[framing] Which came first… the viewers or the agenda?

The idea of what should be considered “mass communication” seems vague. While scale, direction, impersonality/anonymity, simultaneity, transience, and audience aim to restrict the definition, with new technologies emerging it seems to be task much like “nailing Jell-o to the wall”. With software that encourages 2-way communication, helps to better familiarize companies with their target audience and preserve messages for a long period of time to reference, how will we really define “mass communication”?

Agenda-setting… is this not a circular concept? If the media primarily functions as a business, they would need to show news that the majority of their viewers want to see. But, do the stories and material they show affect what the viewers than want to see? Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

In reference to the catharsis hypothesis: ” … it was later discovered that those who weren’t allowed to watch their favorite programs were angry and acted out because of this…” I found this to be incredibly interesting and similar to what some may refer to as the “brat hypothesis” ha. I am interested in investigating this study further.

Tags: agenda setting, catharsis hypothesis, framing, mass communications, week 2