Introduction to Sociology: The Media

 

We shall examine four approaches to the mass media. Communication is one of the main forces for social change in human society:

- printing press invented and developed, allowing for political dialogue to emerge – the creation of the ‘public sphere’;

- the circulation of newspapers facilitated the development of ‘nation-hood’ – i.e., the ‘imagined community’; and

- electronic media developments enabled direct action and mobilisation of support; e.g., humanitarian aid relief and Ukrainian Orange Revolution in 2005.

A key question is how far do the media influence their audience?

 

Approaches to the Mass Media

a) Pluralist theories

- Robert Dahl

Pluralists argue that society is made up of many interacting but competing sections and interests. Each section has equal access to resources and influence, and the state is neutral, monitoring and policing the different sections in the public interest. The mass media cater to these various sections; just as the society is diverse, so there is diversity within the media (e.g., specialist newspapers, cable and satellite television and community radio stations).

The mass media have a rather limited influence because individuals already possess beliefs and attitudes, and the public is more influenced by community leaders and opinion-makers, who mediate the media messages.

 

b) Marxist theories

- Antonio Gramsci

Marxists argue that in every epoch, the ruling ideas are the ideas of the ruling class. The mass media are the means by which the ideas of the ruling class maintain their dominance through ideas, beliefs and attitudes; e.g., advertising stimulate consumer desires for capitalists’ goods. The media ideology reflects the dominant ideology on political authority, work ethics, consumption and nationhood. The media are employed to undermine events that threaten the establishment (e.g., attack on trade unions, left wing politicians, immigrants and feminists). The media messages normalise and make sense of ideas and values that fit with the ruling class.

Contrary to the pluralists, there is a lack of diversity of media messages. This is not surprisingly since there is a concentration of ownership of media outlets (such as The News Corporation and Time Warner). Furthermore, there is a global standard package, which is offered to all with minimal adaptation to the local context (i.e., little diversity); e.g., similar news programmes and global television soap operas.

The media content of television and radio programmes fits with the capitalist logic:

i) many programmes are cheap and appeal to wide audiences (e.g., chat and game shows);

ii) there is little catering to minority interests, such as gays, disabilities, ethnic minorities and children; often such programmes are shown at unsociable hours; and

iii) there is marginal education and information content to many programmes; e.g., news is reduced to sound-bites or moved to unsocial hours.

The media polarise the population into ‘information-rich’ and ‘information-poor’, creating social divisions within the society, rather than catering to the social differences. New editorials are biased, favouring one party over another. The media possess the power to politically manipulate the audience.

Nevertheless, the democratic state can regulate the media in the public interest.

 

c) Interpretative theories

- David Morley

Interpretivists argue that the audience are able to filter media messages. The public is selective to what they are attentive to: ignoring, reacting, forgetting and re-interpreting messages according to their own viewpoint; re-making what has been transmitted (e.g., talk-backs, writing to editors, de-facing printed messages and answering back to shows). According to interpretivism, the mass media are not powerful meaning-makers. The audience is able to distinguish between entertainment and politics, and understand programme producers’ motivations and intentions.

Viewers and readers are more intelligent than normally assumed. Nevertheless, the ability to interpret depends on media literacy, and some social classes and groups are better equipped than others.

 

d) Post-modernism

- Stuart Hall

Post-modernists argue that we live in a media-saturated society. We are constantly bombarded by multitude of images, and the media shape our sense of reality (what is real or fiction). We criss-cross through time and space as we piece together bits of media information into a collage of images, which are largely disconnected; e.g., in one minute we can watch the following as we flick through the channels (or surf the net): a real natural disaster in Asia, a comic show in the UK, a political debate in the US and football in Europe.

The mass media create confusion and incoherence, generate disunity and a loss of real time and space, and increase uncertainty and scepticism about knowledge, reality and ourselves. Did the Iraqi War really happen? Instead, the media encourage superficiality, cynicism, thirst for constant change and desires for the moment, rather than substance belief and truth; e.g., reality TV programmes and chat shows.

Here, the mass media do not manipulate and control the audience, but rather turn them off from politics and engagement with public issues.