Based on the evidence from Greater China, this essay proposes two theoretical propositions regarding the media's democratic potential. First, the liberal-pluralist approach to political economy, with its focus on the critique of the state, may be useful in analysing the authoritarian media in Third World countries and former Communist countries; in contrast, the radical-Marxist approach, with its focus on the critique of the capital, may be used to analyse the liberal-capitalist media. Specifically, the liberal approach goes a long way toward explaining the increased degree of "negative freedom" for the marketised authoritarian media in China, the martial-law media in Taiwan, the Hong Kong media in the shadow of an authoritarian sovereign. Secondly, in all of the three transitional systems, in fact, both of these approaches may intertwine and coexist uneasily and paradoxically. In the PRC, the state still maintains tight reins on news media, but it must negotiate with the market forces. The relative triumph of representative democracy in Taiwan has made the liberal perspective less (albeit still enormously) relevant, while ushering in the radical approach to account for the impact of media conglomeration on limiting the range of expression. On the other hand, as Hong Kong's liberal media order and mature capitalism are being threatened, concern for media professionalism and freedom has come to the fore. Four more unresolved theoretical issues are also briefly outlined.
|
