Self Exploitation: A Perceived Feature of Media Production

SELF EXPLOITATION: A PERCEIVED FEATURE OF MEDIA PRODUCTION
Student Name
Instructor Name
Institutional Affiliation
City and State
Due Date
Self Exploitation: A Perceived Feature of Media Production
Introduction
Although the 21st century draws fame for increased interest in media and cultural production jobs, experts have overlooked the notion of exploitation in the same fields. When it comes to the constructs and political nature of employment in media, the idea of exploitation seems like a permanent element. The concept of self-exploitation refers to how employees are inclined towards self-sacrifice in artistic labor environments across the world, particularly in media production (Percival and Hesmondhalgh, 2014, p. 189). Critics see self-exploitation as the dimension of sacrificing oneself to benefit capitalistic media creation in modern working life. On the other hand, the word did not arise from an individualistic level. Hence, it does not imply that individuals exploit themselves, but media owners control such exploitative models. People working in the creative labor sector learn to manage the hazards of their profession by numerous job handling, adapting to several occupational responsibilities, and diversifying their work portfolio (Percival and Hesmondhalgh, 2014, p. 190). In this context, exploitation in media production is a prevalent issue that requires attention to determine techniques and tools used to exploit the young and readily available workers.
The Concept of Exploitation
The orthodox Marxist theory views labor exploitation as a byproduct of the capitalist’s hidden way of owning production capacities and demonstrating power over employees. Workers willingly seek employment opportunities in media stations, television broadcasts, and film-making companies, indicating there is no compulsion to work for their employees globally. As a result, most times, they are driven to labor and sacrifice themselves for the sake of financial profits and performance for the employer (Hesmondhalgh, 2015, p. 31). This form of self-exploitation, channeled by capitalistic owners, arises since media employees have no rights to production, minimising them to replaceable players and contributors. Hesmondhalgh (2015, p. 33) writes that Marxist theory indicates that the capitalists enjoy the surplus profits and results that the workers create. For instance, television broadcast producers in BBC feel compelled to work for long hours during the airing of a critical show or piece, meaning that they sacrifice their time for the success of the broadcast. On the other hand, the TV owners sit back and relax in their lavish homes, as they expect good fiscal performance to impress shareholders, the board, and themselves. Therefore, Marxist views on capitalistic production are the leading influencer of exploitation in media because they illustrate its occurrence in society.
In addition, Marx claims that the employee’s output occurs in two distinct aspects. The first is that the employee works for their benefit, creating goods worth the same as their payment. This aspect does not attract contention since it follows a fairness angle since the wages received by the workers amount to the output produced by them (Ursell, 2000, p. 807). Secondly, the worker toils for the capitalist because they create commercial value for the owner for which they do not get comparable pay for the same. The twist, in this case, is that the laborer remains effectively underpaid for the surplus output that they produce. Film production assistants are primarily freelance workers in British movie or television series production. As a result, they intensively self-sacrifice to work for long hours to produce quality scenes for the production company. After its release, the movie or series attracts significant incomes and revenue, which is the surplus that Marx highlights. However, the production assistant benefits from the abundance since they were already paid wages for their work output (Ursell, 2000, p. 809). Thus, capitalist exploitation in media is the forceful capture of the surplus output workers generate for their employers.
The Concept of Autonomy as an Influence on Exploitation in Media
Trends indicate that the constructs as a dimension of false freedom for workers cloud media and cultural production autonomy. This aspect is because the hidden concept emphasizes how employee autonomy has been adopted aggressively as the managerial element where workers receive compulsion to adhere to the capitalistic nature of media production (Banks, 2010, p. 255). The principle exists in media corporations under which managers actively implement. As a result of their weakness and powerless input into organisational management, cultural and media workers feel driven to embrace capitalist production actions. Furthermore, their education pushes them to accept and regularly underpin their output towards their roles to imply that autonomous production can bear great benefits for individuals. For example, in the United Kingdom, people consider promoting freelancing in media as a flexibility-fed notion as innately good and autonomy enabling (Banks, 2010, p. 256). However, the hidden agenda, prescribed as freedom and flexibility to earn an income, is essentially promoted as a strategy to cut production costs in terms of wages and payments. On the other hand, it masks its true aims and consequences – to save expenses and blur the lines between employment and non-work locations.
The feature of ‘autonomy as freedom’ appears to section employees in charge of their ‘creative future,’ encouraging them to actively support the mechanisms to speed up media and cultural creation. Nonetheless, this alluring autonomy is strong enough to overcome defects, oppression, reservations, or challenges in the job. This aspect vividly demonstrates self-exploitation since the worker thinks they are working towards an ultimate growth goal. However, the real intention is to maximise their output for capitalists’ profits (Banks, 2010, p. 257). For example, young camera operators in the London live show business are often freelancers who perceive that their flexible work is inclined to their futuristic growth as independent and active producers in the future (Ursell, 2000, p. 815). Whenever challenges occur, such as delayed payments, the aspect of seductive autonomy overshadows the workers’ call for reparation since experts make them believe that they should remain focused on their creative journeys. On the flip side, the media owner’s real intention, such as Channel 4, has the concept of cheap labour in their minds as a form of minimising costs and amplifying profits. Although autonomy is essential to cultural labor, it is only a front for underlying tyranny. As a result, the ambiguity of independent artistic labour concerning its freedom-promoting potential becomes often overlooked compared to its exploitative and limiting qualities.
In blogging as a media production capacity, the controllers have applied autonomy to exploit young and upcoming bloggers. In the fashion blogging industry, there is a detectable vocabulary of instrumentation, in which bloggers receive persuasion that a real individualist piece would appeal to readers based on its greatness (Duffy, 2015, p. 55). This managers’ claim is a covert effort to lure young bloggers to mainstream corporations as creative autonomy. Brooke Duffy’s study on amateur female cultural producers’ independence encourages managerial stat...