Media debate Marxism vs. pluralism


Media texts are ‘dumbed down’ to generate mass audiences, they feel they can get more profits by doing this.

The media texts are only there to conform and cater to the audiences needs. Audiences are active but they choose against opposing or questioning what they see. They decide what they want to see.

By having one ownership they do not choose, many people are passive and therefore accept everything, which leads to elitists being in control not the audience.

The media we consume is from a wide variety, it is so diverse that we are in control of what we watch, hear or read. If we don’t read the sun we are able to read the The Guardian ( which is owned by someone different) so we are initially in control of our choices in media texts.

Yet still The Sun has a high circulation and is more likely to be read by the middle/working class. Murdoch is getting his message across political or not.

However the question of influence requires boundaries. It is necessary to consider that whilst Murdoch may own the main media institutions we are able to select what media texts we consume, if audiences choose to read The Sun you proving pluralism and the active audience theory who are actively able to choose their text.

Not everyone is aware that particular elites own a lot of the media, many may not understand what they read. To them a newspaper is simply a newspaper. They are being falsely exploited.

Basically the audience have control over what they read, watch and listen to, nobody can force feed ideologies into their minds but it is easy to sway ones ideas especially if you are an elite like Rupert Murdoch.

Comments:
1. Firstly this debate does not use enough media terminology. Possible words that could have been used are ideologies and monopolies.
2. Theories can be referred to such as the hypodermic needle. ‘And the active audience theory who are actively able to choose their text.’ Here instead of saying ‘the active audience theory’ it should be the uses and gratifications theory.
3. Finally the Marxist side of the debate isn’t as strong as the pluralist argument. It isn’t developing.