Posts Tagged: paradigm

2. In reference to the part about mass communication being a one-way communication flow mediated and enhanced by technology. R & V said that mass communication used to give little opportunity for immediate feedback from the audience, but new media technologies are changing this. Will these new and evolving media technologies change the way we think about mass communication and lead us into a new paradigm shift?

When thinking about the definition of what a paradigm shift is (a new way of thinking replacing an older one), I definitely believe we are on the cusp of one in relation to the one-way flow of mass communication. Traditional mass-communication may still be a one-way flow with little feedback from audience, but with the growing popularity of interactivity on the Internet, audience opinion has become a very important part of mass communication. This new age, this evolution of media is definitely changing the way mass-communication is accessed. But will this shift our paradigm? Or add a new paradigm for interactive mass-communication?

Think about online newspaper articles, most every story gives readers the opportunity to comment and voice their opinion. Very heated topics such as the idiot Pastor who wanted to burn the Quran on September 11^th, those news articles had thousands of comments from readers. This aspect of engagement with mass communication may be creating a new paradigm. The dictionary definition of interactive is: (of a computer or other electronic device) allowing a two-way flow of information between it and a user, responding to the user’s input.

Although this new age of interactivity is heightening and reducing the use of traditional media, I still know people who read newspapers daily, rather than going to the Internet for their news. I also do not think books will ever be outdated by kindles, or e-books. So, I believe that this interactive mass-communication with create a new paradigm.

Another interesting part of the reading while still on the topic of paradigms was about the direct effects paradigm and the bullet-hypodermic theory. The theory is about injecting audiences with a message that immediately, powerfully and directly causes them to adopt a new opinion or idea. The example given in the book was the War of the Worlds radio show, which is just crazy to think that people actually believed aliens were taking over. I know this theory has been disproven but I can think of a few examples where our society has been completely affected by a message form the mass media. Y2k and Anthrax are two examples that come to mind. Can you guys think of any others?

I found the topics we covered this week to be very interesting. Earlier this week, I posted a question regarding paradigm shifts and asked whether or not we were on the cusp of another groundbreaking shift. Our current paradigm focuses on individual effects, critical/cultural theories, and social level effects.

However, I feel that these ideas will be reevaluated as we develop into a Web 2.0 society driven by collaboration, globalization, and social networks. Now, we need to think less about how the media is affecting society and more about how society is affecting the media.

As some of my classmates have already mentioned, social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter are quickly becoming go-to sources for people to find and report breaking news. Blogs are also serving as an outlet for the growing phenomenon of citizen journalism. Although major news corporations, such as CNN, also have blogs and Twitter feeds, they still have a slower reaction time compared to citizen journalists. Instead of trying to compete, these traditional news sources are slowly beginning to realize that they need to embrace these changes. They even have their own outlets, such as iReport, that allow people to report stories on their official site. This shift away from traditional news sources changes the way we think of such things as agenda-setting. It opens up a whole new set of questions as to the reliability of these new sources of news and who is influencing who. This is a key aspect of what may be a whole new paradigm in communication theory.

—-

My other question concerned the idea of propaganda and the techniques that are used to influence others. Even in this age of information, where consumers are more wary of marketing tricks than ever before, we still have these propaganda techniques being used effectively.

For example, the book mentions how the bandwagon technique is still heavily used to market movies and books. Before the internet, when people saw “America’s #1 Movie!” they would just have to take the commercial’s word for it. Yes, they could go and read different publications and try to find reviews but, more often than not, people were compelled to see something that everyone else was seeing. Now, we can easily Google a movie and find thousands of reviews to decide if we want to see it. Yet even if the reviews have been bad, we still have to urge to see for ourselves what people are talking about.

I think, to answer my own question, even with increasing amounts of information at our fingertips, there are still those sociological forces that drive us. We still have that unquenchable need to belong and effective advertising uses propaganda techniques to tap into those innermost desires. Whether or not we feel that this is ethical, is a whole different issue. However, it is safe to say that although we may be more aware of the fact than we have been in the past, the media still has a very powerful influence on our lives.

1. Chapter 5 briefly discusses the “summary of the Transmission of Direct Effects Model” in studying how messages are transmitted, received and have an effect on people. he reading says this paradigm is based on the idea that media messages were assumed to have a direct influence on those who were exposed to them. But what about messages that don’t have a direct impact on the audience? What are studies that have been conducted on ineffective ad campaigns, for instance?

2. I always think the idea of social responsibility and the press is an interesting one. According to this theory, the press is obligated to provide a truthful account of events to its readership, among other responsibilities. If there is an instance of an embellished story, does it directly affect the public’s trust in that particular publication?

3. According to the uses and gratifications theory, many goals of mass media use can be derived from data supplied by individuals themselves as they report their interests and motives. I’m always interested in learning about the varying motivations for using new technologies, so what would be some of the specific uses and gratifications of the iPad, and how are they different from the motivations of using a standard MacBook or other Apple computer?