Discuss the issues raised by media ownership within a media area you have

studied (50 marks)

Media ownership contributes to the production and distribution of a film and
there are varying issues that arise during the stages of production due to media
ownership. The British Film Industry is in itself smaller than larger major
corporations in America, however certain process such as synergy allows for this
industry to thrive and become successful, also relying on certain aspects such as
the cast and marketing of the film.
When it comes to media ownership, there are many issues that come about for
both major and independent studios especially in reference to the way in which
the films are created and the presented to the audience. Independent studios
can have difficulty when trying to distribute their films on the basis that they
have not established a reputation that distributors can reply on. Naturally,
distributors will only put their money into a film that they are convinced will be
successful and make money or otherwise they could make great losses and all
the money they put into marketing the film and distributing it to the audience
would have been a waste. Also, it is difficult for independent studios to have their
film shown at cinemas. This is because cinemas aim to make money primarily,
and the likelihood is that big-budget films, made by established and
distinguished film studios, will be preferred over low-budget independent films
that have little guarantee of success. When it comes to distribution, major
studios are able to do this themselves without relying on external distributors
and they are instead vertically integrated to provide each stage of the films
development. This is due to major studios being part of media conglomerates
such as Time Warner, which own Warner Bros Entertainment the major studio
that have distributed high grossing films such as The Dark Knight . Cinemas will
also be willing to show these films because the major studios have built a
positive reputation from past film successes and so there will often be a
prediction that new releases will also be a success.
However, major studios do have the issue of filmmakers losing creative control
due to the ethos of certain studios. For example, Disney produces family-friendly
children films and aims to attract the family and young audience. This means
that if a filmmaker working with Disney were to decide to include elements of
violence and mature language in their film, the studio would need to revoke
some create control in order for the film to follow the ethos of the studio.
Although, independent studios do not need to necessarily follow an ethos of a
greater company because they a freelance and can create their own identity. On
the other hand, the create control for an independent studio can be altered
depending on where the funding comes from. Funders expect to benefit from the
film that they have put money into creating and therefore would wish to know
the basics of the film the plot, the setting and the general message that will be
conveyed. This concern from the funders could result in a filmmaker having to
change certain aspects that are an issue. For example, if a film were to receive
funding from the local council, it wouldnt be beneficiary to them if the film
represented or depicted the council or towns belonging to the council in a

negative way. On a larger scale, global criticism towards an organisation that has
funded for a film with controversial content, an example being the Japanese
documentary Yasukuni which was pulled from cinemas, can occur and so funders
may want to consider turning to the filmmakers to change the content. Although
said film was not made by the British Film Industry, it can be argued that this
shows that it is a possibility for both British and international films to face this
issue.
Pride is a British film released in 2014, directed by British director Matthew
Warchus and stars an all-British cast with the exception of an Irish and American
actor. The film focuses on the help the LGBT community gave to families affected
by the British miners' strike in 1984. Pride received funding by the British Film
Institute and this is understandable as the BFI generally limit their funding to
films that fall into the category of British film a film that is defined by the
extent of the British culture depicted in the film and the British cast and crew
among other criteria. Director Matthew Warchus had not directed many films
before Pride, yet still received funding. This is down to the fact that the
production company he was working with was BBC Films, which has produced
many successful British films over the recent years, and the context and cast of
the film was mainly British. This proves that even unknown directors can find the
funding for their film due to the cast and crew, whereas other independent
studios generally struggle to find the funding for their film due to the lack of
reputation and the consensus fear that a low-budget film by an unknown studio
will not be profitable. However, this also shows that the decision to fund for a
film can be primarily based on the content rather than the notability of the
director, as Pride benefited from having the historical British context entwined
with the plot as well as being produced by a notable production company.
Another issue that had arisen with Pride was the distribution and actually related
to the create control the filmmakers had with the film. US distributors edited the
DVD cover of the film to remove the LGBT references. Although other releases
were unchanged, the filmmakers and the BFI film fund had to accept that in
America, removing these references was more of a marketing strategy to sell
more copies of the film, thus revoking the creative control the production
company had on the American release.
Guardians of the Galaxy, released also in 2014, did not rely on the content of the
film to be funded. Rather, it wasnt difficult for them to find funding as the film
was being produced, funded and distributed due to Disneys use of vertical
integration. The film was able to have a large budget of $170,000,000 because
of the popularity, success and wealth of the media conglomerate of Disney and
therefore, Walt Disney Studios were able to both fund and distribute the film to
an audience of Marvel fans waiting for another box office hit. Unlike Pride, there
was no real need to consider the context of the film to decide as to whether it
would be funded because Disney are capable enough to fund their own films,
especially when using source material from their smaller company, Marvel. Also,
Guardians of the Galaxy did not have trouble with the distribution. This is
because Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment distributed the DVD release
throughout the world whereas Pride was distributed by Path in the UK and CBS

Films in the US. Like many companies The Walt Disney Company would rather
not change their product and so by using their own distributors, they can avoid
this issue. It is also important to note that due to the ethos of Disney, it would be
unlikely that they would need to change aspects of the film anyway in order to
suit an audience in another county, unlike Pride where the content could possibly
be controversial.