BlackRock and Vanguard, two colossal investment management firms, have quietly amassed significant ownership stakes in major media corporations, raising concerns about potential influence and control over information dissemination. This article delves into the extent of BlackRock’s holdings, its rise to power, and the implications for media diversity and market competition.
Harvard researchers recently unveiled the extent of BlackRock and Vanguard’s media ownership. Their findings reveal that these two firms hold substantial stakes in nearly every major media outlet, including:
- 18% of Fox
- 16% of CBS (and Sixty Minutes)
- 13% of Comcast (owner of NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, and Sky)
- 12% of CNN
- 12% of Disney (owner of ABC and FiveThirtyEight)
- 10-14% of Gannett (owner of over 250 newspapers and USA Today)
- 10% of Sinclair local television news (reaching 72% of US households)
These holdings raise questions about the potential influence BlackRock and Vanguard wield over the information Americans consume. With $9.5 trillion in assets under management, BlackRock surpasses even the world’s largest bank in financial power. This begs the question: how did BlackRock amass such influence?
The 2008 financial crisis played a pivotal role. The subsequent shift towards passive index fund investing fueled BlackRock’s exponential growth. As trillions flowed into these funds, BlackRock’s ownership in companies across various sectors, including media, soared. This concentration of ownership has led to concerns about reduced competition and the emergence of a financial oligarchy.
Image: Visual representation of oligarchy (Photo by jvandoor via Flickr)
Senator Elizabeth Warren has voiced concerns, advocating for federal oversight of BlackRock as a “too big to fail” institution. However, concrete regulatory action remains elusive. Further complicating matters, BlackRock has developed close ties with the US government, playing a key role in managing the 2008 financial crisis aftermath and advising on economic policy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Former BlackRock executives now hold influential positions within the Biden administration.
Beyond media, BlackRock’s investments extend to weapons manufacturers, tech platforms, and virtually every major corporation in the S&P 500. This vast portfolio grants BlackRock significant leverage to influence corporate decisions through direct communication with management and board members. While BlackRock emphasizes transparency and responsible stewardship, critics argue its sheer size and influence warrant greater scrutiny.
Adding to the complexity, BlackRock’s recent foray into the Chinese market has drawn criticism, particularly its investment in companies implicated in human rights abuses. This move has sparked debate about the ethical implications of BlackRock’s investment decisions and their potential impact on national security.
BlackRock’s pervasive presence in media and markets demands closer examination. While individual reporters may not feel direct pressure, the potential for influence at higher levels raises concerns about media independence and objectivity. As BlackRock continues to shape the financial landscape, understanding its impact on information flow and market dynamics is crucial. The sheer scale of BlackRock’s investments and its close ties to government raise fundamental questions about corporate power and its influence on society.
