POLITICAL PARTIES

INFLUENCE AND
PRESSURE ON MEDIA
ORGANIZATIONS

Adriana Soaita
MBM Year I
Negotiation and Public Relations Prof. Sorin Terchila
 Media is
the 4th
power in
every
democratic
state.
This is all about the following:

Those who have the money have the

power and those who have the power
have the money .

Or, in other words – Where economic

power goes, political power will follow.
Nowadays we all agree that public opinion
changes by receiving information from political
parties and media. The influence is more
consistent and profound than ever.
But why do the political parties and mass media
influence the decisions made by the public? Why
does such an strong connection between politics
and media even exist ?
Actually is the same old story about not losing
(political) power, about maintaining or changing
the status quo in accordance to prevailing
interests of certain groups of people that
represent the system. It is also generally agreed
that there is also positive influence, that
manipulation of public opinion can lead to
improvement in the social order as well as social
responsibility and the environment indirectly.
Let`s swiftly go through some of the
concepts interlinked to this subject:

•POWER (SOCIAL AND POLITICAL)

•POLITICAL PARTIES
•MEDIA & SOCIAL MEDIA
•GLOBALIZATION & CORPORATE WORLD
POWER (SOCIAL AND POLITICAL)
In social science
and related to
politics, power
is the ability to
influence or
outright control
the behaviour
of people.
The term “authority” is often used for power perceived as
legitimate by the social structure. Power can be seen as
evil or unjust. This sort of primitive exercise of power is
historically endemic to humans. However, as social beings,
the same concept is seen as good and as something
inherited or given for exercising humanistic objectives that
will help, enable and move people. The use of power need
not involve force or the threat of force (coercion). On one
side, it closely resembles what egalitarian and consensual
nations (Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden) might
term as "influence", contrasted with the extreme what
some authors identify as "intimidation" in capitalist nations,
a means by which power is used. Much of the recent
sociological debate about power revolves around the issue
of its means to enable – in other words, power as a mean
to make social actions possible as much as it may constrain
or prevent them.
Positive features of POWER:

• Power prompts people to take action

• Makes individuals more responsive to changes
within a group and its environment
• Powerful people are more proactive, more likely to
speak up, make the first move, and lead negotiation
• Powerful people are more focused on the goals
appropriate in a given situation and tend to plan
more task-related activities in a work setting
• Power is associated with optimism about the future
because more powerful individuals focus their
attention on more positive aspects of the
environment
Negative features of POWER:
• Powerful people are prone to take risky, inappropriate,
or unethical decisions and often overstep their
boundaries
• When individuals gain power, their self-evaluation
become more positive, while their evaluations of others
become more negative
• Power tends to weaken one’s social attentiveness,
which leads to difficulty understanding other people’s
point of view
• Powerful people also spend less time collecting and
processing information about their subordinates and
often perceive them in a stereotypical fashion
• People with power tend to use more coercive tactics,
increase social distance between themselves and
subordinates, believe that non-powerful individuals are
untrustworthy, and devalue work and ability of less
powerful individuals
The general view on political power nowadays
though, isn`t that different from how it used to be
along history :)))
 POLITICAL PARTY

It is a group of individuals who share

common principles, organized to
acquire and exercise political power.
It represents certain interests
(economic, social, military,
environmental etc) depending on
the particular issues of the period in
which they exercise their influence.
The objectives of a political party
revolve around seeking political
power through collective efforts.
It normally should employ
constitutional and peaceful
While in power, it translates methods in seeking control over the
its declared objectives into government through elections.
governmental policies.
 Political parties have their deep roots in ancient
Greece and Rome

Roman Senate 44 B.C.– fight for political power - assassination of Julius

Cesar
 In earlier, pre revolutionary, aristocratic and monarchical
regimes, the political process unfolded within restricted circles
in which cliques and factions, grouped around particular
noblemen or influential personalities, were opposed to one
another.

The establishment of parliamentary regimes and the

appearance of parties at first scarcely changed this situation.
To cliques formed around princes, dukes, counts, or
marquesses there were added cliques formed around bankers,
merchants, industrialists, and businessmen. Regimes
supported by nobles were succeeded by regimes supported by
other elites.

These narrowly based parties were later transformed to a

greater or lesser extent, for in the 19th century in Europe and
America emerged parties, depending on mass support.
The 20th century saw the spread of political parties throughout
the entire world. In developing countries, large modern political
parties have sometimes been based on traditional
relationships, such as ethnic, tribal, or religious affiliations.
Moreover, many political parties in developing countries are
partly political, partly military. Earlier, certain socialist and
communist parties in Europe, experienced the same
tendencies.

These last-mentioned European parties demonstrated an equal

aptitude for functioning within multiparty democracies and as
the sole political party in a dictatorship. Developing originally
within the framework of liberal democracy in the 19th century,
political parties have been used ever since the 20th century by
dictatorships for entirely undemocratic purposes.
A fundamental distinction can be made between cadre parties and
mass-based parties. The two forms coexist in many countries,
particularly in western Europe, where communist and socialist
parties have emerged alongside the older conservative and liberal
parties. Many parties do not fall exactly into either category but
combine some characteristics of both.
MEDIA – SOCIAL MEDIA AND THEIR
MEANS OF INFLUENCE
The term "medium" (the singular form of "media")
is defined as "one of the means or channels of
general communication in society, as newspapers,
radio, television and social media."
The term media in its modern application relating
to communication channels is traced back to its
first use as such by Canadian communications
theorist Marshall McLuhan, who stated in
Counterblast (1954): "The media are not toys; they
should not be in the hands of Mother Goose and
Peter Pan executives. They can be entrusted only
to new artists, because they are art forms."
By the mid-1960s, the term had spread to general
use in North America and the United Kingdom.
(Mass media, in contrast, was, according to H.L.
Mencken, used as early as 1923 in the United
States.)
 Ever since the invention of the first printing press in 1450,
changes of public opinions, of behaviours, perceptions or
beliefs, has been attributed to widespread exposure to media
contents.

For instance, “The German Stories” spread by Mattia Corvin and

Saxon merchants, due to political disagreements, would create
a bloody and cruel image of Vlad Tepes in all western Europe.

From its first meaning, of form of art, we ended up today with

pejorative views on media. The first definition of media one may
find when searching on Google is the following :

“Media is a tool to manipulate peoples reactions to a certain

event by sensationalizing the information by increasing or
decreasing the data from the actual truth or by directly giving
false information.”
Fake news concept has
become a global
phenomena. It is almost
a general believe
nowadays that
corporate media
distorts the truth as it
follows the guidelines
of political parties and
other groups of
interest.
We are all consumers of media products. And one way or
another we do get under its influence.
GLOBALIZATION & THE WORLD OF
CORPORATIONS
Globalization most commonly refers to
the interconnectivity and
interdependence of world`s markets.

But globalization also implies the

movement of information, culture,
religion, media, technology, political
and military institutions across borders.

It is the process by which businesses or

other organizations develop
international influence or start
operating on an international scale.

Media globalization results in cultural

homogeneity across the globe as more
and more people have access to the
same cultural images and products.
 These are the world’s largest
corporations, compiled by market
capitalization (the total market
value of a company's outstanding
shares).
We live in an era where fewer
than 10% of the world's
public companies account for
more than 80% of all profits.
Twelve years ago, banks and
energy companies
dominated the top ten.
Today, it’s technology
companies, with US
computer company Apple in
the number one spot.
The Influential Powers of Mass Media -
Higher Powers Behind Closed Doors
No conspiracy theory is needed for
the analysis of media deviations
nowadays. A handful of individuals
and corporations that today own the
majority of media institutions,
acquired their holdings by openly
supporting political elites in the
countries in which their media
operate. Today it seems impossible to
remain in power without the support of
the media. On the other hand, media
owners use their media to promote
and disseminate their own political
views, and exploit politicians to
achieve their own corporate goals.
 Mass media plays a prominent essential role in the
formation of public opinion through several influential
organs such as the press, radio, television, cinema, theater,
books and social networking sites, which is one of the
most important means of communication with the public.

This means of influencing work in combination, and in the

consistency and integrity of the formation of public
opinion on various topics and circumstances and situations
and problems that present themselves on the mind and
that relate to various aspects of political, social, cultural or
economic.
The close interrelation of media, political and economic
capital (sometimes in a hand of a single person) is a
common feature of states nowadays.
 Under the capitalist monopolies, which control mass media, its
means are used in advertising for the general and presidential
elections or for several campaigns. Television and social networks are
the most popular among people.

Concentration of media ownership (also known as media

consolidation or media convergence) is a process whereby
progressively fewer individuals or organizations control increasing
shares of the mass-media. Contemporary research demonstrates
increasing levels of consolidation, with many media industries already
highly concentrated and dominated by a very small number of
companies.

A media conglomerate, media group, or media institution is a

company that owns numerous companies involved in mass-media
enterprises, such as television, radio, publishing, motion pictures,
social networks, Internet. According to the magazine The Nation,
"Media conglomerates strive for policies that facilitate their control of
the markets around the world."
In 1984, fifty independent media companies owned the majority of media
interests within the United States. As of October 2017, there were only six
big companies:

GENERAL ELECTRIC

GENERAL ELECTRIC

THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY

TIME WARNER

NEWS CORPORATION
VIACOM

CBS CORPORATION
MEDIA CORPORATIONS IN ROMANIA

MEDIA PRO – Owner Adrian Sarbu

INTACT MEDIA GRUP – Owner Dan Voiculescu – politician and
businessman
REALITATEA MEDIA – Previous owner Sorin Ovidiu Vantu – actual
owner Elan Schwartzenberg
ADEVARUL HOLDING – Former owner Dinu Patriciu
RCS RDS – Owner Zoltán Teszári
An oligopoly is when a few firms dominate a market. When
the larger scale media companies buy out the more smaller-
scaled or local companies they become more powerful within
the market. As they continue to eliminate their business
competition through buyouts or forcing them out (because
they lack the resources or finances) the companies will
dominate the media industry and will create a media
oligopoly.
Risks for media integrity
Media integrity is at risk when small number of companies
and individuals control the media market. Media integrity
refers to the ability of a media outlet to serve the public
interest and democratic process, making it resilient to
institutional corruption within the media system, economy
Media integrity is especially endangered in the case when
there are clientelist relations between the owners of the
media and political centres of power. Such a situation enables
excessive instrumentalization of the media for particular
political interests.
Elimination of net neutrality
Net neutrality is also at stake when media mergers occur. Net neutrality
involves a lack of restrictions on content on the internet, however, with big
businesses supporting campaigns financially they tend to have influence over
political issues, which can translate into their mediums. These big businesses
that also have control over internet usage or the airwaves could possibly
make the content available biased from their political stand point or they
could restrict usage for conflicting political views, therefore eliminating net
neutrality.
Concentration of media ownership is very frequently seen as a problem of
contemporary media and society. When media ownership is concentrated in
one or more of the ways mentioned above, a number of undesirable
consequences follow, including the following:
• Commercially driven, ultra-powerful mass market media, primarily loyal to
sponsors, advertisers and government rather than to the public
• Only a few companies representing the interests of a minority elite control
the public airwaves.
• Healthy, market-based competition is absent, leading to slower innovation
and increased prices.
Media ownership can pose serious challenges to pluralism when owners
interfere with journalists' independence and editorial line.
An infographic created by Jason at Frugal shows that almost all media comes
from the same six sources.
That's consolidated from 50 companies back in 1983.
The fact that a few companies own everything demonstrates "the illusion of
choice".
In democratic societies, the mass media fulfil essential political functions. The media
exercise democratic control through information and critique. They articulate social
problems and convey them to the political system thereby enabling democratic
participation.
The Role of the Media in the Construction of Public Belief and Social Change
The news media and the government are caught in a vicious circle of mutual
manipulation, myth making, and self-interest. Journalists need crises to
dramatize news, and government officials need to appear to be responding
to crises. Too often, the crises are not really crises but joint fabrications. The
two institutions have become so ensnared in a symbiotic web of lies that
the news media are unable to tell the public what is true and the
government is unable to govern effectively. That is the thesis advanced by
Paul H. Weaver, a former political scientist (at Harvard University), journalist
(at Fortune magazine), and corporate communications executive (at Ford
Motor Company), in his provocative analysis entitled News and the Culture
of Lying: How Journalism Really Works.

“The culture of lying,” he writes, “is the discourse and behaviour of officials
seeking to enlist the powers of journalism in support of their goals, and of
journalists seeking to co-opt public and private officials into their efforts to
find and cover stories of crisis and emergency response.

The result, he says, is a distortion of the constitutional role of government

into an institution that must continually resolve or appear to resolve crises;
it functions in “a new and powerful permanent emergency mode of
operation.”
The architect of the transformation was not a political leader or a constitutional
convention but Joseph Pulitzer, who in 1883 bought the sleepy New York
World and in 20 years made it the country’s largest newspaper. Pulitzer
accomplished that by bringing drama to news—by turning news articles
into stories with a plot, actors in conflict, and colourful details. In the late
nineteenth century, most newspaper accounts of government actions were
couched in institutional formats, much like the minutes of a board meeting and
about as interesting. Pulitzer turned them into stories with a sharp dramatic
focus that both implied and aroused intense public interest.

Pulitzer made stories dramatic by adding blaring headlines, big pictures, and eye-
catching graphics. His journalism took events out of their dry, institutional
contexts and made them emotional rather than rational, immediate rather than
considered, and sensational rather than informative. The press became a stage
on which the actions of government were a series of dramas.

Pulitzer’s journalism has become a model for the multistage theater of recent
decades. The rise of television has increased the demand for drama in news,
and the explosion in lobbyists and special-interest groups has expanded the
number of actors and the range of conflicts.
Business and politics had to learn to play the game as well.
Many companies have become adept at promoting the version of
reality they want the public and government officials to believe.
As a result, business has become a prominent player in the
manipulation of perception and in the corruption of the public
policy process.
Much of what appears in the press as business news is corporate
propaganda.
FOCUS ON POLITICS - FAKE NEWS
People routinely encounter inaccurate
information, from fake news designed to
confuse audiences, to communications
with inadvertent mistakes, to stories
made up to entertain readers. The hope
is that these inaccuracies can be easily
ignored, exerting little influence on our
thoughts and actions. Unfortunately,
being exposed to inaccuracies leads to
problematic consequences. After reading
inaccurate statements, readers exhibit
clear effects of those contents on their
decisions and problem-solving. This
occurs even when readers possess
appropriate prior knowledge to evaluate
and reject the inaccuracies. Exposure to
inaccurate information leads to confusion
about what is true, doubt about accurate
understandings, and subsequent reliance
on falsehoods.
Political Pressures, Economic Insecurity Biggest Threats to Media Freedom

Fear of losing jobs, politics, and self-censorship are suffocating media

freedoms.

Political dictate of strongmen, endangered security, threats, limited and

poor market – all these represent the reality of journalism

Mass media provides often services to political power. They become

servants of the government, and not their critics. Censorship and self-
censorship is implied. Freedom of journalists may as well become a dream.
Attacks on journalists are not sanctioned, nor is hate speech. Police and
judiciary are often serving the politics. A democratic state should support
independent media and journalists.

Dependent judiciary and bad laws lead to journalists and media not being
in a situation to defend themselves against political and business elites.
Media are under multiple pressure: from a corrupted political system,
economy, insufficiently developed democracy in the society, but also – from
themselves.
One way to control society, impose or maintain a status quo is by making direct
or indirect pressures on the media owners and editors, in order to change the
editorial policy in favour of the Government. That way, it is not hard to conclude
that governments and the ruling parties may become or they are the main
financiers of the mainstream media.
Lately, not just here but globally, journalism is no longer strictly a paid
profession. In the upcoming years there will be as many journalists who live of
journalism as there are poets living of poetry. All other problems stem from
there, because it is easy to misuse or blackmail a poor and a frightened man.
Another threat to freedom of media and freedom of expression is simply that
journalists are not capable, enough educated or they are conditioned to select
sources and information, by managers or editors, when working on stories
important for the public.
Media expert from Montenegro, Duško Vuković, said that the media and
journalists are turning to capitalist way of looking at the profession where the
freedom of media is lost.
Citizens should be the most interested in freedom of media which as a result
has the most qualitative communication in a society and working in the name of
public good and interests. The problem is that the citizens, in the context of
capitalist way of production, are seen firstly as consumers of the media.
The Effects of Pressure Groups on the Government

Political-economic factors are shaping news culture.

A pressure group is an organised interest group, which seek to

influence the formulation and the implementation of public policy.
In both the United Kingdom and the United States of America, for
example, membership to political parties has decreased, meanwhile
membership to pressure groups have increased. Pressure groups
differ from political parties in that they do not seek to win political
office; in addition, they concern themselves with sectional policy
rather than a wide range, and therefore pressure groups aim to
protect or advance a shared interest.

A pressure group is therefore any organisation that aims to

influence public policy by seeking to persuade decision-makers.
Democratisation is a political struggle among and within the
ruling elites and various socio-political forces. In the developing
world, democratisation is also a process by which democracy is
transculturated.
As a rule, all the parties concerned in democratisation will try to
seek the endorsement of the media in order to strengthen their
positions at the expense of the opponents’.
The ways the media frame the issues and render their sympathy
will affect the balance of power in a public debate. Essentially,
the media represent resources that can be mobilised to demote
or promote democracy.
The democratic cause will be served if they can help spread
democratic ideals, reflect the voices of contending parties,
provide the public with quality and relevant information,
articulate the social choices, and facilitate public deliberation.
Mode of Media Control

In an attempt to typify the democratic roles of media, Curran (2000) uses the locus by
which the political elite relates to other elites and the media in a society as the
classificatory criterion.

Four types are subsequently identified:

• The first model, as illustrated by contemporary Russia, represents the domination by

the economic elite who exerts its political influence through its power base in the
economy, control of private media, funding of political candidates and informal
channels of access to the state.

• In the second model, as broadly represented by Malaysia, South Korea and Taiwan
before recent democratisations, the leading group is the political elite who exercises
its influence through the media system to other groups in society.

• Corresponding to some Latin American countries, the third ideal type marks an
alliance between the political and economic elites who try to win the popular
acceptance of their consensus through the media.

• The fourth model, typified by liberal corporatism in contemporary Sweden and until
the 1980s by Britain, is based on a system of power sharing between organised
capital, labour and the state that largely defines discourses in the media.
In another context, Chan and Lee (1991) propose a typology of state-press
relationships. This typology views the application of power as the exercise
of rewards and punishments, as reflected by Gamson’s (1968) formulation
of inducement-constraints. Based on how different levels of inducement
and constraints are combined to form varying modes of media control,
the typology is as follows:
The first type, laissez faire, is characterised by a low level of state
inducements and a low level of constraints, as commonly found in liberal
democracies such as the United States whose power structure is in
general more decentralised and pluralistic. With minimal government
intervention, the media are primarily left to the 109 regulation of the
market. The journalists working in this system often adopt a form of
media professionalism that values objectivity, accuracy and balanced
reporting. In practice, this media professionalism represents a general
unarticulated commitment to the established authority. The privately and
sometimes publicly owned media tend to reproduce the existing order, by
cultivating value consensus rather than resorting to state coercion. Within
the boundaries of capitalism and liberal democracy, the press amplifies
diverse voices, especially those of legitimated elite dissent. The media
render their ultimate support for the existing social system as long as it
shows flexibility in adapting to new challenges. They may play a role in the
redistribution of political power, but always among the already powerful.
Opposite to laissez faire is repression that is practised in systems with a
centralised power structure, as represented by China, North Korea and
Central and Eastern European countries before the collapse of communism
around 1990. In a totalitarian or authoritarian system, the state intrudes into
every domain of the civil society and levies strict constraints on the press
without delivering a corresponding level of inducements. Outright press
control is imposed. A repressed press tends to exist on state subsidy and
have little autonomy, especially in the political sphere. Under these
circumstances, the mainstream media in general will serve as the
mouthpieces of the governing elite, legitimating the status quo, demoting
democracy and blocking out dissenting voices.
Colonial Hong Kong is characteristic of yet another type of press control state
co-optation where a high level of inducements is accompanied by a low level
of constraints. Co-optation is the process of bringing outsiders inside so that
the outsiders’ views can be in line with those of the central authority.
Providing the press with a variety of symbolic and financial inducements
such as exclusive information, honours, and government advertising, the
state induces the press to be neutral or supportive of the government. The
press is not directly penalised for keeping a distance from the government.
The cost, if any, is that it will not be rewarded by the state. State co-optation
is most common in systems where the press is privately owned and the
power checks are not very strong.
 Conclusions

• The roles of the media in a society are very much defined by its mode of
media control, which varies mainly with its power structure.
• In general, when power is concentrated, media tend to serve as an extension
of the state and of the political parties and support the status quo.
• The prevailing journalistic paradigm is partisan and administrative in nature.
• When power is more diffused, media can maintain greater relative autonomy
and serve as a forum for a wider sector of the public. Associated with this is
the journalistic paradigm of media professionalism that operates in a
marketed environment.
• Media can perform both positive and negative functions in regard to
democratisation. They can prevent, resist, promote and accelerate
democracy as the case may be, depending on the prevailing mode of power
distribution and specific social and organisational contexts.
• What is especially relevant to the theme of democratisation is that each
mode of media control and the corresponding media roles may shift as
political power is restructured. The media can render a greater
emancipatory force when the power structure becomes more
decentralised or divisive.
• A more equitable distribution of political power will always result in a
more relaxed mode of media control which, in turn, favours the use of
media as a promoter of democracy.
• Mass media is an essential tool for political power. In every nation mass
media serves as a weapon against political opponents and it acts as the
voice that leads the nation to where the power intends. The powers and
convenience of the use of mass media has somehow become a
manipulative tool for political powers, behind the closed doors, although
press freedom seems inevitable in a democratic country.
• While it is essentially true that financial gains is arguably still the top
priority for media organizations, political power possesses the real
control over the industry as it is the perfect tool to fulfil selected
agendas in order to shape certain trends, cultures and believes into
society, to fulfil purposes or ideologies.
Bonus - How to spot a fake news ?