Search

This article sets out the emergent challenges and opportunities for developing effective and ‘future proof’ policy for regulating media plurality. This analysis is carried out against the backdrop of UK authorities’ 2018 public interest test of the proposed merger between 21st Century Fox and Sky, and the latest data on the UK media ownership landscape. That merger review established important precedents for plurality reform, particularly in its acknowledgement that digital intermediaries are not an inherently pluralizing force and that regulatory intervention is needed to prevent concentrations of agenda power, especially at the level of wholesale newsgathering. The article goes on to critically examine the existing regulatory approach to considerations of whether media mergers are in the public interest, especially in the light of mounting evidence of intensifying consolidation within and across news platforms. This article argues that effective plurality reform must start with new legislation that sets out indicative thresholds and detailed guidance on the meaning of plurality sufficiency. This will enable a proper assessment of plurality outside merger activity and could serve as the basis for periodic reviews, enabling regulators to respond effectively to the challenge of new technologies and dynamic market conditions. We also address problems in the plurality measurement framework developed by Ofcom, namely, the inclusion of digital intermediaries as news ‘sources’ in data collection and analysis. In light of findings from the Fox/Sky merger review, a more effective approach would be to reallocate consumption attributed to major intermediaries based on analysis of the actual news sources consumed via those platforms. Far from privileging intermediaries, this approach will provide a more robust basis on which to bring them into the fold of plurality regulation, namely, through the development of plurality standards for algorithm governance. Such an approach also reflects a new reality in which the interplay of gatekeeping and agenda power between traditional media and intermediaries is not a zero-sum game, amidst growing evidence that major intermediaries are serving to consolidate rather than diversify the news offer in favour of incumbent and mostly legacy publishers.

This article reflects on the BBC’s role in (re)shaping a hegemonic agenda consensus and offers a radical appraisal of its public service performance at a time of unprecedented political upheaval in the UK. It draws on a recent case study to suggest that the BBC’s overarching lean towards an elite and ideological worldview is increasingly exposed, and can no longer be defended with recourse to notions of due impartiality. Este artículo propone una reflexión acerca del rol de la BBC a propósito de la reconfiguración de la agenda de consenso hegemónico, al tiempo que ofrece una evaluación radical de la actuación de su servicio público en un tiempo de convulsión política sin precedentes en Reino Unido. Se parte de un reciente caso de estudio para sugerir que la supremacía de la BBC en torno a una élite y a una visión ideológica del mundo, está cada vez más cuestionada, de modo que ya no puede ser defendida en relación a nociones de debida imparcialidad.

Since the Leveson Inquiry, academic and civil society experts have proposed a range of new limits on media ownership, both ceiling limits and threshold triggers of targeted behavioural intervention. The impact of these limits in the current situation would be relatively minor, even if the ceiling limits were set at the lower bounds of 15% or 20%, and need not necessarily result in enforced divestment or equate to a cap on growth. The BBC should be included in the measurement and monitoring of media plurality, but not in prescribed remedies. Plurality policy should address both individual markets for news and information (newspapers, radio, television and internet) as well as the total media market that extends beyond news providers.

Contemporary democratic discourse places emphasis on accountability as the basis of power legitimacy and the scholarly literature across disciplines has reserved a special space for the media in that process, for better or for worse. But exactly who is held to account, when, how and by whom, remain troubling questions in the study of media, politics and power. Amidst displays of adversarial journalism without fear or favour, how far are powerful interests still able to control the agenda and manipulate outcomes? \ud The research undertaken here set out to interrogate the notion of media spectacle in a different way from which it has been commonly applied in critical media theory. In particular, its intimate association with sensationalism and tabloidisation threatens to obscure the role of spectacle in what are considered the mainstays of ‘serious’ or responsible news. The Sun might still be the most popular newspaper in Britain, and online news the fastest growing platform, but it is the serious news outlets of traditional media – public service broadcasting, broadsheets, weeklies etc – which remain by far the most credible sources of news and information. And it is credibility which holds the key to ideological power.\ud The research involved extensive analysis of archived television news programmes, supplemented by 50 interviews with a cross section of news producers and actors including journalists, news executives, politicians, campaigners, press officers, lawyers and civil servants. The core subject is terrestrial television news in the UK – a public service regulated platform with a longstanding reputation for high quality journalism. \ud My overall concern is not so much with scandal involving official misconduct or misdemeanour, but rather controversies that point to systemic institutional corruption of the kind that transcends individuals and party politics. These controversies are no longer rare exceptions in the contemporary newscape and their existence raises profound questions about the scope of accountability through the media. There has, however, been surprisingly little critical assessment of such coverage. This provided the overarching motivation for the research; a core premise being that only by examining those instances where mechanisms of accountability appear most far reaching, can we gain a new understanding of ideological power in the age of transparency.

Research shows that near-universal digital media access in the United Kingdom has yielded broad benefits for citizenship and democracy. But key areas of concern have emerged that continue to pose threats to independence and diversity. These include sustained financial crises within regional and local media, public service broadcasting, and the press sector at large; acute sites of cross-media concentration; and persistent digital divides in terms of access to “quality” output.\ud \ud This report calls on policymakers to consider new funding options and structures to safeguard the future of public-interest oriented news. It also argues for establishing a Media Commission to research and make recommendations on the future of the news media in the UK.

The Mapping Digital Media project examines the global opportunities and risks created by the transition from traditional to digital media. Covering 60 countries, the project examines how these changes affect the core democratic service that any media system should provide: news about political, economic, and social affairs. Research shows that near-universal digital media access in the United Kingdom has yielded broad benefits for citizenship and democracy. But key areas of concern have emerged that continue to pose threats to independence and diversity. These include sustained financial crises within regional and local media, public service broadcasting, and the press sector at large; acute sites of cross-media concentration; and persistent digital divides in terms of access to “quality” output. This report calls on policymakers to consider new funding options and structures to safeguard the future of public-interest oriented news. It also argues for establishing a Media Commission to research and make recommendations on the future of the news media in the UK., Mapping Digital Media