Maybe Things Aren’t So Bad, or Are They? Michael Schudson’s ambivalent critique of commercialism

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In this essay, I attempt to shed light on Michael Schudson’s theoretical and political position vis-à-vis commercialism as a shaping force of journalism. I document and analyze Schudson’s criticisms of market pressures on journalism, his criticisms of other critics of commercialism whom he sees as going too far, and then, the limits of the position he stakes out for himself—which is effectively, given his position as the authoritative synthesizer of the sociology of news, a position for journalism studies as a whole. In homage to Schudson’s classic alliterative model of “How Culture Works,” through five magic “R” words (rhetorical force, resolution, retrievability, retention, and resonance), I argue that the letter “C” unites the five reasons why Schudson is reluctant to overemphasize commercialism’s negative effects on journalism. It’s Complicated. There are Countervailing forces outside of the market and even when there are not, the market itself is self-Contradictory. Don’t underestimate the power of Contingency. And if all else fails, blame it on Culture.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-14
Number of pages14
JournalJournalism Studies
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jun 23 2017

Fingerprint

journalism
market
criticism
work culture
contingency
critic
sociology
news

Keywords

  • commercialism
  • public media
  • Schudson
  • sociology of news

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Communication

Cite this

@article{3563ec9fd2b84a05948cf7e6e5c8daa2,
title = "Maybe Things Aren’t So Bad, or Are They?: Michael Schudson’s ambivalent critique of commercialism",
abstract = "In this essay, I attempt to shed light on Michael Schudson’s theoretical and political position vis-{\`a}-vis commercialism as a shaping force of journalism. I document and analyze Schudson’s criticisms of market pressures on journalism, his criticisms of other critics of commercialism whom he sees as going too far, and then, the limits of the position he stakes out for himself—which is effectively, given his position as the authoritative synthesizer of the sociology of news, a position for journalism studies as a whole. In homage to Schudson’s classic alliterative model of “How Culture Works,” through five magic “R” words (rhetorical force, resolution, retrievability, retention, and resonance), I argue that the letter “C” unites the five reasons why Schudson is reluctant to overemphasize commercialism’s negative effects on journalism. It’s Complicated. There are Countervailing forces outside of the market and even when there are not, the market itself is self-Contradictory. Don’t underestimate the power of Contingency. And if all else fails, blame it on Culture.",
keywords = "commercialism, public media, Schudson, sociology of news",
author = "Rodney Benson",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
day = "23",
doi = "10.1080/1461670X.2017.1335608",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "1--14",
journal = "Journalism Studies",
issn = "1461-670X",
publisher = "Routledge",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Maybe Things Aren’t So Bad, or Are They?

T2 - Michael Schudson’s ambivalent critique of commercialism

AU - Benson, Rodney

PY - 2017/6/23

Y1 - 2017/6/23

N2 - In this essay, I attempt to shed light on Michael Schudson’s theoretical and political position vis-à-vis commercialism as a shaping force of journalism. I document and analyze Schudson’s criticisms of market pressures on journalism, his criticisms of other critics of commercialism whom he sees as going too far, and then, the limits of the position he stakes out for himself—which is effectively, given his position as the authoritative synthesizer of the sociology of news, a position for journalism studies as a whole. In homage to Schudson’s classic alliterative model of “How Culture Works,” through five magic “R” words (rhetorical force, resolution, retrievability, retention, and resonance), I argue that the letter “C” unites the five reasons why Schudson is reluctant to overemphasize commercialism’s negative effects on journalism. It’s Complicated. There are Countervailing forces outside of the market and even when there are not, the market itself is self-Contradictory. Don’t underestimate the power of Contingency. And if all else fails, blame it on Culture.

AB - In this essay, I attempt to shed light on Michael Schudson’s theoretical and political position vis-à-vis commercialism as a shaping force of journalism. I document and analyze Schudson’s criticisms of market pressures on journalism, his criticisms of other critics of commercialism whom he sees as going too far, and then, the limits of the position he stakes out for himself—which is effectively, given his position as the authoritative synthesizer of the sociology of news, a position for journalism studies as a whole. In homage to Schudson’s classic alliterative model of “How Culture Works,” through five magic “R” words (rhetorical force, resolution, retrievability, retention, and resonance), I argue that the letter “C” unites the five reasons why Schudson is reluctant to overemphasize commercialism’s negative effects on journalism. It’s Complicated. There are Countervailing forces outside of the market and even when there are not, the market itself is self-Contradictory. Don’t underestimate the power of Contingency. And if all else fails, blame it on Culture.

KW - commercialism

KW - public media

KW - Schudson

KW - sociology of news

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021421429&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85021421429&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/1461670X.2017.1335608

DO - 10.1080/1461670X.2017.1335608

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85021421429

SP - 1

EP - 14

JO - Journalism Studies

JF - Journalism Studies

SN - 1461-670X

ER -