“Evaluate the usefulness of Livingstone and Lunt in understanding the extent to which media ownership influences the content of news stories.”
Livingstone and Lunt focus on the tension between the needs of the citizen and the demands of the consumer, particularly in relation to media regulation. Their work explores how regulatory frameworks attempt to maintain public interest standards while also accommodating commercial media markets. This approach is useful for understanding how ownership structures, profit motives, and regulatory oversight can shape the content of news stories.
A key part of Livingstone and Lunt’s theory is that media regulation must balance market forces with social responsibility. This makes their theory relevant when considering outlets like The Guardian, which seeks donations from its audience rather than relying on advertising revenue. On its website, The Guardian explicitly states that this funding model allows it to maintain editorial independence and quality journalism, reflecting a strong alignment with the “citizen” side of Livingstone and Lunt’s model. Furthermore, The Scott Trust Ltd. protects Guardian journalism from commercial ownership, helping to ensure content is not compromised by external profit-driven influence.
In contrast, The Daily Mail, owned by DMGT and billionaire Viscount Rothermere, reflects more clearly the commercial side of the regulatory balance. In 2019, DMGT acquired The i, which sparked public concern over potential editorial homogenisation. This acquisition exemplifies the tension Livingstone and Lunt describe: the increasing power of large media groups potentially threatens plurality, but regulation—in this case, Ofcom’s scrutiny—acts as a safeguard. Both publications provided statements asserting editorial independence, suggesting that regulation can indeed help maintain diverse viewpoints despite ownership concentration. This example illustrates the usefulness of Livingstone and Lunt’s focus on regulatory mechanisms in ensuring that media ownership does not always dictate content.
Livingstone and Lunt are also helpful in explaining the role of profitability and risk in shaping content. They argue that in a competitive media landscape, outlets often prioritise stories and content likely to attract large audiences. For instance, during the second UK lockdown in January 2021, The Guardian, despite its left-leaning stance, supported the Conservative Prime Minister’s decision, while The Daily Mail, typically right-leaning, criticised it. These editorial choices may not reflect ownership ideology but instead demonstrate how outlets respond to their audience’s expectations and emotional concerns—a phenomenon which aligns with Livingstone and Lunt’s emphasis on the consumer dynamic.
However, the theory’s focus on regulation and public service can be less helpful when trying to understand the construction of meaning in news content. For example, Livingstone and Lunt do not account for the use of media language, visual codes, or the ideological positioning within specific articles. They may help us understand why a media outlet might cover a topic due to regulatory obligation or commercial appeal, but they do not help explain how that topic is represented—something better addressed by theories of representation or semiotics.
Moreover, while Livingstone and Lunt address the traditional regulatory frameworks, they are less effective at explaining the digital media landscape, where regulation is much harder to enforce. Their theory was formed in a pre-digital context and does not fully engage with the rise of citizen journalism, participatory culture, and networked publics, as theorised by Jenkins and Shirky. For example, although Livingstone and Lunt might highlight regulatory challenges in digital news, they don’t account for the shift in power toward users or alternative platforms such as blogs, YouTube channels, or social media-based news. Nevertheless, these developments reinforce the need for regulation to evolve—a point that aligns with the core concern of Livingstone and Lunt’s theory.
Finally, Livingstone and Lunt’s framework remains relevant in a global context where state censorship and nationalistic media agendas threaten journalistic freedom. While these concerns may be more applicable to countries like China and Russia, their relevance in the UK is reflected in concerns about ownership transparency and government influence over media agendas. This shows that regulation and ethical standards remain a central concern in ensuring a diverse and democratic media space.
No comments:
Post a Comment