The Domination of Global Institutions.

3. ‘Media production is dominated by global institutions, which sell their products and services to national audiences.’ To what extent do you agree with this statement?

An institution is an established organisation which is embedded within society. It is easy to see how global institutions could be seen as dominating media production. These institutions hold a vast amount of money, which consequently gives them a large amount of power in the marketing and distribution area. An example of a global institution is Disney, who have produced over 158 different feature films since 1923. Because of their success they can afford to use both horizontal and vertical marketing to make their institutions’ name become recognised and by doing this it enhances their growth. However, it is possible for smaller businesses to sell their products successfully; for example Bedlam Productions and See-Saw Films with their box office success, ‘The King’s Speech.’

     It could be said that as Disney is seen as such a large and powerful institution, it can dominate others as it is such a wealthy organisation which has managed to weave its way into everyday society. For example, when juxtaposing a Disney film such as ‘Finding Nemo’ with the See-Saw Films and Bedlam Productions’ (both independent film companies) ‘The King’s Speech’ we see that ‘Finding Nemo’ grossed $867,894,287 worldwide and ‘The King’s Speech’ grossed $427,374,139.  It is to be expected that a Disney film immediately attracts a large and loyal audience who have come to expect a high standard of production. However, ‘The King’s Speech’ had grossed more than the Disney classic ‘Toy Story’ which grossed $361,948,825. Somehow this unlikely hit featuring a private story about the English monarchy captured the hearts and minds of a global audience.

     From the above figures we can see in some senses inclinations that even if you do not have a large production company or a widespread target audience, if your story is firm and filmed effectively, it can still be a huge success. The budget for ‘The King’s Speech’ was $15,000,000 whereas the budget for Disney’s ‘Alice in Wonderland’ was $200,000,000 – a huge difference. And yet, ‘The King’s Speech’ has received a far more positive reception than ‘Alice in Wonderland’; ‘The social and political background, acutely observed and carefully woven into the film's fabric…’ (The Guardian – Review on ‘The King’s Speech’.) Indeed, ‘The King’s Speech’ made 30 times its investment in profit while ‘Alice in Wonderland’ made only five times its investment (‘Alice’ grossed just over $1,000,000,000).

          This kind of success from a small production company could be considered the exception rather than the rule. Large Institutional powers could be seen as dominating and casting a shadow over smaller and more independent film companies- Disney has been nominated for over 200 Oscars, just over fifty of which it has won. ‘The King’s Speech’ had been nominated for 12 Oscars, four of which it won. If anything, this shows a certain quality to ‘The King’s Speech’. Although created by the small independent film companies Bedlam Productions and See-Saw Films along with the help of the UK Film Council, ‘The King’s Speech’ has made huge success as its content was rich and appealing and held a strong message for its viewers. Tom Hooper’s ‘The King’s Speech’ offers a case study in how the independent film sector can harness opportunity in the global film business. The Australian and UK film company See-Saw Films put together the financing and produced the film by striking deals with two key distribution partners and hiring Filmnation to sell to the rest of the world. The key to See-Saw Film’s success is their links with the large distribution companies Momentum Pictures and Transmission Films along with investment from the UK Film Council. Institutions such as Disney are producing films on such a frequent basis that they are beginning to lose their meaning, and many people are beginning to hold the view that only their 15 animated feature classics were truly quality films.

     The target audience also dictates whether a film or institution will be received well or not. Disney is directed more towards children and the youth; however they have taken into account the fact that adults will be taking these children to see these films so have put lines into the films that hold double meanings so there is some subliminal adult humour in there too. By doing this, they have broadened their target audience by some degrees. Films such as ‘The King’s Speech’ have a more narrow target audience, the film appeals to a more mature audience and it is not a film which would necessarily hold a great deal of interest across a large number of cultures. Disney has worked hard to achieve a form of global dominance with its films, it is easier for them to spread their films globally as they are directed at children and the content is appealing for children of most cultures. An example of Disney’s distribution of a film is the feature film ‘Robin Hood’ which was translated into sixteen different languages.

      The uses of marketing and distribution also contribute hugely to an institution’s dominance over media production. Walt Disney uses a vast array of horizontal and vertical integration to promote its films and products. Disney has its own record labels, TV Channel, radio station, video games, shops, websites and clothing lines. Disneyland is a huge income producer for the institution itself; it is the largest single site employer in the whole of the United States. Small production companies simply do not have the funds to have this kind of influential power over the media and world on a global scale. It all seems to boil down to finance. The more money held by a company, the more dominance it can have over media production; for example in the UK ‘Alice in Wonderland’ products were sold in the UK chain store Claire’s Accessories; there were games, Facebook groups such as ‘The Loyal followers of the Red Queen.’, Mobile phone Apps, Ringtones and the soundtrack by Avril Lavigne.

      Viral marketing is also used to help increase a film’s awareness and popularity. Trailers on Youtube adverts and fanclubs on Facebook are just a few of the ways films and institutions can advertise online. These methods of drawing an audience’s attention to a product can cost very little in comparison to more conventional marketing methods, which could be helpful for smaller production companies.

      Another factor is that Disney distributes films in association with many different studios such as: Touchstone Pictures, Pixar and Walt Disney Pictures. It can be said that global institutions such as Disney dominate media production by selling their products and services to national audiences, but it can be seen that other smaller production companies still have successful products. Their success can be overshadowed sometimes by larger institutions that produce films on a large scale, but over time a good quality film will always last longer and continue to sell.

     In many cases the big institutions need to create films rapidly because they are aware that their success will not last as their content is becoming less valuable to their audiences. Global institutions are trusted by society for their quality of work, so the expectations of the public are high, but even the largest institutions had to start off small and overshadowed. Overall I believe to a large extent that media production is dominated by global institutions, but independent ones still have the power to become influential.