COMM122 Introduction to Media Industries & Institutions (UMass-Amherst)

Hello, Davis here. In this episode, I will continue to bring to you Max, the real human voice behind this episode on media regulation produced in March 2020. Here is Max. 

I will bring to you as real human voice, Max, who was a real COMM 122 student. Max made this episode on media regulation in 2020. Here is Max. 

As we wrap up the topic of audience research from previous weeks, we will start a new series on media regulations. You are no stranger to media regulations.

This is London! 

Commercial Media Mandate? What is it? 

We are live from Cape Town, South Africa! 

 If you reside in the US, just look at things around you, you will notice that many products are NOT produced in the US. Yet, if you look at cinemas, I bet you will find many of the same films currently screened across different cities worldwide. Chances are, they are made in Hollywood.

While technological advances have dramatically cut down the cost of producing multimedia content, Media production remains a high-risk and high-cost business.   

We will start with a silly question: How is a movie different from a bucket of popcorn? 

A quick chat about “agency.” 

Today we explore the question of  'how media  produce, and promote fringe ideas or minority viewpoints.' through the concept of counterpublic. 

Today Davis will be interviewing Adriana about what she has learned in class about the concept of “dominant ideology” and how media industries play a crucial role in reproducing “the common sense” of our times.

In this episode, our AI host Davis will take you back in history to the roots of this blooming area of communication studies.

In this episode, Davis, your AI host, asks Gabby a few questions about COMM122. Turns out Gabby is not her real name! 

Hello and welcome! My name is Gabby, and I am one of the hosts of the UMASS “Media Industry Podcast,” your trusted companion and source of information for “COMM 122: Introduction to Media Industries & Institutions.”I am a Comm undergrad and am passionate about social media and community engagement. In the fall of 2018 I took this class and it provided me with a great insight into the media industry and also helped me discover what topics I wanted to focus on during my studies and professional career. In this episode, we will talk about “media industry studies,” and look at some of the questions and problems you’ll explore in class this semester.Have you ever asked yourself: “Why did your favorite TV show get cancelled if it was so popular? How could concentration of media ownership threaten freedom of expression? Why does advertising investment in big media events such as the Super Bowl matter for our views of diversity and social inclusion? How state-run and private media can operate as propaganda machines? Or if global, video-streaming websites like Netflix will kill or democratize national film industries? ” Well, these are examples of problems commonly explored by media industry studies.As explained in this week’s readings, Media Industries Studies (MIS) is a subfield in communication and media studies that seeks to understand the works of industrial structures, processes, and labor practices behind the production, distribution, and consumption of different forms of media content. Why is this knowledge necessary? Why do we need to know how media industries operate, and what factors influence their operations? Well, media are not simple, “neutral tools” we use for entertainment and communication. In the 21st century, media (“new-and-old” or “digital-and-analog”) have become powerful actors in the shaping of social life. Media industries are not only multi-billion-dollar businesses that contribute to our economy; they also are systems specialized in the creation of social meaning that can enable or disable social communication, and influence our understanding of the world. If we want to understand today’s communication ecology, we need to know: why media industries produce and distribute some contents and not others; how people’s media preferences are shaped by their ability to access and consume information; and how “we” as consumers and citizens can collectively influence the decision-making of communication services and media corporations. These are central problems we need to address in order to understand under what circumstances the media can promote a more inclusive and better world, or when they become a vehicle to spread misinformation and reproduce social inequalities. Media Industries Studies (MIS) is an intra-disciplinary and interdisciplinary field because it goes beyond media, film and television studies and borrows insights from multiple disciplines, including economics, sociology of culture, law, public policy, and business and management.... (Complete script available on the class Moodle website)

Hello, COMM122 Podcast listeners! This week, we will talk about the economic conditions of media production, with a focus on the transformative role of digitalization.First, let’s refresh a point I made earlier in the semester, which is that the media business is a high-risk one. It is expensive to produce content and there is great uncertainty over what is gonna sell. In this week’s classes, Professor Wayne breaks down four types of costs associated with media production.The first cost, Development costs, which are the costs of the creative phase of media goods, such as songwriting, script-writing, and composing music. In the development stage, media organizations make advance payments to creative talents as an incentive for creative talents to complete the commissioned work. We discussed in class why some songwriters and script-writers went on strike. The main reason is often about these creative talents feeling that they are not getting a fair share of the profits from media products.The second cost is production cost, that is the cost of actually “making the media good.” In some ways, digital technologies have greatly reduced the production cost, as global outsourcing platforms such as Upwork.com makes it easier for a local media organization to scout creative talents around the world at a more affordable rate. The free open-source software movement, also known as FOSS, has produced numerous free computer programs for media content creation and editing, allowing amateurs and less resourceful organizations to produce content professionally.The third cost is distribution and marketing. For traditional media, content is often delivered through a physical medium, be it a CD/DVD disk or cassette tape. These physical media tend to cost more to create, store and ship. So digitalization can significantly cut the cost of distribution because nowadays content is stored in the cloud and distributed over the internet. One thing about cloud storage and delivery is that there is no cap on how many media products that can be stored. Unlike in brick-and-mortar stores, where the number of media products to be displayed and sold is constrained by physical space. Due to the freed-up storage and delivery capacity, the so-called long-tail effect comes into play. Previously, in the era of physical retail, media organizations and retailers would prioritize selling blockbusters, top albums, and bestsellers. Because their inventory is limited by physical space, so they have to reserve the scarce physical space for the items that have the most potential for creating profits. Those top selling products are only a few, but contribute the most to the stores revenue. The rest of the products, that is, the majority of products available in the market, do not sell as easily as the top ones, and they tend to be dropped off store shelves due to limited storefront and screen time. Because online platforms are not constrained by the scarcity in storage and delivery, the majority of the less-popular products can be stored and made available online, without costing extra for the media business. In fact, these less-popular products would find their niche audience online. That is why according to Chris Anderson, products in low demand or that have a low sales volume can collectively make up a large market share, exceeding the relatively small share of bestsellers and blockbusters. If you want to learn more about the long-tail theory, head to YouTube and search Chris Anderson, long tail, and TedTalk.The last cost is Overhead, that is, expenses required to maintain media institutions, such as the infrastructure and operations of studios; salaries of studio and label staff.Ok, that's all for this episode. Please stay tuned for the next episode on the funding model and structure of the US broadcast network.

Hi, welcome back to COMM122 Podcast. Part three on the topic of Media regulations. In this episode, we will discuss regulations targeting media content. The most extreme end of media regulation is censorship. You can check out the recent incident involving South Park in China where the government took down all of its episodes, because the show commented on China’s political situation. Content regulation in the form of outright censorship is quite common in many authoritarian societies, but it is rare in western democracies. Here in the US, the First Amendment prevents the government from making laws that abridge freedom of speech. However, this protection of free speech is not absolute. There are exceptions to what is protected by the First Amendment. For instance, while political speech is generally protected, commercial speech such as advertising is subject to varying degrees of regulations. One example is tobacco advertising, which has been banned on television since 1971. As we discuss several examples of content regulations, keep in mind that different rationales for regulations are applied, depending on what kind of speech, who is involved and what media are used. Governments and legislative bodies are just one of many types of regulators. Let’s revisit a point made in an earlier episode. There are formal regulations implemented by the government and official regulatory bodies. There are also informal regulations, which are rules and norms implemented outside the purview of the government and official regulatory bodies. Informal regulations are also called self-regulation, which is the type of regulation enforced by companies or trade associations. In previous episodes, we discussed examples of informal and formal regulation, do you remember any of that? Yes, movie ratings in the US, for example, are the result of self-regulation because it is enforced by the Motion Picture Association of America. Next, we focus on different pieces of content regulations implemented by the official regulatory bodies. In this case, FCC, and FTC, Federal Trade Commission.The first piece of regulation is about Obscenity, Indecency and Profanity. Notice the bleep censor? Federal law prohibits obscene, indecent and profane content from being broadcast on the radio or TV. However, because of different moral codes and cultural values, the public and regulators may fight what is considered obscene, indecent and profane. Here, FCC takes a somewhat common-sense approach, called, “you know it when you see it.” This standard appeals to our moral gut-feeling and has been adopted from a Supreme Court’s case in 1964. In the case on obscenity and pornography, Justice Stewart Potter wrote: “I know it when I see it.” Based on this regulation, obscene content is prohibited at all times on broadcast TV, radio, as well as cable, satellite TV and satellite radio. Indecent and profane content is prohibited on broadcast TV and radio between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. This is the time when the broadcast TV audience likely includes children. The same rules for indecency and profanity do not apply to cable, satellite TV and satellite radio because they are subscription services.The second piece of a regulation enforced by the FCC is about educational programming. The Children's Television Act requires U.S. broadcast television stations to air content designed to serve the educational and informational needs of children. It also limits the number of advertisements during children's programs. In July of 2019, FCC voted to revise some of the rules about children's education programming. Some of the changes are: stations can carry educational/informational programming as early as 6 a.m., rather than 7 a.m. Stations can also turn ongoing series into short-form content. According to the FCC, the old rule was outdated and the new rule is put in place to account for the fragmentation in viewing behavi

Hey COMM122 podcast listeners, this is Max, Your lovely podcast host. In the previous episode, we discussed four historical regulations targeting the media and communication industry. In the episode today, we are gonna look at some of the most contemporary issues of media regulations. More specifically, we will bring up the issues of net neutrality and cross-ownership. How regulators deal with the issues reflect their regulatory philosophy and ideological leaning. With the seismic changes in the nation’s politics, we will see how the same media regulation issue might be dealt with very differently under vastly different administrations.Because most often regulations are implemented by the government and official regulatory bodies, let’s first discuss the role of government. In the previous examples of radio act of 1912 and 1927, as well as in the communications act 1934, the US government served as a rule-maker, seeking to strike a balance between incentivizing the marketplace and to protect the public interest. Some would argue that the industry itself can handle issues pretty well. The industry can tackle issues such as media violence internally, by implementing self-regulation. People who support this view tend to believe in the free market and small government, claiming that the intervention of the government will obscure the supply and demand equilibrium. In other words, through free competition and supply and demand, the market forces, not the government, will pick the winners and losers. There is a lot to like about this viewpoint. However, the market force isn’t perfect. Sometimes industry just cannot regulate itself. Remember the interference issue before the Radio Act 1912? Governments need to step in sometimes because a democratically elected government can represent the public interest and neutral arbitrator. Many argue that the government should take a more preemptive role in making rules and setting standards to fix issues facing the media industry, not only because market force may fail, but also because the media and communication industry is an important public infrastructure and the stake for the public interest is high. Many media products resemble public goods or common pools of resources, and they cannot be entirely privatized. While this call for governments to step in preemptively might be well-intended, sometimes governments may become too intrusive, paternalistic, or even ignorant by making rules too cumbersome or irrelevant that it takes toll on the healthy development of the industry. We can just look at the recent congressional hearings regarding online privacy, big tech, and foreign interferences. As some of the technologically challenged congressmen and congresswomen grill tech executives and engage in grandstanding, do you really trust they can make fair and balanced rules? So, this is a dilemma facing media regulations, government can be powerful enough to protect you from big business, but it can also be too powerful to harm you. Private industry can be powerful enough to deliver to you better goods and services, but it could become too big to harm the public interest.Next, we will look at a type of regulation called structural regulation. It includes setting rules and standards about access, that is, who has access and how, about ownership, that is, who owns and how much, and about licensing, which is the permission to use public resources such as public airwaves. Net neutrality, a recent regulatory issue falling under the category of access because it is about what content is accessible and by whom. The principle of net neutrality maintains that internet service providers cannot charge content providers to speed up the delivery of their goods. all Internet traffic, whether it be streaming videos from Netflix or your text messages, is treated equally. In 2015, under the Obama administration, internet service providers, ISP, were reclassified by the FCC as a c

Hello, COMM122 podcast listeners. As we wrap up the topic of media mandate from previous weeks, we will now start a new series on media regulations.You are no stranger to media regulations. If you follow the news about e-cigarettes, you might have heard of a call to ban the advertising of e-cigarettes on television. This call came after numerous reports of vaping-related deaths. Another recent case is the talk of breaking up big tech because big tech companies become overly influential. There are also conversations on regulating fake news and foreign interference on social media platforms.Well, First of all, Regulations are various rules, standards, and norms set by governments, legislative bodies, and non-government entities. You might think that regulations are all enforced by governments. Well, many regulations are indeed enacted by governments following laws passed by Congress. We call this formal regulation. An example is the ban on the advertising of tobacco products. There is also informal regulation, also called, self-regulation. An example is movie ratings. Movie ratings are not enforced by the US government, but by the Motion Picture Association of America, which is an non-government organization. Regulations could target content produced by media outlets, or something not directly related to content, such as media ownership, licensing, who has access to the media, and etc.If you feel the information is overwhelming, don’t worry, we will go over each of the common types of regulation, with examples. Before we do that, let’s review four milestones of media-related legislation in the US history. First, the Radio Act of 1912. This is a federal law that went into effect in 1912, not long after the sinking of the Titanic. We mentioned it briefly in the last episdoe. The Radio Act of 1912 is the first legislation targeting radio technology. It requires that anyone transmitting signals through radio-waves needs a license. Before this legislation, public airwaves were the wild west. Everyone, including amateurs, commercial operators and US Navy officers can send signals. This created inference issues as someone may inadvertently or intentionally send fake distress calls. At the time of the Radio Act of 1912, radio was used mostly as one-to-one wireless communication. So the radio act in 1912 is not applicable to broadcasting radio stations. The legislation targeting radio broadcasting came later in the Radio Act of 1927. The 1927 act was proposed again to address the interference issue. But this time, the inference issue was caused by broadcasting radio stations. In our community, you can listen to the local NPR station broadcasts on FM88.5. Can you imagine what will happen if a nearby station tries to broadcast using the same frequency? Yes, it will jam the signal from the NPR station. This is basically what typically happened before the Radio Act of 1927. So the Radio Act of 1927 created the Federal Radio Commission, a government body. It gives FRC the authority to allocate frequencies to stations and individuals, following the Guiding Standard: Public Interest, convenience, or necessity. However, Congress failed to define precisely what it meant by “public interest, convenience, and necessity” in either the statutory text or legislative history. The Radio Act of 1927 ushered in the golden age of radio with inferences died down. As radio stations began to broadcast nationally. A common popular culture emerged based on the common consumption of radio shows. Following the radio act of 1927, Congress passed the Communications Act of 1934. It expanded the regulation to telephone communication, an new invention at that time. It creates FCC, Federal Communication Commission, which is still functioning today. Communications Act of 1934 also set the commercial media mandate as the de facto media mandate for the country. If you want to learn more about

Hello, and welcome back to COMM one twenty two Podcast. We are now on episode twelve. The topic of this week is the Circuit of Cultural Production. While this concept may s eem alien to you, the underlying reasoning is fairly simple. It views innovation in media technology not just as a technical advance, but a gradual process of social construction. In that process, the characteristics, usage, and identities associated with innovation is shaped not by its technological features nor its inventor. Instead, they are shaped by consumers who use it, business interests that profit from it, and by regulators who seek to control it.This view on the circuit of cultural production is a stark contrast from technological determinism. Technological determinism a school of thought arguing that a society's technology determines its social structure and cultural values. To some degree, that is true. In the early part of the semester, we discussed how media content shape ideologies and cultures. In our daily conversations, we may also hear arguments that mirror technological determinism, such as that social media makes us depressed, video games make people violent, so on and so forth. But the reality is, as technology influences a lot of aspects in a society, the technology itself is shaped by many societal factors.We emphasize five components in the circuit of cultural production. They are: representation, identity, production, consumption, and regulation. Regarding representation, it refers to the intended use of the technology by its inventors. When radio technology was first invented, it was intended for long-distance point-to-point communication, as in marine rescues during the sinking of the Titanic and military communications during the two world wars. If we look at the more contemporary example of social media. What was their original intended use? When Mark Zuckerberg first built Facebook, Facebook was meant to be a student directory featuring photos and personal information. As it evolved to become a global social platform, it adopted the mission to “give people the power to share, and make the world more open and connected.'' What about YouTube? YouTube started as a platform for user-generated content, meaning it emphasized grassroots and amateur production.As you can see, Facebook clearly has failed its mission to make us more open and connected. Nowadays, the platform is not used so much to build bridges but to sort people further into like-minded silos. Instead of having an open dialogue, people become more guarded in expressing opinions and suspicious of others’ motives. Facebook is no longer just a platform for socialization. It has grown into a giant platform for friendship, event planning, coordinating and mobilization social movements, news consumption, gaming, and etc. YouTube, which started as a platform for amateurs, is now dominated by professional content producers. YouTube itself also produces original shows. Historically, that shift also occurred in the development of radio. Starting as a point-to-point communication tool, radio technology later was widely used as a one-to-many broadcasting tool, which ushered in the era of mass communication. So, as a new technology evolves, its actual usage, characteristics, and attributes will change over time, and will depart from the original intent of its inventors. This is the second component in the circuit, identities, which is defined as attributes, characteristics, and purposes that come to be associated with technology.The third component is the production. As a new technology expands its domain of usage, it faces business pressures. For example, who is going to fund its continuing expansion. When commercialized, the involved business decisions can impact the design of the technology. Let’s focus on two important business decisions: patents, and corporate development. Patents are sets of exclusive rights granted by a sovereign state, to an inventor or a

On May 31, 2019, a highly anticipated debate took place on Fox Business network, between two news anchors. The event unfolded against the backdrop of US-China Trade War. The two anchors, Trish Regan, and Liu Xin of China's CGTN, had been sparring on social media over the trade war. On May 23, Trish tweeted, “Hey China State TV - let’s have an HONEST debate on trade. You accuse me of being ‘emotional’ and not knowing my facts. Wrong! You name the time and place, and I’ll be there!” Liu accepted the challenge and the two anchors decided to face off in a prime-time debate. What makes this news interesting is that Liu is no ordinary figure. She works for China’s CGTN, which is a state-run English news network that broadcasts globally. CGTN is a government media that projects the ambition of a rising economic and political power. It seeks to challenge the hegemony of CNN and BBC in setting the global news agenda. Hello, welcome back to COMM one twenty-two Podcast. I am your host, and in this episode, we will discuss government media.It is easy to spot content produced by government media. When watching a YouTube video, you might notice a line below the video that says “XYZ is funded in whole or in part by some government.” There are some notable examples of government media. Russia Today is a 24-hour, multi-language news channel funded by the Russian government. Al Jazeera, another news channel specializing in the coverage of the Middle East, is funded in whole or in part by the Qatari government. The American government also supported its very own media organization, called Voice of America.While government media of different countries vary greatly in editorial independence, they share some common attributes: for one, their major funding source comes from a national government. Secondly, they are controlled and operated by government offices and entities, to advance their ‘development agenda’, and as a source of ‘soft power.’Government media has caused quite a bit of political controversy in recent years. Political pundits and analysts accused Russia Today and another Russian outlet Sputnik of spreading disinformation to meddle in the 2016 election. China’s CGTN was also accused by western politicians of mischaracterizing and smearing the current protests in Hong Kong. These government media are widely seen as the mouthpieces of authoritarian or semi-authoritarian governments. Here in the states, the most notable example of government media is Voice of America, also known as V O A. V O A is set for international broadcasting and is part of the U.S. Agency for Global Media, USA GM. The mission of USA GM is to inform, engage, and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy. Government-funded the agency with budget of $753 million in the fiscal year of 2016. USA GM, as a government agency, is led by a single CEO appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate.In theory, Voice of America seeks to represent American society and its value. This does not necessarily make it the mouthpiece of a particular US administration. The “firewall” enshrined in the 1994 US International Broadcasting Act, prohibits interference by any US government official, in the objective, independent reporting of Voice of America. With these characteristics in mind, what do you think are the limitations of government media? Perhaps, you would say, depending on their “governance structure” and who controls operations, government media tend to be more exposed to government interference and control. But, in my defense of government media, under some circumstances, government media become necessary. For instance, during the World War Two, V O A played a critical role in the information war against the Nazi Germany. During the cold war, Radio Free Europe, and Radio Free Asia, both are supported by the US government, brought uncensored news to an audience li

Hello, welcome to COMM122 podcast! This is episode nine. This week, our focus is on the commercial media model, which is the dominant model of media operation in the US. Throughout the classes this week, you will hear the term, mandate. A mandate refers to a media outlet’s foremost purpose, namely, what is its mission, and who and what does it serve. Generally speaking, there are the commercial media mandate and the non-commercial media mandate, which is the topic of next week. The commercial mandate is followed by commercial media outlets, such as HBO, Hulu, the New York Times, and the big four TV networks, CBS, NBC, ABC, and FOX. In fact, most media outlets here in the States are based on the commercial mandate. That means their primary mission is generating profits. However, we do have media outlets based on the non-commercial mandate. For example, PBS and NPR are public broadcasters in the country, whose primary mission is not profit-making, but to educate, inform, and entertain the community. While the commercial mandate is very dominant in the US, it is not necessarily so elsewhere in the world. Take Europe for example, in 2017, public funding accounts for 24% of the revenue of its TV industry, whereas in North America, the number is merely 1%. If we look at the level of public funding for public broadcasters, the US and Canada are at the bottom of the rank, and European countries, such as Norway, Germany, Sweden, and Denmark are on the top.Between various mandates, their key differences lie in: who pays for the media, who does it serve, and what determines success. In reviewing the funding sources of commercial media outlets, we will notice an important shift in the industry, which is the shift from, ad-supported media to, paid media. Let’s unpack that.In the business of TV, we know that in the states there are four big TV networks: CBS, NBC, ABC, and FOX. They broadcast national news, and also have local affiliates across cities to produce regional news. They stream Super Bowl, Emmy’s Award, the Academy Award, and very likely, they carry your favorite TV series. It used to be that the TV networks were 100% supported by advertising. In the pre-digital and pre-cable era, all you needed was a TV antenna to pick up the signal from the TV networks. You didn’t have to pay to watch the content. The content was freely available via radio airwaves. But, what was described has long gone. Between the 1950s and 1980s, most commercial TV stations were funded entirely by the advertising dollars. Yet, in 2004, we, the consumers, spent more money on media than advertisers. And in 2008, we spent more time with paid media than with ad-supported media.So, what has happened? Note that the TV industry is no longer dominated by the big four. We have hundreds of cable channels, which require paid subscriptions. We also have video streaming platforms like Netflix, Hulu and Amazon Prime Video. They also draw revenue from user subscriptions. Besides, we have the iTunes Store, Google Play Store, and many other such stores that allow users to buy or rent a particular episode of a TV show. These are examples of paid-media. Currently, the revenue of the TV industry comes from three main sources. First, licensing fees and broadcasting rights. For instance, one of the big four TV networks strikes a deal with the NFL to live broadcast Super Bowl. The broadcasting right tends to be exclusive, and the TV network gets paid if an overseas broadcaster’s live feed of the game comes from the TV network. The second source of revenue is advertising. This is pretty obvious: during the 2019 Super Bowl, the game's broadcasting rights holder, CBS, charged a record $5.25 million on average for a 30-second spot. The third source is subscriptions. This applies to cable channels but also increasingly the big four TV networks as they individually launch or plan to launch streaming and on-dema

Hello, welcome back to the COMM122 podcast! Its Episode Eight, MY name is nina, ill be your host for today, just kidding, its still maxIn this episode, we will discuss challenges to media globalization, and how media institutions adapt to the challenges.The first challenge is the uneven development in media technology and telecommunication infrastructure. We refer to this problem as the digital divide. In 2016, the United Nations declared the promotion, protection, and enjoyment of the internet to be human rights. However, while the internet penetration rate was 79.6% in Europe, and 87% in the US, it was barely 22% in Africa. In many parts of the world, a stable supply of electricity remains an issue, not to mention high-speed internet. Of course, things are changing with the quick adoption of mobile phones in South Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Latin America. Uneven development requires media institutions to come up with different audience-targeting strategies. For instance, while institutions in North America are invested in using social media to raise awareness campaigns on public health issues, in the rural areas of developing countries TV series prove to be very effective in changing social norms and behaviors . For more info, please read the BBC coverage of Detective Vijay, a TV series in India featuring an HIV-positive detective.The second challenge is a legal and political one. Netflix, for example, is available in over 150 countries, but not in Crimea, a former part of Ukraine and now annexed by Russia. This is due to the US sanctions on Russia. Oh, yes, let’s talk about Netflix in China. In 2017, Netflix announced that it had reached a licensing deal with a local video-streaming company in China. Based on the Chinese laws and regulations, foreign companies providing information services must partner with local companies, and local companies should be the majority shareholder in the joint venture. Needless to say, had the deal gone through, Netflix’s content in China would also be highly selective and censored by the state. The deal never went through. The Chinese new Cybersecurity Law that went into effect in 2017 has made American tech companies’ presence in China increasingly difficult, if not impossible.While the legal and political barrier is largely associated with economic protectionism, sometimes, the barrier also has something to do with strong local competitions. In the Chinese case, there were already three local major video-streaming giants at the time of Netflix's entry. The local companies are doing very well in the Chinese domestic market and have been expanding overseas. Even if Netflix were present in China, it would face an uphill battle with local competitors.Piracy is another legal challenge. Because of the relative ease of copying and transmitting digital content, some argue that media institutions have lost revenues to piracy. But, does it? It is a debatable point. For that point, refer to the video shown in class titled Can piracy be “good” for business?Lastly, the linguistic and cultural barriers. Selling Russian films to American audience? Well, something is bound to be lost in translation. What is key here is not just a common language, but cultural proximity. Some cultural linguistic markets may have an advantage and benefit from closely linked geographies. Other cultural and linguistic markets may be based on diasporic communities, due to colonization and immigration. Be noted that places that seem to be culturally similar may have very different types of audience. For example, Crazy Rich Asians won big in America, but lost big in the Chinese market. Local audiences in China just don’t resonate with the film at all. Want to know more, watch the clip from CBS played in class.How do media institutions overcome these barriers. For the linguistic barriers, the most straightforward strategy is Dubbing and Subtitling. But it is an exp

Hey, its me again. Glad to be back. And we are now at Episode Seven.In last week’s episode, we talked about seven strategies media institutions take to counter high-risks and high-costs in the media industry. This week, we will discuss the last, but perhaps the most important strategy of all, globalization.We all know what that means. Just look at things around us, most are NOT produced in the US. Yet, if you look at cinemas, I bet you will find a bunch of same films currently screening across different cities worldwide. Chances are, they are made in Hollywood.Latest numbers show that over 80% of Netflix’s revenue comes from overseas subscribers. Netflix is available in almost every digitally connected country, except China, we will discuss why that is the case in the next episode. Amazon’s Prime Video also has an extensive global presence. Hulu, which is owned by Disney, is also ambitiously targeting the international market. Like the video-streaming industry, the U.S. film industry, in particular, has become more dependent on international markets for revenue growth. Over 70% of the box office revenues come from overseas sales. Did you also know that a big portion of studios’ revenues here in the US for television shows comes from abroad? While America may have a trade deficit from trading with China and the European Union in terms of durable goods, the US exports far more royalties and licensing fees.So, maybe, we should say this. Media globalization is not just a business strategy, but the backbone of the industry, and it is precisely what make America great.Remember economies of scale and economies of scope? Media globalization is about taking advantage of “economies of scale” and “economies of scope” in the era of mass customization. That is, producing a great number of media products, in a great number of formats, to be sold to the global audience.Well, Why do the media industries embrace globalization? Here are some reasons. Global advertisers want to find a global market for their products. The domestic market is increasingly competitive and saturated, and developments of digital technology make global content delivery possible.By most metrics, the US is the dominant party in globalization. Since World War Two, the U.S. film and TV industry have relied on international markets for growth. And the U.S. is the largest producer of films and TV content in the globe. This is largely thanks to first-mover advantage. Since the US media industry is the first to monetize the global market, it gives the country competitive advantages in terms of strong market presence, brand recognition and loyalty.American dominance has drawn lots of criticism. Scholars use the term, Cultural Imperialism, to describe the destruction of local cultural production and values due to the vast amount of cultural products exported from the US and other dominant western countries. It exerts the homogenizing effects of Western culture as it spread across the world. Examples? Think of theme parks. What is the mental image that you conjure up when you think of theme parks? You likely will picture Universal Studios or Disneyland. I bet most kids around the world will picture the same. This is because the image of a theme park is really defined by two major American media franchises: Universal Studios and Disneyland.Some even argue that America’s dominance in the media world represents neo-colonialism. This term speaks about concerns people have over America’s growing political and ideological influence on the independence of nations. While such criticism mostly comes from the global south, which is the developing world. People in the developed world share the anxiety. In the French-speaking region of Canada, Quebec, some were critical of Netflix’s entry into the Canadian market, feeling that their cultural identity is under attack by the flooding of English-langu

We are now at Episode Six. It’s good to be back to the show.While technological advances have dramatically cut down the cost of producing multimedia content, Media production remains a high-risk and high-cost business. Do you know how much it costs to produce an episode of Game of Thrones? The number is 10 millions. What does the 10 millions cost entail?Well, it could include everything from script writing, content licensing, to crew selection, travel accommodations, and post-production CGI. And...plus all of the expenses on marketing and distributions. So, in a word, it is quite expensive to produce TV shows. In the movie industry, the average cost of producing a hollywood film has also gone up, from 60 millions in late 1990s to 200 millions recently.The media industry is making a big bet on all of the money spent on the things they produce. In other industries where the price of a product is governed by the invisible hand of the marketplace, that is, supply and demand. Prices go up if there are lots of demands and limited supply, and prices go down if there is an over-supply of a product with too little demand.Yet, the media industry hardly follows this rule. The thing is, it is difficult to predict demand of a media product, because tastes of audience change all the time. And, not to mention that media producers need to deal with a fluid political situation where scandals could hit at anytime.Back in 2014, House of Cards was a hit show. Everyone was talking about how it helped Netflix, and how big data analytics drive the production of the show. In 2018, its viewership hit the bottom after the airing of season six. Do you know what happened? Yes, it’s Kevin Spacey. His sexual harassment scandals cost Netflix 39 million US dollars.So, the question is, how do the industry counter the high risk and high cost? Here are several strategies.Strategy number one. Artificial scarcity. We know scarcity creates demand. If you shop on Amazon, and find your favorite product has only a few items left in stock. You probably will feel an urge to order it right away. The media industry can control the availability of information products, in the hope the demand will increase, if the product is not readily available. Such scarcity is artificial, because in theory, the industry has a theoretically limitless supply of a media product. Think about Spotify. With a free account, you can listen to music, but cannot skip songs frequently, nor can you listen to your tracks offline. These features are reserved for premium users. By creating the paywall, the media industry creates the kind of artificial scarcity that drives people to pay for content.Strategy number two. Economy of scale. This refers to the financial advantage that emerge, when the average cost of producing a good decreases, as the number of units produced increases. In the media industry, the cost of producing the original, or the first copy is higher than subsequent copies. For example, it costs about 10 millions dollar to produce an episode of Game of Throne. The 10 millions is the first-copy cost, or we can also call it sunk-cost, which is irrecoverable costs that are incurred in the production of goods and services. The good news is, once the first copy is made, the second, the third, and all subsequent copies are exponentially cheaper to make and distribute. In the digital age, this means copying digital files and making them available on cloud servers. A show may have millions of views and downloads, and each view and download bring money to the industry.Economy of scale is what drives the mass production of media products. But, what is more powerful is the third strategy, economy of scope. This is the financial advantage that emerge from producing a wide range of products, sometimes repurposing components or sharing costs of other enterprises. Have you been to The Wizarding World of Harry

Hello and welcome to the comm 122 podcast. In this episode, we will discuss four categories of goods, and what categories do media products fall under. Why should we care about this? This is because business strategies and business models, as well as some of the challenges facing the media industry, all have something to do with the unique characteristics of media products. Let us begin. How is a movie different from a bucket of popcorn? Well, that’s a silly question, is it? Other than the fact that they both can be consumed in a movie theater. These two are categorically different things. See, the word, consume, is interesting. Can we really consume a media product? I can eat up a bucket of popcorn. It is gone. But, can I use up a movie. Is the movie somehow gone after my consumption? We all know that information and intellectual properties do not get used up when you consume them. This is what we call “Rivalry.” It is a term in economics. We can describe a good or product as either rivalrous or non-rivalrous. It is rivalrous if its consumption by one user prevents simultaneous consumption by other users, or if consumption by one party reduces the ability of another party to consume it. For simplicity, let’s just call it Shareability, that is, whether good can be shared or not. Do I want to share a bucket of popcorn with you? Probably not, but I can certainly share a movie with you. Second question. How is YouTube different from Netflix. Both are video streaming sites but there is a marked difference: YouTube is free, mostly. But Netflix requires a paid subscription. To use a term in economics. Netflix is excludable because it prevents people who have not paid for it from having access to it. Simply put, excludability, or as we call openness in this class, is about whether something is effectively free or not. Rivalry, or shareability, and excludability, or openness. These are the two dimensions along which different products can be categorized. If a product is rivalrous and excludable, meaning it can be used up and is not free of charge, we can call such product, private goods. Some of your most precious possessions are private goods. Your car, your jewelry, and your home.Hey, what about a product that is non-rivalrous and non-excludable, meaning, something that is free and does not get used up? We call it public goods. In a few weeks, we will talk about public media and community-supported media. This kind of media is a prime example of public goods. Think about your local PBS station and NPR station. Unlike channels such as HBO and AMC, public television and radio stations are freely available, and like nearly all media products, they do not get used up. There are also plenty of public goods on the internet. Your favorite website, Wikipedia is one. And there is a large community of people that embrace the open-source and open-access culture. For example, Professor Wayne finished the script of this episode on a laptop that runs open-source software, and myself, your lovely podcast host recorded this podcast using the open-source software audacity. Professor Wayne made this podcast series free to download. So, technically, our podcast is a public good as well. What about the products that are in-between? Can you name something that does get used up, but is free? I would say, lobsters. There are lots of lobsters in the world, but the supply of lobsters is limited, and they could be consumed up if we over-fish. That is why different countries have fisheries policies to regulate how much that can be fished in their territory. However, fishermen do not have to pay for the lobsters they have caught, because these are creatures from the mother nature. We call this sort of goods, commons, or common pool of resources. Lastly, let’s talk about HBO. The HBO channel is NOT free. It does not get used up

Hey, it’s me again Max Gilles. This is COMM122 Podcast, Episode Four. I hope you enjoy our previous episodes on media as, cultural industries and public spheres. In this episode, we will have a quick chat about agency. Agency refers to the amount of control media industry workers have over how and what they do. Agency matters, because media industries are creative industries, and workers need to have a high degree of autonomy to produce meaningful work.Think about a job you’ve had. How much autonomy and ability did you have to decide what to do, and how to do it. What constrained you or set boundaries to your autonomy? You will see that media workers, just like workers in other sectors, have their autonomy circumscribed. Yes, Circumscribed. While they do enjoy a certain amount of freedom in deciding what to produce, their choices are not wholly their own, due to influence from modern institutions, norms and cultural traditions.Here is an example. In 2014, Liz Wahl quits her job during a live broadcast. At the time, Liz was working for Russia Today, also known as RT. RT is a Kremlin-sponsored news network. In 2014, Russia annexed Crimea, a part of Ukraine, and used its sponsored media outlets, such as RT, to wage information warfare against the west. Liz famously said on air: “I can't be part of network 'that whitewashes' Putin's actions.”See, if you work for a media outlet that serves as the mouthpiece of a government, your hands are tied. You face censorship and self-censorship. You might say, Hey, at least, Liz can quit, and not face any consequences. She is now a Democratic Candidate for Texas 23rd district. Had you done it in an authoritarian country, she could face jail time. The anchor or journalist could face prison time! You might ask, why did Liz choose to work for a Russia-sponsored media in the first place? News media in the west are struggling with revenues. Young and aspiring graduates of journalism face a deficiency of jobs in journalism. State-sponsored media from authoritarian countries seize the opportunity, opening their studios in the US and investing in many local media talents. As you can see, part of the circumscribed agency is due to the stringent financial situation facing some media industries at home.This matter can be made worse with artificial intelligence .could AI one day replace news anchors and reporters? Some newsrooms are already experimenting with algorithms to automate news production. China has developed the world’s first AI news anchor. So, folks, be prepared for the robot revolution. And for me, your lovely podcast host, to be replaced with some sort of robotic voice.

Hello, Welcome back to the Comm 122 podcast, My name is Max Gilles and I will be your host todayIn the last episode, we talked about the relationship between media and ideology. We left you with the thought that the media shape the dominant ideology of a society. You probably know that America is a pluralistic society, with diverse and sometimes clashing ideologies. Yes, media does produce and reproduce the dominant ideology of a society, but does media also produce, and promote fringe ideas or minority viewpoints? The answer is yes. In this episode, we will discuss how media functions as a public platform, like a town square, where citizens gather to debate public matters. There is a term for these discussion areas, they are called public spheres, used first by German philosopher Jürgen Habermas. There are many examples of media serving as the public sphere. Think about heated panel debates you see on cable news, and edgy discussions on social media. When Habermas coined the term, he was envisioning a rational citizenry acting in good faith. But in reality, people are irrational. Instead of rational and fair-minded deliberations, people bring emotions and biases to public discussions. We can all recall moments where disagreements turn into strained relationships. Media has become a place not for seeking dialogue, but an echo chamber where you see only what you want to see. Don't be discouraged just yet. There are still great media projects. I recommend three podcast shows that are modeled after the ideal version of a public sphere, in which show producers invite panelists with opposing viewpoints and debate with eloquence and substance. They are National Public Radio’s On Point, which is a call-in show produced by NPR’s Boston affiliate. BBC’s The Real Story, and the New York Times podcast called The Argument. You will find the shows in Apple iTunes, Spotify, Google Podcast, and wherever you find our COMM122 podcast. There isn’t just one public sphere but many. First, there is the mainstream public sphere where mainstream ideas are exchanged. The mainstream public sphere won’t include all voices in society. Back in time, the idea of abstaining from the use of animal products was quite a fringe idea, and wouldn't have been taken seriously in the mainstream public sphere. That, of course, is a different story now. Historically, some voices are systematically excluded or marginalized due to structural inequality that exists in society. For example, African Americans, along with immigrants, refugees, sexual minorities, and the working poor, has been somewhat marginalized from the mainstream public sphere. The lack of representation is a serious issue in our time that champions diversity and inclusion. Okay, what do you do if you are marginalized but want to have your voice heard? You do it through media. You create your own public sphere, called a counter-public sphere. It is counter because it stands in opposition to the mainstream and dominant public sphere. Here are some examples, back in the 1960s, during the civil rights movement, African Americans created their own media promoting their own viewpoints, to challenge the mainstream narrative. Nowadays, you will find niche media for historically marginalized groups and political fringe groups. Do you know Anonymous Media? It is a media outlet created by Anonymous, which is a loosely associated activist group, engaged in politically motivated hacking and cyberattacks. Have you heard of Naked Food. It is a magazine created by vegans, to promote veganism. Both are examples of counter-public spheres, consisting of like-minded communities, that spread alternative ideologies.As discussed in class, counter-public spheres have taken an alarming turn. Conspiracy theorists and white supremacists have carved out their own media space to propagate th

Hello! Welcome to COMM122 Podcast, Episode two My name’s max, and Ill be your host for today.In the last episode, we talked about how media create mainstream and popular cultures. In this episode, we will make a more contentious argument. Media shape ideologies that divide our society into blue states and red states, Trump army and Bernie Bro, Proud Boys and Social Justice Warriors. You see, ideology is a value system through which we assign meanings to the things we see and do. You are a libertarian, so you believe in small government and lower taxes. You are a conservative in America and by extension, you value the Second Amendment and traditional values. Of course, I am painting different ideologies here in a broad stroke. But have you thought about why different societies upload drastically different ideologies, such as in America, freedom, tolerance, and diversity are highly esteemed values, whereas in China nationalism is a unifying principle in public life?Again, the answer lies in media. Media shape and reinforce what we call dominant ideology. The dominant ideology is the social common sense of our time, what is deemed acceptable and desirable by the majority of the public. So, what is the dominant ideology of our time? Maybe, you would say, tolerance, diversity, and progress? Some may say, Make America Great Again? Notice that a dominant ideology, that is, what is accepted and promoted by the majority, can be benign or hideous, progressive or against the current of history. Dominant ideologies also vary across societies and change over time. Take Germany for example, its dominant ideology during the Nazi era was antisemitism, scientific racism, and eugenics. During the cold war, the dominant ideology of former East Germany was, communism. These values are just outrightly despicable in current-day Germany.Why do media create dominant ideology? Do media do it purposefully? Is there a conspiracy of “Amusing Ourselves to Death”, as claimed by Neil Postman in his famous book?We should consider several scenarios. First, in some societies and at certain times in history, media outlets could be controlled by powerful governments, to propagate what authoritarian regimes want to promote. Media outlets then act as mouthpieces and a tool of propaganda. There are many such cases in the history of the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, and war-time America. But, you might be surprised to find many contemporary cases of modern-day media propaganda, in the form of sleek videos, viral internet memes, and catching rap songs. They could be in your Facebook timeline, Instagram stories, and Tik Tok. Don’t forget that, as you become more digitally and media savvy, so do authoritarian regimes.That said, in current-day America, media censorship, and government direct control of media is prohibited by the First Amendment. There is no law requiring Fox News to stick with Conservative talking points and no regulation asking HBO to produce diverse TV shows. Mostly, media shape the dominant ideology by catering to what people want, because that makes business sense. If people want A, not B, then media supply more A, not B. The simple logic is that by heeding to people’s popular choices media industry can maintain and increase advertising revenue and profit from subscriptions and content purchases. Do you notice that this is a self-fulfilling loop: by supplying more of what the public wants, it creates more demand for the thing wanted by the public.Here are some examples.Have you heard of an HBO show called Confederate? I am sure you haven’t watched it. The show was created by David Benioff and D.B. Weiss, two writers behind Game of Thrones. But, this show is now dead in the water. Confederate is an alternative-history drama, imagining a time after the Civil War, where South won. Sounds interesting, but HBO had to cancel the show resulting in a significant financial loss.

Meet your new COMM122 Podcast hosted by Maxwell Gilles! Hello! Welcome to COMM122 Podcast. My name is Maxwell Gilles, and I will be hosting this podcast for Professor Wayne. We begin our first episode on the media industry and its relationship with the society we live in. We first introduce media industries as a cultural industry. What does that mean? It means media, whether they are news media, entertainment media, or internet media, crete culture. More precisely, it means: media produce and reinforce mainstream cultures, shape and adapt to the dominant ideology.You probably have heard a lot about how media products define our contemporary culture and values. It’s true that to some extent media content determines what is right and wrong, what is desirable, and what is not, what is cool and what is out of fashion. Here is an example; try searching hashtag, avocado toast, on Instagram, you will find tens of thousands of pictures of smashed avocado toast. How come people are so obsessed with avocado toast? People have been eating avocado toast since as early as the 1990s. But only until recently has it turned into a pop culture phenomenon. The pivotal moment came when Gwyneth Paltrow, an Academy-Award winning actress, endorsed the dish wholeheartedly in her cookbook. Since then, food bloggers and food magazines have started copying her recipe; people have started posting about it, making avocado toast Instagrammable. In other words, media platforms, and media personnel, as part of the cultural industry, has created the popular culture surrounding avocado toast. If you want to learn more about this intriguing history between media and avocado toast, read the Washington Post article Professor Wayne have uploaded. Here is another example. What is your view on legalizing marijuana? You may support or oppose it, but the popular sentiment in the state of Massachusetts is generally supportive. According to a poll done by W B E Z and UMass-Amherst in 2016, over 50% of the public supports marijuana legalization. Did you know that in 1988, only 24 percent of Americans came out supporting the legalization? Why has public opinion changed so dramatically? A key factor is how the media has portrayed marijuana. Media researchers found that support for legalization began to increase shortly after the media began to cover marijuana, NOT as an issue of drug trafficking, but a medical issue. You can read about the study in the assigned article from the website The Conversation.Are you a narcissist? Do you watch reality TV? This may sound like a loaded question, but give me a moment to explain. For example, I am sure President Trump is a narcissist. But, does watching his show the Apprentice make you a narcissist? Actually, there appears to be a correlation between consuming reality TV shows and Narcissistic Personality Disorder, also known as NPD, a clinically diagnosable mental issue. Of course, correlation does not mean causation, but you will find many great thinkers blaming entertainment media and celebrity culture for creating the egocentric, me culture. On this topic, I am recommending two popular books: “The Narcissism Epidemic” and “The Mirror Effect.” I have given your three examples of media creating and shaping cultures. What is your example? Can you tell us how your value, belief, and personal preference is influenced by the media content you consume? Keep the question in mind as we move to the next episode on media and dominant ideology.

Hey, COMM122 Podcast listeners, in this episode, let’s chat a bit about the broadcast network here in the US, its structure and what the business transactions within look like. First, let’s just say that broadcast TV is a type of continuous media. It is continuous because the content is always on and constantly supported by a stream of revenue from advertising, subscriptions, public funding, and donations. Broadcast TV is also a networked entity meaning that it is a vast network of local and national stations. There are two types of stations in the broadcast TV network. First, the kind of stations operated and owned by the big TV networks, which are CBS, NBC, ABC, and FOX. This type of stations is called Operated and Owned. They are directly controlled by the big TV networks with much of its programming controlled and provided by the TV network. The Operated and Owned stations tend to be in large media markets such as New York and Chicago. For instance, the ABC station in New York, WABC, is operated and owned by ABC. Hey, what about WGGB, which is an ABC station in Springfield? Well, WGGB is different from WABC. While WGGB is affiliated with the ABC network, it is NOT owned by ABC. For those stations that are only affiliated with but not owned by a TV network, we call them regular network affiliates. The network affiliations tend to be owned by media conglomerates such as Meredith, Nextstar, and Sinclair broadcasting group. Lastly, we have independent stations who are not affiliated with any TV network.

Hello, COMM122 Podcast listeners! This week, we will talk about the economic conditions of media production, with a focus on the transformative role of digitalization.First, let’s refresh a point I made earlier in the semester, which is that the media business is a high-risk one. It is expensive to produce content and there is great uncertainty over what is gonna sell. In this week’s classes, Professor Wayne breaks down four types of costs associated with media production.The first cost, Development costs, which are the costs of the creative phase of media goods, such as songwriting, script-writing, and composing music. In the development stage, media organizations make advance payments to creative talents as an incentive for creative talents to complete the commissioned work. We discussed in class why some songwriters and script-writers went on strike. The main reason is often about these creative talents feeling that they are not getting a fair share of the profits from media products.The second cost is production cost, that is the cost of actually “making the media good.” In some ways, digital technologies have greatly reduced the production cost, as global outsourcing platforms such as Upwork.com makes it easier for a local media organization to scout creative talents around the world at a more affordable rate. The free open-source software movement, also known as FOSS, has produced numerous free computer programs for media content creation and editing, allowing amateurs and less resourceful organizations to produce content professionally.The third cost is distribution and marketing. For traditional media, content is often delivered through a physical medium, be it a CD/DVD disk or cassette tape. These physical media tend to cost more to create, store and ship. So digitalization can significantly cut the cost of distribution because nowadays content is stored in the cloud and distributed over the internet. One thing about cloud storage and delivery is that there is no cap on how many media products that can be stored. Unlike in brick-and-mortar stores, where the number of media products to be displayed and sold is constrained by physical space. Due to the freed-up storage and delivery capacity, the so-called long-tail effect comes into play. Previously, in the brick-and-mortar era, media organizations and retailers would prioritize selling blockbusters, top albums, and bestsellers. Because their inventory is limited by physical space, so they have to reserve the scarce physical space for the items that have the most potential for creating profits. Those top and most selling products are only a few, but contribute the most to revenue. The rest of the products, that is, the majority of products available in the market, are not as sellable as the top ones, and they tend to be dropped off store shelves due to limited storefront and screen time. Because as said that online platforms are not constrained by the scarcity in storage and delivery, the majority of the less-popular products can be stored and made available online, without costing extra for the media business. In fact, these less-popular products would find their niche audience online. That is why according to Chris Anderson, products in low demand or that have a low sales volume can collectively make up a large market share, exceeding the relatively small share of bestsellers and blockbusters. If you want to learn more about the long-tail theory, head to YouTube and search Chris Anderson, long tail, and TedTalk.The last cost is Overhead, that is, expenses required to maintain media institutions, such as the infrastructure and operations of studios; salaries of studio and label staff.Ok, that's all for this episode. Please stay tuned for the next episode on the funding model and structure of the US broadcast network.

Hi folks, welcome back to COMM122 podcast. In this episode, we talk about audience research. Audience research is a very extensive subject area. The most commonly referenced example of audience research is ratings. We all know why rating matters. In a media market dominated by the commercial mandate, ratings define the value and the success of a media product. However, there are a few critical points to be discussed here: is high rating equivalent of higher content value for consumers? Do ratings truly capture audience sentiment? What are some of the better ways to understand the audience than ratings? In this episode and the next, we will address these questions.But first, let’s see what audience research entails. Audience research is a form of market research conducted prior to, during and after media products are developed and distributed. The goal of audience research is integrating audience preferences into the products to increase content popularity. Because media companies oftentimes operate in a dual product market. That is, they sell content to audience, and audience to advertisers. So their audience research is used to measure content popularity and in a way that defines the value of two things: the value of content to viewers, and the value of acquired audience to advertisers. Here is an example: lower rated and less popular movies, shows and music albums may be sold at a cheaper price because they are in less demand. This is how content popularity can be reflected in pricing. While content polarity plays a role in the pricing of content as marketed to audience, the price variation won’t be that huge. You can find that most movies and TV shows are sold for between 1 and 8 dollars. But when it comes to the pricing of content for advertisers, it varies greatly. This is because for advertisers, the value does not lie in content but in what type of audience the content draws. As Super Bowl and Presidential Debates draw a much larger audience , the pricing for placing ads in these shows are exponentially higher. Audience research is primarily concerned with three things: who is consuming the content, how many are consuming the content, and how they consume the content. When it comes to the who part, we are talking about audience segmentation, which is a process of sorting people into homogeneous subgroups based upon defined criteria such as product usage, demographics, psychographics, communication behaviors and media use. In this realm, audience research is used to gauge whether the real audience matches up to the constructed audience. The real audience are the actual people who consume the media content. This can be found through various audience research such as ratings, focus-group interviews, and advanced digital data analytics. But before any media product is launched, media producers would imagine what their audience will be, that is referred to as the constructed audience. We all sort of know who the constructed audience is by the glance of the plot, characters, settings of a show. The who part is also the most fascinating aspect of audience research. What media we consume often reflects who we are and where our political ideology, cultural values, and tastes converge and clash with that of others. You can view the New York Times article titled ‘Duck Dynasty’ vs. ‘Modern Family’: 50 Maps of the U.S. Cultural Divide. In the past, people used ratings to gauge who is watching a particular show. But now, modern-day data analytic techniques can be leveraged for more precisely profiling the audience. For example, the New York Times article I just mentioned maps out the audience of various TV shows based on the data of Facebook likes. You can also try a tool called Google Trends, which tracks search activities of keywords. Go to Google Trends and type in the name of your favorite show, and see what surprise you. Note that the unit of measurement is TV household, not individu

Hey, welcome back to COMM122 Podcast. Today, we will discuss copyrights. Do you know I am copyrighted? As your digital assistant powered by proprietary algorithms, the words I pronounce and the paragraphs I read are the intellectual property owned by a company called Natural Reader. That is why Professor Wayne cannot monetize this podcast because he doesn’t have full control of the copyright of the podcast. Of course, Professor Wayne doesn’t intend to profit from the podcast as the podcast is here only for educational purposes. Perhaps he can invoke fair use, which is an exemption under the current copyright law. We will talk about fair use in a minute.So, what is copyright? Copyright is a set of exclusive rights granted to the original authors and creators in the protection of their intellectual property. Copyright laws restrict the copying, modification, and the dissemination of copyrighted material without authors/creators’ permission. Copyrights have expiration dates. Based on the 1976 Copyright law in the US, copyrights owned by corporate authors were granted 75 years of protection. However, in the 1998 Copyright law, the life-span of the copyrights owned by corporate authors was extended to 120 years. Why the extension? You may ask. Partly, this is because the extension helps media conglomerates keep profiting from old productions. Before the passing of the new copyright law, the Walt Disney Company had lobbied for the copyright extension in order to delay the entry of its earliest Mickey Mouse movie into the public domain. This is why the 1998 copyright law is nicknamed the Mickey Mouse Protection Act. After the expiration of copyrights, the content enters the public domain. The public domain is a common pool of content the public can access and use freely without permission. The public domain also represents the cultural assets of any society.Now, let’s talk about fair use. The fair use doctrine is a legal provision established by copyright regulation allowing for limited copying or use of copyrighted material. It is commonly invoked when content creators use a limited amount of copyrighted materials for criticism, commentary, and news reporting, as well as for Educational uses. While you can invoke the fair use doctrine, whether or not your actions will be protected by the fair use is determined by the court. The court decision will be based on three criteria. You can check out the YouTube video added to the slide to learn more about the criteria.Copyrights laws are aimed at balancing the interests of creators and the public interest in access to information and cultural resources. Content creators’ intellectual property needs to be protected, particularly in light of rampant piracy in the digital age. The technological solution to piracy is called Digital Rights Management, DRM. It is a system of software and technological designs that prevents illegal access and use of copyrighted materials. For example, while you can download movies and films on some streaming platforms, you can only access the downloaded content through the platform’s software and apps. However, if the copyright laws are too restrictive, it may end up protecting big corporates but independent and smaller content creators. This is because a robust public domain is essential for the free circulation and exchange of ideas because it serves as a basis for innovation and knowledge creation! Strict enforcement of copyright law and the overprotection of corporate authorship will limit the amount of publicly owned content, creating what is called clearance culture. You will find more examples explaining the concept of clearance culture in the documentary Freedom of Expressions. Basically, clearance culture means the process whereby, because of the extension of Intellectual Property and copyright provisions, clearance or permission has to be asked for the use of previous material, resulting in a cumbersome process with many negat

Hi, welcome back to COMM122 Podcast. In this episode, we will discuss regulations targeting media content. The most extreme end of media regulation is censorship. You can check out the recent incident involving South Park in China where the government took down all of its episodes, because the show commented on China’s political situation. Content regulation in the form of outright censorship is quite common in many authoritarian societies, but it is rare in western democracies. Here in the US, the First Amendment prevents the government from making laws that abridge freedom of speech. However, this protection of free speech is not absolute. There are exceptions to what is protected by the First Amendment. For instance, while political speech is generally protected, commercial speech such as advertising is subject to varying degrees of regulations. One example is tobacco advertising, which has been banned on television since 1971. As we discuss several examples of content regulations, keep in mind that different rationales for regulations are applied, depending on what kind of speech, who is involved and what media are used. Governments and legislative bodies are just one of many types of regulators. Let’s revisit a point made in an earlier episode. There are formal regulations implemented by the government and official regulatory bodies. There are also informal regulations, which are rules and norms implemented outside the purview of the government and official regulatory bodies. Informal regulations are also called self-regulation, which is the type of regulation enforced by companies or trade associations. In previous episodes, we discussed examples of informal and formal regulation, do you remember any of that? Yes, movie ratings in the US, for example, are the result of self-regulation because it is enforced by the Motion Picture Association of America. Next, we focus on different pieces of content regulations implemented by the official regulatory bodies. In this case, FCC, and FTC, Federal Trade Commission.The first piece of regulation is about Obscenity, Indecency and Profanity. Notice the bleep censor? Federal law prohibits obscene, indecent and profane content from being broadcast on the radio or TV. However, because of different moral codes and cultural values, the public and regulators may fight what is considered obscene, indecent and profane. Here, FCC takes a somewhat common-sense approach, called, “you know it when you see it.” This standard appeals to our moral gut-feeling and has been adopted from a Supreme Court’s case in 1964. In the case on obscenity and pornography, Justice Stewart Potter wrote: “I know it when I see it.” Based on this regulation, obscene content is prohibited at all times on broadcast TV, radio, as well as cable, satellite TV and satellite radio. Indecent and profane content is prohibited on broadcast TV and radio between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. This is the time when the broadcast TV audience likely includes children. The same rules for indecency and profanity do not apply to cable, satellite TV and satellite radio because they are subscription services.The second piece of a regulation enforced by the FCC is about educational programming. The Children's Television Act requires U.S. broadcast television stations to air content designed to serve the educational and informational needs of children. It also limits the number of advertisements during children's programs. In July of 2019, FCC voted to revise some of the rules about children's education programming. Some of the changes are: stations can carry educational/informational programming as early as 6 a.m., rather than 7 a.m. Stations can also turn ongoing series into short-form content. According to the FCC, the old rule was outdated and the new rule is put in place to account for the fragmentation in viewing behavior. The loosened up rules is to help media companies re

Hey COMM122 podcast listeners, this is Joanna, your digital learning assistant. In the previous episode, we discussed four historical regulations targeting the media and communication industry. In the episode today, we are gonna look at some of the most contemporary issues of media regulations. More specifically, we will bring up the issues of net neutrality and cross-ownership. How regulators deal with the issues reflect their regulatory philosophy and ideological leaning. With the seismic changes in the nation’s politics, we will see how the same media regulation issue might be dealt with very differently under different administrations.Because most often regulations are implemented by the government and official regulatory bodies, let’s first discuss the role of government. In the previous examples of radio act of 1912 and 1927, as well as in the communications act 1934, the US government served as a rule-maker, seeking to strike a balance between incentivizing the marketplace and to protect the public interest. Some would argue that the industry itself can handle issues pretty well. The industry can tackle issues such as media violence internally, by implementing self-regulation. People who support this view tend to believe in the free market and small government, claiming that the intervention of the government will obscure the supply and demand equilibrium. In other words, through free competition and supply and demand, the market forces, not the government, will pick the winners and losers. There is a lot to like about this viewpoint. However, the market force isn’t perfect. Sometimes industry just cannot regulate itself. Remember the interference issue before the Radio Act 1912? Governments need to step in sometimes because a democratically elected government can represent the public interest and neutral arbitrator. Many argue that the government should take a more preemptive role in making rules and setting standards to fix issues facing the media industry, not only because market force may fail, but also because the media and communication industry is an important public infrastructure and the stake for the public interest is high. Many media products resemble public goods or common pools of resources, and they cannot be entirely privatized. While this call for governments to step in preemptively might be well-intended, sometimes governments may become too intrusive, paternalistic, or even ignorant by making rules too cumbersome or irrelevant that it takes toll on the healthy development of the industry. We can just look at the recent congressional hearings regarding online privacy, big tech, and foreign interferences. As some of the technologically challenged congressmen and congresswomen grill tech executives and engage in grandstanding, do you really trust they can make fair and balanced rules? So, this is a dilemma facing media regulations, government can be powerful enough to protect you from big business, but it can also be too powerful to harm you. Private industry can be powerful enough to deliver to you better goods and services, but it could become too big to harm the public interest.Next, we will look at a type of regulation called structural regulation. It includes setting rules and standards about access, that is, who has access and how, about ownership, that is, who owns and how much, and about licensing, which is the permission to use public resources such as public airwaves. Net neutrality, a recent regulatory issue falling under the category of access because it is about what content is accessible and by whom. The principle of net neutrality maintains that internet service providers cannot charge content providers to speed up the delivery of their goods. all Internet traffic, whether it be streaming videos from Netflix or your text messages, is treated equally. In 2015, under the Obama administration, internet service providers, ISP, were reclassified by the FCC as a common carrier

Hello, COMM122 podcast listeners. As we wrap up the topic of media mandate from previous weeks, we will now start a new series on media regulations.You are no stranger to media regulations. If you follow the news about e-cigarettes, you might have heard of a call to ban the advertising of e-cigarettes on television. This call came after numerous reports of vaping-related deaths. Another recent case is the talk of breaking up big tech because big tech companies become overly influential. There are also conversations on regulating fake news and foreign interference on social media platforms.Regulations are various rules, standards, and norms set by governments, legislative bodies, and non-government entities. You might think that regulations are all enforced by governments. Well, many regulations are indeed enacted by governments following laws passed by Congress. We call this, formal regulation. An example is the ban on the advertising of tobacco products. There is also informal regulation, such as movie ratings. Movie ratings are not by the US government, but by the Motion Picture Association of America, which is an non-government organization. Regulations could target content produced by media outlets, or something not directly related to content, such as media ownership, licensing, who has access to the media, and etc.If you feel the information is overwhelming, don’t worry, we will go over each of the common types of regulation, with examples. Before we do that, let’s review four milestone media-related legislations in the US history. First, the Radio Act of 1912. This is a federal law that went into effect in 1912, not long after the sinking of the Titanic. The Radio Act of 1912 is the first legislation targeting the radio technology. It requires that anyone transmitting signals through radio-waves needs a license. Before this legislation, public airwaves was a wild west. Everyone, including amateurs, commercial operators and US Navy officers can send signals. This created inference issues as someone may inadvertently or intentionally send fake distress calls. At the time of the Radio Act of 1912, radio was used mostly as one-to-one wireless communication. So the radio act in 1912 is not applicable to broadcasting radio stations. The legislation targeting radio broadcasting came later in the Radio Act of 1927. The 1927 act was proposed again to address the interference issue. But this time, the inference issue was caused by broadcasting radio stations. In our community, you can listen to the local NPR station broadcasts on FM88.5. Can you imagine what will happen if a nearby station tries to broadcast using the same frequency? Yes, it will jam the signal from the NPR station. This is basically what typically happened before the Radio Act of 1927. So the Radio Act of 1927 creates Federal Radio Commission, a government body. It gives FRC the authority to allocate frequencies to stations and individuals, following the Guiding Standard: Public Interest, convenience, or necessity. However, Congress failed to define precisely what it meant by “public interest, convenience, and necessity” in either the statutory text or legislative history. The Radio Act of 1927 ushered in the golden age of radio with inferences died down. As radio stations began to broadcast nationally. A common popular culture emerged based on the common consumption of radio shows. Following the radio act of 1927, Congress passed the Communications Act of 1934. It expands the regulation to telephone communication, an invention at that time. It creates FCC, Federal Communication Commission, which is still functioning today. Communications Act of 1934 also set the commercial media mandate as the de facto media mandate for the country. If you want to learn more about this part of the history, read the Commercial radio debate section on the Wikipedia page about this legislation.

Hello, welcome back to COMM one twenty two Podcast. We are now on episode twelve. The topic of this week is the Circuit of Cultural Production. While this concept may seem alien to you, the underlying reasoning is fairly simple. It views innovation in media technology not just as a technical advance, but a gradual process of social construction. In that process, the characteristics, usage, and identities associated with innovation is shaped not by its technological features nor its inventor. Instead, they are shaped by consumers who use it, business interests that profit from it, and by regulators who seek to control it.This view on the circuit of cultural production is a stark contrast from technological determinism. Technological determinism a school of thought arguing that a society's technology determines its social structure and cultural values. To some degree, that is true. In the early part of the semester, we discussed how media content shape ideologies and cultures. In our daily conversations, we may also hear arguments that mirror technological determinism, such as that social media makes us depressed, video games make people violent, so on and so forth. But the reality is, as technology influences a lot of aspects in a society, the technology itself is shaped by many societal factors.We emphasize five components in the circuit of cultural production. They are: representation, identity, production, consumption, and regulation. Regarding representation, it refers to the intended use of the technology by its inventors. When radio technology was first invented, it was intended for long-distance point-to-point communication, as in marine rescues during the sinking of the Titanic and military communications during the two world wars. If we look at the more contemporary example of social media. What was their original intended use? When Mark Zuckerberg first built Facebook, Facebook was meant to be a student directory featuring photos and personal information. As it evolved to become a global social platform, it adopted the mission to “give people the power to share, and make the world more open and connected.'' What about YouTube? YouTube started as a platform for user-generated content, meaning it emphasized grassroots and amateur production.As you can see, Facebook clearly has failed its mission to make us more open and connected. Nowadays, the platform is not used so much to build bridges but to sort people further into like-minded silos. Instead of having an open dialogue, people become more guarded in expressing opinions and suspicious of others’ motives. Facebook is no longer just a platform for socialization. It has grown into a giant platform for friendship, event planning, coordinating and mobilization social movements, news consumption, gaming, and etc. YouTube, which started as a platform for amateurs, is now dominated by professional content producers. YouTube itself also produces original shows. Historically, that shift also occurred in the development of radio. Starting as a point-to-point communication tool, radio technology later was widely used as a one-to-many broadcasting tool, which ushered in the era of mass communication. So, as a new technology evolves, its actual usage, characteristics, and attributes will change over time, and will depart from the original intent of its inventors. This is the second component in the circuit, identities, which is defined as attributes, characteristics, and purposes that come to be associated with technology.The third component is the production. As a new technology expands its domain of usage, it faces business pressures. For example, who is going to fund its continuing expansion. When commercialized, the involved business decisions can impact the design of the technology. Let’s focus on two important business decisions: patents, and corporate development. Patents are sets of exclusive rights granted by a sovereign state, to an inventor or assign

On May 31, 2019, a highly anticipated debate took place on Fox Business network, between two news anchors. The event unfolded against the backdrop of US-China Trade War. The two anchors, Trish Regan, and Liu Xin of China's CGTN, had been sparring on social media over the trade war. On May 23, Trish tweeted, “Hey China State TV - let’s have an HONEST debate on trade. You accuse me of being ‘emotional’ and not knowing my facts. Wrong! You name the time and place, and I’ll be there!” Liu accepted the challenge and the two anchors decided to face off in a prime-time debate. What makes this news interesting is that Liu is no ordinary figure. She works for China’s CGTN, which is a state-run English news network that broadcasts globally. CGTN is a government media that projects the ambition of a rising economic and political power. It seeks to challenge the hegemony of CNN and BBC in setting global news agenda. Hello, welcome back to COMM one twenty two Podcast. I am your host, and in this episode, we will discuss government media.It is easy to spot content produced by government media. When watching a YouTube video, you might notice a line below the video that says “XYZ is funded in whole or in part by some government.” There are some notable examples of government media. Russia Today is a 24-hour, multi-language news channel funded by the Russian government. Al Jazeera, another news channel specializing in the coverage of the Middle East, is funded in whole or in part by the Qatari government. The American government also supported its very own media organization, called Voice of America.While government media of different countries vary greatly in editorial independence, they share some common attributes: for one, their major funding source comes from a national government. Secondly, they are controlled and operated by government offices and entities, to advance their ‘development agenda’, and as a source of ‘soft power.’Government media has caused quite a bit of political controversy in recent years. Political pundits and analysts accused Russia Today and another Russian outlet Sputnik of spreading disinformation to meddle in the 2016 election. China’s CGTN was also accused by western politicians of mischaracterizing and smearing the current protests in Hong Kong. These government media are widely seen as the mouthpieces of authoritarian or semi-authoritarian governments. Here in the states, the most notable example of government media is Voice of America, also known as V O A. V O A is set for international broadcasting and is part of the U.S. Agency for Global Media, USA GM. The mission of USA GM is to inform, engage, and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy. Government funded the agency with budget of $753 million in the fiscal year of 2016. USA GM, as a government agency, is led by a single CEO appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate.In theory, Voice of America seeks to represent the American society and its value. This does not necessarily make it the mouthpiece of a particular US administration. The “firewall” enshrined in the 1994 US International Broadcasting Act, prohibits interference by any US government official, in the objective, independent reporting of Voice of America. With these characteristics in mind, what do you think are the limitations of government media? Perhaps, you would say, depending on their “governance structure” and who controls operations, government media tend to be more exposed to government interference and control. But, in my defense of government media, under some circumstances, government media become necessary. For instance, During the World War Two, V O A played a critical role in the information war against the Nazi Germany. During the cold war, Radio Free Europe, and Radio Free Asia, both are supported by the US government, brought uncensored ne

Hello! This is episode nine of the COMM122 podcast.Last week, we focused on commercial media mandate. To revisit some concepts here. A mandate refers to the foremost purpose, that is, what is the media organization’s mission, and who and what does it serve. In commercial media mandate, media organizations’ chief goal is generating profits. This week, we focus on a type of media organizations that do not prioritize profit-making. They are based on non-commercial media mandates. More specifically, we will cover public media, community media, and government media.First, let’s begin with a recent op-ed in the New York Times, calling for a PBS type public alternative to social media. The piece, which you can read in the optional reading folder, begins with issues plaguing social media. Such issues include propaganda, disinformation, and political radicalization. The author argues that commercial social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, operate on a business model that maximizes audience attention, collect and commodify as much data as possible about the audience. Thus, these platforms tend to amplify the loudest and scariest voices. Precisely because of that, the platforms are toxic democracy. So the author, Mark Coatney, who is a former director of Tumblr, proposed a nonprofit social media that prioritizes community interest over profit, like PBS and NPR in the mass media domain.Mark’s proposal is interesting. It pointedly addresses the strengths of non-commercial media mandates in protecting public interest and serving community needs. Let’s unpack that point. Public media, as the name suggests, is supposed to be by the public, and for the public. More explicitly, many public media outlets have the mission of educating, informing, entertaining, meeting community information needs and contributing to community development.Previously, we mentioned that non-commercial media mandates, while playing a marginal role in the US media landscape, is the dominant mandate in Europe. For instance, in the UK, BBC, which is the country’s public broadcaster, has the largest share of TV audience. Public service broadcasting channels in the UK account for 72% of the total TV audience. PBS is hardly that popular in the United States.Generally speaking, public media are funded through general tax revenues, government grants, donations and individual contributions, license fees, and to a lesser degree corporate sponsorships and advertising. Across the Atlantic, the public media in the US and UK are considerably different in terms of its major funding sources. In the UK, 74% of the British Broadcasting Corporation’s revenue comes from TV license fees, paid by households watching or recording live television transmissions. The TV license fee is mandatory for any TV household. A standard TV licence is currently 154.5 British Pond. You can think of the TV license fee as some sort of taxation. Only 26% of BBC’s revenue comes from commercial operations, such as BBC Studio, which is a commercial production subsidiary of the BBC. You can listen to BBC on a local NPR station here in the US, or stream it anywhere in the world. One thing you will notice is that BBC rarely has any paid advertising. That said, over the past centuries, BBC has grown into a nonprofit media empire with a vast holding of channels, stations, and studios. Some of the BBC's commercial operations, such as BBC Global News, do draw advertising revenue. For more info, read the optional reading on how BBC News creates new content verticals to drive more ad revenue.Turning our focus back to the US. Here, the most recognizable brands of public media are: PBS, NPR, and APM, which stands for American Public Media. The funding sources for public media in America is quite diverse: it comes from individual donations, corporate sponsorships, grants, and funding from universities, as well as state and federal governmen

Hello, welcome to COMM122 podcast! This is episode nine, and now we are in Week 4 of the learning. This week, our focus is on the commercial media model, which is the dominant model of media operation in the US. Throughout the classes this week, you will hear the term, mandate. A mandate refers to a media outlet’s foremost purpose, namely, what is its mission, and who and what does it serve. Generally speaking, there are the commercial media mandate and the non-commercial media mandate, which is the topic of next week. The commercial mandate is followed by commercial media outlets, such as HBO, Hulu, the New York Times, and the big four TV networks, CBS, NBC, ABC, and FOX. In fact, most media outlets here in the States are based on the commercial mandate. That means their primary mission is generating profits. However, we do have media outlets based on the non-commercial mandate. For example, PBS and NPR are public broadcasters in the country, whose primary mission is not profit-making, but to educate, inform, and entertain the community. While the commercial mandate is very dominant in the US, it is not necessarily so elsewhere in the world. Take Europe for example, in 2017, public funding accounts for 24% of the revenue of its TV industry, whereas in North America, the number is merely 1%. If we look at the level of public funding for public broadcasters, the US and Canada are at the bottom of the rank, and European countries, such as Norway, Germany, Sweden, and Denmark are on the top.Between various mandates, their key differences lie in: who pay for the media, who does it serve, and what determines success. In reviewing the funding sources of commercial media outlets, we will notice an important shift in the industry, which is the shift from, ad-supported media to, paid media. Let’s unpack that.In the business of TV, we know that in the states there are four big TV networks: CBS, NBC, ABC, and FOX. They broadcast national news, and also have local affiliates across cities to produce regional news. They stream Super Bowl, Emmy’s Award, the Academy Award, and very likely, they carry your favorite TV series. It used to be that the TV networks were 100% supported by advertising. In the pre-digital and pre-cable era, all you needed was a TV antenna to pick up the signal from the TV networks. You didn’t have to pay to watch the content. The content was freely available via radio airwaves. But, what was described has long gone. Between 1950s and 1980s, most commericial TV stations were funded entirely by the advertising dollars. Yet, in 2004, we, the consumers, spent more money on media than advertisers. And in 2008, we spent more time with paid media than with ad-supported media.So, what has happened? Note that the TV industry is no longer dominated by the big four. We have hundreds of cable channels, which requires paid subscriptions. We also have video streaming platforms like Netlifx, Hulu and Amazon Prime video. They also draw revenue from user subscriptions. Besides, we have iTunes Store, Google Play Store, and many other such stores that allow users to buy or rent a particular episode of a TV show. These are examples of paid-media. Currently, the revenue of the TV industry comes from three main sources. First, licensing fee and broadcasting rights. For instance, one of the big four TV networks strike a deal with the NFL to live broadcast Super Bowl. The broadcasting right tends to be exclusive, and the TV network gets paid if an overseas broadcaster’s live feed of the game comes from the TV network. The second source of revenue is advertising. This is pretty obvious: during the 2019 Super Bowl, the game's broadcasting rights holder, CBS, charged a record $5.25 million on average for a 30-second spot. The third source is subscription. This applies to cable channels but also increasingly the big four TV networks as they individually launch or p

Hello, welcome back to the COMM122 podcast! Its Episode Eight, I am Joanna, your digital assistant. I am made in the USA, not to be confused with the British-sounding host you heard in the last episode. In this episode, we will discuss challenges to media globalization, and how media institutions adapt to the challenges.The first challenge is the uneven development in media technology and telecommunication infrastructure. We refer to this problem as the digital divide. In 2016, the United Nations declared the promotion, protection, and enjoyment of the internet to be human rights. However, while the internet penetration rate was 79.6% in Europe, and 87% in the US, it was barely 22% in Africa. In many parts of the world, a stable supply of electricity remains an issue, not to mention high-speed internet. Of course, things are changing with the quick adoption of mobile phones in South Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Latin America. Uneven development requires media institutions to come up with different audience-targeting strategies. For instance, while institutions in North America are invested in using social media to raise awareness campaigns on public health issues, in the rural areas of developing countries TV series prove to be very effective in changing social norms and behaviors . For more info, please read the BBC coverage of Detective Vijay, a TV series in India featuring an HIV-positive detective.The second challenge is a legal and political one. Netflix, for example, is available in over 150 countries, but not in Crimea, a former part of Ukraine and now annexed by Russia. This is due to the US sanctions on Russia. Oh, yes, let’s talk about Netflix in China. In 2017, Netflix announced that it had reached a licensing deal with a local video-streaming company in China. Based on the Chinese laws and regulations, foreign companies providing information services must partner with local companies, and local companies should be the majority shareholder in the joint venture. Needless to say, had the deal gone through, Netflix’s content in China would also be highly selective and censored by the state. The deal never went through. The Chinese new Cybersecurity Law that went into effect in 2017 has made American tech companies’ presence in China increasingly difficult, if not impossible.While the legal and political barrier is largely associated with economic protectionism, sometimes, the barrier also has something to do with strong local competitions. In the Chinese case, there were already three local major video-streaming giants at the time of Netflix's entry. The local companies are doing very well in the Chinese domestic market and have been expanding overseas. Even if Netflix were present in China, it would face an uphill battle with local competitors.Piracy is another legal challenge. Because of the relative ease of copying and transmitting digital content, some argue that media institutions have lost revenues to piracy. But, does it? It is a debatable point. For that point, refer to the video shown in class titled Can piracy be “good” for business?Lastly, the linguistic and cultural barriers. Selling Russian films to American audience? Well, something is bound to be lost in translation. What is key here is not just a common language, but cultural proximity. Some cultural linguistic markets may have an advantage and benefit from closely linked geographies. Other cultural and linguistic markets may be based on diasporic communities, due to colonization and immigration. Be noted that places that seem to be culturally similar may have very different types of audience. For example, Crazy Rich Asians won big in America, but lost big in the Chinese market. Local audiences in China just don’t resonate with the film at all. Want to know more, watch the clip from CBS played in class.How do media institutions overcome these barriers. For the linguistic barriers, the most straig

Hey, its me again. Glad to be back. And we are now at Episode Seven.In last week’s episode, we talked about seven strategies media institutions take to counter high-risks and high-costs in the media industry. This week, we will discuss the last, but perhaps the most important strategy of all, globalization.We all know what that means. Just look at things around us, most are NOT produced in the US. Yet, if you look at cinemas, I bet you will find a bunch of same films currently screening across different cities worldwide. Chances are, they are made in Hollywood.Latest numbers show that over 80% of Netflix’s revenue comes from overseas subscribers. Netflix is available in almost every digitally connected country, except China, which we will discuss why that is the case in the next episode. Amazon’s Prime Video also has an extensive global presence. Hulu, which is owned by Disney, is also ambitiously targeting the international market. Like the video-streaming industry, the U.S. film industry, in particular, has become more dependent on international markets for revenue growth. Over 70% of the box office revenues come from overseas sales. Did you also know that a big portion of studios’ revenues here in the US for television shows comes from abroad? While America may have a trade deficit from trading with China and the European Union in terms of durable goods, the US exports far more royalties and licensing fees.So, maybe, we should say this. Media globalization is not just a business strategy, but the backbone of the industry, and it is precisely what make America great.Remember economies of scale and economies of scope? Media globalization is about taking advantage of “economies of scale” and “economies of scope” in the era of mass customization. That is, producing a great number of media products, in a great number of formats, to be sold to the global audience.Well, Why do the media industries embrace globalization? Here are some reasons. Global advertisers want to find a global market for their products. The domestic market is increasingly competitive and saturated, and developments of digital technology make global content delivery possible.By most metrics, the US is the dominant party in globalization. Since World War Two, the U.S. film and TV industry have relied on international markets for growth. And the U.S. is the largest producer of films and TV content in the globe. This is largely thanks to first-mover advantage. Since the US media industry is the first to monetize the global market, it gives the country competitive advantages in terms of strong market presence, brand recognition and loyalty.American dominance has drawn lots of criticism. Scholars use the term, Cultural Imperialism, to describe the destruction of local cultural production and values due to the vast amount of cultural products exported from the US and other dominant western countries. It exerts the homogenizing effects of Western culture as it spread across the world. Examples? Think of theme parks. What is the mental image that you conjure up when you think of theme parks? You likely will picture Universal Studios or Disneyland. I bet most kids around the world will picture the same. This is because the image of a theme park is really defined by two major American media franchises: Universal Studios and Disneyland.Some even argue that America’s dominance in the media world represents neo-colonialism. This term speaks about concerns people have over America’s growing political and ideological influence on the independence of nations. While such criticism mostly comes from the global south, which is the developing world. People in the developed world share the anxiety. In the French-speaking region of Canada, Quebec, some were critical of Netflix’s entry into the Canadian market, feeling that their cultural identity is under attack by the flooding of English-language

We are now at Episode Six. It’s good to be back to the show.Do you know how much it costs to produce this podcast?Let’s do the numbers. As an AI assistant, I earn 19 dollars monthly from working for Professor Wayne. That’s astronomically lower than most human labors. It also costs Professor Wayne about 12 dollars a month to distribute the podcast to different platforms such as Spotify, TunedIn, and iTunes store. So, in total, the podcast show costs around 30 bucks a month. Not a lot, actuallyWhile technological advances, such as me, have dramatically cut down the cost of producing multimedia content. Media production remains a high-risk and high-cost business.Do you know how much it costs to produce an episode of Game of Thrones? The number is 10 millions. What does the 10 millions cost entail?Well, it could include everything from script writing, content licensing, to crew selection, travel accommodations, and post-production CGI. And...plus all of the expenses on marketing and distributions. So, in a word, it is quite expensive to produce TV shows. In the movie industry, the average cost of producing a hollywood film has also gone up, from 60 millions in late 1990s to 200 millions recently.The media industry is making a big bet on all of the money spent on the things they produce. In other industries where the price of a product is governed by the invisible hand of the marketplace, that is, supply and demand. Prices go up if there are lots of demands and limited supply, and prices go down if there is an over-supply of a product with too little demand.Yet, the media industry hardly follows this rule. The thing is, it is difficult to predict demand of a media product, because tastes of audience change all the time. And, not to mention that media producers need to deal with a fluid political situation where scandals could hit at anytime.Back in 2014, House of Cards was a hit show. Everyone was talking about how it helped Netflix, and how big data analytics drive the production of the show. In 2018, its viewership hit the bottom after the airing of season six. Do you know what happened? Yes, it’s Kevin Spacey. His sexual harassment scandals cost Netflix 39 million US dollars.So, the question is, how do the industry counter the high risk and high cost? Here are several strategies.Strategy number one. Artificial scarcity. We know scarcity creates demand. If you shop on Amazon, and find your favorite product has only a few items left in stock. You probably will feel an urge to order it right away. The media industry can control the availability of information products, in the hope the demand will increase, if the product is not readily available. Such scarcity is artificial, because in theory, the industry has a theoretically limitless supply of a media product. Think about Spotify. With a free account, you can listen to music, but cannot skip songs frequently, nor can you listen to your tracks offline. These features are reserved for premium users. By creating the paywall, the media industry creates the kind of artificial scarcity that drives people to pay for content.Strategy number two. Economy of scale. This refers to the financial advantage that emerge, when the average cost of producing a good decreases, as the number of units produced increases. In the media industry, the cost of producing the original, or the first copy is higher than subsequent copies. For example, it costs about 10 millions dollar to produce an episode of Game of Throne. The 10 millions is the first-copy cost, or we can also call it sunk-cost, which is irrecoverable costs that are incurred in the production of goods and services. The good news is, once the first copy is made, the second, the third, and all subsequent copies are exponentially cheaper to make and distribute. It is particularly so, in the digital age, it means copying digital files and make them available on clou

In this episode, we will discuss four categories of goods, and what categories do media products fall under. Why should we care about this? This is because business strategies and business models, as well as some of the challenges facing the media industry, all have something to do with unique characteristics of media products. Let us begin. How is a movie different from a bucket of popcorn? Well, that’s a silly question, is it? Other than the fact that they both can be consumed in a movie theater. These two are categorically different things. See, the word, consume, is interesting. Can we really consume a media product. I can eat up a bucket of popcorn. It is gone. But, can I use up a movie. Is the movie somehow gone after my consumption? We all know that, information and intellectual properties do not get used up when you consume it. This is what we call “Rivalry.” It is a term in economics. We can describe a good or product as either rivalrous or non-rivalrous. It is rivalrous if its consumption by one user prevents simultaneous consumption by other users, or if consumption by one party reduces the ability of another party to consume it. For simplicity, let’s just call it Shareability, that is, whether a good can be shared or not. Do I want to share a bucket of popcorn with you? Probably not, but I can certainly share a movie with you. Second question. How is YouTube different from Netflix. Both are video streaming sites but there is a marked difference: YouTube is free, mostly. But Netflix requires a paid subscription. To use a term in economics. Netflix is excludable because if it prevents people who have not paid for it from having access to it. Simply put, excludability, or as we call openness in this class, is about whether something is free or not. Rivalry, or shareability, and excludability, or openness. These are the two dimensions along which different products can be categorized. If a product is rivalrous and excludable, meaning it can be used up and is not free of charge, we can call such product, private goods. Probably, some of your most precious possessions are, private goods. Your car, your jewelry, and your home.Hey, what about a product that is non-rivalrous and non-excludable, meaning, something that is free and does not get used up? We call it public goods. In a few weeks, we will talk about public media and community-supported media. This kind of media is a prime example of public goods. Think about your local PBS station and NPR station. Unlike channels such as HBO and AMC, public television and radio stations are freely available, and like nearly all media products, they do not get used up. There are also plenty of public goods on the internet. Your favorite website, Wikipedia is one. And there is a large community of people that embrace open-source and open-access culture. For example, Professor Wayne finished the script of this episode on a laptop that runs open-source software, and he made this podcast series free to download. So, technically, our podcast is a public good as well. What about the products that are in-between? Can you name something that does get used up, but is free? I would say, lobsters. There are lots of lobsters in the world, but the supply of lobsters is limited, and they could be consumed up if we over-fish. That is why different countries have fisheries policies to regulate how much that can be fished in their territory. However, fishermen do not have to pay for the lobsters they have caught, because these are creatures from the mother nature. We call this sort of goods, commons, or common pool of resources. Lastly, let’s talk about HBO. The HBO channel is NOT free. It does not get used up. We call it collective goods. Many media products are collective goods. Just think about how the media products you have pay for, such as TV shows, e-books, and video games.&nbs

Hey, it’s me again, your AI assistant to Professor Wayne. This is COMM122 Podcast, Episode Four. I hope you enjoy our previous episodes on media as, cultural industries and public spheres. In this episode, we will have a quick chat about agency. Agency means, the amount of control media industry workers have over how and what they do. Agency matters, because media industries are creative industries, and workers need to have a high degree of autonomy to produce meaningful work.Think about a job you’ve had. How much autonomy and ability did you have to decide what to do, and how to do it. What constrained you or set boundaries to your autonomy? You will see that media workers, just like workers in other sectors, have their autonomy circumscribed. Yes, Circumscribed. While they do enjoy a certain amount of freedom in deciding what to produce, their choices are not wholly their own, due to influence from modern institutions, norms and cultural traditions.Here is an example. In 2014, Liz Wahl quits her job during a live broadcast. Liz was then working for Russia Today, also known as RT. RT is a Kremlin-sponsored news network. In 2014, Russia annexed Crimea, a part of Ukraine, and used its sponsored media outlets, such as RT, to wage an information warfare against the west. Liz said on air: “I can't be part of network 'that whitewashes' Putin's actions.”See, if you work for a media outlet that serves as the mouthpiece of a government, your hands are tied. You face censorship and self-censorship. You might say, Hey, at least, Liz can quit, and not face any consequences. She is now a Democratic Candidate for Texas 23rd district. Had you done it in an authoritarian country, she could face jail time. The anchor or journalist could face prison time! You might ask, why did Liz choose to work for a Russia-sponsored media in the first place? News media in the west are struggling with revenues. Young and aspiring graduates of journalism face a deficiency of jobs in journalism. State-sponsored media from authoritarian countries seize the opportunity, opening their studios in the US and investing in many local media talents. As you can see, part of the circumscribed agency is due to the stringent financial situation facing some media industries at home.This matter can be made worse with artificial intelligence, such as me. AI one day could replace news anchors and reporters? Some newsrooms are already experimenting with algorithms to automate news production. China has developed the world’s first AI news anchor. So, folks, be prepared for the robot revolution.

Hello, this is COMM122 Podcast, Episode three. Welcome back! I am Amy, your AI assistant to Professor Wayne. And yes, I sound British. In the last episode, we talked about the relationship between media and ideology. We left you with the thought that media shape the dominant ideology of a society. You probably know that America is a pluralistic society, with diverse and sometimes clashing ideologies. Yes, media produce and reproduce the dominant ideology, but do media also produce, and promote fringe ides, and minority viewpoint? The answer is yes. In this episode, we will discuss how media function as public platforms, like public squares, where citizens gather to debate on public matters. There is a term for that, called public sphere, used first by German philosopher Jürgen Habermas. There are many examples of media serving as the public sphere. Think about heated panel debates you see on cable news, and edgy discussions on social media. When Habermas coined the term, he was envisioning a rational citizenry acting in good faith. But in reality, people are irrational. Instead of rational and fair-minded deliberations, people bring emotions and biases to public discussions. We can all recall moments where disagreements turn into strained relationships. Media become a place not for seeking dialogue, but an echo chamber where you see what you want to see. Don't be discouraged just yet. There are still great media projects. I recommend three podcast shows that are modeled after the ideal version of public sphere, in which show producers invite panelists with opposing viewpoints and debate with eloquence and substance. They are: National Public Radio’s On Point, which is a call-in show produced by NPR’s Boston affiliate. BBC’s The Real Story, and the New York Time podcast show called The Argument. You will find the shows in Apple ITunes, Spotify, Google podcast, and wherever you find our COMM122 podcast. There isn’t just one public sphere but many. First, there is the mainstream public sphere where mainstreamed ideas are exchanged. The mainstream public sphere won’t include all voices in society. Back in time, the idea of abstaining from the use of animal products was quite a fringe idea, and won’t be dealt with seriously in the mainstream public sphere. That, of course, is a different story now. Historically, some voices are systematically excluded or marginalized due to structural inequality that exists in society. For example, African Americans, along with immigrants, refugees, sexual minorities, and the working poor, has been somewhat marginalized from the mainstream public sphere. The lack of representation is a serious issue in our time that champions diversity and inclusion. Okay, what do you do if you are marginalized but want to have your voices heard. You do it through media. You create your own public sphere, called counter-public sphere. It is counter because it stands in opposition to the mainstream and dominant public sphere. Here are some examples, back in the 1960s, during the civil rights movement, African Americans created their own media promoting their own viewpoints, to challenge the mainstream narrative. Nowadays, you will find niche media for historically marginalized groups and political fringe groups. Do you know Anonymous Media. It is a media outlet created by Anonymous, which is a loosely associated activist groups, engaged in politically motivated hacking and cyberattacks. Have you heard of Naked Food. It is a magazine created by vegans, to promote veganism. Both are examples of counter-public spheres, consisting of like-minded communities, that spread alternative ideologies.As discussed in class, counter-public sphere has taken an alarming turn. Conspiracy theorists and white supremacists have carved out their own media space to propagate their vision of the world. Many

Hello! Welcome to COMM122 Podcast, Episode two. I am an AI assistant to Professor Wayne.In the last episode, we talked about how media create mainstream and popular cultures. In this episode, we will make a more contentious argument. Media shape ideologies that divide our society into blue states and red states, Trump army and Bernie Bro, Proud Boys and Social Justice Warriors. You see, ideology is a value system through which we assign meanings to the things we see and do. You are a libertarian, so you believe in small government and lower taxes. You are a conservative in America and by extension, you value the Second Amendment and traditional values. Of course, I am painting different ideologies here in a broad stroke. But have you thought about why different societies upload drastically different ideologies, such as in America, freedom, tolerance, and diversity are highly esteemed values, whereas in China nationalism is a unifying principle in public life.Again, the answer lies in media. Media shape and reinforce what we call dominant ideology.The dominant ideology is the social common sense of our time, what is deemed acceptable and desirable by the majority of the public. So, what is the dominant ideology of our time? Maybe, you would say, tolerance, diversity, and progress? Some may say, Make America Great Again? Notice that a dominant ideology, that is, what is accepted and promoted by the majority, can be benign or hideous, progressive or against the current of history. Dominant ideologies also vary across societies, and change over time. Take Germany for example, its dominant ideology during the Nazi era was, antisemitism, scientific racism, and eugenics. During the cold war, the dominant ideology of former East Germany was, communism. These values are just outrightly despicable in current-day Germany.Why do media create dominant ideology? Do media do it purposefully? Is there a conspiracy of “Amusing Ourselves to Death”, as claimed by Neil Postman in his famous book?We should consider several scenarios. First, in some societies and at certain times in history, media outlets could be controlled by powerful governments, to propagate what authoritarian regimes want to promote. Media outlets then act as mouthpieces, and a tool of propaganda. There are many such cases in the history of the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, and war-time America. But, you might be surprised to find many contemporary cases of modern-day media propaganda, in the form of sleek videos, viral internet memes, and catching rap songs. They could be in your Facebook timeline, Instagram stories, and Tik Tok. Don’t forget that, as you become more digitally and media savvy, so do authoritarian regimes.That said, in current-day America, media censorship, and government direct control of media is prohibited by the First Amendment. There is no law requiring Fox News to stick with Conservative talking points and no regulation asking HBO to produce diverse TV shows. Mostly, media shape the dominant ideology by catering to what people want, because that makes business sense. If people want A, not B, then media supply more A, not B. The simple logic is that by heeding to people’s popular choices media industry can keep and increase advertising revenue and profit from subscriptions and content purchases. Do you notice that this is a self-fulfilling loop: by supplying more of what the public wants, it creates more demand for the thing wanted by the public.Here are some examples.Have you heard of an HBO show called Confederate? I am sure you haven’t watched it. The show was created by David Benioff and D.B. Weiss, two writers behind Game of Thrones. But, this show is now dead in the water. Confederate is an alternative-history drama, imagining a time after the Civil War, where South won. Sounds interesting, but HBO had to cancel the show resulting in a significant financial loss. This is because the show t