Posts Tagged: social responsibility

1. Who is ultimately responsible for conveying the truth to the public?

2. Why is it that when a new technological advance is made, society fears social change?

3. Does the Media seem to be disposed to observations or perceptions?

This week has been an interesting insight in regards to how users and participants in media are equally accountable for the flow and agendas that media represents. First we have to consider how society holds seemingly holds responsibility. There are several models displayed in the Social Responsibility and Theories of the press section. News media should be the following: Truthful and comprehensive to current events in meaningful context, a forum for commentary and criticism, a place to project ideals, opinions and attitudes to different groups in society, and being the penultimate means of mass communication. There are four schools of thought that correspond to and oppose this traditional model.

The Libertarian model expressly revolves around the idea of a marketplace of ideas free of central government. This ideal is lacking in an integrated moderation system which means that either chaos or civility can accompany discussion at any given time. The most moderated model is that of Social responsibility. Here the media is self-restrained to promote diverse opinion. However, government regulation comes in to play to lessen the chances of the most dangerous impulses. The Authoritarian model, best exemplified by Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and modern autocratic regimes entail total government control. The press is completely censored, diverse opinion is set aside for the state’s official opinion and differing sentiment carries harsh consequences. The final ideal is that of the Totalitarian model, or the “Soviet model”. Here the media is expressly used as a propaganda tool and is thus an instrument of the state.

Accountability does not only extend to societal mores and the public’s responsibility rather it also applies to the individual. This is an interesting thought to consider when we see social changes being met with mixed reactions. The human mind is naturally averse to change due to the thought of perception and selection. Perception is a filtering process where the individual looks for familiarity and thus comfort in new surroundings. In terms of the media, perception corresponds to differing perceptual channels. These can be automatic and thus totally engrossing, Attentional Perception which allows the individual to  sub-consciously sort audio-visual subjects that have varying appeals of interest, and Self-reflexive which means the individual can consciously sort subjects and process them in order of importance. In regards to the thought process of the individual I have thought of how the media is more in tune with either perceptions of the individual or agenda setting observations.

The answer is that media subjects are whatever the individual derives from it, including the responsibility to interpret the world. The Japanese Martial Arts Philosopher, Musashi Miyamoto, is quoted in his book “The Five Rings” regarding the vision sense as “sight being observation and perception being intuition”. In other words the individual must perceive what cannot be seen. In this information overflow it is wise to go by this teaching. To observe and receive an expressed opinion makes an event relevant to the individual. However the power of perception, when used wisely and without bias, can provide insight and clarity when the line appears to be blurred.

Feel free to comment on this, thank you everyone.

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?