THEORIES OF THE PRESS

Throughout world history, media has played a very crucial role in every aspect of life especially,
the issues of the state and its citizens. Media has been used as a weapon by different
governments to fulfill different purposes. Media helps in shaping the narrative in society and
imparting and seeking knowledge and education. Though the work of media has always faced
many challenges throughout world history where the governments controlled and restrained the
freedom of the press. The freedom of the press depends on the type of government and their
agenda of state control, some governments promote freedom of the press while the others turn
media into mere propaganda machines.

The often asked question is that why the press is the way it is and why does it serve different
purposes in different countries. It is often said that the press is always shaped and colored by the
social institutions within which it operates. It reflects the social control system that adjusts the
relationships between individuals and institutions. Hence, this may be the answer to our
questions.

The four theories of the press are often said to be one theory with four different examples, it also
refers to four different ways of thinking about the media. The four theories of the press are the
concepts of what the media should be and what should it do. The four theories of the press show
different narratives and understanding regarding the media by different nations and political
regimes. Each of these theories has something unique to offer and their names are as follows;

 The Authoritarian Theory of Press

 The Libertarian Theory of Press
 The Social Responsibility Theory of Press
 The Soviet Communist Theory of Press

THE AUTHORITARIAN THEORY OF PRESS

The authoritarian view asserts that man is weak and imperfect and that the collective society or
state has historically and normatively superseded him; that knowledge is either difficult or
arcane, possibly divinely inspired or revealed; and that truth is absolute.
The authoritarian theory has been the most common of the four ideas of the press's relationship
to society or government, both historically and geographically. It is the hypothesis that was
nearly universally accepted by most countries once society and technology had progressed
enough to produce what we now refer to as "mass media" of communication. It serves as the
foundation for press systems. It has continued to impact the behavior of several governments that
supposedly adhere to libertarian principles, even when it has been abandoned.

Authoritarian thought was established in England throughout the 16th and 17th centuries. The
Authoritarian Theory is defined as the government's rigorous control of content and the public's
overall lack of freedom to critique government policies. Ownership of the media in an
authoritarian media system might be public or private. The majority of printing mediums are
owned by private individuals. Broadcasting and cinemas, on the other hand, are usually in the
control of the government.

The Authoritarian Theory depicts a system in which governments regard the media as a tool for
all purposes. The media's primary function is to educate citizens while also serving as a
propaganda tool for the ruling party.

The primary distinction between the Authoritarian and Soviet-Communist theories is that the
former allows both private and public media ownership, whilst the latter exclusively allows
public media ownership. Another distinction is that, whereas authoritarian media are mostly used
to defend the status quo, Soviet-Communist media are frequently utilized to effect societal
change.

Authoritarian media stems from the idea of the absolute power of the monarchy and mostly
based on the normative theory of mass communication. The idea behind this theory is that the
media should respect the authorities and work according to their commands and the media
cannot work separately from the government. It was essential that the monarchy supported the
media and even when it was not under direct state control, it still needed to do its bidding.

In such a system the media was not allowed to challenge the writ of the government as the state
was considered greater than the individuals and hence, the press was used as a weapon of power
by the government to increase its power. The press was also not allowed to publish sensitive
issues, there was religious and economic censorship and no right to criticize the government. In
case of publishing anything against the government, the concerned journalists were threatened
and even punished sometimes. In such a model, even foreign media is subordinate to the ruling
authorities.

Previously, the Burmese media was governed by an authoritarian administration. Until 2011, the
Burmese media positioned itself as a staunch supporter of the country's previous military
dictatorship. News stories raved over generals, slammed foreign media, and remained
unquestioning of the country's military leadership. Journalists who published reports that posed a
danger to the ruling party were jailed. Strict censorship rules were made and only such
newspapers that are controlled by the state and are usually filled with propaganda are allowed to
publish daily. With the emergence of democracy in Myanmar and the transition to a civilian
government, the Burmese media has been moving away from its harsh authoritarian attitude,
releasing journalists who had been imprisoned. Since June 2011, half of Myanmar's privately
owned periodicals have been allowed to publish without having to first submit page proofs to
censors. In addition, the government will permit private daily newspapers from April next year.

Talking about the application of the Authoritarian theory in the contemporary world there are
many examples like Afghanistan, North Korea, China, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. These countries
control their media according to the authoritarian model and the media is subordinate to the
government and its policies.

THE LIBERTARIAN THEORY OF PRESS

The libertarian theory initially came from liberal thought in Europe in the 16 th century. This
theory is in contrast with the authoritarian theory and develops a completely different stance on
the freedom of the press. This theory was developed by jurists such as John Locke. The
Libertarian Theory defines cultures that give media unrestricted independence, particularly
without government supervision, so that they can report a diverse range of viewpoints. There is
no censorship or control. The majority of media ownership in a libertarian media system is
private.

The function of the media, according to Libertarian Theory, is to inform, entertain, market, and
act as a "watchdog," keeping the public informed and government in check. Libertarian Theory
is based on an instinctive suspicion of government and state power, as well as the conviction that
everyone has a right to information. People are also logical enough to decide what is good or
harmful, according to this theory, and the press should not be restricted in any way. Even terrible
content can teach audiences something. Libertarian ideas are opposed to authoritarian ones.

According to this theory, anyone can publish anything as long as someone’s not defaming
anyone or not showing anything obscene on the media. In such a liberal model of the press, there
is little to no intervention from the government or state institutions and the media is completely
free on the assumption that individuals are rational enough to decide whether something is good
or bad. Hence, in such a situation things rely on the morals and personal ethics of the journalists
and the individuals.

When media has such freedom it is not afraid to criticize the government and its policies rather it
can work against the government and even in some cases help in bringing down a corrupt
regime. Wiki leaks are one such example of the libertarian theory and this theory is in sync with
the US media setup as well.

The critique of this theory is that it portrays the press as an all-positive source of information and
forgets about the negativity that comes with it. In such an ideal world we have to assume that
everybody has morals and ethics and everyone is rational. This theory doesn’t tell us about the
check and balance situation, balancing the freedom of the press and holding the media
accountable for its bad actions.

Finland is a country where the media system applied the libertarian theory of the press. In 2011,
the Finnish press was ranked as the freest in the world according to an organization promoting
freedom in the world called Freedom House. The right to information, freedom of expression is
assured under Article 12 of the constitution. Every citizen has the right to reply and to have
fallaciously published information corrected. Unlike those working under Soviet-Communist or
Authoritarian media systems, threats against journalists are rare in Finland. The internet is also
open and at liberty, with around 89.4 percent of citizens having regular access in 2011.

In the contemporary world, the ideal liberty can be found nowhere but in many parts of the
world, the press is working quite freely. Like in the US, the media criticizes the government
freely and gives way to public opinion on media platforms but some kind of check and balance is
still present in the US, and the behavior of the media doesn’t go unchecked.
SOVIET COMMUNIST THEORY OF PRESS

After the 17th century, the Soviet Union developed Soviet-Communist Theory from Marxist,
Leninist, and Stalinist ideas. According to Soviet-Communist Theory, the state directly owns or
controls all kinds of mass media. The power of the media is concentrated in the hands of a small
group of party leaders. In countries that use the Soviet-Communist Theory, the media's function
is to operate as a tool of the ruling party, to carry out plans of the party and state and to unite the
people of the state, and to bring about a societal change.

Similarly, in the Soviet-Communist regime, the media focuses on the horrible things that happen
in democratic areas rather than the bad things that happen under communism. When the Russian
media was still under the Soviet-Communist regime, for example, the official communist paper
"Pravda" promoted the notion that "Communist is good" by glorifying Stalin's non-aggression
pact with Hitler, and avoided reporting about the Chernobyl disaster as it may raise concerns
about the safety of Soviet nuclear plant. Pravda reported about the incident only two days later
after continuous urging from Sweden.

According to this theory, there could be no private ownership of the media and the government
controls all of the press. The only purpose of the media under such theory is to achieve the
communist objectives and fulfill communist ideologies. There is no freedom of expression here
but the media still plays a positive role as it contributes to the success of the state. But still, there
is too much influence of the ruling class on the press and hence their interests are served only
and the media is only supposed to publish what the government wants.

Technically, no country's media is completely dominated by the Soviet-Communist system at the

moment. Certain countries' media, on the other hand, resemble a Soviet-Communist media
structure. The North Korean media is one example. The government controls the media in North
Korea to a large extent, if not fully. There were no independent journalists, radio, or television in
North Korea for a long time. Television receivers were locked by government-specified
frequency.  The media also covers up the negative things that happen under the communist
leadership, not highlighting the dangers and hardships North Koreans faced. For example, the
government suppressed news of a famine that affected millions of people. This theory is too
outdated to be applied in the present world.
SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY THEORY OF PRESS

The Libertarian Theory has spawned the Social Responsibility Theory. However, unlike the
Libertarian Theory, the Social-Responsibility Theory does not presume that anyone can use the
media to publish anything. Instead, when exercising editorial independence, this view demands
the media to adhere to professional norms and codes of conduct. The Social-Responsibility
Theory states that ownership of media is private mostly and follows the principle of self-
regulation where it follows certain codes and guiding principles. The media is presumed to be
free from the arbitrary control of the government as well.

The role of the media in a Social-Responsible media system is to serve the people and to do so; it
must be free of government influence. This theory proposes that the media has a moral obligation
to offer appropriate information to citizens so that they can make informed judgments. The
various media, on the other hand, can maintain a liberal notion of good public disclosure. The
media is also expected to maintain a high level of professionalism, honesty, and accuracy and
represent the diversity of the cultures.

This media system is fairly workable but because the control is given to the public at large and
private ownership is promoted, it creates problems such as monopoly where the media has so
much control that it can manipulate the content to its liking. Hence, some kind of rules and
regulations are needed in such a media system where there can be a balance in the media system.

The United States of America is an example of a country that follows the Social-Responsibility
Theory. The United States of America has a Bill of Rights that states, "Congress shall pass no
law... abridging the freedom of speech or the press." This measure guarantees the media's
independence while also expressing Congress's confidence in the media's ability to protect that
freedom. Such faith instills confidence in the media to be more responsible for the content it
publishes.

Germany, Japan, and France are other examples of countries that follow a social responsibility
system in media.
CONCLUSION

To summarize it all, it can be said that in the contemporary world no particular theory applies to
any state, there may be a blend of all four but not that one size fits all thing can be said here.
Modern media is very different from when these theories were developed, the media today is
more focused on the ratings of the press rather than the content it publishes or shows on the
media. Things are way more complex in the modern media and we may need another theory that
would truly fit the model of the modern media system.