Tricky media ownership means we should go back to basics

---

By Desi Tzoneva

A superficial look into the growth of online publications (operated by a mere handful of people) points to a change in patterns of media ownership. The long-standing media ownership by a small percentage of the rich elite seems to be changing hands, with individuals taking advantage of the online space to publish news they think is relevant, rather than being dictated to do so from the top. With online today, it is possible for almost anyone to publish anything. And the restrictions imposed by powerful media moguls, are in some cases, diminishing.

Transparency and trying to give the public unfiltered information is a step ahead in this industry – where typically just a handful of individuals have controlled the media empire. What has been important is that it is these guys who can prevent an important story from being run; from showing a certain documentary; for giving copy space or air time to friends, and thereby swaying public opinion to favour what the media owners want.

This is not true media. And it can be problematic. Firstly, commercially-driven mass media is loyal mainly to its sponsors (yes, the advertisers and government rather than public interest); if only a few companies (those representing a minority elite) control the public airwaves, calling them ‘public’ is simply paying lip service. Finally, the absence of healthy, market-based competition often leads to slower innovation and increased prices. Murdoch’s News Corp, for instance, is one of the cases of a media empire attempting to maintain its dominance, which is significanly threatened by not equal media competitors but the spiral of growth online.

The power of the media can’t be overstated. It has the capacity to drive change; shape opinions; expose wars and corruption; but at the same time, it can hide these things, depending on who owns the media company. If this is possible, how then can the media be truly accountable and achieve the high standards it sets for itself?
It’s important to address the issue of what is in the public interest. If the media is controlled by a handful, their interest will infiltrate broadcast/printed content and could not really be said to have a positive impact on public interest. The diversity of opinions would be quite shoddy. But this means that advertisers remain happy - an interesting trade off.

The South African case is not much different. Amandla!Forum says that South African media ownership is currently concentrated in the hands of a few corporations. Four companies - Avusa Publishing; Naspers (Media24); Independent Newspapers; and Caxton - own the bulk of print media. In broadcast, the SABC controls 41.6% of radio and 69.3% of television audiences.

Labeled as “monopoly control [of] our democracy,” many have argued for more state regulation, basically saying that the monopolistic-type ownership stifles competition for smaller entrants, and it is, in fact, better to let the government have a hand in the cookie jar. Over 15 years ago, then Gauteng ANC chairperson, Tokyo Sexwale, called for diversity of media ownership. But how are we to achieve this if entry into the market itself remains difficult? Past legislation; unequally established structures with current impact; and skewed resource distribution are some of the reasons. Not only this, but the levels of foreign media ownership don’t help much in this case, either.

The concept of agenda setting is also very interesting – the media is such a powerful tool and can run the danger of becoming a mouth piece of a ruling party, whether it is political or business. Media bias is another fundamental aspect to this because it has become necessary to ask whether the information we are given has been published just because it sells; because it has a subtle agenda; or if it is, in fact, giving the reader the truth.

In the end, I don’t think the first question should be about regulation or deregulation. We first need to look at whether the media is fulfilling its promises – namely, to inform the public in an accurate, objective way. Subsequent decisions can be made, but the primary consideration is in truly delivering quality news to the population.
Are you for or against media regulation, and why? What are your views on this topic? We’d like to hear from you so post your comments on our blog.

View all

Facebook launches as advertising platform in South Africa

---

By Desi Tzoneva

Wednesday, 3 February saw the launch of Facebook as an advertising platform in South Africa, at The Venue in Melrose Arch. Adrian Hewlett, MD of Habari Media, began by stating that Facebook currently forms the third largest population in the world – it is effectively, the United States of Facebook.”

Hewlett said that while the online industry in South Africa has played the underdog role over the last few years, he is now seeing an important shift. Nielsen’s recent figures of the local online environment generously indicate that there are over eight-million unique users online. Conservative estimates are about 6.5-million users. This is an important opportunity for local advertisers to tap into the social media space. To bring this opportunity to South Africa, Habari Media and Facebook launched the initiative in the country as part of a greater global rollout and strategy.

Next, CEO of social media agency Cerebra, Mike Stopforth, sketched out the landscape of social media in South Africa. While Cerebra began by promoting blogs, Stopforth realised that social media was not about blogs or the technology used. Rather, it is about “the community that sits on top of these platforms… and that community is priceless.”

The problem with social media recently - much hype and buzz has been created around it, many corporates and decision-makers are still unsure of its value. Social media is not easily trackable and translating initiatives into return on investment (ROI) is difficult. Despite these limitations, Stopforth believes that social media works, although in a “roundabout” way.

He divided the social media users in South Africa into three broad groups: the lurkers; the experimenters; and the geeks or ‘uber-users’. The lurkers form the bulk of internet users in South Africa. He said that this group has flourished due to the prominence of social media networks on Google. Simple searches often lead to social media sites, and while these ‘lurkers’ may not necessarily interact in the social sphere, they have become aware of it. “They are the readers, the passive participants in the process.”

The experimenters are those “who have dipped their toes in, started up a profile, (they are part of the millions who have set up a blog or a group once, and never blogged again).” They are those who have acknowledged that there is something going on online and in social media, wanted to understand what that is, but haven’t spent much time doing so.

The geeks, or ‘uber-users’, he identified as a small; highly-networked; highly influential; and knowledgeable group of core users that is steadily influencing the rest of the users in the spectrum.

Interestingly enough, he finds the developments towards social media are propelled by traditional media, with 5FM DJ, Gareth Cliff and newspapers like the Sunday Times, holding a strong online presence. One major shift with traditional print, has been that the publication’s move online has resulted in far more readers becoming involved in the social media side of that brand’s interaction online.

Brands that are smart are slowly but surely realising that the adage, ‘word of mouth’ is fast becoming ‘word of mouse’ (Dave Duarte) and this dynamic is what has changed the attitude of so many brands online. Brands are realising that users, ordinary people, are doing extraordinary things online.

Stopforth said he has seen the change in attitude towards social media by advertising agencies which have noticed the opportunities and no longer feel threatened by the space because in many ways, it is seen to augment above-the-line activities well. Other agencies have noted that benefits from the social space has meant an expansion of skills within the industry; increased experimentation; integration of social media into marketing strategies; staying in the conversation; and sustaining the message above-the-line.

Stopforth added that social media has also been adopted behind the corporate firewall. He said that more brands are beginning to understand that their staff love to connect with each other through these platforms and are therefore creating secure platforms to connect them, moving beyond the marketing dynamic to the HR domain.

Some South African brands which are doing well on social media networks such as Twitter and Facebook include Toyota; Samsung; Microsoft; Virgin Active; Woolworths; Vida e caffe; and Standard Bank.

Stopforth said that brands are still deciding whether to be passive or active; to be forceful online or pro-active; or merely reactive to comments about their brands.

In summary, Stopforth predicts that participation and popularity of social media will increase with the arrival of multiple undersea cables. This will see a massive increase in the amount of internet access available to average South African users. He also says that while brands are not forced to engage, they are missing out on opportunities if they don’t engage with social media.

For more information, email mike@cerebra.co.za or visit www.cerebra.co.za.

View all