Transcript mass society theory.

AMITY SCHOOL of COMMUNICATION
BJMC 2nd SEM
UNDERSTANDING MASS COMMUNICATION
MR. ANKIT KASHYAP
Four Eras
of
Mass Communication
Four eras in mass communication
theories
 Era
of mass society theory (1850-1940)
 Era of scientific perspective on mass media (1940-1950)
 Era of limited effects (1950-60s)
 Era of cultural criticism (1960s-1980s)
Era of mass society theory 1850-1940
 Mass
Communication theories begins with a review
of some of the earliest notions about media. These
ideas were initially developed in the later half of the
19th century as new media technologies were invented
and popularized. Although some theorists were
optimistic about new technology, most were
extremely pessimistic (Brantlinger, 1983). They
blamed new industrial technology for disrupting
peaceful, rural communities and forcing people to
live in urban areas merely to serve as a convenient
workforce in large factories, mines or bureaucracies.
Theorists were fearful of cities because of their crime,
cultural diversity, and unstable political systems. For
many social thinkers, mass media symbolized
everything that was wrong with the 19th century urban
life. The dominant perspective that emerged during
this period is referred to as mass society theory. It
began as a collection of contradictory notions – some
quite radical, others quite reactionary.
In general mass society ideas held strong appeal for any
social elites whose power was threatened by change.
Media industries such as ‘penny press’ were a
convenient for elites’ criticism. The media of the time
were easily attacked as symptomatic of a sick society –
a society that needed to either return to old values or be
forced to adopt a set of totally new values.
In time, the leaders of the Industrial Revolution gained enormous
influence over social change. They strongly favored all forms of
Technological Development, including mass media.
In their view technology was inherently good as it facilitated control
over the physical environment, expanded human productivity and
generated new forms of material wealth.
New technology would bring an end to social problems and lead to
the development of an Ideal social world.
But in the short term, industrialization brought with it enormous
problems – exploitation of workers, pollution and social unrest.
Today, the fallacies of both the critics of technology and its
advocates are readily apparent.
Mass society notions greatly exaggerated the ability of media to
quickly undermine social order. These ideas failed to consider
that media’s power ultimately resides in the freely chosen uses
that audiences make of it.
Technology advocates were also misguided and failed to
acknowledge the many unnecessary, damaging consequences
that
resulted from applying technology without adequately
considering the impact.
Important Theories
 Bullet
Theory
 Propaganda
Theory
Bullet Theory
 Also
called as hypodermic needle theory
 It holds that an intend message is directly
received and completely accepted by
listener. It assumes that the media’s
message is a bullet fired from the “media
gun” into viewer’s head.
 Receivers are passive and defenseless
 Media have direct, immediate and
poerful effect to those who pay attention.
Propaganda Theory
 Media
propagates any idea with direct
impact on the mass society.
 Audience here was also passive and
defenseless
 The ideas used to propagate at that time
were highly influenced by the politics.
Era of scientific perspective on
mass media (1940-1950)
During the 1930’s, world events seemed to continually confirm
the truth of mass society ideas. In Europe, reactionary and
revolutionary political movements used media in their struggles
for political power.
German Nazis introduced propaganda techniques that ruthlessly
exploited the power of new media technology like motion
pictures and radio.
All across Europe, totalitarian leaders like Hitler, Stalin and
Mussolini rose to political power and were able to exercise
seemingly total control over vast populations.
Private ownership of media, especially
broadcast
media, was replaced by direct government
control in
most European nations. The purpose was to
use media
for the service of the society. But the
unintended
outcome in most cases was to place
enormous power in
At the very peak of their popularity, mass
society
notions came under attack from
Lazarsfeld,(1941), an
Austrian researcher and scientist. He argued
that it
wasn’t enough to merely speculate about the
influence
of media on society. Instead he proposed
It was not enough to assume that political
propaganda is powerful – hard evidence was
needed to prove the existence of such effects
(Lazarsfeld, Berelson, and Gaudet, 1944).
Lazersfeld’s most famous efforts, the “Voter
Studies”, actually began as an attempt to
demonstrate the media’s power, yet they proved, at
least to him and his colleagues, just the opposite.
By the early 1950s, Lazerfeld’s work had
generated an
enormous amount of data based on which he
concluded
that media were not nearly as powerful as
had been
previously imagined.
Instead, he found that people had numerous
ways of
resisting media influence and were
He found little evidence to support the worst
fears of mass society theorists. Though
Lazarsfeld never labeled his theory, it is now
referred to as the Limited-effects perspective.
These views media as playing a very limited role
in the lives of individuals and larger society.
Important Theories
 Two
Step flow theory
 Lasswell’s Model
 Persuasion Theory
 Limited Effect Theory
Two-Step Flow Theory
 Flow
of information takes place in
two steps. First from Mass Media to
opinion leaders and then from
opinion leaders to the mass society.
 Media are not so powerful because
there are resistance to their
messages. Resistance is based on
psychological individual traits &
crucial role is played by
 Opinion Leaders
Persuasion Theory
 Subtle
change in the attitude of the
receiver.
 Any
form of persuasive communication
changes the attitude of the receiver.
Attitude on the other hand changes the
behavior .
Lasswell’s Model
 It
is a five step process.
 Who says (Source)
 What (Message)
 In which channel (Media)
 To Whom (Receiver)
 With What effect (Feedback)
Limited Effects Theory
 Explained
in Slide No- 4-7. Refer to
Previous slides.
 Basically, Paul Lazersfeld experiment on
Voting Behaviour. He explained that the
role of media in deciding the voting
behavior is limited.
 3 steps followed by him are…

Contd…..
3 Steps by Lazersfeld
 1.
Activate floating voters to take a
decision
 2. Reinforce the preference in convinced
voters.
 3. Convert convinced voters to switch
their preference.
 Conclusion- He concluded that media
had some kind of influence only at step 2.
Era of limited effects (1950-60s)
During the 1950s, limited-effects notions about media
continued to gain acceptance within academia. Several
important clashes occurred between their adherents and
those who supported mass society ideas (Bauer and
Bauer, 1960).
In 1960, several classic studies of media effects provided
apparently definitive support for the limited-effects
notions.
By 1961, V.O. Key had published Public Opinion and American
Democracy, a theoretical and methodological tour de force that
integrated limited-effects notions with social and political theory to
create a perspective that is now known as elite pluralism. This
theory views society as a number of interlocking pluralistic groups
led by opinion leaders who rely on media for information about
politics and social world.
Advocates of mass society notions came under increasing attack as
“unscientific” or “irrational” because they questioned “hard
scientific findings”.
By the mid-1960s, the debate between mass society
and limited
-effects notions appeared to be over – at least within
the mass
communication research community.
The body of empirical research findings continued to
grow, and
almost all these findings were consistent with the
latter view.
Important Theories
 Play
Theory
 Uses & Gratification Theory
 Agenda Setting Theory
 Dependency Theory
 Dissonance Theory
Play Theory
 Given
by William Stephenson
 First function of media is to provide
entertainment
 He said that one should be subjective and
psychological rather than being objective
and sociological
 2 points to explain play theory..
 A) Maximize the communication pleasure
in this world
 B) Show the extent of autonomy
achievable from an individual respect to
the social control by his socio-cultural
system.
Uses & Gratification Theory
 “What
the media do to the people, to
what the people do with the media”
 USES- It assumes that audiences are
active and willingly expose themselves to
the media
 GRATIFICATION- It refers to the rewards &
satisfaction by audience after the use of
media.
Agenda Setting Theory
 Given
by Maxwell Mc Combs & Don Shaw
 It states that media have the ability to
advise or tell audiences what issues are
major & relevant, thus setting the agenda.
They can achieve this by choosing what
stories to consider newsworthy and how
much prominence and space they give
them.
Key Features
 1. The role of mass media, particularly
news media is to provide filtered
information in order to create a distorted
view of reality.
 2. Media focus on certain issues depicting
them as more important than others
because they want the public opinion to
perceive them as more important.
Dependency Theory
 Integral
relationship between audience,
media & larger social system
 Learning from experiences in real life is
limited
 Audience depend largely on media to
gather information they need
 Prolonged use of media triggers a
dependence
Dissonance Theory
 When
confronted by new/conflicting
information, people experiences a kind of
mental discomfort.
 The level of dissonance is decided by 3
factors…
 A. Selective Exposure
 B. Selective Perception
 C. Selective Retention
Klapper's selective exposure
Joseph Klapper (1960) asserts that mass communication does not directly
influence people, but just reinforces people’s predispositions. Mass
communications play a role as a mediator in persuasive communication.
The following are Klapper's five mediating factors and conditions to
affect people:
• Predispositions and the related processes of selective exposure,
selective perception, and selective retention.
• The groups, and the norms of groups, to which the audience members
belong.
• Interpersonal dissemination of the content of communication
• The exercise of opinion leadership
• The nature of mass media in a free enterprise society.[33]
Three basic concepts:
 Selective exposure – people keep away from
communication of opposite hue.
 Selective perception – If people are confronting
unsympathetic material, they do not perceive it, or
make it fit for their existing opinion.
 Selective retention – Furthermore, they just simply forget
the unsympathetic material.
Groups and group norms work as mediators. For example,
one can be strongly disinclined to change to the
Democratic Party if their family has voted Republican for a
long time. In this case, the person’s predisposition to the
political party is already set, so they don't perceive
information about Democratic Party or change voting
behavior because of mass communication. Klapper’s third
assumption is inter-personal dissemination of mass
communication. If someone is already exposed by close
friends, which creates predisposition toward something, it
will lead to an increase in exposure to mass
communication and eventually reinforce the existing
Era of cultural criticism (1960s-1980s)
Though most mass communication researchers in the United States found
limited-effects notions and empirical research findings on which they were
based persuasive, researchers in other parts of the world were less convinced.
Mass society notions continued to flourish in Europe, where both left-wing and
right-wing concerns about the power of media were deeply rooted in World
War II experiences with propaganda. Europeans were also skeptical about the
power of scientific, quantitative social research methods to verify and develop
social theory (they saw them as reductionist – reducing complex
communication processes and social phenomena to little more than narrow
propositions generated from small-scale investigations). This reductionism was
widely viewed as a distinctly American fetish. Some European academics were
resentful of the influence enjoyed by American after World War II. They
argued that American empiricism was both simplistic and intellectually sterile.
Although some European academics welcomed and championed American
ideas, other strongly resisted them and argued for maintaining approaches
considered less biased or more traditionally European.
One group of European social theorists who vehemently resisted
postwar U.S. influence was the neo-Marxists (Hall,1982). These
left-wing social theorists believe that media enable dominant
social elites to maintain their power. Media provide the elite with
a convenient, subtle, yet highly effective means of promoting
worldviews favorable to their interests. Mass media can be
viewed, they argue as a public arena in which cultural battles are
fought and a dominant or hegemonic culture is forged. Elites
dominate these struggles because they start with important
advantages. Opposition is marginalized, and the status quo is
presented as the only logical, rational way of structuring society.
Within neo-Marxist theory, efforts to examine media institutions
and interpret media content came to have high priority.
During the 1970s, questions about the possibility of powerful media effects
were again raised within U.S. universities.
Initially, these questions were often advanced by scholars in the humanities
who were unrestrained by the limited effects perspective and untrained in the
scientific method. Their arguments were routinely ignored and marginalized by
social scientists because they were unsupported by “scientific evidence.”
Some of these scholars were attracted to European-style cultural criticism.
Others attempted to create an “authentic” American school of cultural studies –
though they drew heavily on Canadian scholars like Harold Innis and Marshall
McLuhan (Carey, 1977).
This cultural criticism, although initially greeted with considerable
skepticism by “mainstream” effects researchers, gradually established itself
as a credible and valuable alternative to limited-effects notions.
Cultivation Theory
 The
Cultivation Theory is a mass
communication theory that suggests a
shaping - cultivating - cumulative longterm effect of TV media on the social
reality of viewers.
Origin of Cultivation Theory
 The
Cultivation Theory has been
developed by professor George Gerbner
from Annenberg School of
Communications of Philadelphia, US, in
1967-1974. He was conducting research
called “Cultural Indicators Program”
about the impact of violence
broadcasted in TV programs on
individuals.
Cultivation Theory




His early hypothesis aimed to
demonstrate that a massive use of
media leads to an increase in
acceptance of violence and in the
engagement of cruel behaviors.
Gerbner started considering TV as a
new social agent competing with
traditional ones such as family, school,
church and peer groups. Analyzing TV
programs, especially fictions, he divided
audiences in 3 groups:
Low Users, those who watch TV less than
2 hours a day.
Normal Users, those who watch TV from
2 to 6 hours a day.
Heavy Users, those who watch TV for
more than 6 hours a day.