Chomsky's Propoganda Model
Chomsky’s Propaganda Model
5 Filters
- Ownership
Concentrated
ownership, owner wealth and profit-orientation of the dominant mass-media
firms. Corporate media firms share common interests with other sectors of the
economy, and therefore have a real stake in maintaining an economic and
political climate that is conducive to their profitability. They are unlikely
to be critical of economic or political policies that directly benefit them. Herman and Chomsky
argue that since mainstream media outlets are currently either large corporations or part
of conglomerates (e.g.Westinghouse or General Electric), the information
presented to the public will be biased with respect to these interests. Such
conglomerates frequently extend beyond traditional media fields and thus have
extensive financial interests that may be endangered when certain information
is publicized. According to this reasoning, news items that most endanger the
corporate financial interests of those who own the media will face the greatest
bias and censorship.
- Advertising
The second filter of the propaganda model is funding generated
through advertising. Most newspapers have to attract
advertising in order to cover the costs of production; without it, they would
have to increase the price of their newspaper. There is fierce competition
throughout the media to attract advertisers. The product is composed of the affluent
readers who buy the newspaper—who also comprise the educated decision-making
sector of the population—while the actual clientele served by the newspaper
includes the businesses that pay to advertise their goods. According to this
filter, the news is "filler" to get privileged readers to see the
advertisements which makes up the content and will thus take whatever form is
most conducive to attracting educated decision-makers. Stories that conflict
with their "buying mood", it is argued, will tend to be marginalized
or excluded, along with information that presents a picture of the world that
collides with advertisers' interests. The theory argues that the people buying
the newspaper are the product which is sold to the businesses that buy
advertising space; the news has only a marginal role as the product
- Sourcing
The third filter relates to the sourcing of mass media news. Even
large media corporations such as the BBC cannot
afford to place reporters everywhere. They concentrate their resources where
news stories are likely to happen: the
House, the Pentagon, 10
Downing Street and other central news "terminals". Although
British newspapers may occasionally complain about the
"spin-doctoring" of New
Labour, for example, they are dependent upon the pronouncements of
"the Prime Minister's personal spokesperson" for government news.
Business corporations and trade organizations are also trusted sources of
stories considered newsworthy. Editors and journalists who offend these
powerful news sources, perhaps by questioning the veracity or bias of the
furnished material, can be threatened with the denial of access to their media
life-blood - fresh news. Thus,
the media has become reluctant to run articles that will harm corporate
interests that provide them with the resources that they depend upon. This
relationship also gives rise to a "moral division of labor", in which
"officials have and give the facts" and "reporters merely get
them". Journalists are then supposed to adopt an uncritical attitude that
makes it possible for them to accept corporate values without experiencing cognitive dissonance.
- Flack
The fourth filter is 'flack', described by Herman and Chomsky as
'negative responses to a media statement or [TV or radio] program. It may take
the form of letters, telegrams, phone calls, petitions, lawsuits, speeches and
Bills before Congress and other modes of complaint, threat and punitive
action'. Business organizations regularly come together to form flak machines.
An example is the US-based Global Climate Coalition (GCC)
- comprising fossil fuel and automobile companies such as Exxon, Texaco and
Ford. The GCC was started up by Burson-Marsteller, one of the world's largest
public relations companies, to attack the credibility of climate scientists and
'scare stories' about global warming. The term "flak" has been used
to describe what Chomsky and Herman see as efforts to discredit organizations
or individuals who disagree with or cast doubt on the prevailing assumptions
which Chomsky and Herman view as favorable to established power (e.g.,
"The Establishment"). Unlike the first three
"filtering" mechanisms—which are derived from analysis of market
mechanisms—flak is characterized by concerted efforts to manage public
information.
- Anti-Communism
& Fear
The final news filter that Herman and Chomsky identified was 'anti-communism'. Manufacturing Consent was written
during the Cold War. Chomsky updated the model as "fear", often as 'the
enemy' or an 'evil dictator'. Anti-ideologies exploit public fear and hatred of
groups that pose a potential threat, real, exaggerated or imagined. Communism once
posed the primary threat according to the model. Communism and socialism were
portrayed by their detractors as endangering freedoms of speech, movement, the
press and so forth. They argue that such a portrayal was often used as a means
to silence voices critical of elite interests. Chomsky argues that since the
end of the Cold War, anti-communism was replaced by the "War on
Terror", as the major social control mechanism. Following the events of
September 11, 2001, some scholars agree that Islamophobia is
replacing anti-communism as a new source of public fear.
Comments
Post a Comment