MEDIA
EFFECTS THEORIES
INTRODUCTION
Communication
is a vast concept which has been naturally founded with human. In its simple
definition, it means the process of transforming a message and information from
the source to the receiver or its better to define it as “it is the process of
creating shared meaning.”(J.Baran, Introduction to mass communication). With
the technological development, many media inventions have been founded and then
it pushed the media researchers and specialists to find another term for this
process which it is mass media. Mass communication is the process of
transforming a message created by a person is a group to large audience or
market through a transforming device which it is the medium. Mass media is the
modern form of communication creation. Peoples start to communicate themselves
(intra communication)…which is develop person to person (inter personal
communication), grow in groups and the last and the latest way communication
mass tool is media. Mass media has become a part of human life and it also
strongly affecting it. Therefore, there are many theories and approaches done
by researchers and philosophers to understand and describe these effects.
Most people accept the
idea that the media can influence people. But the degree of that influence, as
well as who is most-impacted, when, how and why, have been the subjects of
great debate among communication scholars for nearly a century. Media
effects refers to the many ways individuals and society may be influenced
by both news and entertainment mass media, including film, television, radio,
newspapers, books, magazines, websites, video games, and music.
The
study of media effects is the study of how to control, enhance, or mitigate the
impact of the mass media on individuals and society.
HYPODERMIC NEEDLE THEORY
Direct
influence via mass media or: Magic Bullet Theory Also known as media-theories’,
stimulus-response, injectienaald.
The hypodermic
needle model (also known as the hypodermic-syringe
model, transmission-belt model, or magic
bullet theory) is a model of communications suggesting
that an intended message is directly received and wholly accepted by the
receiver. The model is rooted in 1930s behaviorism and is
largely considered obsolete today.
History
In mid
1930’s media scholars found the first theory on Media Effects and the
Media Behaviors. During second world
wars media plays a vital role in both United States and
Germany to made influence in the
people’s mind. The Germany Hitler’s Nazi used film industry for Propaganda and
they produced lots of movies about their achievements which made a great impact
in Germans mind. Later the United States also used its own Hollywood and
produced films like “Its Happened one night”, “It’s a wonderful life” and Mr.
Smith goes to Washington” to portrait Germany as Evil force which also made
impact in Americans Mind. Here media audience accepts the messages directly
without any rejection (Lowery & De Fleur, 1995, p. 400).
The
"hypodermic needle theory" implied mass media had a direct,
immediate and powerful effect
on its audiences. The mass media in the 1940s and 1950s were perceived as a
powerful influence on behavior change.
Several
factors contributed to this "strong effects" theory of communication,
including:
- The
fast rise and popularization of radio and television
- The
emergence of the persuasion industries, such as advertising and propaganda
- The
Payne Fund studies of the 1930s, which focused on the impact of motion pictures
on children, and
-
Hitler's monopolization of the mass media during WWII to unify the German
public behind the Nazi party
Main
concept
The
theory suggests that the mass media could influence a very large group of
people directly and uniformly by ‘shooting’ or ‘injecting’ them with
appropriate messages designed to trigger a desired response.
Both
images used to express this theory (a bullet and a needle) suggest a powerful
and direct flow of information from the sender to the receiver. The bullet
theory graphically suggests that the message is a bullet, fired from the
"media gun" into the viewer's "head". With similarly
emotive imagery the hypodermic needle model suggests that media messages are
injected straight into a passive audience which is immediately influenced by
the message. They express the view that the media is a dangerous means of
communicating an idea because the receiver or audience is powerless to resist
the impact of the message. There is no escape from the effect of the message in
these models. The population is seen as a sitting duck. People are seen as
passive and are seen as having a lot media material "shot" at them.
People end up thinking what they are told because there is no other source of
information.
New
assessments that the Magic Bullet Theory was not accurate came out of election
studies in "The People's Choice," (Lazarsfeld,
Berelson and Gaudet, 1944/1968).
As focus
group testing, questionnaires, and other methods of marketing effectiveness
testing came into widespread use; and as more interactive forms of media (e.g.:
internet, radio call-in shows, etc.) became available, the magic bullet theory
was replaced by a variety of other, more instrumental models, like the two step
of flow theory and diffusion of innovations theory.
Example
The
classic example of the application of the Magic Bullet Theory was illustrated
on October 30, 1938 when Orson Welles and the newly formed Mercury Theater
group broadcasted their radio edition of H.G. Wells' "War
of the Worlds."On the eve of Halloween, radio programming was interrupted
with a "news bulletin" for the first time. What the audience heard
was that Martians had begun an invasion of Earth in a place called Grover's
Mill, New Jersey.
It
became known as the "Panic Broadcast" and
changed broadcast history, social psychology, civil defense and set a standard
for provocative entertainment. Approximately 12 million people in the United
States heard the broadcast and about one million of those actually believed
that a serious alien invasion was underway. A wave of mass hysteria disrupted
households, interrupted religious services, caused traffic jams and clogged
communication systems. People fled their city homes to seek shelter in more
rural areas, raided grocery stores and began to ration food. The nation was in
a state of chaos, and this broadcast was the cause of it.
Media
theorists have classified the "War of the Worlds" broadcast
as the archetypal example of the Magic Bullet Theory. This is exactly how the
theory worked, by injecting the message directly into the
"bloodstream" of the public, attempting to create a uniform thinking.
The effects of the broadcast suggested that the media could manipulate a
passive and gullible public, leading theorists to believe this was one of the
primary ways media authors shaped audience perception.
My Suggestions,
view and Criticism about the theory
Am argue the point view
of this theory people’s reactions direct and immediate to media content,
reactions differ according to motivational of audience members, theire
pre-disposition to accepts or reject a given message, their needs, attitudes,
thinking, moods and phenomenology etc. many social and psychological factors
tend to be influence and intervene before a media message reaches from media to
the audience. This theory is over simplified media effect. but ,somehow it hold
significance as early media theory and application to sensational issues like
war situation when audiences are sensitive state of mind and highly
depended on media for information and
awareness.
The hypodermic theory is
a direct affection like shooting or medicine in your arm, affected chemicals
you put them in the earliest day of communication theories. Media operations
the message it tell us what to do, it controls us. Passive audience and
powerful media this point of view research is difficult to sustain because all
of us affected the media. Every night we watch murders but we do that our
friends sit to next us. We do not do that so the theory in some way it is
difficult to research.
The
theory practice found on the issue sensitivity. It used it to influence people
and pass their decisions which might their people do not like and support. The
magic is done by news. Media producers know that people are spending most of
their time using media and they taking their information from it. By applying
the hypodermic needle theory and controlling the content of the news,
manipulating people will be easy. The most common and effective medium to
deliver this kind of messages is radio and TV, the main source of news. As for
the theory, whatever kind of news content is shown on the TV, it will be
injected on people’s minds and it will influence them. They will not challenge
it because there is no other source. They will accept it and believe it
specially if it came from famous media such as VOICE OF AMERICA, GERMEN RADIO
AMHARIC SERVICE. It’s necessary to assure a fertile ground to raise a
motivational strategy according to case study.
All of
these theories are focusing on the effects of mass media on the audiences. In
addition, this theory helped people to understand the way that mass media work
by and how they are affecting our minds and changing our behaviors. Also more,
this theory is jeep getting more attention with the development of media and
its applications.
This theory suggests simple concepts
about media and audiences /critic/ this theory on press release. In addition,
if we want to discuss a media theory, we have firstly to start with the main
point of media studies tasks which it is the audience. Audiences are the
receivers of the message and also they are responders. It is very important for
media producers to understand the process of receiving the message by the
audiences and how those audiences react and respond to that message.
Actually,
they have to understand what is happing in the audience’s minds when they
receive the message. Media producers should also be aware of their audience’s ages,
classes, gender and location. Understanding these elements leads for better
responding and results. Following the demographic method in studying audience,
makes media producers able to shape their message to appeal for their
audiences. They will be able to know what kind of message will be more
effective for those audiences. They found explanations for media influence on
people and how they react for the messages. They analyzed how these different
messages effects the behavior of the audience. They came out with many theories
about this field which are still hotly debated.
This
theory did not agree with am saying that mainly recognize the audiences are
using their experience, intelligence and opinion to analyze the message.
Therefore, media producers and creators can manipulate the audience and inject
the information and the messages that they want. According to this theory, if
the person watches a violent movie, he\she will do violence. Although it
doesn't take any account of people's individuality, it is still very popular.
A good example about this theory is the demonstration 1997 election
in Ethiopia the national radio broadcasts in the half of the day the people
believe to the opposition party leads to majority vote of the country and also
broadcast the party press release the election is not faire, . This event crate
demonstration the main big cities all the country and lost number of people
excited. Because a fertile ground and peoples interesting on the issue to need
to fulfill.
In other hand the
theory was deterministic and this did not allow for freedom of choice. The
audience was ‘injected’ with a one way propaganda. From this light, one can
confidently say that the theory undermines the right of individuals to freely
choose what media material they consume. The theory is also noted for its
positivity and evidenced by the fact that audience were not allowed to
contribute. This undermines the core aim of media studies which is the
audience. From the latter, one can argue that the audience could not use their
experience, intelligence and opinion to analyze messages. It will be very
difficult to operate this theory in this new world where the audience has
become sophisticated. Furthermore, scholars assure. The Hypodermic Needle
theory was not based on empirical findings. It rather, employed assumptions of
the time about human nature. People were assumed to be uniformly controlled by
their biological instincts and that they react more or less uniformly to
whatever ‘stimuli’ came along (Lowerg and Delfleur,1995.p.400).Contrary to its
shortcomings, the theory had the following outlined point to give it a positive
look;
a) It was seen as an
asset in mobilizing people especially through radio and
b) It also paved the way for researches to be
conducted on its merits and pitfalls.
The media effects are the
consequences or results that humans experience to varieties of media content
(media content-what a media product is made up of) and it is important to note
that many researches are particularly driven towards the negative effects. They
come in the form of psychological, behavior, physiological and cognitive
effects and all of these can be positive or negative.1) Positive
effects
a) Exposure to educative
media content is of great importance.
For example the education
we receive on talk shows and distance learning,
b) Exposure to
informative media content such as news and
c) Exposure to
entertaining media content that serves as an escape from the stress of everyday
life
2) Negative
effects,
A) Exposure to violence and sex on some media
content
B) Exposure to hate
journalism- like entertainments programs to imagination narration peoples think
reality and founds nothing they would be lost themselves.
c) Exposure to false or
sensational information
It is important to note
that the positive and negative effects cut across the content, timing,
direct/indirect and the explanatory mechanism dimensions
Finally, in our
circumstance there is a chance to verify information access the technology even
create uncertainty of every stories. The assumptions at the basis of the
Hypodermic Needle Theory are nowadays out of date. The theory has been widely
overcome by the Two Step Flow Model and Roger’s Innovation Curve (Multi Step
Flow Model) as well as many latter mass communication theories such as
Lasswell’s Model,Persuation theory and others.
This is
undeveloped media technology and access of materials time never access on the
counter attack or the opposite idea of information on supplies is never there.
References;
Davis,
D.K. & Baron, S.J. (1981). A History of Our Understanding of Mass
Communication. In: Davis, D.K. & Baron, S.J. (Eds.). Mass
Communication and Everyday Life: A Perspective on Theory and Effects (19-52).
Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing.
Golden,
L.L. & Alpert, M.I. (1987). Comparative Analysis of the Relative
Effectiveness of One- and Two-sided Communication for Contrasting Products. Journal
of Advertising, 16(1), 18-25.
Berger,
A. A. (1995). Essentials of Mass Communication Theory.
London: SAGE Publications.
Croteau,
D. & Hoynes, W. (1997). "Industries and Audience". Media/Society.
London: Pine Forge Press.
Davis,
D.K. & Baron, S.J. (1981). "A History of Our Understanding of Mass
Communication". In: Davis, D.K. & Baron and S.J. (Eds.). Mass
Communication and Everyday Life: A Perspective on Theory and Effects (19-52).
Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing.
Katz,
E., Lazarsfeld, P.F. (1955). Personal Influence: the Part Played by
People in the Flow of Mass Communication's. 309.
Katz, E.
(1957). "The Two-Step Flow of Communication: an Up-To-Date Report on a
Hypothesis". The Public Opinion Quarterly, 21 (1). pp.
61-78.
Severin,
W. J. and Tankard, J.W. (1979). Communication Theories -- Origins, Methods
and Uses. New York: Hastings House.
http//:www.afirstlook.com
TWO STEP
FLOW THEORY
The two-step
flow of communication model hypothesizes that ideas flow from
mass media to opinion
leaders, and
from them to a wider population.
Introduction
Theories about our surroundings
and the effect human beings can have. As order driven beings, we seek to
stretch and apply knowledge gained in all aspects of life to situations and
experiences very different from the origin of the knowledge. It is through the
stretching and manipulating of old thought that new insights are made, and new
psychological mountains are tackled. It is through this stretching and
manipulating of one socio-political based theory that the field of Advertising
has defined some of its capabilities and constraints in the area of mass
communication. This theory involves the two-step flow of communication.
The Two-step flow of
communication was first identified in a field somewhat removed from
communications-sociology. In 1948, Paul Lazarsfeld, Bernard Berelson, and Hazel
Gaudet published The People's Choice,
a paper analyzing the voter’s decision-making processes during a 1940
presidential election campaign. The study revealed evidence suggesting that the
flow of mass communication is less direct than previously supposed. Although
the ability of mass media to reach a large audience, and in this case persuade
individuals in one direction or another, had been a topic of much research
since the 1920's, it was not until the People's
Choice was published that society really began to understand the dynamics
of the media-audience relationship. The study suggested that communication from
the mass media first reaches "opinion leaders" who filter the
information they gather to their associates, with whom they are influential.
Previous theories assumed that media directly reached the target of the
information. For the theorists, the opinion leader theory proved an interesting
discovery considering the relationship between media and its target was not the
focus of the research, but instead a small aspect of the study.
My view -It lacks clarity, objectivity, balances information because
every second hand information distorted as a secondary source. As the theorists
put on in their definition it exposes ideas flow
from mass media to opinion
leaders, and
from them to a wider population stress by their own opinion interpretation
/defines there background knowledge.
"Ideas often flow from radio and print to
the opinion leaders and from them to the less active sections of the
population." People tend to be much more affected in their decision making
process by face to face encounters with influential peers than by the mass media
(Lazarsfeld, Menzel, 1963). As Weiss described in his 1969 chapter on
functional theory, "Media content can be a determining influence…. What is
rejected is any conception that construes media experiences as alone sufficient
for a wide variety of effects." The other piece in the communication
process is the opinion leader with which the media information is discussed.
Is that the theorists
answer a very visual and vital that exact qualities and characteristics that
define the opinion leader. Is an opinion leader influential in all cases, on
all topics? Or is the influence of an opinion leader constrained to certain
topics? How does an opinion leader come to be influential? Nothing is put it down these points.
Example; the educational mass media which focus on
agenda risen for public relation to group radio listeners and activateists of
the agenda/opinion leader/ through a very issue agriculture, heath,
security….that may hear and leads to discuss about the radio issue in the
community programe.they have their own books as a media guide in the certain
issue ready before broadcast it. in my experience they are not attentively to
follow it because the peoples assume on the benefit of government not conceder
themselves as beneficial look on the
family planning program even that agenda of others may the opinion leaders
count themselves as representative of the sender and allowance of the day is
barrier for them.
Initially
exposed to specific media content
Influences
are not come only in the media also personal opinion leader’s interest.
According
to Lazarsfeld and Katz, mass media information is channeled to the
"masses" through opinion leadership. The people with most access to media, and
having a more literate understanding of media content, explain and diffuse the
content to others.Based on the two-step flow hypothesis, the term “personal
influence” came to illustrate the process intervening between the media’s direct
message and the audience’s reaction to that message. Opinion leaders tend to be
similar to those they influence—based on personality, interests, demographics,
or socio-economic factors. These leaders tend to influence others to change
their attitudes and behaviors. The two-step theory refined the ability to
predict how media messages influence audience behavior and explains why certain
media campaigns do not alter audiences’ attitudes. This hypothesis provided a
basis for the multi-step flow theory of mass communication.
The two-step flow of
communication hypothesis was first introduced by Paul
Lazarsfeld, Bernard
Berelson, and
Hazel Gaudet in The
People’s Choice, a 1944 study focused on the process of
decision-making during a Presidential election campaign. These researchers
expected to find empirical support for the direct influence of media messages
on voting intentions. They were surprised to discover, however, that informal,
personal contacts were mentioned far more frequently than exposure to radio or
newspaper as sources of influence on voting behavior. Armed with this data,
Katz and Lazarsfeld developed the two-step flow theory of mass communication.
This theory asserts that information
from the media moves in two distinct stages. First, individuals (opinion
leaders) who pay close attention to the mass media and its messages receive the
information. Opinion leaders pass on their own interpretations in addition to
the actual media content. The term ‘personal influence’ was coined to refer to
the process intervening between the media’s direct message and the audience’s
ultimate reaction to that message. Opinion leaders are quite influential in
getting people to change their attitudes and behaviors and are quite similar to
those they influence. The two-step flow theory has improved our understanding
of how the mass media influence decision making. The theory refined the ability
to predict the influence of media messages on audience behavior, and it helped
explain why certain media campaigns may have failed to alter audience attitudes
and behavior. The two-step flow theory gave way to the multi-step flow theory
of mass communication or innovation
theory. All kinds of mass media can be researched with this theory (TV, radio,
internet).
The story as told by
Sarah Griswold;
Man has forever fought
against the forces of entropy, working very diligently at creating order and
meaning, dissecting and perusing until order is achieved. For civilization this
has been important. It has lent the world many fascinating theories about our
surroundings and the effect human beings can have. As order driven beings, we
seek to stretch and apply knowledge gained in all aspects of life to situations
and experiences very different from the origin of the knowledge. It is through
the stretching and manipulating of old thought that new insights are made, and
new psychological mountains are tackled. It is through this stretching and
manipulating of one socio-political based theory that the field of Advertising
has defined some of its capabilities and constraints in the area of mass
communication. This theory involves the two-step flow of communication
Definition; A study by
Robert Merton revealed that opinion leadership is not a general characteristic
of a person, but rather limited to specific issues. Individuals, who act as
opinion leaders on one issue, may not be considered influential’s in regard to
other issues (Merton, 1949).
A later study directed by Lazarsfeld and Katz
further investigated the characteristics of opinion leaders. This study
confirmed the earlier assertions that personal influence seems more important
in decision making than media. Again, influential individuals seem constrained
in their opinion leading to particular topics, non-overlapping among the
individuals. The opinion leaders seem evenly distributed among the social,
economical, and educational levels within their community, but very similar in
these areas to those with whom they had influence.
My argument-it must be define the theory which type of audience is
available on the method of reaction implement.audiance fragmentation is
decisive in this time a functionalist view of media. Also the topic and content
is restricted according to opinion leader personal view.
Children, women’s forum
,youngsters ….in our country loses there definition who says personal influence
seems more important in decision making than media through the public figure persons are images and more
belivaiable but not all audience segmentations working .more acceptable in
community radio for community discussion but not a public opinions leader
interperate on young and elite. Also strengthen my opinion;
Studies by Glock and
Nicosia determined that opinion leaders act "as a source of social
pressure toward a particular choice and as a source of social support to
reinforce that choice once it has been made (1966)." Charles Glock
explained that opinion leaders often develop leadership positions in their
social circles. They achieve these positions based on their knowledge of
situations outside their circles (1952).
Lazarsfeld and his associates detailed five characteristics of personal
contact that give their theory more validity:
Non-purposiveness/casualness One must have a reason
for tuning into a political speech on television, but political conversations
can just "pop-up". In this situation, the people are less likely to
have their defenses up in preparation; they are more likely
open to the conversation.
Flexibility to counter
resistance In a conversation, there is always opportunity to counter any resistance.
This is not so in media, a one sided form of communication.
Trust Personal contact carries
more trust than media. As people interact, they are better able through
observation of body language and vocal cues to judge the honesty of the person
in the discussion. Newspaper and radio do not offer these cues.
Persuasion without
conviction The formal media is forced to persuade or change opinions. In personal
communication, sometimes friendly insistence can cause action without affecting
any comprehension of the issues.
Suggestions and critics
My view -It lacks clarity, objectivity, balances information because
every second hand information distorted as a secondary source. As the theorists
put on in their definition it exposes ideas flow
from mass media to opinion
leaders, and
from them to a wider population stress by their own opinion interpretation
/defines there background knowledge.
My argument-it must be define the theory which type of audience is
available on the method of reaction implement.audiance fragmentation is
decisive in this time a functionalist view of media. Also the topic and content
is restricted according to opinion leader personal view.
The
two-step flow is creating variety of thinking and belief in the society.
Because may address it for the opinion leader it lose the first gat information
equally distribute for everyone. The one who here equally the information it
was a chance to understand and interpret it and repeatedly hearing is lost and
disparity of idea makes conflict the opinion leader and the ordinary person.
The first one believes the first hand information. It strengthens; where a
person obtains information second-hand from friends and acquaintances who, in a
first step, have previously obtained the same information from some other
source.
Criticizes the media institutions themselves for the
perspective ways they serve dominant social groups. The traditional image of the
mass persuasion process must make room for 'people' as intervening factors
between the stimuli of the media and resultant opinions, decisions, and
actions.
Criticizes The People’s Choice, a book based on presented the
theory of “the two-step flow of communications,” which later came to be
associated with the so-called “limited effects model” of mass media: the idea
that ideas often flow from radio and print to local “opinion leaders” who in
turn pass them on to those with more limited political knowledge "opinion
followers." The conclusion of the research explained that sometimes person
to person communication can be more effective than traditional media mediums
such as newspaper, TV, radio etc. This idea developed further in the book
Personal Influence, and also each person could only say whether or not
they considered his/herself an advice giver. Even within studies specifically
designed to determine who opinion leaders are and how they are different from
the average populace, there have been problems born from experimental design.
There seemed to be too many factors to control. Despite the difficulties in
qualifying the influential’s, the theory of a group of individuals that filter
the flow of media information has lived on.
Other
Criticisms in me
agree that the original two-step flow hypothesis—that ideas flow from the media
to opinion leaders and then to less active sections of the population—has been
criticized and negated by myriad consequent studies. Two-stage flow hypothesis,
as a description of the initial information process, be applied to mass
communication with caution”. They find substantial evidence that initial
mass media information flows directly to people on the whole and is not relayed
by opinion leaders.
@These
findings also realize opinion leader’s decisive role in the balance theory,
which suggests that people are motivated to keep consistency among their
current beliefs and opinions. If a person is exposed to new observations that
are inconsistent with present beliefs, he or she is thrown into imbalance. This
person will then seek advice from their opinion leader, to provide them with
additional cognitions to bring them back into balance.
References
Baran,
Stanley. "Theories
of Mass Communication". Introduction to Mass Communication. McGraw
Hill.
Retrieved July 2011.
Kats
& Lazarsfeld (1955). "Personal Influence". New York: Free Press.
Staubhaar,
LaRose, Davenport (2009). Media Now. Belmont,
Ca: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. pp. 415–416.
Elihu Katz and Paul Felix Lazarsfeld, Personal
Influence: the Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications, 1955. p. 309
http//:www.afirstlook.com
Multistep
Flow Model
Many steps diffusion of
innovations. The theory also call it diffusion is the process by which an
innovation is communicated through certain channels over a period time among
the members of a social system.
An innovation is idea,
practice or object that is perceived to be new by an individual or other unit
of adoption.
Diffusion research
centers on the condition which increase or decrease the likelihood that a new
idea product or practiced would be adopted members of a given culture.
Diffusive of innovation
theory predicts that media and interpersonal contacts provide information and
influence opinion and judgment.
According to e.m .rogers
(1995) there are five adopter categories;
1. Innovaters (2.5%)
2. Early adopters/13.5/
3. Early majority/34%/
4. Late majority/34%/
5. lagaords/16%/
Two-step
flow theory Also known as the Multistep Flow Model is a
theory based on a 1940's study on social influence that states that media
effects are indirectly established through the personal influence of opinion
leaders. The majority of people receives much of their information and is
influenced by the media secondhand, through the personal influence of opinion
leaders.
The
'Multistep Flow Model says that most people from their opinions
based on opinion leaders that influence the media. Opinion leaders are those
initially exposed to specific media content, interpret based on their own
opinion and then begin to infiltrate these opinions through the general public
who then become "opinion followers" These
"opinion leaders" gain their influence through more elite media as
opposed to mainstream mass media. In this process, social influence is
created and adjusted by the ideals and opinions of each specific "elite
media" group and by these media group's opposing ideals and opinions and in
combination with popular mass media sources. Therefore, the leading influence
in these opinions is primarily a social persuasion.
My view ;critic and Suggestions
A multistep flow of
information from the mass media to persons who serve as opinion leaders which
then is passed on to the general public. No targets groups are put their
audience selection of the content its forget.
I agree with the idea Rogers, idea often the
media first spreads the word about a new idea, but ever-widening interpersonal
networks persuade individuals to make the change. Over time, family, friends,
social leaders, peers and the community at large adopt the innovation. If it is
something the individual feels confident in doing—referred to as
self-efficacy—that does not conflict with that individual’s deeply held values,
they join one of the adoption groups. Finally, adoption of the innovation
reaches a critical mass.
Furthermore,
the two-step hypothesis does not adequately describe the flow of learning.
Everett Rogers’ “Diffusion of Innovations” cites one study in which two-thirds
of respondents accredited their awareness to the mass media rather than
face-to-face communication. Similarly, critics argue that most of factors
involved with general media habits rather than the learning of particular
information. Both findings suggest a greater prevalence of a one-step flow of communication.
In the new idea which
increase or decrease the likelihood that a new idea product or practiced would
be adopted members of a given culture depends on processing of a message takes
far more effort for the recipient and has been shown to have longer-lasting
effects, while peripheral processing requires little effort and may have more
fleeting results. Being persuaded about a political issue covered in the news
would likely require more central processing than viewing a soft drink ad that
persuades viewers by showing happy people drinking the product. Factors that
increase the likelihood of central processing include personal relevance,
likeability, credibility of attractiveness of the source, the number of
arguments used and the number of people who seem to agree with them. Even the
simple use of the word “you” rather than the third person can have a
significant impact on the persuasiveness of a message by making it seem more
relevant.
It is an arena to play the innovators who is
pioneer of the new innovation. The rests are media
and interpersonal contacts provide information and influence opinion and
judgment.
Reference
Baran, Stanley. "Theories of Mass
Communication". Introduction to Mass Communication. McGraw
Hill.
Retrieved July 2011.
Kats & Lazarsfeld (1955).
"Personal Influence". New York: Free Press.
Staubhaar, LaRose, Davenport (2009). Media Now. Belmont, Ca: Wadsworth Cengage
Learning. pp. 415–416. ISBN 978-0-495-56595-6
Uses and
Gratifications
Uses and Gratifications Theory looks at what
people do with media (its functions), positing that individuals actively choose
the media they use and do so with specific goals in mind (Blumler & Katz,
1974). These goals or gratifications may be different for different people and
can include entertainment, information, relief of boredom or escapism, introspection
or insight, finding models for behavior, seeking reinforcement for beliefs or
values, serving as a basis for conversation and social interaction, helping to
either identify with others or to avoid interactions with them, and so on
(McQuail, 2005). Functionalists emphasize the audience’s cognitions and choices.
In this approach: audience members know media content,
and which media they can use to meet their needs.
Introduction
The uses and gratifications approach emphasizes audience
needs (Grant, 1998) the periphery of the media effects tradition, the uses and
gratification theory is one of the first theories to explore media –audience
from the perspective of the audience. This theory adopts a functionalist
approach to media –audience relationship, as it seeks to underscore the
satisfaction that is driven by the audience from the media. There exists a
basic idea in this approach: audience members know media content, and which media
they can use to meet their needs.
Grat·i·fi·ca·tion mean
that
Satisfaction: a feeling
of pleasure or satisfaction
|
|
Act of satisfying: the
act of giving somebody pleasure or satisfaction
|
|
Something satisfying:
something that gives pleasure or satisfaction
|
|
The relation between
media and audience which in grow hypodermic theory. It is media-person interactions” gratifications can be thought of as
experienced psychological effects which are valued by individuals
Originated
in the 1970s as a reaction to traditional mass communication research
emphasizing the sender and the message. Stressing the active audience and user
instead. Psychological orientation taking needs motives and gratifications of
media users as the main point of departure.
The
Main concept Uses and gratifications theory attempts to
explain the uses and functions of the media for individuals, groups, and
society in general. There are three objectives in developing uses and
gratifications theory:
1) To
explain how individuals use mass communication to gratify their needs._ “What
do people do with the media”?
2) To
discover underlying motives for individuals’ media use.
3) To identify the positive and the negative
consequences of individual media use. At the core of uses and gratifications
theory lays the assumption that audience members actively seek out the mass
media to satisfy individual needs.
Statement:
A medium will be used more when the existing motives to use the medium leads to
more satisfaction. Concern
to channel of distributions I have an experience who is a person my neighbor
always listen voice of America the only channel who is satisfied is VOA.
According to his motive and interest the man is makes his life program.
To make
a research this theory Qualitative and quantitative questionnaires and
observations among individual users of media is more favorable. Demographics,
usage patterns, rating scales of needs, motivation and gratification.
Scope:
the acceptance and use of new and old media and media content according to the
needs of the users/receivers.
Application:
all users and receivers research; adopting innovations.
The
Theory Blumler and Katz’s take a non-prescriptive and non-predictive
perspective on media effects. They postulate that individuals mix and match
uses with goals, according to specific context, needs, social backgrounds and
so on. Thus, they are seen as active participants in the media consumption
process.
According
to Derek
Lane “uses and gratification theory suggests
that media users play an active role in choosing and using the media.
Users take an active part in the communication process and are goal oriented
in their media use. The theorist says that a media user seeks out a
media source that best fulfills the needs of the user. Uses and
gratifications assume that the user has alternate choices to satisfy their
need.”
Interest
in the gratifications that media provide the fact that investigators have
focused on different levels of study (e.g., medium or content) and different
materials (e.g., different programs or program types on, say, television) in
different cultures. Instead of depicting the media as severely circumscribed
by audience expectations, the uses and gratifications approach highlights the
audience as a source of challenge to producers to cater more richly to the
multiplicity of requirements and roles that it has disclosed. Being
functional in orientation, the silence of this theory on the
dysfunctions/bad/ of the media to society and culture is
deafening/loud/.invariably, it tends to examine the media in a strictly
positive context, to the neglect of the negative effects that the media have
on society.
This
study examined how social and psychological factors, including the need for
activation, interact to produce different lifestyles and patterns of media
use. The research identified four lifestyle types whose members differed
significantly on a broad range of variables, including newspaper and
newsmagazine readership, and gratifications sought from cable television.
Persons with a high need for activation had lifestyles involving greater
exposure to media sources of public affairs information than those with a
lower need for activation and less cosmopolitan lifestyles. Results suggest
that the roots of media use are far deeper than previously believed.
Four
conceptual problems require resolution if the uses and gratifications
approach to mass communication studies is to be maximally productive: A vague conceptual framework; Lack of
precision in major concepts; A confused explanatory apparatus; and Failure to
view perception as an active process. Consideration of the current state of
the uses and gratifications approach suggests the need for conceptual
analysis if the approach is to unambiguously inform the research enterprise.
They
consume contents for fulfilling their information, entertainment, and mood
management needs; they participate through interacting with the content as
well as with other users for enhancing social connections and virtual
communities; and they produce their own contents for self-expression and
self-actualization. These three usages are separate analytically but
interdependent in reality.
This theory’s portrayal
of media consumption as individualistic and rational is equally
problematic, as it fuels the perception that the individual controls media
consumption with recourse to set goals. It also assumes that the audiences
are sensitive to every factor that influence their media choices and not
misjudge the causes of their behavior. There is therefore little or no
concentration on how audience can consume the media unconsciously.
My view about the theory is concern; it is the modern approach of
think in further head which a year establishes on value of chins which is
raised on hold of a lot of ideas. May I believe it assure the freedom of
press a media to choose peoples and make in shape. Theory linking needs gratifications and media choice clearly on the
side of audience members. The theory was deterministic and this allow
for freedom of choice. The audience was a chance to hear the wants and need
of media outlets. From this light, one can confidently say that the theory
assure the right of individuals to freely choose what media material they
consume and help their life to add a new important thing. The theory is also
noted for its positivity and evidenced by the fact that audience were allowed
to contribute. This makes focus the core aim of media studies which is the
audience. From the latter, one can argue that the audience could not use
their experience, intelligence and opinion to analyze messages. It will be
very easy to operate this theory in this new world where the audience has
become sophisticated. Unlikely in Africa or in Ethiopia never had been
implied on the theory one for his mother medium occasions.
As a beneficiary of
people’s choice different media and content access is limited. So difficult
to see what a new technological choice like FM, SW, MW radio and television
station different magazines, newspapers webpage resources are a number of
people compartment lost it the theory applied it.
Research usage
Uses and
gratifications approach is an influential tradition in media research. The
original conception of the approach was based on the research for explaining
the great appeal of certain media contents. The core question of such
research is: Why do people use media and what do they use them for? (McQuail,
1983). There exists a basic idea in this approach: audience members know
media content, and which media they can use to meet their needs.
In the
mass communication process, uses and gratifications approach puts the
function of linking need gratifications and media choice clearly on the side
of audience members. It suggests that people’s needs influence what media
they would choose, how they use certain media and what gratifications the
media give them. This approach differs from other theoretical perspectives in
that it regards audiences as active media users as opposed to passive
receivers of information. In contrast to traditional media effects theories
which focus on “what media do to people” and assume audiences are
homogeneous, uses and gratifications approach is more concerned with “what
people do with media” (Katz, 1959). It allows audiences personal needs to
use media and responds to the media, which determined by their social and
psychological background.
Uses
and gratifications approach also postulates that the media compete with other
information sources for audience’s need satisfaction (Katz et al., 1974a). As
traditional mass media and new media continue to provide people with a wide
range of media platforms and content, it is considered one of the most
appropriate perspectives for investigating why audiences choose to be exposed
to different media channels (LaRose et al., 2001).
|
As a
broader perspective among communication researches, it provides a framework for
understanding the processes by which media participants seek information or
content selectively, commensurate with their needs and interests (Katz et al.,
1974a). Audience members then incorporate the content to fulfill their needs or
to satisfy their interests (Lowery & Nabila, 1983).
Suggestion
I suggest that the theory allows audiences
personal needs to use media and responds to the media, which determined by
their social and psychological background. it assure freedom of media use
channels to select according to peoples need and went. The uses and gratification theory is the idea that the mass
audiences make active use of what the media offer. The overall idea of the
theory is that people are using the media to fulfill their needs (psychological
and social) the theory have some limitations, such as its highly individualistic
nature. It only takes into account the individual psychological gratification
derived from individual media use. The social context of the media use is
ignored. For example the environment as well as the state of the media user.
In my argument didn’t see the chance to focuses medium usage as division
for individualistic and social usage. am not hands up for the critisiazation
“The theory have some limitations, such as its highly individualistic nature.
It only takes into account the individual psychological gratification derived
from individual media use.” Radio is valuable for individual target for mass so
it is very decisive theory focusing on individual account to their needs.
The Theory fails to account for
socio-cultural factors. First, they take issue with the assumption that open
and active media choices are available to all individuals. Secondly, they
believe the functionalist approach may minimize the impact of the dominant
cultural or transnational power(s) in presenting “choices” that serve to
reinforce existing elites. An additional concern is that if we accept the idea
that people are neither coerced nor manipulated and have full control over
their media consumption choices, policy makers may tend to be less attentive to
and critical of media content and power, my views similar to asserted Morley,
2006.
In another medium person collect each other see as a social group makes
number peoples in the room social context of the medium is answered. So the
medium disparity and individual and social context of medium must aligned it.
Despite the wide range of choices available to users, they have no control
over the media and what it produces. What they consume is solely prepared by
gatekeepers and may include their influences and perception. These gatekeepers
add to, subtract from and organize issues, subjects and stories devoid of the
control from the users.
Statement: A medium will be used more when the existing
motives to use the medium leads to more satisfaction. Concern to channel of distributions I have an
experience who is a person my neighbor always listen voice of America the only
channel who is satisfied is VOA. According to his motive and interest the man
is makes his life program.
In my view it is
highly individualistic, taking into account only the individual psychological
gratification derived from individual media use. The social context of the
media use tends to be ignored. There is relatively little attention paid to
media content, researchers attending to why people use the media, but less to
what meanings they actually get out of their media use. Reporting’s are line in
with peoples content like business, politics, sport, weather… is more
interested and framed agendas the use and gratification of audience’s
attention. This is very important but the theory is not frame or media contents
criteria the usage of listeners /viewers. In my view assertion;
In my view audience uses and needs
must be adjusted it otherwise the media loses it may not fulfill audiences need.
References
Angleman, S. (2000, December). Uses and gratifications
and Internet profiles: A factor analysis. Is Internet use and travel to
cyberspace reinforced by unrealized gratifications? Paper presented to the Western Science Social Association 2001 Conference, Reno, NV. Retrieved June 4, 2005, from http://www.jrily.com/LiteraryIllusions/InternetGratificationStudyIndex.html.
CCMS-Infobase. (2003). Mass media: effects research -
uses and gratifications. Retrieved October 10, 2005, fromhttp://www.cultsock.ndirect.co.uk/MUHome/cshtml/media/
DeFleur, M. L. & Ball-Rokeach, S. J. (1989). Theories of mass communication (5th ed.). New York: Longman.
Blumler, J., & Katz, E. (1974). The Uses of Mass Communications. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
Publications.
DeFleur, M. L., & Ball-Rokeach, S. J. (1976). A
dependency model of mass media effects. Communication Research, 3, 3-21.
Eighmey, J., & McCord L. (1998). Adding value in the
information age: Uses and gratifications of sites on the World Wide Web. Journal of Business Research, 41(3), 187-194.
http//:www.afirstlook.com
CULTIVATION THEORY
Television
shapes concepts of social reality
Introduction
Gerbner’s
cultivation theory says that television has become the main source of
storytelling in today's society. Those who watch four or more hours a day
are labeled heavy television viewers and those who view less than four hours
per day, according to Gerbner are light viewers. Heavy viewers are
exposed to more violence and therefore are affected by the Mean World Syndrome,
an idea that the world is worse than it actually is. According to
Gerbner, the overuse of television is creating a homogeneous and fearful populace.
Cultivation analysis is designed to examine the role of the
media in society (see Gerbner, 1973). The first component, “institutional
process analysis,” investigates how media messages are produced, managed, and
distributed. The second component, “message system analysis,” examines images
in media content. The third component, “cultivation analysis,” studies how
exposure to the world of television contributes to conceptions that viewers
have about the real world. In its simplest form, cultivation analysis tries to
ascertain if those who watch more television, compared to those who watch less
but are otherwise comparable, are more likely to perceive the real world in
ways that reflect the most common and repetitive messages and lessons provided
by television programs.
The methods and assumptions behind cultivation analysis are
different from those traditionally employed in mass communication research.
Cultivation analysis begins with identifying and assessing the consistent
images, portrayals, and values that cut across most programs, either by
conducting a content (message system) analysis or by examining existing content
studies. These findings are then used to formulate questions about people’s
conceptions of social reality. The questions juxtapose answers reflecting the
television world with those that are more in line with reality.
Questionnaires also measure television viewing, typically by
asking how much time the respondent watches television on an “average day,” and
assess demographic variables such as age, gender, race, education, occupation,
social class, and political orientation.
History
With the
decline of hypodermic needle theories a new perspective began to emerge: the
stalagmite theories. It used the metaphor of stalagmite (pillar) theories to
suggest that media effects occur analogously to the slow buildup of formations
on cave floors, which take their interesting forms after eons of the steady
dripping of limewater from the cave ceilings above. One of the most popular
theories that fit this perspective is cultivation theory.
Cultivation
theory (sometimes referred to as the cultivation hypothesis or cultivation
analysis) was an approach developed by Professor George Gerbner, dean of the
Annenberg School of Communications at the University of Pennsylvania. He began
the 'Cultural Indicators' research project in the mid-1960s, to study whether
and how watching television may influence viewers' ideas of what the everyday
world is like. Cultivation research is in the 'effects'
tradition. Cultivation theorists argue that
television has long-term effects which are small, gradual, indirect but
cumulative and significant.
Cultivation
theory in its most basic form, suggests that television is responsible for
shaping, or ‘cultivating’ viewers’ conceptions of social reality. The combined
effect of massive television exposure by viewers over time subtly shapes the
perception of social reality for individuals and, ultimately, for our culture
as a whole. Gerbner argues that the mass media cultivate attitudes and values
which are already present in a culture: the media maintain and propagate these
values amongst members of a culture, thus binding it together. He has argued
that television tends to cultivate middle-of-the- road political perspectives.
Gerbner called this effect ‘mainstreaming’. Cultivation theorists distinguish
between ‘first order’ effects (general beliefs about the everyday world, such
as about the prevalence of violence) and ‘second order’ effects (specific
attitudes, such as to law and order or to personal safety). There is also a
distinction between two groups of television viewers: the heavy viewers and the
light viewers. The focus is on ‘heavy viewers’. People who watch a lot of
television are likely to be more influenced by the ways in which the world is
framed by television programs than are individuals who watch less, especially
regarding topics of which the viewer has little first-hand experience.
Light viewers may have more sources of information than heavy viewers.
‘Resonance’
describes the intensified effect on the audience when what people see on
television is what they have experienced in life. This double dose of the
televised message tends to amplify the cultivation effect.
Cultivation
analysis usually involves the correlation of data from content analysis
(identifying prevailing images on television) with survey data from audience
research (to assess any influence of such images on the attitudes of viewers).
Audience research by cultivation theorists involves asking large-scale public
opinion poll organizations to include in their national surveys questions
regarding such issues as the amount of violence in everyday life. Answers are
interpreted as reflecting either the world of television or that of everyday
life. The answers are then related to the amount of television watched, other
media habits and demographic data such as sex, age, income and education.
My view of the theory _mine
the same mind that makes a social reality of collectiveness whether the television viewers are heavy or light,
actually television effects are mostly direct compare to other medium. The
content of the medium and the viewer’s interest is deciders for the impact of
the medium. Sometimes television is as visual and audio medium more imparted on
society’s idea and more believable.
It In
heal mental ready for the future what the event saw it.
It is basic background of
life experience.
Example -if watch horror movies a man bit or a car kills a man, your
mind is ready for your reality experience come be persistence for your
humanity.
In my experience television
viewers of children are acting when the movie to become justifies themselves as
they saw it and experience them life. May
what they see sex movies talks about it and implement it.
I agree with scholars say
or not am not sure -television creates; positive and negative affect Positive
effects; Mental development,
Alertness, Confidence, Decision maker Peoples informational Entertaining escape
from the stress and anxiety of everyday life
Negative
effects, Exposure to violence,
and Exposure Unsafe sex, Addictiveness - children’s lost time of study,
Exposure to false or sensational information.
Like a hypodermic theory It
is important to note that the positive and negative effects across the content,
timing, direct/indirect and the explanatory mechanism dimensions.
My side of view assures to scholars,
that Heavy television viewers may lose the attitudes, beliefs or customs of
their cultures in favor of those they see repetitively on television.
@ Media’s ability to desensitize people
to socially unacceptable behavior, making it either acceptable or desirable.
The disinhibitory effect may enable people to rationalize or justify.
@ Actions that conflict with their
internal code of conduct or morality (Bryant & Thompson, 2002). Early
research on this effect exposed preschoolers to a film in which adults took out
their aggression on an inflatable punching bag clown (“Bobo”); children who saw
the film later imitated it and also engaged in other violent behavior not seen
on the film.
I agree with my view Cultivation theory is not concerned
with the “effect” of particular programs or with artistic quality. Rather, it
looks at television as the nation’s storyteller, telling most of the stories to
most of the people most of the time. While these stories present broad,
underlying, global assumptions about the “facts” of life rather than specific
attitudes and opinions, they are also market- and advertiser-driven.
Television’s stories provide a “dominant” or mainstream set of cultural
beliefs, values, and practices. Heavy viewing may thus override differences in
perspectives and behavior that ordinarily stem from other factors and
influences. In other words, viewers with varied cultural, social, and political
characteristics should give different answers to questions about values,
beliefs, and practices. These differences, however, are diminished or even
absent from the responses of those who watch a large amount of television,
while they exist for viewers who watch small amounts of television. Thus,
television cultivates common perspectives; it fosters similar views and
perspectives among those who, on the surface, should be very different.
Cultivation theory is an attempt to understand and explain
the dynamics of television as a distinctive feature of the modern age.
Cultivation analysis concentrates on the enduring and common consequences of
growing up and living with television: the cultivation of stable, resistant,
and widely shared assumptions, images, and conceptions that reflect the
underlying dimensions, institutional characteristics, and interests of the
medium itself. Cultivation analysis examines television as the common symbolic
environment the true “melting pot” of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.
In
research methodology Scope and Application Cultivation research looks at the
mass media as a socializing agent and investigates whether television viewers
come to believe the television version of reality the more they watch it.
Example
In a
survey of about 450 New Jersey schoolchildren, 73 percent of heavy viewers
compared to 62 percent of light viewers gave the TV answer to a question asking
them to estimate the number of people involved in violence in a typical week.
The same survey showed that children who were heavy viewers were more fearful
about walking alone in a city at night. They also overestimated the number of
people who commit serious crimes. This effect is called ‘mean world syndrome’.
One controlled experiment addressed the issue of cause and effect, manipulating
the viewing of American college students to create heavy- and light-viewing
groups. After 6 weeks of controlled viewing, heavy viewers of action-adventure
programs were indeed found to be more fearful of life in the everyday world
than were light viewers.
References;
Boyd-Barrett,
Oliver & Peter Braham (Eds.) (1987). Media,
Knowledge & Power. London:
Croom
Helm.Condry, John (1989). The Psychology of Television. Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.Dominick, Joseph R. (1990). The
Dynamics of Mass Communication. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Evra,
Judith van (1990). Television and Child Development. Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gerbner,
G., & Gross, L. (1976a). Living with television: The violence profile. Journal
of Communication, 26, 172-199.
Hawkins
R.P & Pingree, S. (1983). Televisions influence on social reality. In:
Wartella, E.,
http//:www.afirstlook.com
Media
Dependency Theory
Audience
goals as the origin of the dependency.
Introduction
Media dependency looks at audience goals as
the origin of the dependency. The theory of media
dependency came about because the originators saw the need to integrate the
findings of a large body of media effects research that had been done at that
point. DeFleur and Ball-Rokeach (1975) suggest that a “general theory” of the
effects of mass communication is lacking and that it is important to move
toward “a higher level of abstraction in order to understand where our research
and analyses appear to be leading us.” (p. 256).
This need came about
because “the majority of scientific evidence” gathered through lab and survey
research show that media have “little direct influence on people,” yet many
notable scholars and most lay people know that “the coming of new media to a
society makes a tremendous difference in the lives of people. (p. 259)” So, how
do the engineers of this theory suggest we bridge this gap? DeFleur MSD’s
Evolution as a Theory
MSD
theory is a theory, also known as media system dependency theory, has been
explored as an extension of or an addition to the uses and gratifications
approach, though there is a subtle difference between the two theories. That
is, media dependency looks at audience goals as the origin of the dependency
while the uses and gratifications approach emphasizes audience needs (Grant et
al., 1998). Both, however, are in agreement that media use can lead to media
dependency. Moreover, some uses and gratifications studies have discussed media
use as being goal directed (Palmgreen, Wenner & Rosengren. 1985; Rubin,
1993; Parker & Plank, 2000).
She furthered her exploration of the
passive and active audience member in her dissertation/paper, theses/ and other
early scholarly work which centered on the concept of ambiguity. Shibutani’s
(1966) conception of rumor as “improvised news” may have been most influential
to her early work. Rumors, according to Shibutani, were definitions of
ambiguous events created by active, information-processing individuals. She
drew two conclusions from this idea:
“Reality was constructed
and reality had to be constructed in order for people to act with meaning”
(Ball-Rokeach, 1998, p. 10). When acting, people employ whatever information
system they can to make sense of their environment. Because, in our industrial
society, media are readily available, we use them to create our reality. and
Ball-Rokeach (1975) purport that the kinds of effects that occur and are
measurable are not those “that are easily detected in laboratory experiments,
or in before-after studies of people who have been exposed to specific messages.
(p. 260)” Instead these effects are the kind that enlarge people’s belief
systems, change people’s attitudes, motivate subtle shifts in individual or
collective sentiment as well as other kinds of society-wide changes. (DeFleur
& Ball-Rokeach, 1975, p. 260)
Ball-Rokeach and DeFleur (1975) recommend,
instead of looking solely at the individual to assess media effects that it is
worthwhile to consider the entire social framework within which the media
function. The MSD theory, which culminates in chapter twelve of the book
entitled, Theories of Mass Communications, focuses on the interplay between
media systems and larger society. “Media do not exist in a vacuum” (DeFleur
& Ball-Rokeach, 1975, p. 257). DeFleur and Ball-Rokeach suggest that “…the
ultimate basis of media influence lies in the nature of the three-way
relationship between the larger social system, the media’s role in that system,
and audience relationships to the media” (1975, p. 261).
A very important part of the philosophy behind
this theory comes from sociological theory. The work of Durkheim, Tönnies and
Marx, though constructed before the media themselves were developed, provide a
framework across which MSD theory can be extended. This framework is built from
the notion that the informal relationships between people, which were
characteristic of non-industrial societies, decline as a result of economic
growth and a movement toward an urban-industrial society. Because informal
relationships among people weaken, an information void occurs. Consequently,
the media rise up and fill this gap. Individuals, then, become reliant on media
for safety, social and entertainment information. Thus, a dependency on the
media system arises. This basic notion
suggests that pre-existing informal ties dissipate in societies of complex
structure and thus are no longer able to supply the many needs people have for
information. DeFleur and Ball-Rokeach (1975) offer three needs which media
fulfill in industrialized societies:
The need to understand
one’s social world
Example – globalization
worlds talk similar language and agenda in a specific issue , making every
aspect of world even help each other in the result of media dependency.
The need to act
meaningfully and effectively in that world.
The need for fantasy-escape
from daily problems and tensions (p.
262)
Certainly, as societies
grow more complex and technology improves, the breadth of needs that media fill
widens. It can be assumed that the larger the quantity and centrality of the
specific information provided by a certain medium, the greater the audience
dependency it warrants. Similarly, as the amount of change or conflict rises in
a society, dependency on media also rises. Furthermore, the MSD theory
concludes that, “The potential for mass media messages to achieve a broad range
of cognitive, affective and behavioral effects will be increased when media
systems serve many unique and central information- delivery functions. That
potential will be further increased when there is a high degree of structural
instability in the society due to conflict and change.” Additionally, it is
vital to include the fact that“…altering audience cognitive, affective and
behavioral conditions can feed back in turn to alter both society and the
media” (DeFleur & Ball-Rokeach, 1975, p. 263). Because so many variables
come into play as we discuss MSD theory, we can understand why the conceivers
of the MSD theory titled the book chapter in which it takes form, “Toward and
Integrated Theory.”
MSD has also been used to
analyze various crisis situations such as 9/11 (Matsaganis & Payne 2005;
Kim, Jung, Cohen & Ball-Rokeach, 2004), the SARS epidemic in China (Tai
& Sun 2007) and a number of elections and governmental regime changes.
(Schulz, Zeh, & Quiring, 2005) These opportunities provide fertile ground
for prosperous MSD research considering the relative increase in ambiguity
surrounding
My view with Suggestion
and critics
My suggestion is argue her what to conclude in the theory media
dependency can also be decreased through the possibility of “coalition
formation” which can result in subculture media source. She also mentions that
people have the option to ‘drop out.’ This means that people can constrain the
power of the media simply by decreasing the importance of personal
understanding as a goal. Her final limitation occurs on the individual
processing level, and contends that media dependency can be decreased through
the processing of media information in a “ debunking/expose/, literate, or
creative manner” never peoples dependency in the media separate it because
needs of the audience never limited it even peoples depend of others easily
listen about others are satisfied them. as a breakfast medias are necessary to
put information us as a current events. if you went a job or change a job
listen to radio vacancies and salaries. You may drive and relax musical
programs are corporate. Any product you went to buy about the new product and
material information’s available on the media. So, how can separate it any one
would you?
In my view my idea will be in
agreement human being are dependant nature and media. Nature defines the living
of breath. And the media gives; Knowledge of Self /internal and external
identity/, Knowledge of Society/our environment/, Knowledge of World
/globalization/….all this accountable for dependence to our day to day life. In
modernization world Medias decide what you wear today/weather condition report
is expected/ in addition to another example traffic which place to easily
arrives in your work place freeways you may found in media. Dependency in my
version mean that fundamental information may you finds every day to do things
or not.
In our country exchange of coffee market prices are daily
announced so the farmers or merchants are decide whether sell or not. They are
everyday follow the price of coffee even other people watch, listen and read
commodities price oil, foreign currency exchange of banks, daily activates of
politics that is in hire or fire. Policies affect it in my life declared or
not. World may how it is pass the time as human being dependence the media
which found an answer or not.
Farmers saw seeds,
cultivate themselves because of information. When depend the media; the
knowledge is widened and shares in all aspects health, agriculture, Food preparation.
Perhaps because the theory is so large and all
encompassing (and thus so daunting /discourage/to refute), I could only find a
few criticisms of the MSD theory. Although one could certainly submit the
critique that the very vastness of the theory is a potential fault, I wasn’t
successful in locating researchers that held this opinion. Surprisingly, one of
the limits of the theory, which include emphasis on other systems of
information besides the media. Other networks, which are made up of
interpersonal relationships, are often times intimately linked to the media
system. She also mentions that people have the option to ‘drop out.’ This means
that people can constrain the power of the media simply by decreasing the
importance of personal understanding as a goal. The final limitation occurs on
the individual processing level, and contends that media dependency can be
decreased through the processing of media information in a “ debunking/expose/,
literate, or creative manner my view similar wtht Ball-Rokeachs suggestion. This
can be done for purposes of play, by decoding media stories in terms of their
understandings of the distortions of the media production process, or
recreating media stories by imposing their version of reality. Ball-Rokeach
(1998) suggests, though, that this type of media processing requires time and
effort, which are scarce resources in the lives of most people. On the social
level, she notes that media dependency can also be decreased through the
possibility of “coalition formation” which can result in subculture media
sources” (Ball-Rokeach, 1998, p. 25).
I
believe they developed the concept of a system made up of interdependent
relationships simply to show that relationships exist. The notion of power is
very important to the discussion of dependency.
May I
believe, individuals are involved in the direct participation of direct live
radio programs. Any one says as his/her self opinion contribute a bound
societies, administrators are there and answers for individual to do for a
common facilities’ as we know your want may be there so you ask and find
solutions.
Am happy
to see agree with scholars’ A good theory evolves and changes over time based
on the input of those who use the theory. Although in the case of MSD, changes
have not really been made to the fundamental structure of the theory, its
application has set of interrelated constructs that present a systematic view
of phenomena by specifying relations among variables with the purpose of
explaining and predicting the phenomena. The evolution of the MSD theory has
roots in sociology but extends out to connect individual cognitive effects of media
to happenings within the larger societal structure. Ultimately, the consequence
of media dependency is that of information access and the power relations
between those who provide access to information and those who seek it. This
power dynamic is significant for many reasons, one of which is outlined in
Media Unlimited, where suggests that globalization is a result of media
dependency. Social identity formation through material goods and ideas …a few,
also offer motivation for dependence on media. In belief and experience politicians
have media phobia. They are never belive medias but also they depend it to sell
themselves. As an earlier experience presdant rechard nexon,presdant bushe,
Clinton…prime minster tony blear media
focus mainly on instable governments as
proof that ambiguity yields dependency on media, it can also be found in other places like,
identity definition, play and interpersonal connection. Certainly research
using the MSD theory has its challenges because the theory is so wide-reaching.
References
Adorno,
T.W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D.J., & Sanford, R.N. (Eds.). (1950)
The authoritarian personality. New York: Harpers.
A_First_Look_at_Communication_Theory___8th_Edition_
Baran,
S.J. & Davis, D. K. (2000). Mass Communication Theory (2nd Ed.). Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
http//:www.afirstlook.com
AGENDA-SETTING
THEORY
The
creation of what the public thinks is important.
Journalism professors
Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw regard Watergate as a perfect example of the
agenda-setting function of the mass media. They were not surprised that the
Watergate issue caught fire after months on the front page of the Washington
Post. McCombs and Shaw believe that the “mass media have the ability to
transfer the salience of items on their news agendas to the public agenda.”
They aren’t suggesting that broadcast and print personnel make a deliberate
attempt to influence listener, viewer, or reader opinion on the issues. Most
reporters in the free world have a deserved reputation for independence and
fairness. But McCombs and Shaw say that we look to news professionals for cues
on where to focus our attention. “We judge as important what the media
judge as important.” Although
McCombs and Shaw first referred to the agenda-setting function of the media in
1972, the idea that people desire media assistance in determining political
reality had already been voiced by a number of current events analysts. In an
attempt to explain how the United States had been drawn into World War I,
Pulitzer Prize–winning author Walter Lippmann claimed that the media act as a
mediator between “the world outside and the pictures in our heads.” McCombs
Agenda-setting Hypothesis- The mass media has the ability to transfer the salience of issues on their news agenda to the public agenda.
Media agenda- the pattern of news
coverage across major print and broadcast media as measured by the prominence
and length of stories.ing popularity of radio
and television The emergence of an industry of persuasion, such as advertising
and public relations The Payne Fund studies of the 1930s, which focused on the
impact of motion pictures on children Hitler’s monopolization of the mass media
during WWII to unify the German public behind the Nazi party (propaganda)
Considering the complexity of the agenda-setting theory, I should think
otherwise. As a matter of perspective, the agenda-setting theory offers a more
cautious yet precise analysis of mass media and its implications on human
behavior. While the hypothermic needle theories seem logical in the beginning,
it fails to account for the complex nature of human attitudes (attitude being
the interim from influence to behavior). Underlining this, Berelson (1948)
aptly puts it as on any single subject, many hear, but few listen.
The
greatest contribution of agenda-setting theory above the other earlier theories
would be how it models communication into a measurable process. By conducting
content analysis of the emphasis mass media puts into its products, researchers
have been able to predict the kinds of issues that would be salient in the mind
of the audience. This was observed in the 1959 General Election in England
(Blumler & McQuail, 1969), as well as the 1968 Presidential Campaign.
WHAT CAUSES WHAT?
McCombs and Shaw believe
that the hypothesized agenda-setting function of the media is responsible for
the almost perfect correlation they found between the media and public ordering
of priorities:
Media Agenda → Voters’ Agenda
But as critics of
cultivation theory remind us, correlation is not causation. It’s possible that
newspaper and television coverage simply reflects public concerns that already
exist:
Voters’ Agenda → Media Agenda
The results of the Chapel
Hill study could be interpreted as providing support for the notion that the
media are just as market-driven in their news coverage as they are in
programming entertainment. By themselves, McCombs and Shaw’s findings were
impressive, but equivocal. A true test of the agenda-setting hypothesis.
Must be able to show that
public priorities lag behind the media agenda
In the
research done in 1968, McCombs & Shaw focused on two elements: awareness
and information. Investigating the agenda-setting function of the mass media,
they attempted to assess the relationship between what voters in one community
said were important issues and the actual content of the media messages used
during the campaign. McCombs and Shaw concluded that the mass media exerted a
significant influence on what voters considered to be the major issues of the
campaign.
As such,
there are two basic assumptions about agenda-setting:
The
press and the media do not reflect reality; they filter and shape it
Media
concentration on a few issues and subjects leads the public to perceive those
issues as more important than other issues.
Agenda-setting mantra—
the media aren’t very successful in telling us what to think, but they are
stunningly successful in telling us what to think about. In other words, the
media make some issues more salient. We pay greater attention to those issues
and regard them as more important. By the mid-1990s, however, McCombs was
saying that the media do more than that. They do, in fact, influence the way we
think. The specific process he cites is one that many media scholars discuss—
framing. James Tankard, one of the leading writers on mass communication
theory, defines a media frame as “the central organizing idea for news content
that supplies a context and suggests what the issue is through the use of
selection, emphasis, exclusion, and elaboration.” The final four nouns in that
sentence suggest that the media not only set the agenda for what issues,
events, or candidates are most important,
Framing _The selection of
a restricted number of thematically related attributes for inclusion on the
media agenda when a particular object or issue is discussed. They also transfer
the salience of specific attributes belonging to those potential objects of interest.
My own “final four” experience may help explain the distinction.
McCombs’ definition of
framing appears to be quite specific: “Framing is the selection of a restricted
number of thematically related attributes for inclusion on the media agenda
when a particular object is discussed.” In contrast, the popularity of framing
as an interpretive construct in media studies has resulted in diverse and
ambiguous meanings. The way Stuart Hall and other critical theorists use the
term is so elastic that the word seems to refer to anything they don’t like.
Thus, I regard a narrow view of framing as a distinct advantage for empirically
based Media-effects research.
In the
later part of agenda setting research (1980s), much of the focus was on
priming, a term taken from the field of cognitive psychological. In simple
terms, I see priming as similar to judging a book by its cover. Priming refers
to the effects of the media of giving the audience a prior context used to
interpret subsequent communication (i.e. a frame of reference). While
agenda-setting refers mainly to the importance of an issue, priming suggests to
us whether something is positive or negative. An example of priming was seen in
how in 1994, Times magazine depicted O.J. Simpson on the cover of their magazine
with a digitally enhanced face that made him look darker and more malicious
than in reality. Lead image photojournalism
manipulation.
A good
at explaining why people with similar media exposure place importance on the
same issues. Although different people may feel differently about the
issue at hand, most people feel the same issues are
important. Agenda-Setting Theory states
that the news
media have a large influence on audiences, in
terms of what stories to consider newsworthy and how much prominence and space
to give them. Agenda-setting theory’s main postulate is salience transfer.
Salience transfer is the ability of the news media to transfer issues of
importance from their news media agendas to
public agendas. "Through their day-by-day selection and display of the
news, editors and news directors focus our attention and influence our
perceptions of what are the most important issues of the day. This ability to
influence the salience of topics on the public agenda has come to be called the
agenda setting role of the news media." Related
to agenda setting is agenda building theory which
explores how an issue comes to the attention policy makers and media. The
agenda-setting function has multiple components:
Media
agenda are issues discussed in the media, such as newspapers, television, and
radio.
Public
agenda are issues discussed among members of the public.
Policy
agenda are issues that policy makers consider important, such as legislators.
Corporate
agenda are issues that big corporations consider important.
These
four agendas are interrelated. The two basic assumptions that underlie most
research on agenda-setting are that the press and the media do not reflect
reality, they filter and shape it, and the media concentration on a few issues
and subjects leads the public to perceive those issues as more important than
other issues.
My view believes it the most basic theory in
journalistic experience. the voice of the people and the majority number of
people are applied or directly presented in this theory allow to connect the
medium and the people. I suppose it the theory predicts that if people are
exposed to the same media, they will place importance on the same issues.
According to Chaffee & Berger’s 1997 criteria for scientific theories,
Agenda-Setting is a good theory may I also reason;
A good
exosphere for media environment the audience and media relation
Modern
media approached; because solves problem the theory applied as a key function.
It has
explanatory power because it explains why most people prioritize the same
issues as important.
It has
predictive power because it predicts that if people are exposed to the same
media, they will feel the same issues are important.
It is
parsimonious/economical/ because it isn’t complex, and it is easy to
understand.
It can
be proven false. If people aren’t exposed to the same media, they won’t
feel the same issues are important,
It’s
meta-theoretical assumptions are balanced on the scientific side,
It is a
springboard for further research/best research topics/for modern journalism
thinking,
It
has organize Agenda setting is an
important theory used by the media and is defined as the media’s attempt to
transfer salient issues into the public domain to enable the public to discuss,
deliberate or debate on these issues to make informed decisions.
The theory has limitations, such as media audiences or users may not be as
ideal as the theory proclaims. Audiences are likely not to be well-informed,
deeply engaged in public affairs, thoughtful and skeptical.Instead, there is
the likelihood of paying only intermittent and casual attention to public
issues or affairs and remain ignorant of the details. The effect is weakened on
the part of people who have made up their minds.
Another limitation is the
neglect of certain issues by the media. The media under this theory is
challenged with concentrating more on few issues, subjects and stories for the
public to consume. For example, in Ethiopia some of the media (especially
newspapers) have greater concentration on politics and advertising to the
neglect of pressing issues on diseases, poverty, water, education etc.
Example: Ethiopian renascences abay dam is necessary to
participate all public parts so it is the media set agenda how public to discuss, deliberate or debate on these issues to
make informed decisions. They follow us informative a lot of media formats like
radio talk show, question and answer, entertimental…all this deliberately
participate all public as a one issue.
Media salience: a key independent variable in agenda setting
theory is mostly recognized as a single construct. Theoretical explications of media salience scholarship
varies throughout the agenda setting literature. Spiro Kiousis perused
the relevant literature and discovered that 3 dimensions of media salience emerged: attention, prominence, and valence. Thus
developing his multi-construct model of media
salience.
Characteristics
of Agenda-setting Research
Based on
the agenda-setting literature, Kosicki ]summarized the following characteristics of
agenda-setting studies:
1.
Agenda-setting research deals with the importance or salience of public issues.
2. A
public issue is seen as a rather broad, abstract, content-free topic domain,
devoid of controversy or contending forces.
3.
Agenda-setting studies have a twin focus on media content and audience
perception: both measuring the amount and time devoted to a certain issue by
mass media and the amount of public attention to that issue are integral
components of agenda-setting research
4.
Agenda setting is characterized by some desire to deal with a range of issues
rank-ordered into an agenda.
5.
Agenda setting is proposed as an effect of specific media content or trends in
that content, not a general effect of watching television or reading newspapers
or newsmagazines.
Suggestion
In my view media are reversed thinking
on agenda settings. Is that the to people think or how people thinks. The media
may not affect what people think, but may affect what they think about,
through the choice of which topics to cover and what to emphasize. Control
of the flow of information is often referred to as “gatekeeping,” and is based
not only on media professionals’ perceptions of what is important, but also on
time and space limitations.
It is the relevance of this theory to the gate keeping
role of the medias notwithstanding, its apparent attempt at sideling other
equally important issues will always remain a serious drawback. A relatively
uninformed media or press can mislead audience and perhaps an entire nation.
Here in Ethiopia, similar experience the media clearly goofed/make mistake/.
they had either pronounce on issues about which hey /the media/could be cited for veritable ignorance, taken money
in order to have the truth buried/cover, masked/or as was in some rare cases,
sought to settle personal scores with actors in the political scene, hanging on
to their/the media’s/role as façade. The reality of objectivity appears lost on
the proponents of this theory. The theory is premised on the false assumption
that all targets will have similar reaction to the message that are being
churned/mix/.
Out by the media and woefully fails to take into account,
the truth that the perspective of the media’s audience are markedly varied. The
differences that underlie these perspectives constitute an afford to the
effectiveness of the agenda setting theory.
This theory is discriminatory nature; media crowed out this
other equally important issue clearly robs the viewer, readers and listeners of
alternatives from which to choose. The net effect of this development is
evident in compromised and subjective debates on the media landscape. This can
portend danger for country’s democracy, especially when the media are
emasculated by an oppressive or corrupt government.
It has an explanatory power because it explains why most
people prioritize the same issues as important. It also has predictive power
because it predicts that if people are exposed to the same media, they will feel the same issues are important. Its
meta-theoretical assumptions are balanced on the scientific side and it lays
groundwork for further research. Furthermore, it has organizing power because
it helps organize existing knowledge of media effects.
There are also limitations, such as news media users may not be as ideal as the theory assumes. People
may not be well-informed, deeply engaged in public affairs, thoughtful and
skeptical. Instead, they may pay only casual and intermittent attention to
public affairs and remain ignorant of the details. For people who have made up
their minds, the effect is weakened. News media cannot create or conceal problems, they can only alter
the awareness, priorities and salience people attach to a set of problems.
Research has largely been inconclusive in establishing a causal relationship
between public salience and media coverage.
Another limitation is that there is limited research in
the realm of non-traditional forms of news media (i.e. Social Media, Blogs, etc...) and it’s Agenda
Setting Role. Although blogs and other forms of Computer Mediated Communication
appear to be quickly gaining ground against traditional news media outlets, more research still needs to be done. What is
plainly visible is that, "In an effort to survive, traditional newsrooms
have embraced newsroom blogs as an alternative vehicle for news delivery." Yet, there still continues to be a socio-economic gap
(although likely a small one) between those who use use non-traditional forms
of news media and those who don't.
References
Brooks, Brian S., et al. "News Reporting and
Writing". Seventh Edition. Bedford/Missouri Group. Page 27. ISBN 0312396988
Mccombs, M. (2004). Setting the Agenda: The mass media and public opinion.
Malden, MA, Blackwell Publishing Inc. p 1. ISBN 9780745623139
Scheufele, D. A. (2000). Agenda-setting, priming, and
framing revisited: Another look at cognitive effects of political
communication. ‘‘Mass Communication & Society’’, 3(2&3), 297-316
Cohen, B. C. (1963). "The press and foreign
policy". Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press p.
www.afi rstlook.com.
The
Spiral of Silence Theory
Theory:
The one
view dominated the public scene and others disappeared from the public
awareness as it adherents became silent. In other words, the people fear of
separation or isolation those around them, they tend to keep their attitudes to
themselves when they think they are in the minority. This process is
called “Spiral of Silence”.
(Noelle-Neumann, 1984, pp.174-178).
Elisabeth
Noelle-Neumann, the German political scientist contributes
the famous model called “Spiral of Silence”. In 1947 Neumann and her husband found “Public Opinion Organization” in
German and also she was a President of “World Association for Public Opinion
Research” in 1978 to 1980. Through this Spiral of Silence theory Neumann
indirectly explains the Jews status during World
War II under Nazi’s control. Here, Adolf Hitler
dominated the whole society and the minority Jews became silent due to the fear
of isolation or separation.The
spiral of silence is a term used by Noelle-Neumann to describe the reaction
of people to openly visible approval or disapproval among the shifting patterns
of public opinions and values. According
to her theory an individual’s willingness to express his or her opinion is a function
of how he perceives the public opinion. To run
with the pack is a happy situation; but if one cannot because their reasoning
or convictions are contrary to what seems to be the universally prevailing
point of view, they will just remain silent as the second best choice and in
the process let the majority opinion dominate. The spiral of silence feeds
upon itself – more the cautious people withdraw from the debate – the stronger
the majority opinion appears – more the minorities withdraw. According
to Noelle-Neumann it is through this resulting spiral of silence that a new
public opinion develops or the meaning of an old public opinion gets
transformed and spreads. The model of her theory is based on three
major premises:
@ People
have an innate fear of social isolation, which makes most people willing to
heed the opinion of others.
@ Humans
have an ability to realize when public opinions grow in strength or weaken - a
"quasistatistical organ" which makes people aware of the prevailing public
opinion;
@ The
reaction to this realization leads to either more confident speech or to
silence - people are reticent to express minority views out of fear of being
isolated.
As
Elisabeth Noelle-neumann’s spiral of silence graph incorporated;
Opinion expressed as
dominant by mass media-------
Interpersonal support for
deviant opinon@@@@@@@
Amount of people not
openly expressing deviant opinion and/or changing from deviant to dominant
opinion.
The
Spiral of Silence theory explains why people often feel the need to conceal
their opinions/preference/views/etc. when they fall within the minority of a
group. The spiral of silence begins with fear of reprisal or isolation, and
escalates from there. Individuals use what is described as "an innate ability"
or quasi-statistical sense to gauge public
opinion. The Mass
media play a large part in determining what the
dominant opinion is, since our direct observation is limited to a small
percentage of the population. The mass media have an enormous impact on how
public opinion is portrayed, and can dramatically impact an individual's
perception about where public opinion lies, whether or not that portrayal is
factual. Noelle-Neumann describes the spiral of silence as a dynamic
process, in
which predictions about public opinion become fact as mass media's coverage of
the majority
opinion becomes the status
quo, and the minority
becomes less likely to speak out. The theory, however, only applies to moral
or opinion issues, not issues that can be proven right or wrong using facts (if
there, in fact, exists a distinction between fact and value).
Example:
In a
company, the managing
director decides to increase their working hour from
8 to 10 and send e-mail to all employees. Majority of them accept this time
changes and few employees are not satisfied with his decision. But they cannot
or ready to express their
thought publicly.
Because
They may
feel unsupported by the other employees.
2.
“Fear of isolation” likes transfer
3.
“Fear of Rejection” By rejecting their personal opinion
from the public will help to avoid fight.
4.
They may try to save their job by
suppressing or avoid personal statement in public.
They frame work based on few assumptions:
Spiral
of silence theory describe as a dynamic process, the predication about public opinion
in mass media which gives more coverage for the majorities in the society and
gives very less coverage for minorities.
Being
the part of Minority. People loss their confidence and silent or mute to express their
views because of the fear of isolation or they feel alone or unsupported. Fear
of suspend about ideas and practical views makes silence, even peoples do not
believes peoples. And rule of law mostly forget minorities right never directly
participatory and answer for all questions. They are hanging up majority right.
Media are singer of majority as the owned rule of law. As a formal communication
takes a light show of stage presentation it undermines the rests.
4.
Sometimes the minorities withdraw their expressed opinion from public debates
to secure themselves from the majority. Maximum numbers get more vocal space in
the society and lesser number become less vocal space or become silent.
Advantages and Disadvantages:
1.
Spiral of Silence theory has both micro level and macro level explanatory
process.
2.
It works well during the public campaign, Senate and Parliament.
3.
Spiral of silence theory – which helps to raise question about
considering the role and responsibility of media in the society.
4.
The theory which is not considering the other explanation of
silencing. In some cases the person may feel the majority’s ideas or opinion is
much better than his own view.
5.
It portrait overly negative view of media influence the
average people.
Role
of Mass Media:
Noelle-Newman
believed that the media facilitates the muting of the minority opinion in the
spiral of silence due to its ominous presence and clout. To
support this hypothesis she refers to the works of Lippmann who talks about the
stereotypes of masses and difference between the perceptions that a person
obtains firsthand and those that come by other means, especially through the
mass media. She says the difference between the two
types of perceptions is blocked out because the mass media is cumulative, ubiquitous
and consonant. People are not conscious of it and tend
to accept and adjust this indirect experience to their perceptions so
completely that their direct and indirect experiences become inseparable. As a
result the influence of mass media remains largely unconscious (Noelle-Neumann,
1984, p.145).
Political Implications:
The
Spiral of Silence theory has immense/huge/ implications on democracy as the
most humane political system. Noelle-Neumann states that citizens keep close
tabs on the climate of opinion in their countries, and remain quiet if they
think their own views don’t comply with the majorities. She
believes that to a large extent our view of social reality is distorted by the
underlying ideology of the gatekeepers of the media content. According
to her the producers of the media content are liberalistic because liberalism
is a code of function shared by the journalist community to portray themselves
as critics, and as a façade/front page/ to the government and the
powerful. This is important in view of her
discussion on “Vox populli – Vox dei” (Voice of people – Voice of god), wherein
she states that every government rests on public opinion. Public
opinion, in the sense of a social skin binding society together, has
considerable political clout that can topple governments. Hence, as masses
of stereotypes are gullible /trusty/to the mass media manipulations, the elite
should focus on developing consensus through “strong psychological pressures”
(Noelle-Neumann, 1984, pp.174-178).
Suggestion
and point of view
In my view the last
paragraph may I strongly agree works here in Ethiopia is spiral of silence is
makes on government of Ethiopia. For example the government afire of
communication is works what the opinion poll of the public voxpopi and adjust
how make silence as a minority view join to rejection the majority, and loud
how can makes forum of a majority view,
In politics.
the inherent limitations of spiral of silence
as the basis of public opinion formulation; its implications on the concept of
democracy and people as incapable of thinking and making decisions on
sophisticated political issues.
Suggestion
in my opinion I concur
that the reality of Ethiopia reporting’s political the ruling government and
the opposition party assembly. It is less coverage on the idea of unruling
parties.
In this
social environment, People have fear of rejection to express
their opinion or views and they known well what behaviors will make a better
likelihood. It’s called “fear of Isolation”.’
Suggestion
in my opinion I see
eyes to eye that our culture brings that” silence is golden “proverb so someone
who talks to and counts as a nothing conversers.
IN MY
SUGGSTION of the same mind that the media gate-keepers decide the content and
tone of the information that is dispersed to the public, filtering information
as per their own interest. The media create a “pseudo crises” in order
to sift the other topics out of the field. Noelle-Neumann
states that individuals faced with the mass media are helpless; it is the
journalist’s prerogative to confer the attention/recognition – good or bad. Are
the editor’s roles in this area they are count themselves an agent of the
majority or the dominant ideology sphere. So never hear lost their action
power for a gatekeeper level only
protect the superiority .
I
ARGUE that spiral peoples silence not only fear of majority view they also
count themselves the media also dominate as majority viewer’s idea. Persons
also believe the majority ideas is possible to implementation and don’t count
themselves as odd of the public.
I
agree with her
apparent contempt for aspects of democracy, and particularly for the role of
public in political affairs
Her
tendency to scapegoat liberal mass media as manipulative and
self-serving her exploitation of research design that
produce politically useful results
The
strongest arguments are that Noelle-Neumann contends in her book that the
masses are ignorant, powerless and live with a bone deep fear of social
isolation. She states that the classical democratic
ideal that people can act with maturity and rationality like scientists in an
effort to fathom /understand/ reality with the support of the mass media is an
illusion. And, a genuinely participatory democracy,
according to her, is a rationalist self deception that should be rejected
The
“elite concept of public opinion” only to go on even more firmly to advocate
the need of an elite leadership in a conforming society. Her
approach sates that the public’s opinion is not necessarily that of informed or elite
audience, therefore, she contends the elite should focus on developing
consensus in public opinion through “strong psychological pressures…in the
public arena which is essential if the community is to be capable of making
decisions and taking action”. Within
her totalitarian definition of public opinion, Noelle-Neumann establishes a
privileged role for powerful elite. Along with which she offers advice on
manipulation of the stereotypes by exploitation of music and clothing styles
and control of the “irrational, morally loaded component” in mass public
opinion.
Noelle-Neumann’s theory of the spiral of silence
is the question of deciding on an approach to communication and social
organization that is best or (at least) the least harmful for the human
society, which imbibes in it a huge diversity of ideas, interest groups and
moral claims.
Nonetheless, it
would seem that the spiral of silence theory is quite applicable in situations
in which opinions are not of great consequence, e.g., if a strong opinioned
person is unwilling to bend his/her beliefs, then the theory may not apply at
all. Also, if that person is an opinion leader, (the Diffusion of
Innovations theory) and is the one speaking out and affecting others; then
he/she would be less likely to bend his/her opinions to conform others.
I
would agree with the point of view that the spiral of silence is more useful to
apply in situations when trying to explain why people cover up or change their
opinions when in a group setting especially when they think they are alone in
their opinions, instead of a theory on formulation of public opinion and mass communication
behavior. The
Spiral of Silence is useful to apply in situations when trying to explain why
people cover up or change their opinions when in a group setting especially
when they think they are alone in their opinions.
Another example of spiral
of silence in Ethiopia debate about the rent seeking in Ethiopia. It seems that
pretty much everyone is lobbying to bring the officials go to jail whom them
expose. The regional president is seemingly the only person who thinks that we
should take major the un honest officials. A lot people participate the case
who wish comes to change and willing to speak they are a party member bring to
official side ,whereas the people who think we still need to be there consider
themselves to be minority and will keep their opinion to themselves. The media
playing a role support the discussion and nothing to see the change. Dominant
political view is dominate the minorities /reject their views/.
Example:
An
example to help illustrate the Spiral of Silence theory is a person going out
with a new group of people or on a date with someone you do not know very
well. When ordering pizza for this theory, I would conform to the
mushroom lovers because I feel I am in the minority since I do not like
mushrooms and I think everyone else does. Therefore I do not want to be
rejected or alone in my opinions.
Suggesestion-
my point of view is It is under attack on
government media usage and weapon of the dominant ideology or majority people
and it clashes now the journalism science voice to the voiceless.
In the limitation, it is as much a measure of protection as it is one of
oppression. Since it only applies to moral issues, which tend to evoke
passionate responses in even the most reserved individuals, it can be used to
contain social
unrest over highly controversial topics. Though it
can aid in keeping civil order, attempts to employ it knowingly are essentially
methods of manipulation and coercion. The Spiral of Silence theory is a
scientific theory that for the most part is quite sound in situations in which
opinions are not of great consequence. For example, if my opinion is a
strong conviction and I am unwilling to bend in my beliefs then the theory may
not apply to me to such an extent. Also, if I am an opinion leader, (from
the Diffusion of Innovations theory) that is I is the one voicing my opinions?
The
Spiral of Silence is useful to apply in situations when trying to explain why
people cover up or change their opinions when in a group setting especially
when they think they are alone in their opinions. To show this let us take a good example the
debate about the war in Iraq, seems that pretty much everyone is lobbying to
bring the troops home. the president is seemingly the only person who thinks
that we should still be there. This can’t be the case though, I’m sure that are
a large number of people who believe in what the president says or they
wouldn’t have elected him in the first place. The problem with them speaking
out is that the perceived majority believe that he is wrong and that the war is
a lost cause. The people who are willing to speak out are the people who are
bringing the troops home, whereas the people who think we still need be there
consider themselves to be the minority and will keep their opinion to
themselves. The media also is playing a role in this; you would be hard pressed
to find a new station or pretty much any program that openly supports the war
and the president.
Reference
Jeffres, L., Neuendorf, K.A., Atkin, D.
(1999). "Spiral of Silence: expressing opinions when the climate of
opinion is unambiguous." Political
Communication.
Glynn, C.J, Hayes, A.F., Shanahan, J. (1997).
"Perceived support for one's opinions and willingness to speak out: a meta
analysis of survey studies on the 'Spiral of Silence.'" Public Opinion
Quarterly.Griffin, E. (2000). A first look at communication theory (4th ed.).
Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. pp. N/A
http//:www.afirstlook.com
Griffin, E. (1997). A first
look at communication theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. pp. 337,
375, 387-398, 476, 484, 496.
KNOWLEDGE
GAP
Increasing
gap between higher and lower educated people because economy.
History
and Orientation
The
knowledge gap theory was first proposed by Tichenor, Donohue and Olien at the
University of Minnesota in the 70s. They believe that the increase of
information in society is not evenly acquired by every member of society:
people with higher socioeconomic status tend to have better ability to acquire
information (Weng,
S.C. 2000). This
leads to a division of two groups: a group of better-educated people who know
more about most things, and those with low education who know less. Lower
socio-economic status (SES) people, defined partly by educational level, have
little or no knowledge about public affairs issues, are disconnected from news
events and important new discoveries, and usually aren’t concerned about their
lack of knowledge.
Core
Assumptions and Statements
The
knowledge gap can result in an increased gap between people of lower and higher
socioeconomic status. The attempt to improve people’s life with information via
the mass media might not always work the way this is planned. Mass media might
have the effect of increasing the difference gap between members of social
classes.
Tichenor,
Donohue and Olien (1970) present five reasons for justifying the knowledge gap.
1) People of higher socioeconomic status have
better communication skills, education, reading, comprehending and remembering
information.
2) People of higher socioeconomic status can
store information more easily or remember the topic form background knowledge
3)
People of higher socioeconomic status might have a more relevant social
context.
4)
People of higher socioeconomic status are better in selective exposure,
acceptance and retention.
5) The
nature of the mass media itself is that it is geared toward persons of higher
socioeconomic status.
Example; I have two neighborhood children’s with similar age.
the one who is economic higher family is
learn in private school he is know all access of computer but the other who
learn in public school child is doesn’t spell corrected all alphabets.
No comments:
Post a Comment