Category: (Book)
12 new, starting at $17.00
13 used, starting at $17.22
Firmly rooting its argument in democratic and economic theory, the book argues that a more democratic distribution of communicative power within the public sphere and a structure that provides safeguards against abuse of media power provide two of three primary arguments for ownership dispersal. It also shows that dispersal is likely to result in more owners who will reasonably pursue socially valuable journalistic or creative objectives rather than a socially dysfunctional focus on the 'bottom line'. The middle chapters answer those agents, including the Federal Communication Commission, who favor 'deregulation' and who argue that existing or foreseeable ownership concentration is not a problem. The final chapter evaluates the constitutionality and desirability of various policy responses to concentration, including strict limits on media mergers.
Your Media May Be ReconstitutedReviewed by Steven Saus, 2008-01-16
In the first chapter, in only fifty-three brilliant pages, we have
a sweeping encyclopedic look at the issue, how the current empiric
framing of the issue misses the point entirely, and a
straightforward argument why we should return to a value-driven
approach.
Unfortunately, the book does not end after chapter one.
Having already demolished the arguments of "the other side" by
showing the complete irrelevance of their underlying values, he
feels compelled to answer their every argument point-by-point. As a
result, he spends the next one hundred and fifty pages going back
over the material from the first fifty, exhaustively dismantling
the statements of his opponents.
In this, he is far more gracious than I. From his rebuttals alone -
and the number of times that he must explicitly point out that the
right wing's arguments completely miss or obfuscate the point - it
becomes obvious that those he is arguing with have completely
different goals.
I am reminded of the many times I found myself debating
creationists. Rather than simply stating that they had different
goals (faith, not science), the most vocal creationists routinely
employ linguistic tricks, logical-sounding dodges, and semantic
logic traps. Their goal was - and still is - not to compare and
test ideas, but to capture the public's mind. Debate, after all, is
more a measure of verbal strategy than a test of an idea's
soundness.
C. Edwin Baker has apparently not learned this, and believes that
his opponents are still acting in good faith. Therefore, he must
believe that they are misinformed or mistaken, and so he rebuts all
their points. Repeatedly. He has many facts and excellent analysis
on his side - but it is the sheer weight of both that is the book's
downfall.
Media Concentration and DemocracyReviewed by Yuening Jiang, 2007-11-11
Great book in excellent condition. Thanks very much.
Baker is a great thinker, not a good writer though.
Concentrating on ConcentrationReviewed by doomsdayer520, 2007-05-04
This book is not for beginners, but will provide much more
intellectual coverage of media ownership issues for any concerned
activist influenced by the works of Ben Bagdikian, Robert
McChesney, and the like. This book can also be seen as a more
technical, but somewhat less illuminating, sequel to Beker's
previous manifesto, the more expansive "Media, Markets, and
Democracy." In this latest book, Baker advances a quite unique
legal/economic analysis while zeroing in on specific matters of
media ownership. Baker agrees with the critical media analysts who
see trouble for democracy in the recent concentration of media, and
here he goes beyond mere criticism into the deeper matters of law
and economics that have caused the problem, and the legal and
economic tools that could potentially solve the problem. The first
chapter of this book is a fascinating economic analysis of the
corporate media and its behavior, and why such trends are having
measurable impacts on egalitarian democracy. The subsequent
chapters debunk claims that media concentration is not really a
problem, or a problem that will be easily corrected by free markets
or the Internet. (Baker's analysis of the politicized and
uncorroborated faith in mythical free markets is especially
insightful.) Baker also provides in-depth coverage of the First
Amendment issues of media ownership, and finally advances several
fairly plausible policy solutions that are based on real legal
precedents and feasible readings of the law.
Unfortunately, this book is not as strongly presented as Baker's
previous works. Here the writing style is highly padded and
repetitive, with excessive previews of upcoming sections and
reviews of previous chapters. Another issue is occasional
quantitative analyses that appear forced and awkward. Also, Baker
builds much of his arguments by debunking other theorists, most
notably Benjamin Compaine and to a lesser extent Bruce Owen, in a
fashion that will probably lead to a ruinous intellectual arms
race. This book will be most useful as a research supplement for
those who have been influenced by Baker's established theoretical
work on media patterns and the health of American democracy,
especially the matters covered in this book's stronger predecessor.
[~doomsdayer520~]
