Dumbing down the media

By the end of the 20th century the notion of the semi-altruistic media baron was beginning to unravel. While Rupert Murdoch and Kerry Packer still run fairly archetypal media dynasties, no one believes their children will be moguls like their fathers. The classic model of the privately run media empire - the Hearst/Beaverbrook/Northcliffe/Murdoch model - is rapidly being replaced by the media conglomerate model, an edifice which is not based on the political power of an individual and his newspapers, but on the economic power of a technologically and geographically diverse public corporation.

In their quest for even greater financial success, the old-style media barons have traded personal power for corporate power. While they still send shivers of fear down the spines of politicians, the chieftains of today's media empires are much more interested in securing their place at the top of the pecking order of the international communications industry than they are in changing governments or wielding their personal power over politicians. The new media baron is far more likely to be an admirer of Henry Ford than of Katherine Graham.

This metamorphosis is reshaping journalism for the simple reason that journalism no longer retains its place at the centre of media power. Throughout most of the last century it was the control of journalism that gave the media barons their greatest influence (and a lot of money, besides). Beaverbrook's power over Churchill was because of journalism. Murdoch assisted in destroying the Whitlam Government because of journalism.

In those days, journalism was not just the media baron's most potent currency, it was close to being his only one. Today a media corporation trades in many different currencies, and journalism is no longer the biggest of these - entertainment is. “Rupert Murdoch is not a newspaper proprietor any more,” says business commentator Alan Kohler. “He is a global entertainment retailer, and so are his children. They are not monsters who will one day return to the swamp,” he argues. “They are role models for anyone who wants to get rich in the media.”

Not only is entertainment more profitable than journalism, it is also far more universal. Entertainment appeals to all age groups, all demographics, across all cultural boundaries. It may lack the political or intellectual potency of journalism, but it's not in decline, it doesn't have a credibility crisis, it doesn't demand great mental effort from its audience, and it can run on movie screens, television screens, computer screens and telephone screens. The future of serious journalism is under threat in large part because it has been replaced by entertainment at the heart of the media power edifice.