A monopoly is the exclusive possession or control of the supply or takes in a commodity or service. What this means is that in media a monopoly is something a person or a company has when they own a large portion of the media market. Rupert Murdoch has a monopoly of businesses in the media sectors, because he owns lots of newspapers and television channels and more.
Why is it important to ensure that one single media producer in the UK has a monopoly?
It's important to make sure that no one person in this country has a monopoly because if they did, the media would be near enough controlled by just them. This means that everything we see, hear, and read would be controlled by that one person; therefore the information can become unreliable and of the opinion of that person, and things would stop being in the public's interest. It would be harmful to the public if one person had a monopoly in this country because they would not get fully correct information and would be influenced by the same person every day without noticing.
Why is consumer choice important?
It's important for consumers to have choice over the things that they
see, hear, and read, this is because they need to be able to decide what the
best thing is for them. If they didn't have a choice, then they would hear the
same thing over and over again, and it might not necessarily be right
information. To have a varied choice is important so the news that they hear is
not biased or wrong. Also, competition is important in the media industry
because if there was no choice for a business, such as Sky for example, could
charge a lot of money for their services and the public would not have a choice
in paying it as there would be nowhere else they could go to get a lower price.
What is censorship?
Censorship in the media industry is when some
things are removed or suppressed for the benefit of the public. This usually
happens when something is considered to be offensive or harmful to the general
public.
What are the arguments for and against
censorship?
A good thing about censorship is that it can keep a certain amount of
control in the media and therefore is usually seen as a good thing. It stops
harmful, offensive, or obscene things being seen by the wrong people, like
children, and this makes the media safer. However, some people argue that
censorship is a bad thing because it can prevent people from seeing the truth
and it can restrict freedom of speech.
Why should under 18's be subject to
particular considerations by regulators?
People under the age of 18 are often seen as being vulnerable people and should therefore be protected. They should not be shown things which could be potentially harmful to them in anyway. For example, when BBFC decide on which certificate a film should have, they must consider younger people and make sure that only people of the appropriate age group can see the film. If for example, a film has graphic scenes of violence or obscenity, the BBFC would choose to give the film an age certification of 18 to ensure that it could not harm, offend or upset them in anyway. But on the other hand, some under 18 year olds disagree about the certificates which some films are given. This is because they feel like they are mature and old enough to see those type of things, so have already experienced or witnessed themselves. So does this mean that there is no-need for the age’s rates to be so high?
No comments:
Post a Comment