 media and ideology. Basically we as the student of political sociology we are familiar that there are normally two common perspectives and theoretical perspectives regarding media and ideology. These are mainly known as the Marxist approach and the Plurist theory. These two schools these two perspectives they have the claim that media has great influence on individuals behavior and thinking. On this both groups, both schools of thought they are agreed that through media individuals behavior can be determined and it can be influenced. So what's the Marxist philosophy? They have the perspective that through media elite class promote their interests and become their savior. Elites who are, their interest for normally media defend and they also save them. That is, the purpose of the media is that the top, the elite in the authority should not be affected, in fact their interests should be defended and specifically those in the society who are in various classes, in all of them, with mass media, facilitating they want to defend the interest of the elite. Then the ruling class they normally use the media to introduce and to promote their ideology. The specific, a special, alarming thing, which is explained in the Marxist theory in detail, that when a ruling party wants to communicate with its people in their particular context, it campaigns the media so that people listen to them and follow them. But there is criticism on this too, definitely that Marxists actually they exaggerate the media elite taxes in interest articulation. This philosophy in it, especially, this is wrong, that the elite should not be promoted as opposed to the people who communicate with them. The Plurist philosophy, the Plurist theory, they believe that media provides equal and balanced coverage to different classes of the societies. They reject the autism of a special class or individual. They make sure the media has access to both the official and the decent voices. The Plurist theory is that the objective of the media is not to reach the people with a specific perspective. That is, what is in favor of someone, in favor of the government, in favor of the elite class, is to project the media. But the different voices should be suppressed. That this point of view is not right and it is not usually popular. But the criticism on this theory, they think that two things cannot be done at a time. Definitely, you have to get a single perspective of promotion. Because how can it be balanced? And especially, what will manipulate the media? That is, the media will also be interested in being linked to someone. But if it is in a government, then the government can give the media a lot of convenience. Or those people who have resources, they can influence the media for their own purposes. If there are any media investments, obviously advertisements are required in the media, people who run the media channels will also need some resources. Those who have resources will then use the media in their favor. So, this is a major criticism on the Plurist theory that a complete independent or balanced media, in today's time, when the media is required to maintain the total independence and a balanced approach to cover all the elements equally. That is, it is possible that the elements will get coverage. But how will they be balanced? If any party is not getting benefits from it, then the media itself is keeping its survival at stake. So, obviously, if the media has to compete in today's time, pursue and grow, then its dependency will also be on those people who will provide resources. And this game, we know that it runs in the world, that it is so difficult for the media, total independence, and that it should properly deal with all the elements equally. So, in this situation, the various perspectives, various approaches, their importance in their place, but in all these situations, a balanced approach is very difficult.