The Pluralist Theory

The Pluralist Theory

The pluralist theories on media differentiate greatly from that of the

Marxist in it arguments and opinions. Many pluralist sociologists such

as Katz and Lazarsfield as well as pluralist authors e.g. Nicholas

Jones a correspondent on BBC radio news help argue the pluralist case

illustrated by the writings and actions.

Pluralism acquires a diverse perspective on the involvements of the

media seeing it as offering a wide selection of views of the various

groups in society. They state modern society is democratic and people

have autonomy allowing choice in whether or not to purchase or watch

medial output. Thus the theory that the media provide the public with

what they want to know in order to be profitable. The pluralist theory

accentuates that society is made up of several interacting but

competing sections, which have more or less, equal access to resources

and influence. These are policed by a benign and neutral sate

operating in the public interest disagreeing strongly with Marxist

theories of the media being a subconscious ideological tool used to

indoctrinate the public.

In addition to this pluralists raise a number of points to support

their views such as the media are not all-powerful as governments hold

legislations against media owners having to much power ruling out such

trends in ownership as vertical integration. This was due to vertical

integration being considered as unfair for two main reasons: the

first, it doesn't allow competition to survive because smaller

companies cant compete with the cheaper costs of conglomerates: and

second, it reduces customer choice, because one person's or...

... middle of paper ...

...as a whole differentiates.

In conclusion the Pluralist theory is heavily based on assumption yet

develops an understanding between the publics freedom of choice in

what to view or read. However examples of this reliance between the

media and politicians to promote ideas can be portrayed by Tony Blair

in item B whom "would not impose further restrictions on cross-media

ownership" who may be acting in order to gain support from large media

institutions which rules out Katz and Lazarsfield ideas that power and

status are of little relevance in this particular context as people

who vote for politicians may have been subdued to bias in the media.

Overall, pluralists assert that there is little proof to claim

audiences submissively accept what is being fed to them and that

audiences are selective in their choices of media.