Media Sociologists Flashcards
(109 cards)
Dutton - mass media characteristics
Mass media has been differentiated from other types of communication in terms of four essential characteristics: Distance, Technology, Scale, Commodity.
Distance - traditional mass media is impersonal, lacks immediacy and is one-way. No matter how emotionally involved a person is, they have no way of directly affecting what is happening on screen.
Technology - mass media requires a vehicle such as a television, or a mobile phone.
Scale - mass media involves simultaneous communication with many people, e.g. live television.
Commodity - mass media comes at a price, e.g. to watch Netflix you must pay a subscription fee.
Crosbie - new media
Crosbie argues that the new media has characteristics that make them very different to other forms of mass media.
Technology - They cannot exist without the appropriate (computer).
Personalisation - Individualised messages can be simultaneously delivered to vast numbers of people.
Collective control - Each person in a network potentially has the ability to share, shape and change the content of information being exchanged.
McQuail - impartial news
McQuail (1992) argues that ‘news’ is not objective or impartial. News is a socially manufactured product because it is the end result of a selective process.
Galtung and Ruge - 9 news values
Galtung and Ruge (1965) identified 9 key news values. Some of the most memorable include: Extraordinariness, Reference to Elites, and Negativity.
Davies - churnalism
Pluralist Davies (2008) argues that modern day British journalism is characterised by ‘Churnalism’, which is the uncritical, overreliance by journalists on ‘facts’ churned out by public relations experts and government spin doctors. He found that 80% of news stories in a two-week period in 1997 were sourced this way and that only 12% of stories were generated by journalists.
Bagdikian - wider power elite
Bagdikian (2004) suggests that almost all media owners in the USA are part of a wider power elite made up of industrial, financial and political establishment. He claims that this makes the news politically conservative and promotes corporate values. This explains why newspapers usually have sections dedicated to financial news rather than the growing gap between the rich and poor.
Herman and Chomsky - media propaganda
Herman and Chomsky (1988) argue that the media participate in propaganda campaigns helpful to elite interests. They suggest that media performance is largely shaped by market forces. The media promotes elitist values as powerful institutions such as the government can threaten and pressure the media, thus controlling the flow of information.
Edwards and Cromwell - the West in media
Edwards and Cromwell (2006) argue that particular subjects e.g. US and UK responsibility for genocide, corporate criminality, and threats to the existence of life are ignored by the British mass media. For example, the USA is almost always presented as the champion of democracy.
Hall - hierarchy of credibility
Hall agrees that news is supportive of capitalist interests because those in powerful positions have better access to media institutions. Hall argues that this is a result of the news values employed by most journalists. In particular, the views of politicians, business leaders and police officers (primary definers) are believed to be more important than those of pressure groups, trade unionists and ordinary citizens. Hall refers to this as the hierarchy of credibility.
Schlesinger - power of the elites
Schlesinger (1990) is critical of theories that focus on the power of the elites and media owners because the media does not necessarily act in the best interest of these people. For example, politicians are very careful of what they say in the media as they understand that it can be misconstrued. They are aware that the media can strongly influence voting behaviour.
GUMG - language used by the media
The Glasgow University Media Group (GUMG) found that language used by the media are more sympathetic to the interests of the powerful and often devalued points of view of less powerful people. For example, the media reported strikers as making ‘demands’ whereas those in powerful positions were reported as ‘negotiating’.
Stein - internet as a secondary source
Stein (2002) urges caution in the use of the Internet as a source of secondary data because its content has not been academically or scientifically verified. Stein also argues that access to computers and the Internet, both within the Western societies in terms of social class and worldwide, is still deeply unequal. This is referred to as the ‘digital divide’.
Bagdikian - media ownership
Bagdikian (2004) notes that in 1983, 50 corporations controlled the vast majority of all news media in the USA, but by 2004 media ownership was concentrated in 7 corporations.
Curran - press barons
Curran (2003) notes that ownership of British newspapers has always been concentrated in the hands of a few ‘press barons’, e.g. in 1937, four men owned nearly one in every two national and local daily newspapers sold in Britain.
detailed systematic examination of the social history of the British press does suggest that the evidence for owner interference in and manipulation of British newspaper content is strong.
notes that in the period 1920-50 press barons openly boasted that they ran their newspapers for the express purpose of propaganda that reflected their political views.
points out that even when engaged in investigative reporting, the majority of newspapers in Britain have supported the Conservative Party.
also notes that the period 1974-92 saw the emergence of Rupert Murdoch, however, Curran rejects the idea that Murdoch is part of a unified capitalist elite but acknowledges that Murdoch’s newspapers are conservative in content and strongly supportive of capitalist interests. He argues Murdoch’s motives are economic rather than ideological in that Murdoch believes that right wing economic policies are the key to vast profits.
Doyle - examination of media ownership
Doyle (2002) suggests that examination of ownership and control patterns is important for two reasons.
1) All points of view need to be heard if society is to be truly democratic.
2) Abuses of power and influence by elites need to be monitored by a free media.
Doyle argues that too much concentration of media ownership is dangerous and unhealthy because the media have the power to exert considerable influence over public opinion.
Miliband - role of the media
Miliband (1973) argued that the role of the media is to shape how we think about the world we live in and suggested that audiences are rarely informed about important issues such as inequalities in wealth or why poverty exists.
Five ways of ideological manipulation
Tunstall and Palmer - government control of media owners
Tunstall and Palmer (1991) suggest that governments are no longer interested in controlling the activities of media owners because they need their support to either gain power or hang onto it.
Curran - media owner intervention
Curran’s analysis of British newspapers suggests that both pluralist and Marxist theories may be mistaken in the way they look at media ownership. He argues the pluralist view that media owners do not intervene in media content is evidentially false.
argues that since 2000 there has been even greater intervention by owners such as Murdoch. However, Curran disagrees with Marxists about the motive for this. He notes that the actions of media owners are not collectivised, rather they pursue their economic goals in a ruthlessly individualised way in an attempt to obtain a bigger share of the market than their capitalist competitors.
GUMG - role of journalists
The GUMG suggest that media content does support the interests of those who run the capitalist system. However, this is an unintended by-product of the social backgrounds of journalists and broadcasters rather than a conscious capitalist conspiracy.
The GUMG points out that most journalists working for national newspapers, television and radio tend to be overwhelmingly male, White, and middle class, e.g. 54% are privately educated.
The GUMG claims that these journalists and broadcasters tend to believe in middle-of-the-road (consensus) views and ideas because these are generally unthreatening. Journalists believe that these appeal to the majority of their viewers, listeners and readers.
Ideas outside this consensus are viewed by journalists as ‘extremist’. People who hold these opinions are rarely invited to contribute their views in newspapers or on television, or if they are, they are ridiculed by journalists.
The GUMG argues that these journalists are not motivated by a desire to defend capitalist interests. Media companies are profit-making businesses.
Those who commission and plan programmes, or decide newspaper or magazine content, usually play safe by excluding anything that might offend or upset readers or viewers. Losing several thousand readers, or viewers, because they were offended by ‘extreme’ views and potentially losing millions of pounds in revenue and profit is too much of a risk.
Barnett and Weymour - media being dumbed down
Barnett and Weymour argue that such decisions have had a negative cultural effect in the sense that education, information and news have been increasingly side lined.
They compared television schedules in 1978, 1988 and 1998 and argued that the evidence suggests that television in Britain has been significantly dumbed down, e.g. the number of one-off dramas and documentaries has halved, while soap operas and cheap reality shows have increased fivefold.
Barnett and Weymour note that even the BBC is succumbing to these commercial pressures. Furthermore, they conclude that despite having hundreds of television channels, we do not have more choice, just more of the same thing.
Adorno and Horkheimer - media should encourage critical thinking
Adorno and Horkheimer (1940) think that mainstream, mass culture is mostly produced in an entirely rational way, so creative decisions are also commercial decisions.
think that real culture should challenge us, stimulate critical thought and encourage our individuality. The culture which they think is valuable helps to cultivate a critical disposition in people.
Curran - manipulation of media content
Curran (2003) found lots of evidence of owners directly manipulating media content.
argues that in the later 20th century and today, owners are, if anything, even more interventionist, with again Rupert Murdoch being the obvious example.
Galbraith - technocratic managerial elite
Galbraith (1967) found a ‘technocratic managerial elite’ - despite being well paid and regarded, they remain employees rather than the employers. Those employers are called ‘media conglomerates’.
Bernard and McDermott - media ownership rules
‘current media ownership rules in the UK prevent any one entity acquiring excessive influence in the sector, thereby ensuring plurality of voice and diversity of content’.