Critics of concentration of media ownership and conglomeration argue that they are a threat to democracy. What is the thrust of their concern? Do you share it? Why or why not?

It should be noted that the concentration of media ownership and conglomeration is a threat to democracy.  

I quite agree with the above statement. Today, most media stations are owned by conglomerates. In such a case, the media outlets are easily influenced by the people that they're associated with.

For example, critics of the concentration of media ownership and conglomeration argue that such media houses limit the diversity of coverage and this affects informed decision making. This ultimately is a threat to democracy.

Learn more about conglomerate on:

link

The thrust of their concern is biasness and the fact that people would not be able to make informed decisions.

Yes I agree with this concern

Explanation:

Today so many media stations and outlets are owned by different corporations or conglomerates. So it is very possible that these media outlets are influenced by the corporations Which own them.

The main concern of critics is that these media outlets would begin to put forward biased contents and they would stop serving the public when they overlook the shortcomings of these corporations. Thereby making people unable to make informed decisions which is crucial for democracy.

Corporate media is actually a good idea since it creates a healthy competition. What is necessary is a check by the government so as to avoid biasness. Making publication of real news and enhancing informed decision making.

answer; according to the ( irs );