Lippincott Library Microforms: Film cont. 110], Mar. 29, 1982 to Sept. 23, 1984.
[Lippincott Library Microforms: Business Collection], Nov. 19, 1984 to Aug. 18, 1995
[Lippincott Library Current Periodicals], latest 2 years.

Reader profiles include detailed descriptions of reader demographics and circulation areas for US newspapers.

Underground newspaper collection [microform]. Wooster, Ohio, Micro Photo Division, Bell and Howell and the Underground Press Syndicate. Call#: Microfilm news 270. Listing of contents available in Van Pelt Reference Stacks at AI3.U54.

Indexes over 250 alternative, radical and left periodicals, newspapers and magazines. Includes selected abstracts from research journals. Holdings: 1991 to present

Full-text database of newspapers, magazines, and journals from alternative and independent presses.

note on how to find times select content via lexisnexis and/or factiva

This is a very good introduction to both economics and each of the major media industries, namely the Daily Newspaper Industry, Book and Magazine (Print) Industry, the Broadcast Networks, the Cable Industry, Hollywood, Radio, the Recording Industry, the Advertising industry and burgeoning Online Media.

This volume defines all important introductory economic concepts and terms.  It explains why most mergers are unsuccessful (pages 14, 22, 38, 82 and 234), why joint ventures are so common and profitable (page 40), and all of the individual revenue streams of each of the different mediums listed above.  This volume is accessible and very interesting.  Moreover, when read in conjunction with Baker’s two books, it helps illuminate some of his points, specifically how conglomerates can be in the best interest for consumers in some ways while simultaneously detrimental to them as well.  Namely this book gives a fair description of the state of the industry and allows one to draw his/her own conclusions.  It portrays the situation without making overtly normative judgments.

This article talks about job cuts at the Tribune Company’s papers. More broadly, it outlines the problems currently facing the aging media companies and how they are reacting to new challenges and market pressures. Perhaps one of the most interesting issues that this article brings up (written in the form of a dialogue) is the fact that even though newspapers are profitable, and their profits generally continue to grow, since they are seen as ultimately on headed towards demise, investors are not flocking to them. Rather, they head towards internet and other new media sectors, which they see as ultimately taking the place (financially, if not socially) of newspapers. The article, however, doubts that newspapers are own their way out.

This article is very informative on the workings of the newspaper industry.  It mentions that what distinguishes Knight Ridder from other newspaper companies is that the founding family does not retain control through supervoting stock, as is the case at companies such as The New York Times, Belo, and McClatchy.  According to the article, many Wall Street analysts believe that print newspapers are slowly dying, under relentless pressure from new media companies such as Google, which offer advertisers more efficient and cost effective ways of reaching their target audiences.  The article also alludes to the pressures that Wall Street puts on newspapers to cut costs; for some editors within the position, this has been anathema to them, for they argue that news content will surely suffer if given fewer resources.  This is the standard problem for publicly traded media companies: those in charge of business operations want to maximize profit, whereas those in charge of editorial content want to great the best product possible.

Bagdikian works to expose the monopolistic practices of the media industry. He specifically focuses on the big five (Time Warner, Disney, Bertelsmann, News Corporation, Viacom) and how they act together like an oligopoly or cartel. One of the main issues is that they work together on joint projects that prevent them from being true competitors.

He also looks at the monopolies in other media areas, specifically newspapers. He examines the ways in which newspapers are run without true competition in local markets and the self-censoring effects of advertising (for a more in-depth analysis, I recommend Professor Baker’s books).

Another problem that becomes apparent is the conglomerate nature of these corporations and the fact that advertisers and interest groups can leverage their power against one facet of the conglomerate to create change in another (boycott ads in one periodical to protest an article in another in which the advertiser does not place its ads).

Baker takes certain ideas touched upon in Bagdikian’s book, The (New) Media Monopoly and analyses them in much greater depth (Bagdikian has published many versions of his book, the first of which appeared when there were 50 major players in the media business… there are now only 5). He uses economic analysis to determine the efficiency of the current system (or lack thereof), and makes various policy arguments for remedying the current problem within our press. The structure is as follows: he illustrates the problem, proves it economically, introduces a policy proposal, compares it to programs implemented around the world, and then discusses the constitutionality of going forward with his recommendations.

Implicit throughout his book is that the media serves a distinct role in society and that given the current influence that advertisers can exercise, they prevent the media from fulfilling the needs of a democratic society. This idea is developed in greater depth in his book Media Markets and Democracy where he analyses a democratic society’s requirements of its press according to 4 different theories of democracy. He values diversity and that the media should work harder to meet the desires of its readers through content rather than from its advertisers by delivering the right readers.

Another key point of Baker’s argument is that advertising disproportionately hurts the poor. He points to the example of an English newspaper that had larger circulation than the other major newspapers combined, but not withstanding this fact, because the newspaper was read by people without a substantial disposable income, there were few (if any) advertisers who would subsidize the paper. Thus, the paper had to be profitable with only subscription revenues, and it eventually failed. Baker gives the case study and then explains why this is so on theoretical grounds and that this phenomenon most likely occurs rather often—advertisers seek a wealthy audience, and thus media products are disproportionately catered to their tastes, in terms of political leanings, interest pieces, and other editorial content.