Media, politics and business always interact

Author:Zhang Jiahui(Lucas)

After watching the film, let’s try to analyze the relationship between media, olitics and business. On the one hand, the media can influence the government's agenda. When major events occur at home and abroad, it is the media that gets information in the first time. After processing this information in a short period of time, including editing focusses, adding renderings, etc., it often has a strong visual impact on the public and leadership, and has a huge social impact. In this way, the agenda will disrupt the original plan, prioritise the inclusion of this matter in the agenda, and accelerate the resolution of the problem. The advantage of this role of the media is that when some matters of vital interest to the people cannot be solved through normal channels, the exposure of the media will attract the attention of state organs.

On the other hand, the media will monitor government behaviour. In traditional Western democratic theories, the government's acquisition of power from citizens through social contracts does not necessarily represent good. The so-called absolute power leads to absolute corruption, which reveals that the government may abuse its power to violate citizens' rights. Therefore, the government needs to be supervised. The media has become one of the most effective means by its rapid transmission of information and wide coverage. The media has indeed played an active role in promoting political democratisation, but as media institutions gradually move towards privatisation, new forms of media and political relations have emerged. McChesney discussed this in detail in his book Rich Media and Poor Democracy. He believes that on the one hand, because the government encourages corporate alliances, the media market is gradually dominated by a few large companies, and profit chasing has become the first rule. Through the high-tech unlimited media communication function, they produce programs that cater to the audience, most of which are low-level interest and lack publicity. In this way, citizens lose interest in public issues, let alone participate in political life. Democratic political culture has begun to shrink in Western societies with highly developed media. On the other hand, the modern media has given up the duty of "political gatekeeper" and has become an accomplice to political corruption and a destroyer of social culture, which not only violates citizens' political rights, but also brings about the decline of democracy. Perhaps McChesney's attitude towards the relationship between the media and politics is too pessimistic, but in all countries around the world, whether the media has played its responsibilities and whether it can maintain its role as a democratic guardian under the premise of privatisation are indeed worth thinking about. From this, we can also feel that the policies provided by the government have a direct impact on the development of business, but business representatives can also lobby the government's policies reasonably and legally. While monitoring the government's actions, the media will also take advantage of the high coverage and rapidity to promote and publicize the business, seize the market and create benefits. However, the government also includes regulations such as restriction and management of the media in the formulation of policies. I think the three complement each other, but they also restrict each other.