Media Ownership: Comcast

          When the world thinks of media conglomerates, prominent names such as Walt Disney and NBC Universal come to mind. Media conglomerates are companies that own “…large numbers of companies in various mass media such as television, radio, publishing, movies, and the Internet. [They] strive for policies that facilitate their control of the markets across the globe.” These companies, especially Walt Disney, have such a great influence on the U.S.’s mass media.

Because media directs individuals’ way of living, it's a powerful market to have a share in. Within these large companies, more and more shares of the mass media are being divvied up among the smaller individual organizations, a process called concentration on media ownership that is becoming increasingly common. Besides The Walt Disney Company, one of the most well-known media conglomerates is Comcast, the largest cable and Internet provider, as well as the fourth largest telephone service in the U.S.

            Comcast is growing rapidly, sticking its hand into many diverse shares of the media. Its headquarters are in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, offering cable, Internet, and digital phone services in 39 states as well as the District of Columbia. Its main subsidiary is NBC Universal of which Comcast owns 51% control. However, Comcast is beginning to expand, reaching out to numerous cable/programming networks such E! Entertainment, G4, The Golf Channel, and Style Network, as well as certain communication companies. Also, Comcast is involved in sports franchises and interactive media, as well as a few joint ventures in the media world. By presenting more exciting and interesting options in media, Comcast has travelled up the corporate ladder, making it one of the most well-known and used media conglomerates in the U.S.

            This concentration on media ownership is not the most intelligent strategy, for there are more negative aspects of this concentration than there are positive. The potential negative consequences are “commercially driven, ultra-powerful mass market media” that is predominantly loyal to its benefactors, rather than to public interest. Also, the public airwaves are controlled by a “minority [elite’s]” interests and perspectives. Lastly, that vigorous, market-centered “competition is absent, leading to slower innovation and increased prices”. Critics are worried mainly about these companies gradually becoming monopolies or oligopolies, and this is a potential consequence of the concentration on media ownership. Also, if only issues or interests that reflect those of the companies are shared, then what is not to say that the public would suffer from lack of knowledge that could affect them personally?

A few positive characteristics of this are fewer. Though there is the prospect of the practice of healthy competition among companies as well as providing a way to keep the government in check, the concern of the critics center upon “when there is a concentration of ownership due to the risk of increased economic and political influence”, that that influence can be unpredictable and “unaccountable” in itself.

For Comcast, the possibilities of the programs/channels it owns could be biased, or something be omitted, that omission or opinion could be vital to any one individual, or could affect other people in a personal manner. Comcast chose to build upon itself, becoming this large conglomerate, but the trick is to be as subjective and truthful as possible, for it is this company’s responsibility to not abuse its corporate power. Imagine—if all the major conglomerates of the world began to abuse their power in the media and beyond, it would be pure chaos and lies. It is media companies’ responsibility to relay to the public what it needs to know without bias or omission, though to some extent, it occurs anyways.