What is media concentration, and is it good or bad?
This article is part of
News
The term ‘media concentration’ denotes the fusion of various media companies, which end up forming part of the same media conglomerate. Media concentration is a worldwide phenomenon with benefits and downsides.
“In the digital age, media companies worldwide are presented with major challenges. To stay afloat economically in a sector where traditional revenue from subscriptions and advertisement is on the decline, joining forces is a logical strategy.”
Media concentration is a very normal phenomenon. It’s a logical option for media companies, and sometimes it’s necessary to strengthen their position, especially in small markets like Flanders. It’s important for news and media users to know and understand the degree of media concentration in our region, because this can influence reporting.
3 types of media concentration
We distinguish 3 types of media concentration:
- Horizontal media concentration: one player owns multiple media within the same link of the value chain (eg. a publisher owns several newspapers).
- Vertical media concentration: one player owns several consecutive links within the same value chain (eg. a telecom company does not just act as the cable distributor, but also owns a production company and a tv station).
- Cross-medium media concentration: there are links between the providers of various media chains (eg. tv stations with their own website).
Benefits and downsides of media concentration
Media concentration is not good or bad by definition. It offers a number of advantages, both at the local and national levels:
advantages
Because the various newsrooms can call on one another, there is more scope for specialisation within each newsroom. News media that specialise in sports can focus on sports alone, and rely on other newsrooms within the group for reporting on other topics.
In times of international superpowers and declining advertisement revenue, it’s important to stay strong in the face of foreign media companies (eg. Netflix). Media concentration allows for creating a healthy and stable conglomerate that is able to compete on the market.
Small media companies often struggle to attract subscribers and advertisers. They tend to rely on subsidies. When those are cut (like in the case of Charlie Magazine), they get in trouble. By joining a media group, their further existence is guaranteed. There are a number of small, independent media outlets in Flanders that have united under the banner Media.21, an umbrella company for digital news media.
Downsides
The higher efficiency created by media concentration can be accompanied by a less diverse offering. Research shows that newspapers belonging to the same media group often adopt each other’s articles. The independent character of newsrooms can be compromised this way.
Media concentration can influence the news selection and reporting quality. Certain information can be withheld (eg. unfavourable news about leftist politicians in a left-leaning media group). Or brands within the same group can be put in an overly favourable spotlight.
The Digital News Report shows that a high level of trust in news media is mostly prevalent in countries with a diverse media landscape. When media are highly concentrated, this can arouse suspicion from news users. The idea that reporting might not be objective wins ground.
Media concentration in Flanders
The Flemish media landscape is currently owned for 80% by only 5 major groups:
- VRT (public broadcaster): één, canvas, MNM, Studio Brussel, …
- DPG Media: VTM, Q2, Het Laatste Nieuws, De Morgen, Q-Music, …
- Mediahuis: Het Nieuwsblad, De Standaard, Gazet van Antwerpen, NRJ, …
- De Vijver Media: Play4, Play5, Play6, Play7, Njam!, Woestijnvis, …
- Roularta: Kanaal Z, De Tijd, Knack, Libelle, …
