“Manufacturing consent” is a concept that explore how mass media shapes and influences public opinion. The concept was popularised by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky in their 1988 book Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, the theory explores how corporate and state interests align to control the narrative presented in mainstream media (Herman and Chomsky, 1988). The term refers to the idea that mass communication is often altered to serve the interests of powerful elites, subtly influencing the beliefs and perspectives of the general public.
The Propaganda model
Herman and Chomsky’s analysis revolves around what they term the “Propaganda Model,” which describes how economic and political forces filter news content. They outline five key points that shape media output:
Media ownership:
Concentration of media ownership among large corporations affects what is covered and how. A small number of conglomerates owning the majority of media outlets often results in news coverage that aligns with corporate interests (Jones, 2020).
Advertising:
Media outlets rely heavily on advertising revenue to survive, which can result in content being adjusted to suit the interests of advertisers (Curran and Seaton, 2018). Stories that might alienate advertisers or their interests may be downplayed or avoided altogether. An example is the reluctance of some media platforms to cover environmental issues critically, for fear of losing funding from large advertisers in the fossil fuel industry.
Sourcing of information:
The third point, involves the sourcing of news, where journalists often rely on government officials or corporate spokespeople, who are considered credible and authoritative. According to Herman and Chomsky in Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (1988), this dependency can result in a narrow range of perspectives, as these official sources may have their own agendas and be bias.
Flak:
Flak refers to negative responses to media coverage, which can deter critical reporting. Organisations like think tanks or lobbying groups generate flak to discredit dissenting voices or narratives that challenge the status quo (Jones, 2020). For example, scientists raising concerns about climate change have, at times, faced considerable flak from conservative think tanks funded by fossil fuel interests, which question the legitimacy of their research.
Ideology:
And finally, dominant ideologies, such as anti-communism during the Cold War or the ‘War on Terror’ post-9/11, shape the news agenda. During the Cold War, media narratives in the UK and in the US often portrayed socialist movements in a negative light, emphasising the threat they posed to Western democracy, while downplaying the complexities of those movements (Curran and Seaton, 2018).
Conclusion
“Manufacturing Consent” offers a critical framework for understanding how media operates as a gatekeeper of information. It challenges the notion of a neutral and objective press, highlighting the underlying forces that shape media content. In an era of mass communication dominated by corporate interests, algorithms, and 24-hour news cycles, the importance of media literacy cannot be overstated. Being aware of the filters through which information is presented empowers audiences to critically assess the news, seek diverse perspectives, and make informed choices.
References:
Herman, E.S., & Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media.
Jones, O. (2020). The Establishment: And How They Get Away With It.
Curran, J., & Seaton, J. (2018). Power Without Responsibility: The Press and Broadcasting in Britain. 8th ed.
Union of Concerned Scientists. (2017). How the fossil fuel industry harassed climate scientist Michael Mann.
I think this is a great blog explaining the Propaganda Model. You went through each of the key five points, and provided examples, which helped for easier understanding. I really liked how you included references to further define your key points. Great job!