Media Regulation and Ownership

Media Regulation and Ownership Media Ownership The concern surrounding the concentration of mass media ownership is hardly a new topic. In 1970, the Davey Committee on the Mass Media was the first to sound the alarm bell. Daily newspapers in particular were falling into fewer and fewer concentrations of corporate hands. For example, in 1990, 17.3% of daily newspapers were independently owned. In 2005 a sad 1% was independently owned. These findings, among other things, caused the Senate Standing Committee on Transport and Communications to launch a study on Canadian news media in March 2003. Prior to that, another government inquiry, the Kent Royal Commission on Newspapers, brought these fears to light. By then, three big chains controlled fifty seven percent of the daily circulation; this is up from forty five percent in the short time since Davey issued his report. In studying the condition of the newspaper industry, both the Davey Committee and the Kent Commission noted the growing concentration of newspaper ownership were res ponsible for wide spread social costs. The Canadian newspaper markets and the accompanying rise of chain ownership would surely lead to a reduction of the news and views presented in the press. This would ultimately threaten the publics right to freedom of expression by restricting the number and diversity of voices heard in the daily press. Today, the concentration of newspaper ownership is far worse than either the Davey or Kent studies could have imagined. The three biggest chains now control more than seventy four percent of daily circulation. One company alone, the Can West Global, owns or controls more than forty percent of English language circulation. What is very troubling is the fact that there exists a complete monopoly of the daily press in Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland. In respect to previously mentioned facts, it is clear that the introduction of a legislation to curb the concentration of media ownership in Canada is long due. Confronted with this possibility in the past, media owners have bickered that such measures would encroach on their individual rights and transgress freedom of the press. While being conscious of this argument, the truth is that the case for imposing limits on media ownership is based solely on democratic, social and journalistic concerns. The media’s social responsibility makes them unlike any other commercial activity. Freedom of the press is not just the proprietary right of owners to do as they see fit, it is a right of the Canadian people. For the right to be valued we need to encourage diversity and openness in the media. This means creating policies to encourage wider involvement in media industries by numerous individuals, and switch the concentration of media power in fewer and fewer hands. Many countries have used and practiced this simple principle and have developed procedures to control the threat of media ownership concentration. An example of a region that is currently taking action is the European Commission. The European Commission is proposing legislation to confine the reach of big media corporations and manage the spread of cross-media ownership, as such can have a huge effect on information which in some situations can be priceless. Another great example is what is occurring in Britain. Television broadcasters in Britain are confined to fifteen percent of the national audience. In the case of newspaper mergers, the British Monopolies and Mergers Commission is obligated to evaluate the impact on the accu rate presentation of news and free expression of opinion when deciding whether to approve a merger. Sweden is another county that is taking action. Sweden has a long standing press grant whereby a number of newspapers, not always funded by private corporate advertisers, are provided public financing. The Italian Broadcasting Act of 1990 sets tangible limits on media concentration. Under the law, no one person or company may own or manage more than twenty percent of all the media In Germany, whenever a merger allows a company to control a precise press market or reinforce its already scheming position, the federal cartel office is forced to intrude to stop the merger. The policies have been used several times and with some outstanding success. Not too long ago, the cartel office banned Springer from acquiring monopoly control of the Munich newspaper market. The French government checks any group or individual from owning more than thirty percent of the daily press. However, if a company or individual has extensive interests in the broadcast media, it may only control up to ten percent of the daily press. The Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom is urging the government to take action in an attempt to help encourage and defend a free and democratic press. I believe that legislation aimed at tackling the problem of media ownership concentration should have a least three broad goals. First, constrain and ultimately reverse the current level of media ownership concentration. Second, supply procedures that will encourage a diversity of media ownership. Lastly, make sure that the media effectively live up to their social responsibility and offer a wider variety of exposure and content Most developed countries have legislation that restrictions the amount of media holdings any company or individual can own. Others are functioning positively to limit cross-media ownership. Compared to developed countries, Canada has very weak requirements. There is not much to prevent or stop one company from dominating and controlling the newspaper, television or radio markets in the country. In a free and democratic society, that is clearly intolerable Precise restrictions on ownership limits are necessary. However, the Competition Bureau, the federal body which controls mergers and acquisitions, also needs to take a more vigorous role in defending the public from the adverse affect of mergers in the media area. In order to tackle the pressing problems, it would be a good idea for the following suggestions to be given power in legislation. The first proposal would be the total number of daily newspapers, radio stations, or television stations owned by one company or individual in any market should not exceed thirty five percent. Secondly, no one company or individual should directly or indirectly manage or control more than twenty five percent of the distribution of daily newspapers in Canada. Thirdly, to limit cross-media ownership concentration, it should be proposed that no one person or company may own or control more than twenty percent of all the media. Lastly, the current Competition Act should be altered so that it includes the following part: The Director of Research and Investigation should state whether or not a merger concerning media interests may be likely to function against the public interest, taking into account all matters which appear in the particular circumstances to be relevant and having regard to the need for precise presentation of news and free expression of diverse opinion. Limiting the amount of worth one company can manage is a significant step towards protecting freedom of expression. However, it will only be efficient if it came with measures to encourage new owners to enter the market and to support other forms of ownership. There is now substantial evidence presented to propose that a high degree of concentration of ownership makes it nearly impossible for new parties to enter the market. To tackle these problems, the following measures should be taken into consideration. First, the legislation should be enacted to provide special tax inducements and interest-free loans for the establishment of new newspapers by small local investors, community groups, and non-profit organizations. Second, tax incentives and interest free loans should be provided to encourage employee purchases of media properties. And thirdly, the future role of the CBC/SRC and provincial public service broadcasters is crucial to ensuring a diverse broadcasting network. Public broadcasters should be guaranteed adequate and stable multi-year financing coupled with a renewed mandate clarifying their public service goals. Media concentration can and will give birth to a number of dangers namely. These dangers include single minded perspectives on major events and debates, information handling, and the eradication of alternative views and opinions. The impact on free speech independence will be devastating. The fear of being sacked and punishments from top level managers might pressure the journalists to self-censor. However, the increase of media concentration is matched by an equally alarming shift toward collection. This occurs as non-media corporations directly or indirectly gain holdings in the media sector, a development that raises the spectre of potential editorial interference. Clearly, the increasing reach and power of these corporations gives new urgency to concerns about who controls them and whose interests they serve. Given these concerns, introducing the following legislative measures might help to encourage responsibility on the part of the current media controllers and to help diversify coverage and content. First, to further develop editorial independence from managerial interference, legislation should establish a code of professional practice to protect journalists and other media workers from possible obstructions Second, in connection with a reform of the current libel law, legislation should be enacted establishing a right of reply to inaccurate or misleading reporting. Third, the self-regulatory press councils and the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council have often proven to be ineffective in dealing with public complaints about media coverage. A proposal, that an independent and publicly accountable body, a Media Commission, be established to investigate such complaints, report publicly on its findings, and order any redress where it has decided an infraction has occurred. Fourth, media corporations, particular those involved in other sectors of the economy, should be required to provide full details about their ownership holdings and a statement of the relationship to be maintained between the editorial department, including the editor and publisher in the case of newspapers, and the corporation. Fifth, broadcasters are currently required to set aside a small amount of time for public service organizations and community groups. A similar policy should be developed whereby daily newspapers would be required to set aside a modest amount of space for community groups and local non-profit organizations. Such a requirement would help ensure more diversity of voices and issues in the press. In Conclusion, most democratic societies recognize the need to ensure the printed word and visual image should not be overly monopolized. If diversity of opinion lies at the heart of democracy, then surely no one individual or company should be permitted to preside over what Canadians see, hear, and read. The reserved legislative proposals outlined earlier, if accepted, would represent an important step toward encouraging wider diversity, openness, and choice in our media. It would encourage this by limiting and reversing the concentration of media power into fewer and fewer hands. If immediate actions are not taken, the range of news and information the Canadian public receives will be further restricted, as the pool of those who own and control its content will continue to shrink. As a result from this, what we see and hear will be what one or two individuals decide is best for us.

My 70th Birthday Speech

My Seventieth Birthday Speech â€Å"The seventieth birthday! It is the time of life when you arrive at a new and awful dignity; when you throw aside the decent reserves which have oppressed you for a generation and have stand unafraid and unabashed upon your seven-terraced summit and look down and teach-unrebuked. You can tell the world how you got there. † Mark Twain Good afternoon family and friends, I am privileged to be here today to celebrate with you my seventieth birthday. Today is a day I will remember fondly if health allows me to, for seventy is a good long time to live- I should know!In addition, it is truly something to celebrate. In the presence of everyone, my husband Alexander, my sons Alexandre and Vito, my daughters Thea-Simone and Mikaela, my 13 grandchildren and my three great grandchildren. I can proudly say, you are the reason I live today. Who I am today is a product of my earlier socialization, my experiences and my ambitions. I may be described as an in trovert, as you all know; I am quiet by temperament and flourishes in my own company and space, until I met my husband.Alexander and I met when we were in high school, we were friends first, however; a few years later the friendship has grown into something more. We both got accepted into a four year college where my major was psychology and his was biology. I graduated with our bachelor’s degree and then moved on to graduate school at Harvard University to further advance my studies to doctorate’s degree. In the latter part of graduate school I found out that, we were going to have a baby. Above all things I worried about being a good mother to our baby. I looked forward to its birth amidst the support of friends and family.Understandably, I became alarmed when my doctor spoke about his concern about the hike in my blood pressure. He cautioned me about the dangers of high blood pressure levels especially during pregnancy. I immediately changed my diet as per recommend ation and did a critical self-reflection in my quest to de-stress and restore my blood pressure to normal. It was indeed a scary time for me when my blood pressure seemed beyond control and I had to be hospitalized for treatment in the latter trimester of my pregnancy. At this point, the doctor has decided t best that I await the birth of my baby within the hospital walls, luckily, it was almost time. Looking back now, I am amazed that I found the strength to take the next step. When my daughter was born, I was devastated to learn to that, she had but a fifty-fifty chance of surviving as a direct result of the dangerously high blood pressure levels during labor. She stayed with us for a couple hours before she passed on, leaving behind devastation in her wake. I was at a low place in all faucets of my life during this time. I was crippled by grief and felt as if I had come to the end of my journey.I could not help feeling that this was a personal blow to me by God. I wondered how he could have allowed something so drastic and final to happen to me. I wondered if I was being punished for some terrible wrong that I had done. I had to dig deep inside of me to hold onto my faith in God and find the strength to pick up the pieces of my life. I was encouraged to mourn my baby by not living in denial and resume University as soon as I was able, as staying at home for an extended period as was previously planned would hinder the healing process.I conceded and returned to school hoping to fill the vacuum that the baby’s death had left inside of my soul. Had it not been for the wonderful people who entered my life and embraced me as one of their own, my coping skills would have been non-existent. Together they created a very strong support system and constantly encouraged me to hold on to my dreams and aspirations, remaining focused and surmounting each obstacle as they arose. The future was unpredictable in its entirety but I tried to remain focused and continue to believe in that which I want to achieve for myself.I knew I could not do it all by myself and I am forever grateful to my wonderful husband who stood by me through happy times and sad ones and for all the assistance I have received then and now that has helped to shape who I am today. My hard work and determination has paid off, now it is time for me to have fun. I am now retired from being the CEO of the Middleton Psychiatric Hospital and has passed down the honors to my eldest son Dr. Vito Samuda. I believe I have bored you long enough with my long speech, and I can hear the stomach growling from hunger, enjoy your meal.Guest List| Name|   | Hank Aaron|   | F. Murray Abraham|   | Spencer Abraham|   | Dick Albert|   | Eddie Albert|   | Marv Albert|   | Kim Alexis|   | Debbie Allen|   | Ethan Allen|   | Gracie Allen|   | Irwin Allen|   | Joan Allen|   | Karen Allen|   | Marcus Allen|   | Peter Allen|   | Steve Allen|   | Tim Allen|   | Woody A llen|   | Bobby Allison|   | Ben Alexander|   | Jason Alexander|   | William Alexander|   | Tori Amos|   | Marie Antoinette|   | Susan Anton|   | â€Å"Tiny† Archibald|   | Benedict Arnold|   | Eddie Arnold|   | Tom Arnold|   | Bea Arthur|   | Chester Allen Arthur|   |Elizabeth Ashley|   | Laura Ashley|   | Klaus Barbie|   | Sir James Barrie|   | Dave Barry|   | Jeff Barry|   | Linda Barry|   | Marion Barry|   | Rick Barry|   | Freddie Bartholemew|   | Stan Belinda|   | Albert Belle|   | Richard Benjamin|   | Jack Benny|   | Crystal Bernard|   | Bill Bradley|   | Ed Bradley|   | Omar Bradley|   | George Brett|   | Zachary Ty Bryan|   | Kobe Bryant|   | Morgan Brittany|   | Lenny Bruce|   | Nigel Bruce|   | Robert Bruce|   | William Jennings Bryan|   | Anita Bryant|   | Kirk Cameron|   | Jim Carrey|   | Drew Carey|   | Mariah Carey|   | Eric Carmen|   |Diahann Carroll|   | Lewis Carro ll|   | Ray Charles|   | Suzette Charles|   | Warren Christopher|   | William Christopher|   | Agatha Christie|   | Doug Christie|   | Julie Christie|   | Dick Clark|   | Dwight Clark (49ers)|   | Marcia Clark|   | Roy Clark|   | Henry Clay|   | Adam Clayton|   | Jimmy Cliff|   | Sidonie Gabrielle Claudine Colette|   | Joseph Conrad|   | William Conrad|   | Jenny Craig|   | Jim Craig|   | Yvonne Craig|   | Billy Crystal|   | Jamie Lee Curtis|   | Tony Curtis|   | Michael Damian|   | Matt Damon|   | Bill Dana|   | Keith David|   | Larry David|   |Dizzy Dean|   | James Dean|   | Jimmy Dean|   | John Dean|   | Sandra Dee|   | Sandy Dennis|   | Martin Denny|   | Sandy Denny|   | Andy Dick|   | Philip K. Dick|   | Kirk Douglas|   | Michael Douglas|   | Mike Douglas|   | Sherman Douglas|   | Stephen A. Douglas|   | William O Douglas|   | Sandy Duncan|   | Reginald Dwight|   | (See â€Å"Elton Jo hn†)|   | Jakob Dylan|   | Bob Dylan|   | Steve Earle|   | Duane Eddy|   | Nelson Eddy|   | Bill Elliot|   | Bob Elliot|   | Chris Elliot|   | Cass Elliot|   | George Eliot|   | Sam Elliot|   | Sean Elliot|   | T. S. Eliot|   | Julius â€Å"Dr.J† Erving|   | Chad Everett|   | Percy Faith|   | Tammy Faye|   | Arlene Francis|   | Coleman Francis|   | Connie Francis|   | Dick Francis|   | Anne Frank|   | Barney Frank|   | Sandy Frank|   | Aretha Franklin|   | Bonnie Franklin|   | Joe Franklin|   | Benjamin Franklin|   | Peter Gabriel|   | Jennie Garth|   | Crystal Gayle|   | Phyllis George|   | Wally George|   | Johnny Gilbert|   | Melissa Gilbert|   | Sarah Gilbert|   | John Glenn|   | Jeff Gordon|   | Topher Grace|   | Billy Graham|   | Katherine Graham|   | Amy Grant|   | Hugh Grant|   | U. S. Grant|   | Judd Gregg|   |Dick Gregory|   | Gilbert Gottfried|   | Buddy Guy| | Dar ryl Hannah| | George Harrison| | Debbie Harry| | P. J. Harvey| | Paul Harvey| | Steve Harvey| | Buck Henry| | John Henry| | Patrick Henry| | Frank Herbert| | Sir Edmund Hillary| | Buddy Holly| | Lauren Holly| | Bob Hope| | Curly Howard| | Jerome Howard| | John Howard| | Moe Howard| | Ron Howard| | Victor Hugo| | Hubert Humphrey| | Janis Ian| | Amy Irving| | John Irving| | Julius Irving| | Washington Irving| | Chris Isaak| | Dennis James| | Harry James| | Henry James| | Jesse James| | Kevin James| |

Being an Only Child or Having Siblings Essay

The bond between siblings is the most enduring bond that any of us experiences, this bond is not as demanding and critical as that of our parents, children or spouse and this is potentially longest relationship we will ever have in life. The bond that is shared with siblings helps to determine the quality of bond we will experience with our other relationships in life. Children who have brothers and sisters usually have more perspective of life than the only children. Sibling relationships can teach children the differences between the views of life, not just only from parents but it is also from their brothers and sisters close to their own age. The first thing that children who have brothers and sisters can learn is how to share with others. This helps to develop social skills at a young age, which are crucial throughout life. Although sometimes children just want to keep something for theirs own, they have to think about their siblings before doing that every time. It is just like a conception of sharing. Children with siblings are able to make and maintain friendships. However, the only child in a family has all the things that are given. They don’t have to worry about their sibling who they have to share with or think about. However, if the only child is around other children that do share, it can cause an altercation. In early childhood, children who have brothers and sisters, have constant companions and playmates, they can play games together, have conversations, learn to play make-believe and share problems with each other. Having siblings also teaches younger siblings things such as learning to walk and talk sooner, because the younger child will try and imitate with the older child is doing. They can also help to take care of each other. The older sibling can help the younger siblings with learning to make their bed, play football, basketball or help with homework. There is no limit to what siblings can do for each other. In comparison to only children who receive more of their parents’ attention, which may give them an advantage with help with homework, more playtime with dad or mom, and perhaps more or better toys, educational items, clothes, etc. because there is more money available. But, only children may not have the opportunity to socialize as much with other children. Days can be long with them. These parents may go to the parks more, and join mommy and me groups to help their children learn to interact with other children. As an adult, one usually finds a happy memory of their childhood to share with another person, of the relationship with their sibling. This could bring back feelings of happiness or hostility, depending on the severity of sibling rivalry. For some siblings, the rivalry carries on into adulthood and becomes unhealthy. On the other hand, a possible disadvantage for only children when they get older and reflect back on their childhood memories, is that they may regret not having a sibling. At the time, it may have seemed better to be the only child and have more physical things and attention. But upon growing older, they may miss the bond and relationship they could have had. In conclusion, an only child will always be just that. Once older, the family does not extend and they will not know the joy of having nieces and nephews and the special bonds and memories that come along with that. Also, the relationships among brothers and sisters are boundlessly varied, but whatever their characteristics, these bonds last throughout life. After the loss of a parent, a sibling is the only on that can truly understand what you are going through as well as the pain of your loss.

Techniques For Enhancing Self Efficacy - 1485 Words

While techniques aimed at enhancing self-efficacy may be beneficial at all developmental stages, they may be particularly influential during early adolescence, as occupational aspirations become established and perceptions of aptitude may increasingly influence students’ sense of which career options are attractive and viable (Brown, 2002). Self-efficacy beliefs and goal attainment are central to the development of academic-career interests and to the collection of occupational opportunities that students view as possible careers for themselves. School counselors can optimize the development of students’ academic and career interest and competencies through a number of cognitive implications using SCCT. It is important to confirm that†¦show more content†¦Counselors can also encourage students to reconsider the outcomes of past performance experiences and invite them to look at their past and present successes in a way that promotes, rather than overlooks, p erceived ability. A school counselor can facilitate mastery of goals in several ways. First, the counselor can keep the student focused on the progress of skill development rather than on ultimate skill attainment. It is also important to focus on acknowledging the students’ performance, encouraging them to attribute successful experiences at skill development to internal, stable factors (e.g. ability) rather than to internal, unstable (e.g. effort) or external (e.g. luck, ease of task) factors (Brown, 2002). When setting goals with students, both in group settings and individually, the counselor should ensure that the goals are specific, measurable, realistic, attainable, and timely. If students do not set realistic goals, failure to realize them may have a negative impact of their self-efficacy and future outcome expectations. Similar to most traditional counseling theories, career counseling theories were predominately developed based on the behaviors of â€Å"white, middle-class, and able-bodied heterosexuals† (Career Counseling Issues, n.d.). Therefore, there may be numerous assumptions embedded in these career-counseling theories. Brown (2002), states