Framing Post – Week 2

When a chapter on early developments in Mass communication Theory begins with a reference to The Lion King, the author clearly knows their audience. The message is clear: those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it. Thus, we study the origins of communication theory so that we don’t screw things like up like those guys did. From scanning over the first chapter in our reading, I think of when we talked about the Hypodermic Needle theory in class. When it was created, I’m sure it was very relevant and credible. But times have changed and we have seen it become obsolete. Yet is there still value in it? Looking at the roots of mass communication theory, how much have things changed since its first conception, and what value lies in those elements that have become seemingly irrelevant?

Looking at the second chapter, I immediately wonder how “the individual perspective on mass communication theory” will play into this class, as we focus more generally on society and culture. Considering the recent developments in technology, I’m interested to see how both the amateurization of the media and fragmentation of the media into niche segments have effected traditional mass comm thought. Both themes deal with how media is being broken down into smaller and smaller parts, which would make unique content more engaging for the individual who chooses to consume it.

And in this third chapter, we get to the broader themes of the class, with the sociological perspective on comm theory. I’ve always been intrigued by the Agenda Setting theory, as it can border the line the between whistle-blowing and conspiracy. We often call media “the fourth estate,” but how much power does media really have in controlling the thoughts of a society? Where do we draw the line between entertainment or journalism and manipulation?

Tags: framing, mass communications