Page 195 - Communication Theory and Research

McQuail(EJC)-3281-14.qxd 8/16/2005 6:33 PM Page 180

180 Communication Theory & Research
expectations accordingly. For the journalist, faster reporting means less time for
selection and processing. Across the board, the time difference between event
and report is decreasing, those involved are allowed less time to give their
reactions (Van der Donk and Tops, 1992: 54) and increasingly, moreover, it is the
public’s opinion that is sought through instant opinion polls, ‘The politicians
reach the people via television; the people reach the politicians via polls’ (see
Abramson et al., 1988: 90). The life of public issues is shortened as the publicity
process speeds up. This whirling communication carousel of immediate action
and reaction within the publicity process decreases rather than increases the
scope for journalistic signification.
Finally, increased opportunities for telematic communication also lead to a
greater concentration, a greater density (Münch, 1993: 262–3; Weischenberg et al.,
1994: 27) of available information. In principle, each message can now reach
everyone and, in principle, be received by everyone. Journalists are finding it
increasingly difficult to attract the public’s attention within this densely packed
public space. There is a parallel increase in employment opportunities for
professional attracters of attention such as government information officials and
public relations (PR) officers, the natural antipodes of journalists. Recent
research in the Netherlands shows that the first group already outnumbers the
latter by 2:1 (Van Ruler and de Lange, 1995: 24).
When we wish to summarize the preceding trends into a formula, the ‘commun-
ication pressure’ in society consists of a multiplication of volume, speed of
circulation and density of public communication:

Communication pressure = Volume × Speed of circulation × Density.

The most distinguishing feature of the new communication services based on
telematics, interactivity (Bardoel, 1993: 57), undermines the position of journalism
yet again. The emphasis shifts from ‘allocution’ to ‘consultation’ (Bordewijk and
Van Kaam, 1982; McQuail, 1987: 41), from undirected dissemination to a directed
search for information. Increasingly, it is the receiver to whom the task of
selection falls. Although it is fair to say that only a limited public, as yet, will
actually make use of such (inter)active opportunities, as a matter of principle their
significance is considerable, for they infringe on the exclusive access to many
different sources that journalists have enjoyed up till now.
Interactive services may also provide an incentive for increased commun-
ication between citizens, for horizontal communication in society. It has been
predicted that this development will be at the expense of the existing vertical
communication between the state and the citizen, in which journalism has
traditionally played such an important part. The advance of what Abramson et al.
(1988: 113) refer to as ‘unmediated media’ may exert extra pressure on the position
and the filtering effect of the established media. Moreover, the combination of
computers and networks provides additional opportunities for communication in
fields of social life hitherto practically untouched by the media. We are already
seeing the emergence of many new circles of communication, bound together
by common interest, through services such as the Internet. The ‘media gap’