Irony of libertarian theory, critics of gatekeeping rights of mass media and the government.

The society is made up of clustered sectors pulled together to foster development in a way that ensures humans survival on earth. over the years certain innovative ideas has been put in place to ensure we humans remain at the top of our game, being the sole driver and engineer of matters that concerns the earth.

Being empowered by this dutifully responsibility as one of the most highly intellectual species on earth surviving solely on the information at hand. In this dire times of human development the circulation and reportage of information has never been more critical. An indispensable role that lies on the shoulder of informed individuals known as the communicators, existing under the umbrella of an organisation called the mass media. Quite a responsibility but what happens when the mighty drivers of dissemination of information can't handle the wheels?

As a fellow whose area of specialisation borders around Mass communication and other related field of study, I have always considered it as a personal and public duty to ensure the members of society stay informed about the society by all legal means possible. As Joseph Klapper once stated in his deduction about the roles of mass media in the society which stated that Only informed citizens of a state are capable of making informed choices" I was born patriotic and passionate about the affairs of my nation, knowing how important information is in fostering progressive growth among the members of the public.

---

---

Gatekeeping is the act and process of filtering dissemination of information. This has been the primary function of the conventional media, before the emergence of social media, the conventional media act as the sole gatekeeper of information. They choose which information should be disseminated, this act is considered as the social responsibility of the conventional media and an act of professionalism. Over the years many scholars have questioned the gatekeeping right of the conventional media due to the fact that the primary priority of the conventional media should be objectivity. The act of gatekeeping of the conventional media is influenced factors such as :

1) IN HOUSE POLICY/RULES
Every media organisation has their in house policy in which the organisation structure and management operates. Regardless of how credible a news story is, a media organisation can choose to ignore such information because it did not go inline with the organisation policies. If the conventional media organisation is based on this, how can we be assured that the information being broadcasted has not been doctored to match the taste of such media organisation? can such information be regarded as be being objective.

Joseph Klapper, one of the authors of media effect stated that, all what the conventional media does is not about dissemination of information but engineering the the content being broadcasted. From his statement it is clear that the act of objectivity is not the primary focus of conventional media

---

2) CENSORSHIP AND OWNERSHIP CONTROL
The owners of media organisations have been found to always dictate the tune in which content of their media organisation must play. This factor is one of the greatest challenge media organisations are facing. If a story is being published and it does not go inline with the perspective of the owner of such media organisation such story will never see daylight. This sometimes is also related to political factors, if the owner of a media organisation is affiliated to any form of political party, he/she would decline any information that might dent the image of the party regardless of it being factual or not.

This is also common among government owned media organisations, they find it difficult to publish information that are not in accordance with the ruling government. In the surface most country operating in democratic government have always claimed that libertarian theory is the major approach of media organisations under there jurisdiction but if the decision of media organisations is being dictated by the government can such press claim to be free?

---

3) EDITOR'S' CHOICE
As someone who have had a lot of experience working in the news room of a broadcast media, I have seen a lot of stories make it to the editor's deck but never got to the Studio. Every human is entitled to their perception of things and this is applicable to an editor also. Editors are a major player in gatekeeping content, they are in the position to dictate what get published or not. Thier decision to publish a story or content can be based on their personal opinion regarding such subject.

---

4) AFFILIATED COMPANIES/ PROMINENT FIGURES
Some figures in our society have accumulated a lot of power to the extent that, some media organisations especially the private ones feel intimidated by their power, having in mind the kind of backslash that could occur as a result of speaking against them. A media organisation with affiliations to such companies might find it difficult to be objective about their content because their main source of income of most media outlets is from adverts and when a media outlet speaks ill of such a company, they have the capacity to withdraw their advert from such media outlet which will endanger the survival of the media organisation.

---

---

Despite all these, It might make you wonder why does the conventional media still chose to gatekeep Information.
In an ideal situation, There are few reasons why gatekeeping of information is necessary:

• Conflict reporting During my days as mass communication student, I did a course subject called conflict reporting. There are times when the dissemination of information is held by mass media due to how conflict oriented the information is or there are times when the mass media choose to change the original narrative of a story to prevent conflict. For example if a terrorist attack should occur and it seems like majority of people that died in the attack is a particular ethnic group, the media/government can decide to withheld such information or not to report people killed in the attack, to prevent civil unrest due to retaliation.

---

• Partial truth This one of the reasons why investigative reporting takes time compared to other forms of reporting. If a media organisation uncovers a drug syndicate or governmental corruption, their primary responsibility is to ensure all facts are intact before disseminating the information because publishing inconclusive story could be more destructive no matter the good intentions and it could also backfire on such media organisation.

---

• National stability There are cases when an information may threaten national stability. For example the case of removal of subsidy in Nigeria, due to the manner in which the information was broadcasted the price of petroleum skyrocketed before the removal of subsidy fully takes effect. Even market women who have no knowledge of what subsidy means started increasing the prices of goods and blame the removal of subsidy for it. In order to prevent information from having this kind of effect on people, Media organisations or government can decide to withheld the information.

---

• Preventing panic and fear For those of us that witnessed the outbreak of COVID 19, we are aware of all kind rumours that plagued the planet which made it a lot difficult to cope with the situation. This rumour and fake news caused more damage than the virus and it was titled Info-demic Unlike the virus, Info-demic was fuelled with fear of the virus and it spread faster than COVID-19. The mass media or government might choose to cover up a threat, which might be a virus or terrorism to prevent the citizens of a state from panicking.

---

---

Here is the greatest irony of it all, Libertarian theory. It is the foundation of the creation of the media that centers on freedom, while gatekeeping is their duty. The basis of libertarian theory advocates for the freedom of the press without being influenced by the powers of the government, this has allowed mass media to operates has watchdog. But there is more to this theory, it doesn't only give the media power to operate freely.

It also empowers the people to be the judge of the kind of information they choose to believe and get exposed to. Arguably, it can be said that the core of libertarian theory is against the gatekeeping rights of the mass media or government regardless of their noble intentions. Libertarian theory states the people have the right to know and decide how they choose to interpret information. It states that no governmental institutions/agency or Media has the right to act like a god when it comes to choosing the kind of information that is right for the people despite knowing it might cause them harm. Let them know, Let them decide what is best for themselves.

---

---

Based on the above argument, if I'm asked a question such as, should all news be disseminated to the people regardless of the consequences or should Information be withheld from the people to prevent disastrous consequences? Trying to answer such a question I find myself in a big dilemma because I would say, they should. We can't fully trust the media or government to be objective and also be in the perfect position to judge which information deserves to be disseminated to the people. They might use such instances to cover up their atrocities in the name of professionalism and social responsibility.

---

---

_{This write-up was inspired by weekly featured content titled "247 News" in hive learners community.}

---

---

_{Cover image - 𝖣𝖾𝗌𝗂𝗀𝗇𝖾𝖽 𝗎𝗌𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝖼𝖺𝗇𝗏𝖺
Image 1 - Source
Image 2 - Source}

---

---