Suchergebnisse

In Manufacturing Consent (1988), Noam Chomsky and I put forward a "propaganda model" as a framework for understanding how and why the mainstream U.S. media operate within restricted assumptions, depend uncritically on elite sources, and participate in propaganda campaigns helpful to elite interests. In this article I describe the model, address some of the criticism leveled against it, and discuss how it holds up today.Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the Monthly Review website.

The 'propaganda model' of news production in capitalist democracies elaborated by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky in 1988 was met with initial hostile criticism and then more or less complete neglect. In the last five years, there has been a renewal of interest, although opinion remains seriously divided. This article adopts a sympathetic stance towards the main ideas of the model, but suggests that there are a number of ways in which in its classical iteration it is insufficiently sensitive to the nature of the pressures and constraints on news production arising from the economic and political realities of capitalist democracy. If one takes account of these complexities and modifies the model accordingly, it is possible to give a much more complete account of processes of news production and to respond effectively to the main criticisms that have been advanced against Herman and Chomsky's views. From this perspective, rather than the tendency towards uniformity predicted by the classical iteration of the model, it becomes possible to account for the real, if limited, variety of news and opinion that are observable features of mass media. It further follows from this account that the majority of ordinary journalists, far from being the more or less willing collaborators in propaganda, are potentially allies of those who wish to build a different and better world.

"Thirty years after Chomsky and Herman elaborated the Propaganda Model this title aims to introduce a new generation of readers to it. It presents cutting-edge research demonstrating the model's general validity as well as new attempts – in the light of digital media and 21st century politics – to critically update, expand, and refine it. International researchers thus analyse the continuities and new developments in media Environments throughout various regions of the world. Part I addresses the theoretical and methodological dimensions of the PM beginning with an interview with Edward Herman on the model itself. Part II reflects on propaganda as a concept and practice within new mediated digital communications systems and interfaces. Applications of the Propaganda Model are featured in Part III notably new forms of media and content not previously analysed within it: the entertainment industries through the analysis of television, professional sports, Hollywood movies and videogames using quantitative and qualitative research methods. The last section presents case studies of corporate media and reporting practices as reflections of elite power. An extensive re-visioning of the PM this book concludes by identifying the fundamental dimensions of the model, the key modifications and expansions that are suggested—such as the inclusion of new filters—whilst assessing the model's overall value for conducting research in different geographical contexts and media systems and products."

Media scholars in the Netherlands have largely ignored Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky's propaganda model. Nonetheless, this article concludes that the model is germane to Dutch journalism and its current crisis because of the striking similarities between the Dutch and U.S. news systems and content. By focusing on the systems' similarities instead of their differences, this article highlights the influence of the market on journalism on both sides of the Atlantic and offers insight into the PM's international applicability. The article outlines the PM, discusses its increased relevance, and highlights the prominence of the model's five filters in the Dutch media landscape.

"Thirty years after Chomsky and Herman elaborated the Propaganda Model this title aims to introduce a new generation of readers to it. It presents cutting-edge research demonstrating the model's general validity as well as new attempts – in the light of digital media and 21st century politics – to critically update, expand, and refine it.
International researchers thus analyse the continuities and new developments in media
Environments throughout various regions of the world. Part I addresses the theoretical and methodological dimensions of the PM beginning with an interview with Edward Herman on the model itself. Part II reflects on propaganda as a concept and practice within new mediated digital communications systems and interfaces. Applications of the Propaganda Model are featured in Part III notably new forms of media and content not previously analysed within it: the entertainment industries through the analysis of television, professional sports, Hollywood movies and videogames using quantitative and qualitative research methods. The last section presents case studies of corporate media and reporting practices as reflections of elite power. An extensive re-visioning of the PM this book concludes by identifying the fundamental dimensions of the model, the key modifications and expansions that are suggested—such as the inclusion of new filters—whilst assessing the model's overall value for conducting research in different geographical contexts and media systems and products."

Since its initial formulation in 1988, the Herman-Chomsky Propaganda Model (PM) has become one of the most widely tested models of media performance in the social sciences. This is largely due to the combined efforts of a loose group of international scholars as well as an increasing number of students who have produced studies in the US, UK, Canadian, Australian, Japanese, Chinese, German, and Dutch contexts, amongst others. Yet, the PM has also been marginalised in media and communication scholarship, largely due to the fact that the PM"s radical scholarly outlook challenges the liberal and conservative underpinnings of mainstream schools of thought in capitalist democracies. This paper brings together, for the first time, leading scholars to discuss important questions pertaining to the PM"s origins, public relevance, connections to other approaches within Communication Studies and Cultural Studies, applicability in the social media age, as well as impact and influence. The paper aligns with the 30th anniversary of the PM and the publication of the collected volume, The Propaganda Model Today, and highlights the PM"s continued relevance at a time of unprecedented corporate consolidation of the media, extreme levels of inequality and class conflict as well as emergence of new forms of authoritarianism.

The propaganda model is a powerful tool for explaining systematic flaws in media coverage. But does it explain the cracks and tensions within the commercial media that are capable of arising at moments of political crisis and elite disagreement? To what extent does the model privilege a flawless structuralist account of media power at the expense of focusing on contradictory dynamics inside the capitalist media? This article looks at a key moment where critical media content was generated by a mainstream media organization: the coverage of the run-up to the Iraq War in the British tabloid paper, the Daily Mirror in 2003. It reflects on the consequences of such a moment for resisting corporate media power and asks whether it suggests the need for a revision of the propaganda model or, rather, provides further validation of its relevance.

International audience ; The world is currently witnessing a revitalisation of the right and of authoritarian political tendencies. Right-wing forces across the globe have been able to push misogynist, homophobic and xenophobic discourses into the mainstream of politics and media. Whilst these developments have been fuelled by the neoliberal economic programmes unrolled since the 1970s, sexism and racism have always been anchored within the structures of real existing capitalism. This suggests, then, that many of the societal issues we are encountering today are rooted in structural disadvantage and oppression pertaining not only to economics and class but also to gender, race and ethnicity. Yet, approaches in Communication Studies and Cultural Studies have often engaged in separate interrogations of media misrepresentations in relation to either class and economics, or gender and/or race. On the other hand, intersectional scholarship has long highlighted how these societal spheres are interconnected and should thus be researched simultaneously. The Herman-Chomsky Propaganda Model constitutes the leading analytical tool to theorize and investigate media bias. The following contributions will conceptualize and illustrate how the PM relates to intersectional scholarship and societal structures. This will be done on the basis of theoretical elaborations and empirical case studies as well as broader discussions of the politics within the disciplines of Communications Studies and Cultural Studies. It will be demonstrated that the PM can be used to unveil interlocking media biases and misrepresentations deriving from parallel societal discriminations including classism, sexism and racism.

International audience ; Since its initial formulation in 1988, the Herman-Chomsky Propaganda Model (PM) has become one of the most widely tested models of media performance in the social sciences. This is largely due to the combined efforts of a loose group of international scholars as well as an increasing number of students who have produced studies in the US, UK, Canadian, Australian, Japanese, Chinese, German, and Dutch contexts, amongst others. Yet, the PM has also been marginalised in media and communication scholarship, largely due to the fact that the PM"s radical scholarly outlook challenges the liberal and conservative underpinnings of mainstream schools of thought in capitalist democracies. This paper brings together, for the first time, leading scholars to discuss important questions pertaining to the PM"s origins, public relevance, connections to other approaches within Communication Studies and Cultural Studies, applicability in the social media age, as well as impact and influence. The paper aligns with the 30 th anniversary of the PM and the publication of the collected volume, The Propaganda Model Today, and highlights the PM"s continued relevance at a time of unprecedented corporate consolidation of the media, extreme levels of inequality and class conflict as well as emergence of new forms of authoritarianism.

This two-part article explores Herman and Chomsky's propaganda model from diverse angles, with the aim of deepening its current dynamism and validity for explaining mass media production and content in advanced capitalist democracies. Part I of the contribution studies the contemporary relevance of the five components or "filters" that comprise the model, relates them to ongoing sociohistorical developments, and focuses on the different interactions affecting the media in the context of power relations. It then analyzes the situations in which the spectrum of media opinion is more open. Part II focuses on the validity of the model for explaining news content both in countries other than the United States and on the Internet, as well as for explaining media products other than news. This is followed by an examination of the possibility of expanding and modifying the model by incorporating other factors, which may be considered secondary filters.

This two-part article explores Herman and Chomsky's propaganda model from diverse angles, with the aim of deepening its current dynamism and validity for explaining mass media production and content in advanced capitalist democracies. Part I of the contribution studies the contemporary relevance of the five components or "filters" that comprise the model, relates them to ongoing sociohistorical developments, and focuses on the different interactions affecting the media in the context of power relations. It then analyzes the situations in which the spectrum of media opinion is more open. Part II focuses on the validity of the model for explaining news content both in countries other than the United States and on the Internet, as well as for explaining media products other than news. This is followed by an examination of the possibility of expanding and modifying the model by incorporating other factors, which may be considered secondary filters.