This article is a rejoinder to Murdock and Golding’s response to my critique of the political economy of communications (PEC) analysis of media production. This article sets this exchange in the context of a broader debate in recent editions of Media, Culture & Society about the value of PEC. Much of the debate stems from Garnham’s critical review of 40 years of PEC research.
DwyerP (1989) Community radio: professionalism, community access and technical change. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Imperial College London, London.
2.
DwyerP (2015) Theorizing media production: the poverty of political economy. Media, Culture & Society37(7): 988–1004.
3.
FuchsC (2016) Against theoretical Thatcherism: a reply to Nicholas Garnham. Media, Culture & Society38: 301–311.
4.
GarnhamN (1979) Contribution to a political economy of mass-communication. Media, Culture & Society1(2): 123–146; 343–367.
5.
GarnhamN (2011) The political economy of communication revisited. In: WaskoJMurdockGSousaH (eds) The Handbook of Political Economy of Communications. New York; London: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 41–61.
6.
GarnhamN (2016) Review of Fuchs, C. ‘Digital Labour and Karl Marx’. Media, Culture & Society38(2): 294–300.
7.
MeehanEWaskoJ (2013) In defence of a political economy of the media. Javnost: The Public20(1): 39–53.
8.
MurdockGGoldingP (1973) For a political economy of mass communications. Socialist Register10: 205–234.
9.
MurdockGGoldingP (2016) Political economy and media production: a reply to Dwyer. Media, Culture & Society38(5): 763–769.
10.
WeberM (1978/1922) Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology, trans. RothGWittichC. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
