"Also, the commercial media in a superior position, really, to any other corporate lobby, because where would people hear about commercial media or corporate media criticism, where would they hear criticism of them other than in the commercial media?"
About this Quote
It is a clever trap McChesney lays out: the media’s greatest asset isn’t just money or access, but the ability to make its own power feel like the weather. His question lands like a closed circuit. If commercial outlets dominate the channels through which public debate travels, then criticism of those outlets must pass through the very gatekeepers being criticized. That’s not a conspiracy so much as an architecture: a system designed to reproduce itself while insisting it’s merely “the marketplace of ideas.”
The intent is to reframe “bias” away from partisan talking points and toward structural advantage. Corporate lobbies usually fight in public. The commercial media can shape what counts as “public” in the first place: which stories get oxygen, which terms feel neutral, which critiques look fringe, boring, or “too academic.” McChesney’s subtext is that the most effective censorship is logistical, not theatrical. You don’t need to ban dissent if you can starve it of distribution, legitimacy, and repetition.
Context matters: McChesney emerges from the media reform tradition, arguing that ownership concentration and ad-driven incentives narrow journalism’s horizon. His line is also a rebuke to the comforting belief that exposure automatically produces accountability. In a media environment built on advertising, ratings, and brand safety, the system can tolerate criticism as content while still preventing it from becoming consequence. The question is not whether critique exists, but whether it can accumulate enough force to change who holds the microphone.
The intent is to reframe “bias” away from partisan talking points and toward structural advantage. Corporate lobbies usually fight in public. The commercial media can shape what counts as “public” in the first place: which stories get oxygen, which terms feel neutral, which critiques look fringe, boring, or “too academic.” McChesney’s subtext is that the most effective censorship is logistical, not theatrical. You don’t need to ban dissent if you can starve it of distribution, legitimacy, and repetition.
Context matters: McChesney emerges from the media reform tradition, arguing that ownership concentration and ad-driven incentives narrow journalism’s horizon. His line is also a rebuke to the comforting belief that exposure automatically produces accountability. In a media environment built on advertising, ratings, and brand safety, the system can tolerate criticism as content while still preventing it from becoming consequence. The question is not whether critique exists, but whether it can accumulate enough force to change who holds the microphone.
Quote Details
| Topic | Freedom |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Robert
Add to List
