Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

My case study was over the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case. In it, I explored the political spending of corporations and the effect it has had on different types of media, including political ads, documentaries and stand alone programming, traditional news media and the average voter. In this, I attempted to answer the question of the week: "who controls/monitors the media?"

The Citizens United case was the Supreme Court's ruling that the government can't regulate independent political expenditures by corporations. This differed from the past in that it was the first time that companies and labor unions can now use unlimited amounts of their money to expressly advocate for a candidate. Past laws such as the Tillman Act of 1907 and Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 had previously prohibited this, but in 2010, these were overturned by Citizens United. This has changed media in that it's made it possible for corporations to support much more speech through radio and TV ads. Companies can now also produce documentaries either for or against a candidate. As a result, the traditional news media has become more cluttered and the average voter is much more likely to be misled by talking points, soundbites and propaganda masquerading as news.

The discussion that followed was centered mostly different people's opinions of the ruling. The general consensus of the class was that the ruling would lead to more corruption and that it was a problem when trying to define free speech like the book talked about. Most people said they saw it crossing the line of free speech and that this right shouldn't be extended to corporations. I asked if the class thought it would be more difficult to distinguish news from corporate propaganda and the general response was that it was already difficult to tell and that they thought the ruling would make it even more difficult. This brought it back around to the question of the week. The government is giving up a little more of its control to monitor and regulate the media (in the political spectrum at least) and the full consequences of this will be seen in the coming years as the case develops.

Sources: 

•Chatillon, D. (2010). Citizens United: Coining Soon to a Cable Broadcast and Satellite Channel near You!. Communications Lawyer, 27(1), 1-32.

•Kerr, R. L. (2011). Transforming Corporate Political Media Spending into Freedom of Speech: A Story of Alchemy and Finesse, 1977-78. American Journalism, 28(1), 34-74.

•WALZ, C. N. (2011). Campaigns Turn to Courts over Political Advertising. Communications Lawyer, 28(1), 3-7.

The Comcast and Time Warner Cable Merger

The question that my case study sought to answer was, "Who controls and monitors the media?". I chose to focus on the FCC's monitoring of the broadcast industry through, the proposed merger between Time Warner Cable and Comcast.

The role of the FCC is to monitor the broadcast industry to ensure that it acts in the public's best interest. The concern is that this merger is a form of horizontal integration (Straubhaar, Larose, Davenport), that will lead to a monopoly in the cable industry. I presented the concerns of some other companies that Comcast will be able to get content for cheaper rates and the fear that this will negatively impact internet streaming as Comcast will charge higher rates for buffer free internet (Eggerton). I Talked about Comcast's defense, that they and TWC do not operate in the same major markets and their belief that this will help bridge the digital divide.

The discussion that followed the case study focused primarily on if the class had a problem with this potential merger, and the general answer was, "No". My classmates did not feel this would hurt competition.When asked if they believed it would get blocked, one student said it would not because Comcast has a way of getting what it wants, which I found interesting. And when I asked if students had a problem with a body that is overseen by the government regulating private businesses, one of my classmates said that she did not because it helps prevent monopolies. One student also asked me if there was recent precedent for the FCC blocking a similar merger. The response that I had was the proposed AT&T and T-mobile merger that was never officially blocked because it was taken off the table by AT&T when it became clear the FCC would not approve it.This brought me back to the question for the week, the decisions that the FCC makes are very complex maybe this merger is not a big deal, but maybe the impact of their decision could set a precedent in terms of the control the FCC has on the shape of the broadcast industry.

Sources:

Eggerton, J. (2014). FCC Hears Plenty From Comcast/TWC Opponents. Broadcasting & Cable, 144(32): 24.

Following the 1996 Telecommunications Act: Media Mergers and the Public Interest Standard. (2012). Conference Papers -- International Communication Association, 1-39

Kang, Cecilia. (2014 September 9). “A lot of people don’t like the Comcast-Time Warner merger, but that doesn’t mean it won’t be approved.” The Washington Post. Retrieved from                                                                                  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/09/03/a-lot-of-people-dont-like-the-comcast-time-warner-merger-but-that-doesnt-mean-it-wont-be-approved/      

Straubhaar, Joseph, Robert Larose and Lucinda Davenport. (2014). Media Now: Understanding Media, Culture, and Technology. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Company.                                 

Agenda Setting and its affects on the NFL

Summary:

On September 8, 2014 The NFL announced a new set of rules concerning domestic violence in the NFL after a video of professional running back Ray Rice assaulting his then-fiance in an elevator went viral. In the past we had newspapers, the original source of the “Agenda Setting Theory” in mass media. Agenda setting means informing the public about an issue and bringing it to the top on the public agenda. The effect of Rice’s act caused the mass media to respond; even president Barack Obama made comments about the case stating all of the wrongs about domestic violence.

People did not have to be sports fans to hear about the incident or hear about the new policy set by the NFL. New media has allowed for more people to be more vocal with their opinions by doing things such as posting on twitter or other social media sites.  New media is what has forced the NFL to have to respond and take action on the case.

I believe that the incident was handled the way it had to be. If the media didn’t have such a huge influence on society, then the NFL would have probably kept the incident between them and Ray Rice. The NFL didn’t have any other option but to suspend Ray Rice because everyone had an opinion and the NFL was getting nothing but criticism.

Discussion:

In class we discussed if the video hadn't gone viral, would the NFL have taken action like they had? People were saying that the action of banning Ray Rice probably wouldn’t have occurred if the video wasn’t leaked, but because the media released it to the masses and heard their voices, their opinions on the crime forced the NFL to respond.

Most of the class didn’t realize the amount of time that the actual incident with Ray Rice had occurred since they were only hearing about it now. We agreed that major networks probably always tried to hide situations such as this one to keep it from the media so they could handle it the way they pleased, but new media today doesn’t allow for many things to be kept hidden. The video of Ray Rice and his wife in the elevator was sold to TMZ for a large amount of money, and therefore causing the NFL to do their research and start new laws such as the “Domestic Violence Policy.”

Sources:

Brody, Rachel. US News. U.S.News & World Report, 08 Sept. 2014. Web. 08 Sept. 2014.            <http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/09/08/should-the-nfl-ban-ravens-ray          rice-after-the-domestic-violence-video>.

<http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000391538/article/ray-rice-released-by-ravens    indefinitely-suspended>.

On September 8, 2014 The NFL announced a new set of rules concerning domestic violence in the NFL after a video of professional running back Ray Rice assaulting his then-fiance in an elevator went viral. In the past we had newspapers, the original source of the “Agenda Setting Theory” in mass media. Agenda setting means informing the public about an issue and bringing it to the top on the public agenda. The effect of Rice’s act caused the mass media to respond; even president Barack Obama made comments about the case stating all of the wrongs about domestic violence. People did not have to be sports fans to hear about the incident or hear about the new policy set by the NFL. New media has allowed for more people to be more vocal with their opinions by doing things such as posting on twitter or other social media sites; new media is what forced the NFL to have to action on the case. In class we discussed if the video hadn't gone viral, would the NFL have taken action like they had? People were saying that the action of banning Ray Rice probably wouldn't have occurred if the video wasn't leaked, but because the media released it to the masses and heard their voices, their opinions on the crime forced the NFL to respond.

Political Economics

Summary:
The development of the Internet has shifted the pace and mediums of political campaigns drastically over the past 2 decades. The high rate of innovation from the media industry, coupled with the highly competitive environment of political parties and candidates, causes new innovations to be distributed very quickly across the political arena.

The largest advancement in political economics has been the convergence of technology and social platforms, which has allowed political campaigns to lump fundraising, event coordination, public image, and public interaction into singular online management systems. Examples of these systems include Donate.gop and Nation Builder

While I argued in class that social media use for politics was pushing us towards "Technological Determinism", "Agenda Setting" is a much more appropriate term. Facebook does not determine our frame of mind or political affiliation, rather voters have the chance to set political policy through their voice on the internet. Examples of this can be seen in the overseas use of Social Media to coordinate protests where there is a lack of democratic government (Ifukor, P.)

Post Presentation Discussion
During the class discussion, the greatest confusion from the class came from my point about "gatekeepers". In social media, the role of gatekeepers is greatly diminished, so that more people can contribute their voice. I didn't define gatekeepers very well initially, so during the discussion we had the chance to clarify their role (or lack there of), in current social media.

Technological convergence and innovations are the strongest areas where social media has made an impact on politics. While voter voice has grown, the influence of their words has not yet made large changes to politics. However, the narrow voter targeting of political campaigns, and the rapid development of technology in response to online success, has seen nearly instantaneous results.


Sources:
Social Media Campaigns: http://nyti.ms/1AD034r\

Ifukor, P. (2010). "Elections" or "Selections"? Blogging and Twittering the Nigerian 2007 General Elections. Bulletin Of Science, Technology & Society, 30(6), 398-414.)

Kahne, J., & Middaugh, E. (2012). Digital Media Shapes Youth Participation in Politics. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(3), 52-56.

Samuels, B. (2011). Facebook, Twitter, YouTube--and Democracy. Academe, 97(4)

Netflix and its Influence on New Markets

  
 
           For Thursday's presentation, I responded to the question of the week: “How does media convergence influence new media markets?" I presented my case study on Netflix and how it is dominating the market and moving towards a monopoly.

 Netflix has changed the way we look at online streaming. Netflix now has more than 50 million subscribers and continues to dominate the online streaming industry (Faughnder, R.). It also relates to media convergence because Netflix has been able to incorporate DVDs and online TV shows, while also making it accessible on different types of technology. It is important that Hulu, Amazon, and other companies integrate different forms of media if they want to keep competing with Netflix. The main points in my presentation were that Netflix is growing and expanding and has had many accomplishments. Examples of this are: the Gotham deal, the various Emmy awards Netflix has received recently, and how it is expanding into more than 40 countries.

The class discussion went very well and everyone had great input. I mentioned that it was important for us to watch Netflix this next year to see how well they do. The two questions I asked the class were: are there any companies they see beating out Netflix, and what do they think the future of TV and DVD will be. I agreed with the statement one of my classmates made about how he believes that DVDs will go away and people are going to decide to get it online rather than having to buy a disc to watch it. This helped answer the question of the week because the class agreed that online streaming is becoming extraordinarily popular. Online streaming shows how old and new media are continually converging and shaping the way we live our lives. 

Faughnder, R. (2014, July 22). Profit up as Netflix reaches 50 million customers. Los Angeles Times, p. 1.

Greenwood, J. (2014, September 2). Netflix making cable up its game; Video company changed face of television. National Post's Financial Post & FP Investing, p. 3.

 Pallotta, F. (2014, September 5). Netflix swoops in to stream 'Gotham'. CNN Money . Retrieved September 6, 2014, from http://www.cnn.com/

 Sevilla, G. C., & Herald, C. (2013, December 4). Netflix online revolution outpaces the competition; Streaming service has more viewers than HBO. The Calgary Herald (Alberta), p. 7.

Welcome to the COMM 330 class blog!

Welcome to the COMM 330 class blog. This blog provides an opportunity to explore the intersection of communication technology, media industry and social use of media. This blog will be highlight issues raised in COMM 330: Communication and Technology being taught by Dr. Heidi Campbell at Texas A&M University this fall semester. Students will have an opportunity to use this blog to share their thought about the course material and more specifically post information related to their class case study presentations. I am looking forward to a great semester of interaction both online and offline!