The first of the tripartite theories that compose this dissertations Phase I lens is Medium Theory. In 1964, Marshall McLuhan challenged the conventional definitions of what media was perceived to be when he claimed that the medium is the message. With this claim, he stressed how all the then-current channels differ (print, radio, television), not only in terms of their content, which he considered to be only a secondary factor, but also in regard to how they awaken and modify thoughts and senses (McLuhan Fiore, 1967). He differentiated the media by the cognitive processes each required, placing a higher cognitive value on print, but a more emotional (visceral) reactive process to radio and especially television. McLuhan (1964) keenly noted that news was a core component of the medias we exist as message role and thus popularized the idea that media channels were and remain a dominant force that must be understood to know how they influence society and culture.
By focusing on the mediums characteristics itself, rather than on what it conveys or how information is received, McLuhan and others objectified the media and gave it a strength based on much more than a physical presence (Katz Lazarsfeld, 1955). In medium theory, a media channel is not just a newspaper, a radio, a magazine, the Internet, a digital video camera or anything else conveying a message. Rather, it is the symbolic environment, the contextual envelope, of any act of communication. Therefore, due to its widespread reach and mutability, media, apart from whatever content is transmitted, has a measurable and noticeable impact on individuals and society (McLuhan, 1978).
Medium Theory proposed that people adapt to their environment through a certain balance or ratio of the senses, such as auditory over visual in jungle-like environments and that the primary medium of any age brings out a particular ratio, thus affecting perception (McLuhan Fiore, 1967). To this environmental aspect was added the concept of time, as in the time invested to focus the senses on a particular activity. When attention is scarce, whatever method or system allows one to combine foci is deemed an improvement, thus leading to the observation that the content of a new medium is the old medium, in a sense, repackaged.
Medium theory examines physical, psychological and social variables as the senses that are required to attend to the medium whether the communication is bi-directional or uni-directional, how quickly messages can be disseminated, whether learning to encode and decode in the medium is difficult or simple, how many people can attend to the same message at the same moment, and so forth. Medium theorists argue that such variables influence the mediums use and its social, political, and psychological impact.
2.2 Modernization Theory
Modernization Theory is defined as the appearance of modes of social life or organization which emerged in Europe from about the seventeenth century onwards and which subsequently became more or less worldwide in their influence.(Giddens, 1991). Modernization Theory and variants try to explain the ways that communication and media are used in both traditional and modern societies.
Modernization Theory has been controversial and thus has been altered fundamentally in a series of three waves. The original Theory appeared in the 1950s and throughout the that decade and the 1960s, Modernization Theory tried to explain the diffusion of Western styles of living, technological advances and individualistic types of communication as the product of an intrinsic superiority of Western culture and of individual motivation and achievement almost exclusively present in Western cultures. (Littlejohn, 1999). As can be expected, this culture-centric view was increasingly dismissed, leading to three variants in the first wave of change, each narrowing an aspect of Modernization Theory to strengthen the defined impact of mass media
That mass media is the key to promoting the global diffusion of many technical and social innovations that are essential to modernization. Think business, economic and science news for the masses.
That mass media can teach literacy and other essential skills and techniques, encouraging a state of mind more in favor of modernity, or the imagination of a different way of life beyond the traditional way. Think celebrity, new wave and trendy news.
That mass media could support national identities in new nations (colonies) and support attention to democratic policies (elections). Think political and social news and commentary.
However, although these variants did further define the role and impact of mass media to some degree, they were discredited because of their now subliminal pro-Western bias (Schramm, 1964). The impact on news coverage varied from country to country, with some nations, particularly the U.S., focusing their news effort inward (what we are doing in the world) while others, such as England and Japan, focused in outward fashion (what the world is doing.)
The second wave of modernization theory is a part of the critical theory that was popular in the 1970s and 1980s. It did not support, but actually criticized the influence of Western modernization, leading to charges of forcefully imposing Western cultural and economic imperialism on the rest of the world. One aspect did stand out
The idea that peripheral countries were assumed to be dependent on mass media, as provided extensively by the Western world, thus creating a media dependency. We shall see more of this dependency further below.
The third wave of modernization theory, rising in the 1990s, tries to be more neutral, neither in favor nor against Western modernization. It focuses more on the contradictions in the modernization process and to explain the consequences of modernity for individuals in contemporary society (Giddens, 1991). Giddens showed that modern societies are characterized by time-space distortion (time and distance lose meaning as the past and the distant are within reach) and disembedding mechanisms.
Modern societies can stretch further and extend themselves even more across space and time using mass media and interactive media to establish and strengthen connections. These connections may not be necessarily based on a shared socio-cultural background, but are increasingly seen as based on personal preferences (Rasmussen, 2003). Disembedding mechanisms are things such as money, symbols, the use of English as a common language and the Internet, and these help present activities once embedded in particular material products and in limited places to the larger forum connected by the Internet.
This theme of combination of unification and fragmentation in society and in media use also is part of the rise of the new media primarily because computer networks, PDAs and mobile phones have become important tools for modern life. They enable simultaneous reduction and extension of scale, creating a unitary and a fragmented world, a world that is both social and individualized.
2.3 Diffusion of Innovations Theory
Diffusion of Innovation Theory declares that media in all its forms, as well as interpersonal contacts (word of mouth), provide information and influence opinion and judgment. Using the excellent definitions of E.R. Rogers (1962), diffusion is thus the process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over a period of time among the members of a social system. An innovation is an idea, practice, or object that is perceived to be new by an individual or other unit of adoption. And communication is a process in which participants create and share information with one another to reach a mutual understanding.
Rogers (1962) defined innovation as occurring in four stages invention, diffusion (or communication) through the social system, time and consequences. The information flows through networks, thus the more effective and efficient a network is, the better the chances of diffusion and thus of innovation.
Innovation diffusion research has tried to isolate and define the variables that influence why and how users adopt a new medium, such as the Internet. Opinion leaders are known to exert influence on audience behavior via their personal contact, but additional intermediaries called change agents and gatekeepers are also included in the process of diffusion. The five accepted adopter categories are (1) innovators, (2) early adopters, (3) early majority, (4) late majority, and (5) laggards. These categories follow a standard deviation curve, with very few innovators adopting the innovation in the beginning (about 2.5) and early adopters making up for about 13.5 of the population. A short time later the early majority (about 34) jumps on board the innovation followed by the late majority (another estimated 34) and after some time, the laggards (about 16) come to the innovation (Croteau Hoynes, 1997). The key to critical mass or the tipping point is being able to attract a large number of early adopters. For new media, the price of computers and the limitations of the Internet did not allow access to early majority numbers until the mid-1990s, when new media could then begin to challenge the old.
2.4 Phase II New Media Challenges Old Media--Dependency Theory
The Baby Boomer generation saw television move into their homes and become the centerpiece of news and entertainment. For their children, growing up in the 1980s and 1990s, television was cable with over 100 channels, all day news networks and take it with you media like the Walkman. The new media explosion emerged in the 1990s, as two generations watched a third grow up with global access and tools to make them known in it, such as blogs, podcasts, vidcasts (video blogging)and social areas like MySpace.
To describe this phenomena, Dependency Theory states that media is dependent on the social context (DeFleur, 1989). Media use and preferences are directly influenced by how society views it. In this way, Dependency Theory integrates several perspectives (Innis, 1964)
By combining perspectives from psychology with ingredients from social categories theory.
By integrating systems perspectives (how systems work) with elements from more causal approaches (why they work as they do.)
By combining elements of Uses and Gratifications Theory research (also discussed below) with those of media effects analysis.
By providing a contextual philosophy featuring traditional aspects of media use along with the content of media messages and their effect on audiences.
Dependency Theory proposes that there is an integral, almost symbiotic relationship among the audiences, the different media and the larger social systems. The theory states that a person depends on media information to meet certain needs and achieve certain goals, which is a common link with Uses and Gratifications Theory. But the fact is that people do not depend on all media equally with two factors clearly influencing the degree of media dependence (1) one is more dependent on media that meets a higher number of personal needs than on media that meets just a few and (2) dependency is heavily influenced by social stability, so that when social change and conflict are high, with established institutions, beliefs, and practices being challenged, the reliance on the media for information will increase, whereas in more stable times the dependency on media will drop (DeFleur, 1989). What was not in doubt under Dependency Theory was that there was a high degree of media dependency in societies and that much of the media was increasingly ineffective in meeting the more personalized needs arising from the potential of new media.
It is a basic principle of sociology that a persons needs are not always strictly personal, but may be shaped by the culture or by various social conditions. By the same token, individuals needs, motives, and uses of media are equally contingent on outside factors that may not be in the individuals control. (Innis, 1964) These outside factors act as constraints on what and how media can be used and on the availability of other non-media alternatives. And the more alternatives an individual has for gratifying needs, the less dependent he or she will become on any single medium. When the old media lost its aura of authority and objectivity, new media was there to provide a customized alternative for thousands and then millions of people.
2.5 Uses and Gratifications Theory -- The Dialogue Begins
Uses and Gratifications Theory attempts to explain the uses and functions of the media for individuals, groups, and society in general. There are three goals that are guiding the development and research of Uses and Gratifications Theory (Donohew L., Palmgreen, P., Rayburn, J. D., 1987)
1) Explaining how individuals use mass media to gratify their needs, in essence, seeking an answer to the question What do people do with the media
2) Discovering the underlying motives for an individuals use of the media and why they prefer one media over another.
3) Identify the positive and the negative consequences of an individuals media use.
At the center of Uses and Gratifications theory lays the assumption that people actively seek out the mass media to satisfy their individual needs (DeFleur, 1987). Thus a medium will be used more when the current motives to use the medium leads to more satisfaction. In the realm of traditional news journalism, the mountain top was the newspaper and the TV evening news, a rarified air where news emerged with the power of authority. But faced with a 24-hour news cycle and increasing evidence that bias was rampant in the pursuit of ad revenue and ratings, the old media left much of its audience disenfranchised and disillusioned. Efforts by the old media to think local, act global were met with cynicism, as time and again news was treated as a commodity instead of a public good, in effect, making it a private sinecure (Watson and Hill, 1997). To the surprise and alarm of the old media, their once impregnable fortress of journalism was eroding, from within by celebrity news and ratings and from without by bloggers and a rising tide of citizen journalists.
2.6. The Framing Theory
The concept of framing in the Framing Theory is related to the Agenda-Setting tradition of theories (Overview, 1993), but it expands the research by focusing on the essence of the issues at hand rather than on a particular topic. For example, rather than evaluate the frames similar to those used in the abortion debate, Framing Theory looks at the context created by the Abortion is murder and Pro-choice frames (Ball-Rokeach et al, 1990).
According to Fairhurst Star (1996) framing consists of three elements forethought, language and thought. To use language, people must have thought and reflected beforehand on their own interpretive frameworks and those of others so as to develop the intended frame. The language (combination of communication elements) the helps the individual to remember information and act to transform the way in which they view the situation presented.
Fairhurst G. and Star, R. (1996) describe several techniques for framing situations. Amongst these
Metaphor To give an idea or program a new meaning by comparing it to something else.
Stories (myths and legends) To frame a subject by anecdote in a vivid and memorable way.
Traditions (rites, rituals and ceremonies) To pattern and define an organization to confirm and reproduce the organizations values.
Slogans, jargon and catchphrases To frame a subject in a memorable and familiar fashion.
Artifacts To illuminate values through physical vestiges (sometimes in a way language cannot, for example medals, trophies, monuments, warrants, etc.).
Contrast To describe a subject in terms of what it is not.
Spin to talk about a concept so as to give it a positive or negative connotation. (Davis Baron, 1981).
Some recent examples of frames include the Cold War, the Tea Party and battling cancer, phrases created and specifically used to elicit commonly shared images and meanings.
The basis for this dissertation of the Framing Theory is that the media focuses attention on certain events and then places them within a field of meaning, using words, images (if video or photography is used) and even music to create the intended context. Framing is an important topic since it has been shown consistently and across societal differences to have a major influence on audiences for almost every media.
The media draws the publics attention to certain topics because it decides what people are going to see and hear, leading to what they will think about. This is the original agenda, the basic frame, this setting of the thought. Beyond that basic context, often created without much thought, Framing Theory looks a the way in which the news is brought to the public, the frame in which the news is presented, the spin, which is also a choice made by journalists. Thus, a frame refers both to the way the media and its exponents organize and present events and issues that they cover, but also the way audiences interpret and react to what they are provided. Frames are abstract notions that serve to organize or structure social meanings that can lead to action or non-action. A frame that heightens emotional response is radically different, in form and finality, than one whose purpose is to downplay potential reaction, whether that reaction is storming the walls or modifying an opinion.
Under traditional media, framing was in the hands of print and radioTV. Over time, government, corporations and other entities began using framing as a way to enhance their messages or overcome that of others. Their primary intent was to create the Needle that would cure the issue or the Bullet that would lay it to rest. Thus framing is a tool of communication that leads others to accept one meaning over another. It is a skill with profound effects on how organizational members understand and respond to the world in which they live. It is a skill that most successful leaders possess, yet one that is not often taught. And one must not forget that media products are human products and that these constructs are ones that the audience routinely takes for granted.
2.9 Priming Theory
During the 1980s, as Framing Theory was gaining precedence, much attention in Agenda-Setting research was focused on the concept of priming. This concept was derived from the cognitive psychological concept of priming, meaning an increased sensitivity to certain stimuli due to prior experience. Because priming is believed to occur outside of the persons conscious awareness, it is different from memory in that memory relies on the direct retrieval of information, while priming relies on implicit memory. Research has shown that the affects of priming can impact the decision-making process (Domke Wackman, 1998), thus making it an effective tool for providing contextual influence.
Priming refers to enhancing the effects of the media by offering the audience a prior context a context that will be used to interpret subsequent communication. Basically priming creates a toolboxfilter kit that allows the person primed to come to a decision faster and more easily. The media does its job, positively or negatively, by providing the audience with selected standards and created frames of reference. In the old media, frames were limited, highly-controlled and difficult to challenge. The new media upset that that imbalance in favor of the audience.
Agenda-Setting and thus framing refer mainly to the importance of an issue priming tells us whether what the person is exposed to is something that is good or bad, and whether it is communicated effectively (Hassan Thomas, 2006). The media have primed audiences about what a news program looks like, what a news report should be, what a good guybad guy dichotomy looks like and much more. Priming is now in the hands of new media, who can move quickly to either establish or undermine frames. Whereas old media can still provide gravitas to help cement a frame in place, it is in the new media that critical frames are being developed, each one priming sectors of the audience to greater awareness. There is a large possibility that these priming efforts, crucial to dealing with information overload in terms of personal time and effort to achieve understanding and satisfaction with the media, are actually increasing the information burden. However, it can be argued that when few or only one voice dominates the public discourse with its frames, when only one side gets to prime the message to the masses, then those people are ill-served by the masters of the message. Control of information is power, and better to have that power in the hands of the masses, of each person capable of using the tools of mass media, than to have it condensed into the hands of few. This dissertation will prime the notion that new media is freedom of expression--literally--personified.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment