Do we get the media we want, or want the media we get?

                A seldom argued fact about the media today is that they are incredibly powerful. The degree of their influence over the public is such that we are asking, do we get the media we want, or want the media we get. For example, look at Duck Dynasty, the reality television show about a family company making duck calls. A couple of years ago, a show like this seemed absurd and now it is a top-rated show on A&E. The media requires support to be successful, but are they powerful enough to change the desires of viewers?

                One argument may be that media outlets can change public desires as evidenced by the constant flow of young pop stars. For example, Hilary Duff was marketed as the good girl by Disney and her show and other commodities (dolls, clothes, etc.) were very popular. Soon after, Miley Cyrus got a television show and we stopped hearing from Hilary Duff. Some would say the success of these two acts is evidence of a change in audience desires, but these too acts were incredibly similar. Both stars were originally marketed as the “good girl” and both had music and television careers supported by Disney. The change was not in the desire or the content, but simply the face that was connected to it all.

                Another aspect of this duality is dependent on the media companies wanting to stay in business, which really means that they want to make money. As is so often experienced, rocking the boat, to speak metaphorically, is not always well received in pop culture. A company that could successfully start a trend would perhaps be very well rewarded, however, “as an antidote to the notion of a powerful elite in charge of the media, note that the media have to sell themselves successfully to large numbers of the population; they have to win big audiences in order to be economically viable and survive (O’Shaughnessy et al. 2012). It is very risky to start trends and I do not believe that media companies are willing to take that risk.

All of this stems from the media companies underlying desire; making money. As the textbook says, “most media changes have occurred in capitalist economies, so their development has been hugely influenced by profit motives and we must understand that the media have been developed in the interest of making money” (O’Shaughnessy et al. 2012), which means they are far more likely to follow trends simply to make money. This goal explains why a company would support an artist so fervently and then simply just drop them and choose another artist.

Media today has an enormous influence on people of all races, ages and social classes. It is arguably corrupting the youth of the world, turning them into nothing but consumer robots that buy anything they are told to. I believe the media has a more firm grasp on the desires of children but overall, as evidenced, I do not believe they control the desires of the masses.

References

O’Shaughnessy, M., & Stadler, J.. (2012). Media and Society. 5^th Ed. South Melbourne, Oxford University Press.