...Marxist and Pluralist Consequences...

We had played a Debate game; here are the Marxist n Pluralist views.
It starts with a pluralist argument and ends in a mixed view-

We are individuals; we have the choices to consume from a wide range of institutions. We are active, not passive; it's us who makes the choice at the end of the day.

No! E.g. then why are there more Tesco stores-obviously because more people consume from them= large profit to open more stores.

Gramsci came up with hegemony that ideologies are fed from the dominant classes and the audience do not question what is being fed.

But it could also be said the audience are active yet they choose not to question what they see. Or they do question all time, as programmes would not be watched if it didn’t cater to consumer needs.

The elite are in charge so they filter their ideologies through texts, so you can say they are active as they are only given one set of ideologies, which many people conform to.

We are active, we choose what we watch/read & believe. Murdoch doesn’t own all of the media, there are selected media ranges out there that don’t send one set of ideologies and even if they did we are literate enough to make up our own mind and not conform.

But the media still maintains social divide, as texts are being produced which criticise this position.

It seems that whilst there is the case of hegemony and pluralism, both theories passes flows; with the rapid growth of new media technology the extent to which the Marxist view is still valid is questionable and in our 21st century the pluralistic view offers a more accurate perspective on the relationship between the audience and media.


-What is missing?
Theorists- Althusser
The models
Keywords- RSA, ISA, Fourth Estate