Viewpoint diversity and media consolidation: an empirical study.: An article from: Stanford Law Review
Book Details
Author(s)Daniel E. Ho, Kevin M. Quinn
PublisherStanford Law School
ISBN / ASINB00283QN9Y
ISBN-13978B00283QN96
AvailabilityAvailable for download now
MarketplaceUnited States 🇺🇸
Description
This digital document is an article from Stanford Law Review, published by Stanford Law School on February 1, 2009. The length of the article is 32102 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.
From the author: One of the central predicates of legal regulation of media ownership is that ownership consolidation reduces substantive viewpoint diversity. Appellate courts and, in turn, the Federal Communications Commission have increasingly demanded evidence for this convergence hypothesis, but extant empirical measures of viewpoint diversity sidestep the problem, ignoring diversity, viewpoints, or both. Our Article develops and oilers a finely tuned, time-varying statistical measure of editorial viewpoint diversity, based on a new database of over 1600 editorial positions in twenty-five top newspapers from 1988-2004. Using this new measure, we assess the validity of the convergence hypothesis by examining the evolution of editorial viewpoints over the course of five major mergers and acquisitions. Our data reveal complex patterns that defy extant accounts, showing stability, convergence, and divergence of viewpoints in the face of--and depending on the circumstances of consolidation. These findings fundamentally challenge extant empirical regulatory assumptions--pointing to the crucial role of editorial policies--and deeply inform the viability of the ownership regulations and the interpretation of the 1996 Telecommunications Act.
Citation Details
Title: Viewpoint diversity and media consolidation: an empirical study.
Author: Daniel E. Ho
Publication:Stanford Law Review (Magazine/Journal)
Date: February 1, 2009
Publisher: Stanford Law School
Volume: 61 Issue: 4 Page: 781(88)
Distributed by Gale, a part of Cengage Learning
From the author: One of the central predicates of legal regulation of media ownership is that ownership consolidation reduces substantive viewpoint diversity. Appellate courts and, in turn, the Federal Communications Commission have increasingly demanded evidence for this convergence hypothesis, but extant empirical measures of viewpoint diversity sidestep the problem, ignoring diversity, viewpoints, or both. Our Article develops and oilers a finely tuned, time-varying statistical measure of editorial viewpoint diversity, based on a new database of over 1600 editorial positions in twenty-five top newspapers from 1988-2004. Using this new measure, we assess the validity of the convergence hypothesis by examining the evolution of editorial viewpoints over the course of five major mergers and acquisitions. Our data reveal complex patterns that defy extant accounts, showing stability, convergence, and divergence of viewpoints in the face of--and depending on the circumstances of consolidation. These findings fundamentally challenge extant empirical regulatory assumptions--pointing to the crucial role of editorial policies--and deeply inform the viability of the ownership regulations and the interpretation of the 1996 Telecommunications Act.
Citation Details
Title: Viewpoint diversity and media consolidation: an empirical study.
Author: Daniel E. Ho
Publication:Stanford Law Review (Magazine/Journal)
Date: February 1, 2009
Publisher: Stanford Law School
Volume: 61 Issue: 4 Page: 781(88)
Distributed by Gale, a part of Cengage Learning
