By Lilli Pert
It’s often been wondered by people as to why certain new stories seem to dominate our media feeds whilst other stories often seem non-existent, this is how media nudges us without us noticing and how we are faced with the big idea of manufacturing consent without being aware.
Manufacturing consent is a term made famous by Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky. At its core it’s a manufacturing concept about how the media can shape what we collectively: care about, are concerned about or ignore often without giving orders. In democratic societies this process doesn’t look like the obvious propaganda campaigns we have learnt about in history books instead it happens silently, done by quiet structural pressures that influence stories to rise to top.
Herman and Chomsky break this down using what they call the ‘propaganda model’ which isn’t about individual journalists being dishonest instead it focuses on the environment those journalist work in. This presenting the idea to us that the structures of the modern media control the flow of information and how that is passed to consumers. It could be thought about in the sense that there is invisible ‘currents beneath the water surface’, something that cannot be seen but something that shapes the way everything flows.
One of those major currents is who owns the media. Many major outlets are part of huge corporations of which have detrimental influence on journalists outputs. There may not be a major CEO hovering over a reporter’s shoulder telling them what to write, however organisations business interests inevitably shape newsroom priorities. This is because certain stories feel more ‘safe’ are more ‘fundable’ as they may align more with a company’s world view.
Another current is advertising. News outlets rely heavily on out which means they also rely on keeping appetisers comfortable. This can yet again influence what reporters are pushing out onto the media through certain news outlets to ensure they retain funding. Much like the previous example, it’s not as if somebody is directly saying ‘do not criticise the sponsor’ however, taking the risk to dare and do so may impact funding and that is a risk many reporters are not willing to take. For this reason stories that clash with advertising interests slowly become less common and overtime just fade into the background.
Another current journalists maybe impacted by is sourcing. Journalists needs steady information and official sources. For example: government spokesman, corporate PR teams or the experts tied to institutions. That dependence makes it easier for certain perspectives to dominate the conversation simply because they’re always reliable polished and ready to comment. If journalists are sourcing information from unreliable sources, these can be laced with biased information that can swear narratives towards private corporations/individuals, personal interests.
There is also talk about something called ‘Flak’, this is something that Herman and Chomsky speak about which essentially means backlash. If a story challenge is powerful interests, the pushback can be in intense. This can include things such as legal threats, organise complaints or public relation campaigns. Even the possibility of this can nudge outlets towards ‘safer topics’.
Finally , there’s ideology. This is the big picture narrative on how society thinks. For example, in the 1980s, office focused on anti-communism and this may today prove why much of the Western world criticises this ideology as it has had time to impact people’s beliefs in this modern day.
None of this means the media is dependent soley on external influence, nor that there is a puppet master pulling the strings on any form of media we receive. It more outlines that the system has built in habits and incentives that steer coverage in certain directions. Whilst critics argue that the propaganda model overlooked the diversity and independence of modern media, the idea still offers a powerful lens for how understanding why public conversation takes the shape it does.
In a world full of algorithms and endless feeds, manufacturing consent may be more relevant now than ever. The force is shaping our attention have multiplied and it is important that people take understanding to ‘ the currents beneath’.
