Post 4: Communication Revolution

In his book, Communication Revolution, Robert McChesney argues that the United States is currently undergoing a communication revolution in which new forms of media and new trends in communication are being developed, but that large corporations are reaping most of the rewards. He argues that we are now at a critical juncture, and we, as a nation must decide to act and demand that communication, especially journalism, remain under control of the populace, rather than a select few. Because of the rapidly-changing field of communication, practices are being formed that will affect our future, but most of these practices are being shaped by corporate interests.

It has been stated that new technologies and trends in communication are a result of the free market system and the product of a few entrepreneurial geniuses. McChesney argues that most of the communication accomplishments that we have seen in the last two decades are the result of subsidies and political policy. In the introduction, McChesney lists just a few policies that he would like to see made in the near future:

Wired and wireless internet as a birthright to all Americans
Competitive commercial media markets that allow for smaller media companies
Policies and subsidies to support nonprofit media
Truly informative political advertisements during elections
Limitations of commercialism in the media, especially in children's programming

These ideas initially seemed somewhat radical to me, but I certainly can see the political and social benefit from allowing all citizens access to the internet. Poorer citizens are at a distinct (and unfair) disadvantage without the internet, especially now, when it is so necessary for finding opportunities and information.

In chapter 3, McChesney discusses his 5 "truths" of recent media. These are that
our media system was created by public policy, that the first amendment was meant for all citizens, not just corporations, that our current media system is not a free market system, and that the current policy-making process is dominated by corporate interests and needs to be better understood and harnessed by other citizens.

So how does this related to digital publishing. Digital publishing, in all of its various forms, make up the bulk of the recent changes to our communication system. The advent of the internet, cable systems, even newspapers, now all rely on digital publishing in multiple ways. All of this new media is a double-edged sword. It changes the game for both the major corporations, smaller media outlets, and all American citizens.

I used to work as a photog (cameraman) for the ABC news affiliate in Gainesville, FL. We absolutely needed digital publishing to do our jobs. Our reporters did their initial research on the internet, our editors downloaded video via satellite, and I used digital video cameras and editing software to shoot and edit footage. Each of these was a major improvement for the overall product at the end of the day. Quite literally, our news station would not exist without these means of digital publishing. The small market of Gainesville did not use to be able to support its own local news station, but because of the proliferation of these technologies and techniques, it became feasible. The company that owned our news station only owned one other television station and a few publishing companies. That may sound like a media corporation, but compared to the few giants of television news, our parent company was tiny. McChesney argues that large media giants have been benefiting more than smaller companies from new technologies, but that with more political involvement, citizens can ensure that the media is not controlled by only a select few.