The 5 most important points of this article (
http://monthlyreview.org/2001/03/01/global-media-neoliberalism-and-imperialism#.TtZZ6thPva8.blogger) are, in my opinion:
1. The author, Robert W. McChesney, believes that the idea of globalism as a 'natural and inexorable force' is misleading. He prefers to use the term
neoliberalism, which basically refers to the 'set of national and international policies that call for business domination of all social affairs with minimal countervailing force' (in shorter terms, neoliberalism refers to the laws that allow businesses to pretty much do what they want socially, or in terms of controlling the media). Neoliberalism requires a strong, large government - to better support and protect, rather than control and restrict, said businesses. Neoliberism depends on the belief that new technology and new products can solve social problems more efficiently that any other option, forcing a reliance on corporations to provide the solution. The main goal in neoliberalism is for commerical media and communication markets to become and remain deregulated, so that their power is unchallenged and they are free to do what they please.
2. The second point builds on neoliberism. Companies (especially American companies) are in a constant struggle for control of the market, and as a result, oligopolies are being formed across the globe (an oligopoly is when a very small number of firms controls a very large portion of the market). This has previously happened with the oil and car industries and is now happening in the media/entertainment industry. Companies are expanding overseas in an effort to make the most profit and capture the most of the consumer market they can. As Frank Biondi, former chairman of Universal Studios, said, "99 percent of the success of these companies long-term is going to be successful execution offshore". The idea of the oligopoly makes it that much more important for the government to stay out of business deals and to allow the market to be as unregulated as is possible (neoliberism), because restricted business practices would not allow for such massive expansion. Because they maintain such a large percentage of the global market, many companird don't even associate the business with the country it was founded in anymore (Thomas Middelhoff said "I'm an American with a German passport" when it was complained that it wasn't right for a German company to control 15% of the U.S' publishing and music markets).
3. The next point builds on the previous one, that oligopolies take time to form. There are usually dozens of companies in each industry competing for the largest amount of consumers. However, in time, those that cannot compete get pushed out or even absorbed by the larger companies until eventually, only a few remain. The media, especially, has many competitors. Of the seven top American contributers to the media industry none of them even existed 25 years ago and yet, today, they each rank among the largest firms in the world. These seven companies nearly all have overseas branches, and between them own all the film studios in the U.S., all but one television network, and control 80-85% of the music market. There used to be dozens of other companies competing for these markets, but the top seven were strong enough to eliminate most of their competition to completely dominate the market.
