For instance, there was a time where media hegemony exists in Indonesia. It was the time called “New Order” during President Soeharto regime which lasted for 32 years. He was well known for his authoritarian leadership. The media at that time was not free to make a full coverage of the national and international news. They had to get approval before they were able to publish the issue. The media was oppressed especially in publishing article that comprises critic to the government. The most evident phenomenon was the closing of several print media, such as, Tempo magazine. The magazine company was forced to close because it reported negative critic that offended the ruling government.
At that time, government established a media organization to ensure the media freedom. However, the media organization turned up to be the government watchdog in the media industry. Every negative critic and opinion about the current leader was repressed. At that time, media hegemony was practiced because it was one way to ensure the continuity of the leadership. However, the hegemony collapsed in 1998. Since democracy was introduced, media gained their freedom to make a full coverage of every news around the country and around the globe. This era was known as the “Reformation Era”.
Today, technology advancement plays a big role in the media industry. For instance, the rise of the internet as the ‘new media’ serves as a medium to deliver the news. Mobile phones and television enable the media industry to deliver their message efficiently. Hence, people’s knowledge are not limited to one point of view only. People absorb a lot of information from the media today. Due to the vast information that they can access, people view things from many perspectives. Hence, the viewer are more educated today.
Additionally, democracy also plays a major role in today’s media development. Since the rise of democracy, the media are able to publish critics about the current issue in the country. The pressure from the authority no longer exists. No opposing views are banned. However, the civilians’ voices have to be delivered in an ethical manner. It should not be delivered arbitrarily.
In today’s context, with the technological advancement that lead to more educated viewers and democracy, is it still possible for media hegemony to flourish?? Is media hegemony a healthy style for the media industry??
I think so. Tv shows, news,game shows, reality shows indicates leadership and dominance , not Control...and the power of the media is on the fans or participants which mostly are working class people and other diverse subordinate groups.
ReplyDeleteWell, government plays a very important role in the distribution of media. Supressed media has its advantages and disadvantages. Having supressed media could allow harmony in this multiracial/culture/ethnic world. On the other hand, it takes away or hid information from the masses.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to media hegamony, it is dependent on the government. I believed they had the authority and power that even the masses may not overthrow. Thus media hegamony may be done discretely, and when no end recievers get hold of this information, it will flourish.
In my point of view, the government is fair enough with the media. Media has shown their power by critics.The media is just one way of people expressing their opinion to public both positive and negative. The government have shown some fairness in the media but it's not fighting for the struggle of control but rather showing their side of view. I don't think the media hegamony is healthy for the industry
ReplyDeleteWinston~
the phenomenon of media hegemony still exists in certain form nowadays. people in the modern society have access to more information but are still limited to some extent. for instance,some countries will not let their people to access every website they want. this may somehow narrow down the info people get, but if we look at it from another angle, this is probably a way of maintaining the stability of the society:)
ReplyDeleteMedia Hegemony still exists in the world today. For example, when my brother went for his final year project to china last year, they could not access facebook as it was blocked there. There are alot of websites that are blocked too. The government is trying to keep the outside world from influencing their people. By doing so, it limits the information that the people is able to get. Restricting information and only letting people get the information that they want them to get is not healthy at all.
ReplyDeleteMedia hegemony is still practised by many countries today. However, due to technological advancements not all news and information are fully censored or classified like the olden times. Information has its way to reveal itself to the public in a number of ways.
ReplyDeleteWorld leaders should thus recognize the need for transparency and honesty in providing information. This creates more trust and happiness in the people towards the government.
I think that media hegemony still exist today. However, it might not be as extreme as the "New Order" in Indonesia. One of the example is the news coverage of the death of a student in one campus. It is reasonable that the government control its citizens thought, because people do not need to know everything that is happening. It can also serve to mantain the bilateral or regional ties between countries. Hence, the media has to be controlled in a way to regulate the news coverage.
ReplyDelete-William-
everyone needs to express their own opinions and not have influence over what they can say or cannot say. i don't think media hegemony will ever flourish because it will always hinder self expression.
ReplyDeleteThe only reason the government should have to intervene with public news is if it will spark panic and mayhem. If order is lost over what is being said through media, the government should try to downplay the facts. Media already does so, it's influenced by what people want to see and listen to. Most shows aren't looking to reach important facts, they're using it for ratings.
ReplyDeleteThe media is sometimes controlled to make the government look better than it is. There is a lot of corruption everywhere. We need to be able to think for ourselves and not be easily influenced by the media. The internet is a good way to say whatever is on your mind and not have it censored. Are we influenced by the media? Are we partially censored because the media we take in is censored too?
ReplyDelete-Nini
In my opinion, media hegemony is still needed for some conditions to control the information appearing in the media. Not all information is appropriate to be shown to the public. At the same time, people may express their opinions through other media such as blog where they can say their thoughts more freely. Acceptance by the public is not 100% guarantee as different people have different opinions. One thing that people need to remember when expressing their thoughts is about ethical or moral issue.
ReplyDeleteWell, in my opinion, i feel that media hegemony might still exists but to a small extent. With the new technology, as u have described earlier, it is possible for everyone to get a lot of information. Besides that, with the new technology, government is having a little power to control the citizens' from reaching to a large context of news from around the world. You see, it is difficult to control internet, which is globally rather than media hegemony. When you use media hegemony, government is able to control but this case is not applied to the existence of new technology. Hence, media hegemony might be still exists but has a little impact in today world.
ReplyDeletethanks
Media hegemony still exists today in some countries. Though I don't want to name it, in those countries, all kinds of media are being controlled by the Government. With the developing technology, it is getting more and more difficult to control. Even so, media hegemony still exists nowadays.
ReplyDeleteI think sometimes media hegemony is beneficial actually. Especially, perhaps, in countries that might be disunited and chaotic, one in which there are too many differing views, causing the country to have no direction... it might just be ideal for, say, the government to step in and provide direction through the media.
ReplyDelete