Political Economy and Cultural Studies Approaches to Media Analysis

Introduction

The focus of political economy is majorly the structural inequalities associated with the production and the resulting consequences from representation, access and consumption. It defines the relationship between the economy and various forms of democratic politics through placing of emphasis on economic distribution related issues. Meanwhile, cultural studies has its emphasis more on analysis of populist cultural activities, focusing on social agency of people with respect to their capacity and tendency to resist social determination and dominant cultural ideologies.

This paper aims to provide an analysis of the contributions brought forth by these two perceptions with respect to media studies; providing a view on the grounds commonly shared areas of divergence and on how they have been able to be both taken into consideration in media analysis.

Political economy and cultural studies provide the two main theoretical approaches for media studies. The two have a history of considerable antagonism. Political economy fronts the opinion that the media actively promotes the dorminant ideology of the ruling classes.

Common Ground

Both political economy and cultural studies have adopted a neo-marxist approach, the resulting effect is that both critical and its impacts on the society, ideology, power and dominance being placed at the core of their analysis, taking into consideration the social order as an important platform on which media content is both generated and consumed while both attempt to dissociate themselves from the pluralist view, which approves of capitalism. (Golding and Murdock, 2000).

Stuart Hall manages to successfully bring out the common thrust between the two views. Hall (1982) argues that within the evolution of the media studies there exists four separate phases that is, the mass theorists phase, the Frankfurt school phase, the liberal pluralists phase and the critical theorists phase. Hall points out that the most notable shift was observable in the last two phases where media research can be seen to be shifting from being a 'behavioural to ideological' as well affirming itself on providing a view point on 'how societies are to viewed' (Hall 1982).

Pluralist perceive the society, particularly the western society as being majorly comprised of plurality of groups in competition with each other while critical theorists have the perception of a Marxist, which holds the opinion that a capitalist society composed mainly of two classes that contend with each other. That is, the bourgeois who control the economy, hold political social and legal authority and the mass of powerless working class. The founding structure of capitalism eventually will eventually give birth to a superstructure cultural ideas and ideologies with respect to capitalism, which then facilitates the continuation of capitalist system of production (Lee and Newby, 1983).

To Marxists, capitalist society perpetuates constant class struggle and domination in which the owners of means of production have hegemony. The result of this is that to critical theorists what becomes essential is the argument that then power becomes skewed in favour of the ruling elite/class, with the media turning out to be of service mainly to the dominant class.

Therefore, with respect to this, point can be made that the critical theorists perceived the society and media from mainly materialistic scope. They mainly focused on the 'concrete conditions'. This is drawn from the argument that knowledge should be based on rationality and evidence, albeit scientific proof. Taking into consideration the fact that Marxism is assumed to be an all-encompassing theory, it positions critical theorists together with modernists. However, from this point going forward, the two critical perceptions increasingly take divergent paths with respect on understanding the media and the important areas on which emphasis and focus need to be placed.

Divergence

Ideology and the notion of culture, forms the points from which cultural ideologists analyse the media. Dahlgren (1997) points out that 'cultural studies' materialism takes a constructivist and dialectical perspective on culture… people and social institutions in specific circumstances produce culture, which in turn helps to produce and reproduce society. From this point of view, culture is also composed of circulation of values, and…meaning'. Hence making culture a more of everyday experience lived.

Cultural studies influenced literary studies heavily, placing emphasis mainly on meaning in texts from a linguistic and semiotic perspective (Dahlgren, 1997). Their main interest being to produce and transmit of ideological discourses, seeking to utilize analytic tools from the theories in humanities to demonstrate meaning can be drawn from social activities thus is a social practice. It is with respect with this line of analysis and factoring in Gramsci's notion of hegemony that they demonstrated the manner in which the media advertently or inadvertently creates consent for the ruling class over the powerless working class (Hall, 1982). Using the study of signification, theorists managed to successfully demonstrate on the other hand the possible contestations of meanings of tests, terming it 'class struggle in language' (Hall, 1982). This is further brought to the fore by Hall (1980) when he outlines that the dominant forces will actively make effort to embed certain cultural values in the text, while audiences retain the option to have oppositional readings and opinions to it.

Political-economists hold reservations and skepticism on the notion of contestation of ideology, viewing door to post-modernism as having been brought about by the cultural studies perspective.

cultural studies is very diverse in its strands, a factor that leaves it open to fresh analysis hence as a result has been continually influenced by feminism, race related issues, identity politics and other emergent factors in the society. The result of this is the introduction of issues of relativism in post-modern cultural studies that question Marxist viewpoints (Dahlgren, 1997). However, Dahlgren also concedes that this is '… to Cultural Studies credit that it has provided space for this theoretical encounter.

Holding on to radical roots Cultural Studies has reserved an aura of self-reflection, resisting any temptation of being drawn into orthodoxy. For instance it has offered resistance to being converted into an academic discipline with a fixed identity, preferring instead to remain and retain sense heterogeneity in its selection of theoretical tools while keeping its boundaries permeable. (Dahlgren, 1997) says that incase cultural studies is focused on the micro issues of signification in cultural text and audience reception and engagement, then political-economy will by contrast be focused on the broader macro issues of economic ownership and the overriding socio-political environment (Curran et al, 1987). Having not been impressed by the results of the 'effects studies' carried out by naturalists, political economists opted to seek for and provide a better explanation the power of the media. Their opinion was based on the sociological tradition and connected to political science and economics (Golding and Murdock, 2000). which Curran et al describes succinctly as the 'developments in the sociological study of large scale, formal organizations yielded theories of organizational structure and behavior, as well analytic tools, which were viewed to be applicable to the study of media organizations and of their work practices and production processes.' (1987: 64). Their main issues of concern clearly outlined by McQuail as follows;

Critical political-economic theory

• Economic control and logic is determinant
• Media structure tends towards concentration
• Global integration of media develops
• Contents and audiences are commoditized
• Diversity decreases
• Opposition and alternative voices are marginalized
• Public interest in communication is subordinated to private interests (McQuail, 1994: 83)

Conclusion

To consider particular ideology as being dominant with respect to economic power infers to the existence of 'improbably coherent, controlling, argument free ruling class who ensures that everyone bends to its interests. It is possible however, to view the mass media texts as ideological terms, that is, they advocate for certain ideas while ignoring others. However, there still exists a possibility of perceiving mass media texts in ideological terms that is, as a form of communications that advocates certain ideas while ignoring others.

Proponents of inclusion of contradictory messages in mass media texts that front the dominant ideology while also undermining it, point out to the challenge of emergent politics that focus on issues such as sexuality, gender and ethnicity, that brings to the fore a society of difference with respect to identity and interpretation. We learn from cultural studies of the ever present in the mainstream culture at least in unchallenging manner as opposed to a radical manner. Also, we learn of the neither uniformity nor non uniformity of power in both its acceptance and application. Even though the inequality and difference continues to hold, the ideology concept is major determinant in the relationship between media and power.

From political economy point of view, it is essential that critical edge especially in analytical prevarication be retain as an assurance for our political discriminance.

The process of production and the act of reception is central to determination of meaning, that is, both are subject to influence and determination by their larger social, economic, cultural and political contexts.

It is essential that the opted for choices by audiences be analysed with respect to their immediate social context of life while interpreting the content with respect to the existing socio-political environment.

Placing emphasis majorly on the structure and content of media messages and effort to assess the impact of the said messages may not provide an effective means through which meditated culture can be analysed or perceived (Thomson, 1990). Thus it becomes preferable to take into consideration the functioning of mass media in the wider sociological view of culture, social structure and social groups rather than only considering the effect of mass media on ideology or hegemonic effect on people. This is formed by the view that the societies today cannot be accurately be defined by the traditional definition of a capitalist state.

The fact is today the world is dominated by media, who hold varied ideas and identities that they simultaneously circulate at any point in time. It therefore becomes essential to understand former in order to be able to properly appreciate the latter.

Bibliography

Dahlgren, P. (1997) 'Cultural Studies as a Research Perspective: Themes and Tensions' in J. Corner et al (eds.) International Media Research: A Critical Survey. London: Routledge

Golding, P. and Murdock, G. (2000). 'Culture, Communications and Political Economy' in J. Curran, M. Gurevitch (eds.) Mass Media and Society. London: Arnold (3rd Edition)

Grossberg, L. (ed) (1996) 'On postmodernism and articulation: An interview with Stuart Hall' in D. Morley and K.H. Chen Stuart Hall. Critical Dialogues in Cultural Studies. London: Routledge

Hall, S. (1980): 'Encoding/decoding' in S. Hall et al. (eds.) Culture, Media, Language. London: Hutchinson

Hall, S. (1982) 'The rediscovery of 'ideology': return of the repressed in media studies' in M. Gurevitch, J. Curran and J. Woollacott (eds.) Culture, Society and the Media. Methuen

Lee, D. and Newby, H. (1983) 'Part 4: Industrial Society as Capitalist Society – Marx and Marxism' in The Problem of Sociology: An Introduction to the Discipline. London: Hutchinson

McQuail, D. (1994) 'Theory of Media and theory of society' in Mass Communication Theory: An Introduction. London: Sage (3rd Edition)

Murdock, G. (1992) 'Citizens, consumers, and public culture' in M. Skormand and K.S. Schroder (eds.) Media Cultures. Reappraising Transnational Media. London: Routledge