Media industries: power and media industries (Curran and Seaton). The concentration of ownership in a few conglomerates, the pursuit of profit and power, the resulting narrowing of variety, and the case that diversity and alternative ownership widen creativity and democracy.

What this dot point is asking

OCR names Curran and Seaton as the theorists for ownership and power in the media industries. Their argument is that the media are dominated by a few large, profit-driven companies, and that this concentration tends to narrow what gets made, while diversity and alternative ownership widen creativity and democracy. You need their case and the ability to apply and evaluate it on set products.

The answer

Concentration of ownership

This concentration is the starting point. A handful of companies own a large share of the press, broadcasting and online media, which gives them significant economic and cultural power.

Profit, power and the narrowing of variety

Because these companies seek to maximise profit and minimise risk, they tend to produce safe, standardised and repeatable products, and the overall range and variety narrows. This can also limit the diversity of viewpoints in public debate, a concern for democracy (Curran and Seaton's wider point is about the media's role in the public sphere, not just entertainment). Concentration, on their account, is bad for creativity and democracy.

The case for diversity and alternative ownership

Their second, more hopeful claim is that greater diversity of ownership produces better outcomes. Where media are more varied, including alternative, independent and public service ownership, there is more room for creative risk-taking, a wider range of products, and a healthier democratic debate. This is why the funding model (commercial, public service, alternative) matters so much, and why a campaigning or alternative product looks so different from a conglomerate's output.

Evaluating Curran and Seaton

The theory is powerful but not the whole story. Digital and participatory media (Shirky), public service broadcasting and independent producers all push back against concentration and widen choice. Hesmondhalgh adds nuance: the industries minimise risk but also need innovation. A top answer judges how far concentration really limits variety, balancing the theory against these counter-forces.

Examples in context

A strong answer applies Curran and Seaton to named ownership, contrasts concentrated with diverse ownership, and judges the limitation, rather than asserting that big companies are simply bad.

Try this

Q1. Explain what Curran and Seaton argue about concentrated media ownership. [5 marks]

• What the marker wants. A few large, profit-driven companies dominate, narrowing variety and diversity of viewpoints, with diversity of ownership widening creativity (AO1).

Q2. Explain how the ownership of one set product affects the range of products it offers. [10 marks]

• Cue. Identify the ownership, apply Curran and Seaton on profit and variety, and contrast with more diverse or alternative ownership (AO2).