Media Ownership: Control In digital Age
Ownership
and control of media before the digital age in Nigeria is mainly centralized ,public
or private ownership, that is ownership by the Federal and State government and
few individuals or group of people .In the digital age ,ownership is mainly
deregulated.
According to
section 39, sub-section (2) of the 1999 constitution. Without prejudice to the
generality of subsection (1) of this section, every person shall be entitled to own,
establish and operate any medium for the dissemination of information, ideas
and opinions provided that no person, other than the government of the
federation or of a state or any other person or body authorized by the
president on the fulfillment of conditions
laid down by an act of the National Assembly, shall own establish or
operate a television or wireless
broadcasting station for any purpose whatsoever.
This clause
is to re-echo the control of the government over certain media. It puts other
media outlets (Radio and Television) excluding print, under the exclusive
preserve of the Federal and State government and the power to control ownership
of it in the president.
The Nigeria
Broadcasting commission is the organization entrusted with the onerous task of
discharging this responsibility of the president of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria Government ownership.
The “New
Nigeria ‘’ established in 1966 is an example of 100% owned by Federal Government news media in Nigeria while “Daily Times’’ represents an
example of the second category of Federal Government ownership.
The Federal
Government of Nigeria finances and as
such possesses the Nigeria Television Authority (N.T.A) and the Federal Radio
Corporation of Nigeria otherwise referred to as Radio Nigeria. Federal
government also owns Voice of Nigeria (VON).
The
“Statesman’’, “The Voice’’ and the Ogun State Television are good examples of
state owned Media financed by a single state. While “The Voice’’is financed by
Benue State, Ogun State Television (OGTV)
is financed by the Ogun State Government.
PRIVATE
OWNERSHIP
An individual or a corperate body or a group of persons should own a
medium for purpose of disseminating information and have the controlling share
if not total financial control over the running of the medium. “Nation
Concord”, “The Guardian’’ are examples of media organization funded by single
individuals Late Chief M.K.O.Abiola funded the concord as Alex Ibru funds “The
Guardian’’.
MASS
MEDIA CONTROL According to the Webster’s Third News
International Dictionary, Control is defined as the “application of policies
and procedures for directing, regulating
and coordinating production, administration and other business acvtivities
in a way to achieve the objective of the enterprise’’
In relation to the mass media of
communication, control means lack of freedom from’’ most proprietoral, legal
and economic instructions as to what
should be the editoral contents of the
media. This lack of freedom from emanates from “regulations direction and
coordination of production of editorial matters’’ by forces outside news
processing enclave.
Media Control takes either managerial or
editorial form. Editorial controls is the professional prerogative of the
editor. The phrase describes a situation where the editor, as the “gate
keeper’’, controls the contents of the medium. He choose between “in and out’’
and is consequently responsible for either relaying or suppressing truths.
Managerial Control is operative where the
proprietor dictates policies, overseas
administration and consequently
controls the media either directly or indirectly through the appointment of
family relations or loyalists for the running of organization. Media control boils
down to three levels. That is, government control, advertisers control and
proprietorial control.
The government is involved in the news
media ownership for various purposes most important of which is to establish a
mouth organ for itself. It therefore direct and controls such media to suit its
purposes.
To be realistic, a private proprietor has a purpose for setting up the business, It
could be either to make profit, to wield influence, to enhance his popularity
or to further his political ambition. Whatever this motive is for setting up
the business, it should be guided properly if he wants to achieve his aim.
Definitely his first major assignment will be to control and direct the
business towards achieving this
objectives.
Reference:-Mass Media and the society,issues and perspectives by Goke Raufu (2003).
Reference:-Mass Media and the society,issues and perspectives by Goke Raufu (2003).
COMPARATION OF TALKS
SHOW IN
TWO RADIO STATIONS
I would like to analyze the
programming of Eko Radio FM 107.5 and the radio one FM 103.5. These two radio
Stations have large listeners in Lagos State. Eko Radio is an indigenous Station
where programmes are conducted in Yoruba and some Egun and Awori dialects. The
only time English is spoken is during news broadcasts.
The
other Radio Station is the Radio one FM 103.5 which combines their programmes
in Yoruba and English, it also network with Radio Nigeria for news broadcasts.
Radio one
call-in programmes are often conducted in English Language and dealt with
serious issues that concerned the masses like electricity, when police have the
right to shoot at a suspect and so on.
The audience
called in to express their opinions and they were enlightened.
Radio Lagos call- in programmes are always conducted in Yoruba and dealt with
trivial but interesting, informative and educative topics. For example, The
First Son of the husband got the daughter of the father’s third wife pregnant,
although the daughter belong to the ex-husband of the step mother of the son.
Then audience call-in to express their opinions.
MEDIA OWNERSHIP AND CONTROL IN
THE DIGITAL AGE.
According to
Ton Temmy (October 20,2010), the strengthening of right Laws benefiting
corporate media creators, as well as government restrictions on technology, have created a situation
in which government is still in control of the creation and distribution of
content.
Additionally,
corporate media producers have engaged in practices of aggressively persecuting
fans and citizen producers over intellectual property rights-forcing fan
website to be shutdown, and litigating against consumers who share and remix
media.
There are
two ways to consider ownership of media today: Ownership of content and ownership
of media organizations. For the former, the concept of content as property depends
on metaphors we use to describe it, and it’s important to take a look at the history of copyright
before we examine how it has been transformed in the 20th century by
metaphors of physical property.
With the
rise of interactive and media sharing technologies, consumers can easily
appropriate media created by corporate producers and use it to create
transformative works that are critiques or commentary on the original, and that
make potentially subversive statements about our culture. While corporations
may still control the output of content, their grip on its distribution and how
that content is “read’’ is diminishing.
While such
transformative use is legally protected under the fair use doctrine of US
copyright law, the usual result of corporate litigation of individuals is that
the consumer, due to the inability to pay legal costs, will back down and the litigator
will have won by default.
Ownership of
content and ownership of the media organizations. Due to the fact that internet
or websites have created opportunities for every Dick and Harry to own a space
or more in the internet unencumbered by licensing or regulations, media
ownership is no longer a big deal on the internet. However, care must be taken
in terms of contents.
In a networked society where information can
so freely be copied and distributed, large news organizations are facing a
crisis of ownership.
Thus, when considering corporate ownership of
media organizations themselves, It is useful to look at news organizations and
the economic troubles they are currently facing, largely due to the ubiquity of
free news enabled by interactive distribution technologies. Such as those
opposed to Net neutrality who would allow corporations to become the
gatekeepers of content.
According to
Keiyana Fordhan, there are three ways interactive technologies have disrupted
the news: (1) They can freely distribute news at zero cost; (2) They have
greatly increased competition since anyone can distribute news; (3) They have
changed consumer behavior so that buyers and sellers can connect directly,
making advertisers increasingly irrelevant.
These disruption have forced
corporate news producers to not only reexamine their business models, but also
to file suit against aggregators, and search engines as a first line of
defense. Aggregators like yahoo News argue that what they do, i.e. exerting
headlines and linking back to the source, is fair use,and should be protected (1980-1981).In
2006 Field v.Google a federal district court upheld Google’s claim to fair use,
citing the enormous public benefit that search engines offer.
Thus, it remains unclear where lines of
ownership can be drawn, and news organizations continue to fight for control of
their content, the loss of which threatens to obviate their businesses.
In conclusion, today, the internet,
which is available to private citizens with a computer and a connection, is one
of the primary ways that information and media is distributed. It can be
likened to telephone lines, which are free for all to use. When AT&T, in
the mid-20th century, attempt to place a ban on technologies that
utilized this network in a nondestructive manner. This ban was overturned in
1968 and paved the way for devices like modem, without which the internet never
would have come about. (B.Nerman272)Now, in the 21st century, there
are lobbies to place the same type of bans and restriction on internet, such as
those opposed to net neutrality who would allow corporations to become the gatekeepers
of contents.
MUKAILA-AFOLABI.BLOGSPOT.COM
MUKAILA-AFOLABI.BLOGSPOT.COM


