CMNS 130 Review: "Alternative Media"

The mainstream media are rarely challenged by the mass audience. It is not necessairly a "bad" thing. The heart of democracy and liberalism allow free market claims: anyone can say what they want, and thus they have free expression. John Locke stated that the clash of various ideas and expressions will eventually lead to the results of "good" ideas becoming established as the dominant beliefs within a culture. The media support the mainstream views becuase it attracts the widest audience possible, which leads to advertisers' financial and economical support. It is their expression of ideas in a free market.

However, it is difficult for free ideas to "flow" when the costs of market entry overwhelms the views of alternative media. There are only a limited number of owners of the larger mass media organs, and it is simply difficult for other media companies to compete in this free space. They will eventually be bought out or joined with a larger media business. It is even more difficult when advertisers do not agree with the alternate views; the costs of production and distribution of such views are too high for alternate media to compete. Thus, the alternate views of society continue to be diminished, as mainstream beliefs and values continue to be reinforced.

The 3 public service alternatives

There are three publicly serviced alternatives that allows room for minority views to be expressed in the media.

The first one is called Franchised pluralism, which mirrors the plurality of society. Air-time and technical facilities are dependent on the size of membership and/or sale of the TV magazines, and thus organizations develop their own package of programs. They are financed through public funding, advertising, and membership dues. The disadvantages of this media is that these organizations and views cannot guarantee some kind of establishment when there are constant cultural and social changes in a society.

The second one is known as the Liberal Corporatist model. This type of media exist in most of western Europe, such as Germany.
The leading social interests are brought in which are regulated by appointed or elected broadcast councils. They guarantee pluralism of social opinion and the audience's right to participate in the expressions.
Obviously, the disadvantages of this model is that it can, and probably will, over-represent dominant social opinions at the expense of the unorganized and the weak social movements. The positions of the broadcast council can be biased and be filled on the basis of party support. It can also lead to decentralized management and even be opposed to federal government regulation of the media.

The third model is known as the Civil Service model. It occurs in Britain, where broadcasting allows a neutral zone above politics. Appointed authorities have overall control of public broadcasting, which funds by license fees. This way, alternative views can be financially backed and be allowed to express different social and cultural views.
The negative aspects of this model is that it still cannot sufficiently reflect the diversity of society, and the producers and authorities undermine government and flak criticisms of the media that may be biased.