Media inequality is a situation in which some political or social groups have more access to media than their rivals, which helps them shape public opinion to their own advantage and to the detriment of others. Just as unequal access to wealth or opportunities creates hurdles in the way of development, media inequality can do likewise by acting as a barrier between a society and economic growth.
This was stated by Nasser Zakeri, an economist, in a write-up for the Persian daily Shargh. A translation of the text follows:
In a society where media inequality is not conspicuous, political rivals have to criticize their competitors’ agenda and performance on the one hand and defend their own actions in the face of criticism from rivals on the other hand. Such a situation compels all political groups to do their utmost to increase their efficiency and improve their performance, otherwise their rivals will dominate public perception. In other words, equal access to public tribunes and media will force political groups to make efforts for increasing their share of votes just like economic enterprises using every means possible to grab a larger share of the market.
This effort leads to the improvement of the country’s governance and the approval of more successful economic programs. But if a political group manages to limit the rival’s access to public platforms and media, it will definitely gain an advantage. Under the circumstances, that group can present its plans as “the best programs” to the general public, even if they do not have a defensible theoretical basis. The group can also introduce its affiliates as successful figures despite their weak track record.
The outcome of such a mechanism will be a significant decline in the quality of governance and economic growth, as well as unequal access to public tribunes and the dissemination of biased information. As a result, people will doubt the programs of other political groups and fail to make the best decision.
Public Misperception
Some people might argue that with the widespread access of citizens to information through virtual space, the chances of media inequality has been minimized, so no political group can gain the upper hand by limiting the access of rivals to media outlets.
This argument cannot be taken seriously for two reasons. First, even if it is not possible to completely deprive political rivals of access to mass media, they can make the flow of information expensive by limiting the rivals’ access to public platforms. As a result, one political group could dominate the country’s official media and promote its perspectives by using public resources, while forcing rivals to pay the huge cost of information dissemination.
Second, traditionally, a significant number of citizens rely on the country’s official media and don’t use virtual space. As a result, they will have no chance of hearing voices other than that of a particular political group. Although media inequality can protect the ruling party from its contenders and guarantee its authority by destroying political competition in the short- and medium-term, it will inflict harm on the society in all fields, especially in the economy.
In the absence of equal access to public broadcasting media, macroeconomic policies and strategies that would have been abandoned in the early stages will continue for years, or the inefficient executive managers who should have resigned at the very beginning of their terms will remain at their jobs and prevent the establishment of meritocracy and the employment of skilled and qualified individuals.
In sum, media inequality deprives the society of the opportunity to learn and gain experience; it does not allow citizens to evaluate the country’s senior officials and macroeconomic policies with adequate information. The 20-Year National Vision Plan (2005-25) pays special attention to Iran becoming an economic superpower in Southwest Asia. Nineteen years on, the country has gained a lot in various fields, especially in science and technology, but the goals set for making the country an economic frontrunner in the region have yet to be achieved.
What role did media inequality play in this failure?
