David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Applied Philosophy 28 (1):65-79 (2011)
Should media communication be left to the market, or rather (partly) removed from the market? This question is discussed by reconstructing an often-found ‘standard argument’ in the literature on the subject. This standard argument states that some form of market-independent media provision is required since markets will fail to deliver a specific kind of high-quality content conducive to the democratic process. This paper argues that the standard argument is defective in several respects. By doing so, it reevaluates the way we think about the contribution of the media towards democracy and the role that the market is to play in this respect. First, the paper argues that the standard argument's normative premise should not be couched in a welfarist theory but in terms of the capabilities that the media should strive to realise. Second, it sets the normative expectations of the media's contribution towards the public sphere and democracy at too high a level. Third, the standard argument's diagnosis of the market's failure incorrectly assumes that the market can never generate the demand for high-quality content. An alternative, more circumscribed claim about the market's failure is presented, resting on two more contingent types of demand failure
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
John McManus (1992). Serving the Public and Serving the Market: A Conflict of Interest? Journal of Mass Media Ethics 7 (4):196 – 208.
Rutger J. G. Claassen (2009). Institutional Pluralism and the Limits of the Market. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 8 (4):420-447.
Lawrence Souder (2010). A Free-Market Model for Media Ethics: Adam Smith's Looking Glass. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 25 (1):53 – 64.
James Stacey Taylor (2006). Why the 'Black Market' Arguments Against Legalizing Organ Sales Fail. Res Publica 12 (2):163-178.
Pamela Taylor Jackson (2009). News as a Contested Commodity: A Clash of Capitalist and Journalistic Imperatives. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 24 (2 & 3):146 – 163.
Deana A. Rohlinger (2007). American Media and Deliberative Democratic Processes. Sociological Theory 25 (2):122 - 148.
T. Phillips (2011). From the Ideal Market to the Ideal Clinic: Constructing a Normative Standard of Fairness for Human Subjects Research. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36 (1):79-106.
Matt Zwolinski (2010). Price Gouging and Market Failure. In Gerald Gaus, Julian Lamont & Christi Favor (eds.), ESSAYS ON PHILOSOPHY, POLITICS & ECONOMIC: INTEGRATION AND COMMON RESEARCH PROJECTS. Stanford University Press.
David Schmidtz (1993). Market Failure. Critical Review 7 (4):525-537.
Geert Demuijnck (2001). Market Forces and Mass Media – Competing for an Audience of Consumers. In Cassidy Eoin G. & McGrady Andrew G. (eds.), Media and the Marketplace – Ethical Perspectives. IPA.
A. Askland (2002). Floating Maximally Many Boats: A Preference for the Broad Distribution of Market Benefits. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 40 (1):91 - 99.
Costas Lapavitsas (2004). Commodities and Gifts: Why Commodities Represent More Than Market Relations. Science and Society 68 (1):33 - 56.
Added to index2010-12-01
Total downloads12 ( #137,846 of 1,140,270 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #142,694 of 1,140,270 )
How can I increase my downloads?