Abstract

By providing historical context for the recurring regulatory retreat in the face of structural problems in the news media, this study examines the policy discourse that continues to define the US journalism crisis and government’s inability to confront it. To contextualize this pattern, I compare two historical junctures, the first occurring in the 1940s, exemplified by the Hutchins Commission, and the second occurring in the more recent policy debates during the years 2009–2011, exemplified by the Waldman Report. Both of these historical moments represented a societal response to a journalism crisis, and both entailed deeply normative discussions about the role of media in a democratic society and government’s role in managing that relationship. A comparison of these historical case studies brings into focus recurring weaknesses in liberal reform efforts. Specifically, it highlights what I refer to as the “discursive capture” reflected in common assumptions about the proper relationship between media and government, and how this American paradigm is constrained by an implicit market fundamentalism.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call