Ownership of Newspapers: The View from Positivist Social Science

Abstract

A.J. Liebling's often quoted comment, "freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one," assumes that ownership matters. Certainly, the importance of ownership is assumed by most media critics who decry the trend toward ever greater concentration of ownership of the media. This essay considers whether the assumption is correct or, more precisely, evaluates the support for the assumption offered by social science research that has examined ownership of newspapers.

This literature review supports four claims. First, chain ownership matters and has mostly objectionable effects. Second, this is true even though most summaries of the research curiously claim either that the evidence supports the view that chain ownership has no particular bad effects or that the evidence is entirely inconclusive. (I acknowledge the virtually inevitable inconclusiveness - the supportable claim is that the research provides relatively clear evidence.) Third, too often the methodological sloppiness of research published even in the field's best scholarly journals makes understanding the research difficult. Fourth, and perhaps most important, problems inherent in the positivist social science methodology gravely limit the relevance that these studies can offer on the key judgmental questions-concerning media ownership. In fact, often the research fails to shed light on the key issue, the significance of ownership. This failure potentially constrains policy thinking precisely when, if better formulated, the research could help guide policy related to an institution that plays a central role in the country's politics and presumably in people's lives. For these reason~, Part III examines methodological inadequacies and comments on the importance of questions ignored by the existing research.