INDUSTRY - HESMONDHALGH

Evaluate the usefulness of Hesmondhalgh in understanding the extent to which media ownership influences the content of news stories.

Below is the essay that we/you wrote on Curran and Seaton. Take a look at the ideas that are presented about the influence of ownership on content. Write a similar essay evaluating the usefulness of Hesmondhalgh. 

Curran and Seaton argue that newspapers follow the normal capitalist pattern of increasing concentration of ownership in fewer hands leading to a narrowing of the range of viewpoints. They theorise that News conglomerates have successfully defended their oligarchy in the online landscape. 

The Guardian agrees with Curran and Seaton’s concern about narrowing range and loss of quality. On their website, they seek donations explicitly stating that this model of funding allows them to retain a focus on quality and journalistic integrity in the content of their news stories. The Scott Trust Ltd. has always functioned to protect Guardian journalism and content from the control of owners. Conversely, the Daily Mail is owned by DMGT (and billionaire, Viscount Rothermere). In 2019, DMGT followed the normal capitalist pattern of increasing concentration by purchasing The i. Curran and Seaton's work predicts that this would lead to a narrowing of the range of opinion in the content of news stories. However, when Ofcom prepared a report on this purchase, the editors of both The Daily Mail and The i provided letters that assured government that Rothermere had no editorial input into The Daily Mail and that the purchase would not lead to The i (a centre left publication) changing its content to align with The Daily Mail (a right wing publication). This seems to contradict Curran and Seaton, but their theory remains useful as it draws our attention to the fact that DMGT values the ability to reach a wider demographic with a range of content.

By drawing attention to issues of risk and profitability, Curran and Seaton are arguably useful in terms of understanding the way that the content of news stories is shaped by the need to appeal to audiences. However, in prioritising the effects of ownership and control on the content of newspapers this theory may not aid in understanding how ideologies, audience choice or media language conventions may determine content. For example, in January of 2021, Boris Johnson called for a second UK lockdown due to rising Covid cases. The Guardian (a left wing publication) supported Johnson (a right-wing prime minister), presenting him in a positive light, while the Daily Mail chose derogatory images and accusatory language to condemn his decision (a reversal of their usual partisan concerns). While Curran and Seaton may be used to highlight the economic context that justifies these decisions around story content (The Mail catering to its middle class audience and the Guardian maintaining journalistic integrity) they do nothing to help us understand or analyse the way that meaning is/was constructed in these stories.

Another aspect of Curran and Seaton’s work is their dismissal of the internet as offering diversity of voices outside of the news oligopoly. They suggest that constraints like nationalism and state censorship still affect the content of news stories and there are indications that this may be true in countries like China and Russia. However, in the West, freedom of the press is enshrined in law, and there is an increasing demand for diversity of opinion, especially online. The Guardian prides itself on the diversity of opinion expressed in its content and in 2018 appointed Joseph Harker to the role of senior editor in charge of diversity and development. We might therefore argue that this somewhat invalidates the theory. Moreover, theorists like Jenkins and Shirky point to the increasingly participatory nature of online media, including the rise of citizen journalism. While Curran and Seaton’s work on the subject took shape in 2003, Shirky rose to prominence around 2010, so it is likely that the contradictory messages about news content stems from the swift development of online media participation. Does this invalidate Curran and Seaton? As a lone theory yes, but it also allows us to recognise the rapidity of change and the need for theory to shift and change in relation to the changing world.