). Media ownership and concentration in America. Oxford University Press. ISBN978-0-19-518852-3.
  • Skinner, David; et al., eds. (2005). Converging media, diverging politics: a political economy of news media in the The states and Canada. Lexington Books. ISBN978-0-7391-1306-half-dozen.
  • Media convergence. The Canadian Encyclopedia. Retrieved 2011-05-02 .

0 Response to "What Are the 6 Corporations That Own 98 Percent of Social Media in 2018"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel