The magic of Mickey Mouse works... The world's largest media conglomerate, The Walt Disney Company has the ABC television network and 10 broadcast stations. It also has a portfolio of cable networks like the Disney Channel and ABC networks. Additionally, Walt Disney Studios produces films, while its Marvel Entertainment is a top comic book publisher

Advantages and Disadvantages of Media Consolidation

Media for the Consumers What works for the consumers, works in the media. Like any other business, the purpose of the media is to earn profit and the only way they can do so, is by providing the viewers with whatever they want. So something that is popular in media stays on, while others are just chucked out. Since people are responsible for what appears in the media, it is assumed that quality media wins. Minimal Government Control If the media is consolidated, and it is people who make choices of what they want to see, the government control is minimal. The Advantage of Converging Technologies According to pro consolidation arguments, due to converging technologies the media houses are fueled by the desire to reach consumers in different and often innovative ways. This allows the user to get a phone, TV and internet from a single company, and pay a single competitively priced bill, instead of three different bills. The competition among the few media houses also ensures better and lower prices for the consumers. Diversification The diversification argument by the media houses says that with consolidation there is lesser investment risk. Therefore, a bad phase by a subsidiary of the media conglomerate can be counterbalanced by more profitable ventures. Meanwhile, the pro consolidation voice also argues that with diversification there are a number of TV channels, movie productions, newspapers, radio or the Internet offered by companies. Thus every niche is catered for, and every voice is heard.

Lack of Competing Viewpoints and Perspectives One of the biggest fears in the minds of those opposing media consolidation is that the large media houses will silence alternate views, which can then lead to a decline in democratic viewpoints. It is staggering to imagine that only a handful of media houses cater to billions of viewers. They are responsible for controlling all aspects of the industry, from creation and production to delivery. This has led to lack of meaningful content and alternate viewpoints in the media. So, every channel you tune into expresses the same opinions. There is marked censorship of content, especially if it is too controversial. The lack of diversity is a direct result of monopoly in the market, and little or no healthy market-based competition. Money Vs. Public Interest The lack of adequate competition also means that media houses now, run after money instead of serving public interest. Since every media house is now ensured of a large global audience, the focus shifts from providing quality services to getting more money. Innovative or risky ideas are now squelched in favor of 'tried and tested' methods. Moreover, with less competition, the media houses charge more and, due to the lack of alternatives, the consumer has to pay. Focus on Advertisers The commercially driven media is loyal to their sponsors and advertisers, not to the viewers. There is minimal interest in journalism and public affairs, and more concentration of lucrative genres that do quite well. As the CEO of Westinghouse put it aptly "We are here to serve advertisers. That is our raison d'être." Under-representation of Minorities and Women There is a vast under-representation of women and people of color in media. Even though women consist of 51 % of the US population, they hold less than 7 percent of all TV and radio station licenses. There is also a lack of accurate coverage and diverse programming related to women and minorities in the media. Biased Political Views Large media houses are also blamed for their biased political views. A well-known supporter of the Republican party is the media tycoon Rupert Murdoch. In 2010, Murdoch's News Corp. made a $1 million donation to the Republican Governors Association. Of course, the company defended this. Jack Horner, a spokesman for News Corp. said "It's patently false that a corporate donation would have any bearing on our news-gathering activities at Fox News or any other of our properties." This is not an unusual event however. Media companies are known to support candidates and political parties. When donations of this magnitude are made, it affects and influences the content in the media as well. Less Local News With the monopoly of large media businesses, the local news takes a backseat. With cross-owned media there was a marked production of total news produced locally.