Media regulation - More information on argument for / against Internet regulation

Media Regulation - Concept : 

Media Regulation – the big idea – Gatekeeping v Freedom of speech

The key concepts that should be on your radar are:

GATEKEEPERS:

- A gatekeeper is a person who controls access to something, for example via a city gate or bouncer, or more abstractly, controls who is granted access to a category or status.

So in terms of Media Regulation – they are either the officially recognised bodies that regulate the media or the individual groups elected by the Media platform themselves.

About the current content regulatory system

New Zealand’s current content regulatory system is made up of the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993, the Broadcasting Act 1989 and voluntary self-regulation (including the New Zealand Media Council and Advertising Standards Authority). The Office of Film and Literature Classification and the Broadcasting Standards Authority are statutory regulators under their respective regimes. 

New Zealand’s content regulatory system seeks to prevent harm from exposure to damaging or illegal content. It does this through a combination of classifications and ratings to provide consumer information, and standards to reflect community values. These tools are designed to prevent harm from people viewing unwanted or unsuitable content, while protecting freedom of expression

(check out link here for more info)

The main debate about Gatekeepers is that:

• They regulate content and therefore the contributors – they are powerful!
• The Internet promised to allow free speech and expression – and has now come unstuck because of this – ‘move fast and break things has become move fast and fix things.’
• Gatekeeping is dependent on many external factors that relate often, to the culture, politics, country, religion where the media is produced – in other words – gatekeeping is culturally reactive.

How do you resolve the ever present argument of:

• REGULATION OF SPEECH v FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

“Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech.” — Noam Chomsky

KEY CONCEPTS AND DEBATES:
Freedom of Speech vs Protection from Harm
Pluralist vs Moralist
Gatekeeping vs Democratisation (the action of making something accessible to everyone)

• Media Regulation will never be watertight – it has to react to technological advancements/convergence.
• Media Regulation changes over time – historically it reacts to technology and cultural zeitgeists.
• Media Regulation is closely linked to:
  • • Moral Panics
      Censorship
      Desensitisation
      Self-Regulation
• Media Regulation can be covert, subversive and ‘invisible’ – think of Chinese interference with internet access
• Media Regulation has to determine the minefield of:
  • • Public v. private
• Postmodern society is built on the foundations of ‘no absolute truths’ and mini- narratives and Regulation contradicts this zeitgeist (the defining spirit or mood of a particular period of history as shown by the ideas and beliefs of the time.)
  • • Self Regulation
    • Begs the question that perhaps China has got it right – the re-introduction of the absolute truths/the grand narratives through the back door of covert and subversive regulation of its citizens accessing the internet, may in fact make life simpler, safer and easier to navigate?

THEORY

To achieve a higher grade you need to include reference to a specific theory & associated theorist. 

Freedom of Expression

Theorist(s): John Milton (1608-74) and John Locke (1632-1704)

An enlightenment idea, which holds that in order to be truly free in a liberal democracy, the  powerful should be held to account via a free press (The Fourth Estate). This principle was enshrined in The First Amendment to the Bill of Rights in America (1791) and is held to be a fundamental principle of liberal democracies.

Harm Principle

Theorist(s): John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)

Was also a enlightenment liberal thinker who tried to define the limits on the freedoms of the citizen. He suggested that people should be free in all things, and ‘…that this freedom should only be restricted if their actions may cause harm to others.’ Applying this to freedom of expression, he famously said, “You cannot, without good reason, shout, ‘Fire’ in a public theatre.”

Moralists and Pluralists

Moralists hold that collectively defined rules should regulate and limit media consumption available to the public, especially to protect vulnerable groups.

Pluralists believe in self regulation.

Mark Kermode & Owen Jones assert that people should be given the tools to regulate their own media  consumption. The most obvious being, the power switch or block button.

If you don’t like it, don’t watch it!