What is a potential consequence of concentration of ownership in media according to Curran and Seaton?

What is a potential consequence of concentration of ownership in media according to Curran and Seaton?

• A. Increased diversity of ownership.
• B. Market domination and lack of deregulation.
• C. Reduced profits for large corporations.
• D. Better alignment with public service values.

Answer: (D)

Concentration of ownership tends to shrink the range of voices and perspectives available in the media. Curran and Seaton argue that when a small number of corporations controls most outlets, editorial choices become more aligned with those owners’ commercial interests and gatekeeping priorities, rather than with serving the public interest. This weakens public service values like accountability, diversity of viewpoints, and representation for minority voices, because a less plural media landscape makes it harder for audiences to encounter critical, watchdog journalism and a broad spectrum of perspectives. So the idea is that concentration undermines public service values, not strengthens them. The other options don’t fit this view: increasing diversity isn’t a consequence of concentration, deregulation isn’t the central mechanism Curran and Seaton focus on, and profits for large corporations don’t inherently imply better public service alignment.

Concentration of ownership tends to shrink the range of voices and perspectives available in the media. Curran and Seaton argue that when a small number of corporations controls most outlets, editorial choices become more aligned with those owners’ commercial interests and gatekeeping priorities, rather than with serving the public interest. This weakens public service values like accountability, diversity of viewpoints, and representation for minority voices, because a less plural media landscape makes it harder for audiences to encounter critical, watchdog journalism and a broad spectrum of perspectives. So the idea is that concentration undermines public service values, not strengthens them. The other options don’t fit this view: increasing diversity isn’t a consequence of concentration, deregulation isn’t the central mechanism Curran and Seaton focus on, and profits for large corporations don’t inherently imply better public service alignment.