MEDIA SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES vs CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES

It is a very relavent question to the media industry. First: The foot soldiers of media i.e. stringers are important part of the industries and they are rendering services to their respective houses but almost for free or you can say that in an hope to yeild in near future but that future never come. If they are not utility oriented to the organisation then why they make them work. If they were working not over here they would have been working at some other place or could be fetching something.
On social ground if government is making the losses good made by the corporate houses then why they are keeping an close eyes on the exploitation of these younger lot.
These younger lot work as a negotiating agents for these political parties. SO they want to keep them as this only- helpless , ready to work for small money.

I feel that these individual stringers are the foot soldiers of the industry but are not given the due recognition or the success of the industry , you can say this is the example of concentration of wealth in few hands . Editors farm houses also I consider the extension of this arguments.
If we will not talk about the living condition of these stringers then why we talk about the CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The sole purpose of any business house is make profit not the social welfare of their worker, suppliers, customers , investors & those who are associated with them.If political parties - journalists are keeping an check on them then why not to keep an check on media house or rather you can say MEDIA SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES. Then we must not also make a hue & cry on the salary of CEO of any MNC and huge gap between the pay scale of any CEO & an ordinary employee of that company.