World Media Models
Introduction
Media theory is used to mean a model that focusses on the association between media and social reality. Media as an entity has special status like an industry that allocates its goods and services and acquires money while in another way it talks about the society, people, associations and guides on the most vital aspects in a country (McHam, 1998). The criticism media imparts on people, businesses and governments affects them variedly, if the media does not undertake this objective, it is termed to as redundant. The manner in which the media is attributed and managed, its structures and examples will be discussed in this paper through the focus of four major theories that on the whole have a rigid media tendency and its viewpoint in varied societies.
There are a wide range of media systems all over the world, naturally all of these systems can be classified into two parts: the authoritarian media model and the libertarian media model. The other categorized of media systems are variants of these two models. The classical theories in the book by Siebert, Peterson and Schramm says that there are four media models comprising of Authoritarian Model, Libertarian Model, Communist Model and Social Responsibility Model (Daniel, 2004). Practically, the communist model was acquired from the authoritarian model and the similarities between them are numerous. On the other hand, the social responsibility model was acquired from the libertarian model and have a variety of common attributes. Just as there are vast similarities between these models, there are differences between authoritarian model and libertarian model. What follows are some of these differences.
The authoritarian model was advanced in the 16th and 17th century. The major players comprise of Hobbes, Hegel and Machiavelli. The basic structure for this model arises from the complete power of the monarch. In this media model, media has the ability to be owned by the ruler and the leading political party as well as private individuals. This is however, in regard to the nation’s political and economic systems (Friedland, & Kim, 2009). Though the objective and function of media us to back the state and leadership. The owners of the media control of media using licenses, censors, dictatorial power and laws. Restriction is placed in criticizing or passing threats to the power models in place.
The communist media model is to a great extent based on the authoritarian model, though stresses on the joint ownership of media and complete control of media. This model came up in the former Soviet Union at the start of the twentieth century. The theoretical structure of the model arose from Marx and Lenin and went on to be advanced by Stalin and Mao Zedong (McHam, 1998). Theoretically, it is the whole society that in general own media. Restrictions is placed on private ownership of media. More so in regards to Marx’s opinion that media is among the most ideological tool in the country, the media are on the whole managed by the communist party and the ruling structures in place to uphold the communist system as well as the Marxist ideology. Considering that the media’s basic objective in the Western nations is to be critical and manage the power, the basic objective of media in communist nations is to be constructive to attend to the power (Friedland, & Kim, 2009). Characteristically, the Western media-as-watchdog objective is branded as a wicked thought that risks to soil the communist society.
The libertarian media model came from England in the end 17th century and then at a fast pace distributed itself to America much later. The main idea of this model came from Enlighten aspect and natural rights. The model is attributed to Locke, Milton, Mill, Adam and Smith. According to this model, media are meant to be multi-purposed and functioned, as well as oversee the ruling system and the society as a whole, to educate the public and offer entertainment (McHam, 1998). The model is based on certain principles among them; press freedom attribute, market driven process and personal needs oriented service. As the title of this model suggests, the model shows, stresses the needs of autonomy as its basic representative attribute: media are managed by owners in a free market of ideologies; media are managed by regulations; the media’s editorial is self-determined and not one thing is restricted from being published before publication is done.
The social responsibility media model arises a good number of its attributes from the libertarian media though focusses more on media’s social objective as opposed to their autonomy (McHam, 1998). Though, just a limited number of community based media groups in certain Western countries, currently no country’s media structure at the top level is believed to abide by the social responsibility model.
It is from these contrasting ideologies that the authoritarian and communist media models and the libertarian and social responsibility model comprise two forms of contradicting philosophies. Media in the US and China arise from the two extensively varied concepts of media objectives, goals and activities (Li, et al, 1998). The contrasts that arise between media of these nations are not surprising. They are a show of the contrast that the two societies are attributed to as well as the social set up. As stated by Siebert, Peterson and Schramm, a media system is a reflection of the society (Friedland, & Kim, 2009). To a great extent, the contrast in the media system in most cases show the political, socio-economic, and cultural variations in the community. This contrast in the media models is a show of the varied philosophies under which social frameworks and media models are created. This is similarly noticed in journalists’ contrasting attitudes to the objective of the media. In reference to Beer and Steyn, journalists based in both developed and developing nations have varied opinions on the mode and objective of media (Tran, 2009). Journalists located in the western countries are bound to attribute news as an impartial report regarding an activity, while those from Third World countries in most cases attribute news as a statement that has the ability to advance the goals of the government. They go on to stress that an unfortunate thing this journalists from far advanced nations are bound to use similar method to acquire news in nations that are developing just as in theirs, and the same applies otherwise, journalists from countries developing similarly are bound to use similar method to acquire news in developed nations just as in their nations.
However, in all of the varied differences between the two forms of media models, the main contrasts are particularly prevalent in media’s vital, socially independent, free of management by political forces and market rivalry, while the authoritarian media model is contradictory to this, stressing on being subordinate to the ruling political class and the services offered (Li, et al, 1998). On the other hand, the differences in media’s nature essentially leads to varied media codes, valid legal policies, media operation mechanism and media players’ practices. Journalists in many communities are coached by several different media philosophies and undertake their media practices in regard to varied media codes.
Getting to understand and recognize the contrast between these models is indispensable in talking about the objective of media in relationships formed globally. Media experts who are used to one media model philosophy and operation may not have a positive feeling with other media model’s philosophy and procedures (Tehranian, 2002). Additionally, with regard to this differences in the manner of thinking, culture and long-time refinement of a precise social setting, audience used to a single media model’s practice may acquire the feeling that other media model’s practice as not being agreeable.
Conclusion
The media has in most cases been left open to criticism and social experts have kept this debate open as the manner it could be used to elevate the objective of civil society and advance democratic sense and processes. According to the paper, the media can be used to advance and instill democratic tendency in a country however varied they may be. The paper has been able to focus on the varied media model theories on their structures and where they are applied. The changes that these media models bring to a country though varied and other levels similar, offers growth in terms of politics and economic with regard to new information and technologies. This ends up affecting the media industry in varies ways; economic growth and new social and political setting as noted in media contents.
References
- Daniel, (2004). Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press
Friedland, L., & Kim, N. (2009). Citizen Journalism. In Encyclopedia of Journalism.. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. (pp. 298-303)doi:10.4135/9781412972048.n75
Li, H. et al (1998). Image, Perception, and the Making of U.S.-China Relations. Boston: University Press of America.
McHam, D. (1998). Four Theories of the Press. Retrieved on 6th March 2014 from: http://www.class.uh.edu/comm/classes/comm4303/section1/fourtheories.html
Tehranian, Majid. (2002). Peace Journalism: Negotiating Global Media Ethics. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 7: pgs. 58-83. doi:10.1177/1081180X0200700205
Tran, H. (2009). Theories of Journalism. In Encyclopedia of Journalism. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. (pp. 1394-1400) doi:10.4135/9781412972048.n386
