iieiiei1eWrkers - Leicester Research Archive - University of Leicester

11.2 Cultural Mediation and The Limits to 'Ideological Domination'
In following through the above argument on the question of the kinds of
content and their impact we have tried to show that because of the internal
tensions betwccn routine operations, media ideologies of professionalism and
artistic creativity both radio and the cultural industries are not empty conveyor
belts of one particular set of ideas. Whilst professionals strive for 'relative
autononiy' within media organisation by negotiating with enterpreneurs, the
commercial success of their programmes and products provides them with
bargaining power. Finally, the process of ideological transmission is further
complicated by the active consumption of the audience.
By locating my inquiries in a total socio-political context I have sought to argue
that there are at least three limits to 'ideological domination '. Firstly, the
complex relations within the radio and cultural industries (mentioned above)
interrupt instead of facilitating the smooth flow of the dominant ideologies.
Secondly, within the ruling power bloc itself there is a contest of ideas rather
than a single or unified dominant ideology. As outlined in chapter 3,
coalitions are often transitory and fraught with tensions. Thirdly, there exists
among the subordinated classes distinctive and heterogeneous cultures and
ideologies. The articulation between these diverse discursive formations, whether
within or between classes, is therefore a constant struggle and any consensus
must be arrived at through a process of negotiation, not imposition.
These complexities and tensions are evident at three levels. Within the
traditional power bloc, religious schisms and military factionalism are rife. In
addition, they now have to compete for legitimation with the political parties
formed within the newly instituted system of parliamentary democracy. Although
some of these ideological divergencies are incorporated into the present version
of the official view to form a 'political consensus' the fundamental tensions have
not been resolved. The contentious notion of 'Dhammic Socialism' propounded
by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu for example, has now acquired an official status through
its articulation with economic modernisation. However, in the rhetoric of
'Pandin D1,amma, Pond/n Thong' (The Land of Dhamma, Land of Gold) not
only is the amelioration of social inequalities not dealt with, but it also
contradicts the basic Buddhist doctrine of enlightenment as a means to spiritual
salvation by promoting the materialistic ethos and the emphasis on individual
economic achievement required in a capitalist mode of production.
241