Editing Manufacturing Consent (section)

== {{Anchor|Five filters of editorial bias}}Propaganda model of communication ==
{{main|Propaganda model}}
<!--This section is linked from [[Media bias]]: do not rename without including an anchor to previous name ([[MOS:HEAD]])-->The book introduced the propaganda model of communication, which is still developing today.

The propaganda model for the manufacture of public consent describes five editorially distorting filters, which are said to affect reporting of news in mass communications media. These five filters of editorial bias are:
# ''Size, ownership, and profit orientation'': The dominant mass-media are large profit-based operations, and therefore they must cater to the financial interests of the owners such as [[Corporation|corporations]] and controlling [[Investor|investors]]. The size of a media company is a consequence of the investment capital required for the mass-communications technology required to reach a mass audience of viewers, listeners, and readers.
# ''The advertising license to do business'': Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from [[advertising]] (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de facto licensing authority".<ref>Curran, James, and [[Jean Seaton]]. 1981. ''[[Power Without Responsibility : the press and broadcasting in Britain|Power Without Responsibility: The Press and Broadcasting in Britain]]'' (1st ed.). This book has many subsequent editions.</ref> Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the [[working class]] press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.
# ''Sourcing mass media news'': Herman and Chomsky argue that "the large bureaucracies of the powerful ''subsidize'' the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media's costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers." Editorial distortion is aggravated by the news media's dependence upon private and [[government]]al news sources. If a given newspaper, television station, magazine, etc., incurs disfavor from the sources, it is subtly excluded from access to information. A news organisation loses readers or viewers, and ultimately, advertisers. To minimize such financial danger, news media businesses editorially distort their reporting to favor government and corporate policies to stay in business.<ref name = MC>Herman and Chomsky, ''Manufacturing Consent''.</ref>{{Clarify|date=February 2021|reason=Who are the bureaucracies? What is this talking about exactly? [[Wire services]] such as Associated Press?}}
# ''Flak and the enforcers'': "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. [[think tank]]s). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.<ref name = MC/>
# ''Anti-communism'': This filter concerns the spectre of a common enemy which can be used to marginalise dissent: "This ideology helps mobilize the populace against an enemy, and because the concept is fuzzy it can be used against anybody advocating policies that threaten [dominant] interests".<ref name = MC/> Anti-communism was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the [[Cold War]] (1945–91) [[anticommunism]] was replaced by the "[[war on terror]]" as the major social control mechanism.<ref>Chomsky, Noam. 1997. ''Media Control, the Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda''.</ref>

=== The propaganda model of communication and its influence over major media organizations ===
The propaganda model describes the pillars of society (the public domain, business firms, media organizations, governments etc.) as first and foremost, profit-seekers.<ref name="Herman 42–54">{{Cite journal |last=Herman |first=Edward S. |date=2018-01-04 |title=The Propaganda Model Revisited |url=https://monthlyreviewarchives.org/index.php/mr/article/view/MR-069-08-2018-01_4 |journal=Monthly Review |language=en |pages=42–54 |doi=10.14452/MR-069-08-2018-01_4 |issn=0027-0520}}</ref> To fully consider the effects of the propaganda model, a tiered diagram can be drawn. Due to the impressionable and exploitative nature of major media organizations including broadcast media, print media, and 21st century social media, media organizations are placed at the bottom. Higher up the model, it pans to the larger organizations that are financially capable of controlling advertising licenses, lawsuits, or selling environments. The first level displays the [[public domain]] in which prominent ideologies within the masses can influence the intentions of mass media. The second level pertaining to the business firms accounts for the media’s source of information<ref name="Herman 42–54"/> as business firms are wealthy enough to supply information to media organizations while maintaining control over where advertisers can sell their advertisements and stories. The final layer, the governments of the major global powers, are the wealthiest subgroup of the pillars of society. Having the most financial wealth and organizational power, media organizations are most dependent on government structures for financial stability and political direction.