서브메뉴
검색
Failing to Preserve, or Preserving Failure?: Journalism Antitrust Exemption Acts and the Democratic State
Failing to Preserve, or Preserving Failure?: Journalism Antitrust Exemption Acts and the Democratic State
상세정보
- 자료유형
- 학위논문 서양
- 최종처리일시
- 20260202105322
- ISBN
- 9798297664005
- DDC
- 000
- 서명/저자
- Failing to Preserve, or Preserving Failure?: Journalism Antitrust Exemption Acts and the Democratic State
- 발행사항
- [Sl] : The Pennsylvania State University, 2025
- 발행사항
- Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2025
- 형태사항
- 248 p
- 주기사항
- Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 87-04, Section: A.
- 주기사항
- Advisor: McAllister, Matthew P.
- 학위논문주기
- Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Pennsylvania State University, 2025.
- 초록/해제
- 요약My dissertation examines the disconnect between capitalism and democracy as it pertains to the key institution of journalism, through an analysis of how industry-serving policies that push for antitrust exemptions have been justified, defended, critiqued, and sold to the public in two distinct time periods over 50 years apart. Grounded in historical materialism and Critical Political Economy of Communications (CPEC), I conduct a comparative historical institutionalist analysis of the discourse within and surrounding two analogous anti-trust exemption acts - the Newspaper Preservation Act of 1970, and the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act, introduced in 2021. I unpack the ways in which both acts invoke democracy to justify corporate-friendly policies, drawing on Klein's (2007) Disaster Capitalism; how ontological narrowing to market alternatives contradict such a notion through Pickard's (2015) Market Ontology; and how this limited viewpoint can reveal power dynamics through Freedman's (2014) notion of Policy Silences. Using an approach grounded in immanent critique, I recognize this disconnect as a contradiction between the normative expectations of the state to serve and protect the public, and its repeated failures to do so - failures that manifest in strikingly similar ways across echoing policies separated by over five decades. My dissertation also speaks to theories of regulation and the role of the state more broadly. One dominant explanation among normative scholars for these contradictions - often labelled "policy failures" - is the drastic and pervasive growth of neoliberal logics infiltrating U.S. policymaking since the 1970s. However, in comparing the presence of neoliberalism in both policy narratives, which span the outer limits of this timeline of purported distortion, I found not just a lack of distinction, but surprising continuity in the use of neoliberal rhetoric over time, thus complicating the narrative that neoliberalism acted as an external perverting force upon an otherwise publicserving state during a distinct historical moment. Instead of perpetuating the state and its regulatory actions as inherently public serving before the pervasive infiltration of neoliberalism born from external forces outside the capitalist state agenda, I propose that critical scholars must acknowledge that "under monopoly capitalism the function of the state is to serve the interests of monopoly capital" (Baran & Sweezy, 1966, pp. 65-66). I conclude that as CPEC scholars we must return to a Marxist foundation of praxis in order to effectively articulate emancipatory action, which cannot be based on revisionist interventions within existing capitalist structures, but must instead be established through the unification of theory and praxis in order to amass the growing need for social transformation that aims to make the ideal real.
- 일반주제명
- Political power
- 일반주제명
- Ontology
- 일반주제명
- Democracy
- 일반주제명
- Journalism
- 일반주제명
- Political science
- 기본자료저록
- Dissertations Abstracts International. 87-04A.
- 전자적 위치 및 접속
- 로그인 후 원문을 볼 수 있습니다.
MARC
008260126s2025 us c eng d■001000017360205
■00520260202105322
■006m o d
■007cr#unu||||||||
■020 ▼a9798297664005
■035 ▼a(MiAaPQ)AAI32289579
■035 ▼a(MiAaPQ)PennState23572slf5652
■040 ▼aMiAaPQ▼cMiAaPQ
■0820 ▼a000
■1001 ▼aForde, Sydney Laurina.
■24510▼aFailing to Preserve, or Preserving Failure?: Journalism Antitrust Exemption Acts and the Democratic State
■260 ▼a[Sl]▼bThe Pennsylvania State University▼c2025
■260 1▼aAnn Arbor▼bProQuest Dissertations & Theses▼c2025
■300 ▼a248 p
■500 ▼aSource: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 87-04, Section: A.
■500 ▼aAdvisor: McAllister, Matthew P.
■5021 ▼aThesis (Ph.D.)--The Pennsylvania State University, 2025.
■520 ▼aMy dissertation examines the disconnect between capitalism and democracy as it pertains to the key institution of journalism, through an analysis of how industry-serving policies that push for antitrust exemptions have been justified, defended, critiqued, and sold to the public in two distinct time periods over 50 years apart. Grounded in historical materialism and Critical Political Economy of Communications (CPEC), I conduct a comparative historical institutionalist analysis of the discourse within and surrounding two analogous anti-trust exemption acts - the Newspaper Preservation Act of 1970, and the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act, introduced in 2021. I unpack the ways in which both acts invoke democracy to justify corporate-friendly policies, drawing on Klein's (2007) Disaster Capitalism; how ontological narrowing to market alternatives contradict such a notion through Pickard's (2015) Market Ontology; and how this limited viewpoint can reveal power dynamics through Freedman's (2014) notion of Policy Silences. Using an approach grounded in immanent critique, I recognize this disconnect as a contradiction between the normative expectations of the state to serve and protect the public, and its repeated failures to do so - failures that manifest in strikingly similar ways across echoing policies separated by over five decades. My dissertation also speaks to theories of regulation and the role of the state more broadly. One dominant explanation among normative scholars for these contradictions - often labelled "policy failures" - is the drastic and pervasive growth of neoliberal logics infiltrating U.S. policymaking since the 1970s. However, in comparing the presence of neoliberalism in both policy narratives, which span the outer limits of this timeline of purported distortion, I found not just a lack of distinction, but surprising continuity in the use of neoliberal rhetoric over time, thus complicating the narrative that neoliberalism acted as an external perverting force upon an otherwise publicserving state during a distinct historical moment. Instead of perpetuating the state and its regulatory actions as inherently public serving before the pervasive infiltration of neoliberalism born from external forces outside the capitalist state agenda, I propose that critical scholars must acknowledge that "under monopoly capitalism the function of the state is to serve the interests of monopoly capital" (Baran & Sweezy, 1966, pp. 65-66). I conclude that as CPEC scholars we must return to a Marxist foundation of praxis in order to effectively articulate emancipatory action, which cannot be based on revisionist interventions within existing capitalist structures, but must instead be established through the unification of theory and praxis in order to amass the growing need for social transformation that aims to make the ideal real.
■590 ▼aSchool code: 0176.
■650 4▼aPolitical power
■650 4▼aOntology
■650 4▼aDemocracy
■650 4▼aJournalism
■650 4▼aPolitical science
■690 ▼a0391
■690 ▼a0615
■71020▼aThe Pennsylvania State University.
■7730 ▼tDissertations Abstracts International▼g87-04A.
■790 ▼a0176
■791 ▼aPh.D.
■792 ▼a2025
■793 ▼aEnglish
■85640▼uhttp://www.riss.kr/pdu/ddodLink.do?id=T17360205▼nKERIS▼z이 자료의 원문은 한국교육학술정보원에서 제공합니다.
