b) Explain how the political context in which newspapers are produced, influences their ownership and regulation. Refer to The Guardian and The Daily Mail newspapers you have studied to support your answer. [10 marks]
In this essay, we will be examining the political context in which newspapers; The Guardian and the Daily Mail, are produced and how they influence ownership and regulation. The news industry here is oligopolistic which contradicts the concept of a free press if it is controlled by the elite, upper-class.
In this essay, we will be examining the political context in which newspapers; The Guardian and the Daily Mail, are produced and how they influence ownership and regulation. The news industry here is oligopolistic which contradicts the concept of a free press if it is controlled by the elite, upper-class.
The Guardian, left wing, labour, is owned by the Scott Trust, which is a British company that owns other businesses as well, not just The Guardian since 1936. This type of ownership can be seen to allow freedom in speech for its journalists as
the Trust only governs the structure of the paper and doesn’t have a say in content or leader lines, which is beneficial for journalists. The profits made are
reinvested back into the Trust, and quality journalism rather than financial dividend is the Trust’s goal.
In terms of further regulation, the Leveson report believed that the relationship between the press and politicians was too close. They believed that the press were easily influenced by the politicians, and were not in the interest of the public. But despite this, there is evidence for the fact that the newspapers are both linked to political parties, their influences, as well as their affiliations (whom they're sided to). For example, one of The Guardian's front covers says "Half UK's young black men are out of work" which could easily be identified with the Labour party, as the labour party is for the idea of full employment for everybody. Whereas one of the Daily Mail front covers, says "This lady's not for turning!" with Theresa May on the front, which could signify that the newspaper clearly supports the Conservative party and is for the idea of Brexit. The political context doesn't entirely affect the production of the two newspapers, but it can be argued that the news itself can influence the political context.
Moreover, the two newspapers, or any newspaper in the UK, is regulated by a new self-regulatory body called IPSO. It is independant and was set up due to the Leveson report, and the phone hacking scandal that took place in July, 2011. However, this could suggest that if newspapers are regulated, they would not be able to express their freedom, which is contradictory. Though, newspapers like The Guardian are free to leave the regulatory body IPSO and be independent, but other newspapers that do not join the IPSO, would be confined to direct regulation by OFCOM.
In conclusion, the relationship between political contexts, ownership and newspaper regulation is complex and affected by a number of factors. The importance of press freedom and the relationship that newspaper owners enjoy with political parties can be seen to be influenced by the political context in which newspapers are produced. But, at the same time, the political contexts in which the press functions are also influenced by press ownership and the press’ response to regulation.
In terms of further regulation, the Leveson report believed that the relationship between the press and politicians was too close. They believed that the press were easily influenced by the politicians, and were not in the interest of the public. But despite this, there is evidence for the fact that the newspapers are both linked to political parties, their influences, as well as their affiliations (whom they're sided to). For example, one of The Guardian's front covers says "Half UK's young black men are out of work" which could easily be identified with the Labour party, as the labour party is for the idea of full employment for everybody. Whereas one of the Daily Mail front covers, says "This lady's not for turning!" with Theresa May on the front, which could signify that the newspaper clearly supports the Conservative party and is for the idea of Brexit. The political context doesn't entirely affect the production of the two newspapers, but it can be argued that the news itself can influence the political context.
Moreover, the two newspapers, or any newspaper in the UK, is regulated by a new self-regulatory body called IPSO. It is independant and was set up due to the Leveson report, and the phone hacking scandal that took place in July, 2011. However, this could suggest that if newspapers are regulated, they would not be able to express their freedom, which is contradictory. Though, newspapers like The Guardian are free to leave the regulatory body IPSO and be independent, but other newspapers that do not join the IPSO, would be confined to direct regulation by OFCOM.
In conclusion, the relationship between political contexts, ownership and newspaper regulation is complex and affected by a number of factors. The importance of press freedom and the relationship that newspaper owners enjoy with political parties can be seen to be influenced by the political context in which newspapers are produced. But, at the same time, the political contexts in which the press functions are also influenced by press ownership and the press’ response to regulation.
This is an excellent response Neila in which you've explained the contexts- politics and the free press- and the complicated issues surrounding this. You have drawn on well chosen examples and the structure is mainly clear. V
ReplyDelete