State Media - Determinants of State Control

Determinants of State Control

Both theories have implications regarding the determinants and consequences of ownership of the media. The public interest theory suggests that more benign governments should higher levels of control of the media which would in turn increase press freedom as well as economic and political freedoms. Conversely, the public choice theory affirms that the opposite is true - "public spirited", benevolent governments should have less control which would increase these freedoms.

Generally, state ownership of the media is found in poor, autocratic non-democratic countries with highly interventionist governments that have some interest in controlling the flow of information. Countries with "weak" governments do not possess the political will to break up state media monopolies. Media control is also usually consistent with state ownership in the economy.

The press in most of Europe (with the exception of Belarus) is mostly private and free of state control and ownership, along with North and South America. The press in the United States, Canada and Australia has always been the responsibility of the private commercial sector since its inception. Levels of state ownership are higher in some African countries, the Middle East and some Asian countries (with the exception of Japan, India, Indonesia, Mongolia, Nepal, the Philippines, South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand where large areas of private press exist.) Full state monopolies exist in Burma and North Korea.

Read more about this topic:  State Media

Famous quotes containing the words state and/or control:

    To the rulers of the state then, if to any, it belongs of right to use falsehood, to deceive either enemies or their own citizens, for the good of the state: and no one else may meddle with this privilege.
    Plato (c. 427–347 B.C.)

    Our culture still holds mothers almost exclusively responsible when things go wrong with the kids. Sensing this ultimate accountability, women are understandably reluctant to give up control or veto power. If the finger of blame was eventually going to point in your direction, wouldn’t you be?
    Ron Taffel (20th century)