MARXIST & PLURALIST CONSEQUENCES

There is one elite in power of most of the media- Rupert Murdoch. This demonstrates information being fed to the audience by one.

The media does in cases such as Rupert Murdoch's get influence from one person, however e.g. newsapers, tv, viewers/ readers give negative feedback to things they don't agree with and many times these things are taken into account.

If these things are being run by one person as you said Murcoch then there would be biased news being passed down to the audience, therefore the audience do not really have a choice as they may try to escape from things but they are run by the same person.

Rupert Murdoch would dumbdown such issues which he would not want to print e.g. about page 3, he would say that its upto the girls and there for male pleasing.

Its up to the viewers/ consumers. If they do not like Murdochs's stuff then they don't have to buy his products e.g. the sun, therfore other newspapers which are not run by him.

At the end of the day, it is Rupert Murdoch who decides what goes in his papers and his other media texts. It is his ideologies and values which are being drip fed (hypodermic needle) to the passive audience.

But as he owns many companies, which do not all promote the same idealogy, he is providing variety for us and that is becuase he has to cater to our needs, as we will only consume what we want to consume.

They could be providing the same ideology but its just "dumbed down" made subtle so people carry on believing a plurist society exists, as long as one man runs (almost) everything we will continue to be under the power of the elitists.

- what is missing in this debate is media terminology and theorists such as:
the pluralistic model
the hegemonic model
gramsci
althusser