Theories of the Information Society, Third Edition - Cryptome

INFORMATION AND THE MARKET
An associated way in which informational trends both reflect the priorities
of capitalism and support its continuation is that they provide ideological expression
to the values and world view of the core capitalist nation, the United States.
Of course this is a close cousin to the preceding function of selling. In so far as
the images the media produce act as stimulants to buy the things corporations
manufacture, to a very large degree they will give succour to the capitalist system
as a whole. Celebration of the lifestyle of consumerism also provides broad ideological
support to the capitalist nations.
However, Herbert Schiller (2000), while certainly not ignoring this contribution
of mass communications to American ideological domination, also highlights
some rather more direct ways in which mass media, overwhelmingly emanating
from the United States, give ideological support to its transnational empire. One
key way stems from the prominent position enjoyed by the United States in the
production and distribution of news. Being the major source of news reporting,
it is perhaps not surprising that American media (followed by the British and one
or two other nations which generally share its patterns of economic organisation
and political outlook) broadly reflect the concerns of the home nation. The upshot
is that ‘free enterprise’, ‘free trade’ and ‘private ownership’ are phrases widely
used and conditions frequently advocated in the news services. Similarly,
‘economic health’ and ‘industrial success’ are defined by the terms and conditions
prevailing in the capitalist economy – thus ‘competition’, ‘markets’ and ‘business
confidence’ are terms unproblematically adopted to depict what is presumed to
be the normal and desirable condition.
More important perhaps, world events and trends are covered from a distinctively
metropolitan – usually American – perspective. Nations are examined
in the news only to the degree to which events there have some observed, or at
least potential, consequence for the United States – unless a disaster is of such
proportion that it commands the news by virtue of its drama. For example, late
in 1993, Somalia – a country in the Horn of Africa that few Americans would be
able to locate on a map – was prominent in US media because American troops
had been killed there by local militia, and places like Haiti receive attention only
when events there are likely to have significant effects on immigration to the
United States. Similarly, Middle East affairs receive coverage chiefly when there
is a crisis with major implications for the United States and its allies. Meanwhile,
locations such as India, Africa and China (home for almost half the world’s
people) command coverage most often because of traumatic events such as
earthquakes, floods and famines that bring about thousands of casualties. What
alters this framework is when something happens with major implications for the
United States, as for instance early in 2001 when the Chinese grounded a US spy
plane; then China was headline news for several days in April. Coverage of the
Iraq invasion and subsequent occupation displays similar features. Despite overwhelming
opposition around the globe that was reflected in a range of media, US
news coverage was noticeably supportive and uncritical of the American-led war
(Tumber and Webster, 2006, ch. 4), rarely providing space for the widespread
dissent evident worldwide (Massing 2003; 2004).
132