Page 244 - Culture Society and the Media

234 POLITICAL EFFECTS
personal discussion, etc.), or in the case of TV, say, different programme-types
(party broadcasts, news bulletins, current affairs and discussion programmes,
etc.), or perhaps the appearances of different types of speakers (Conservative,
Labour, Liberal, professional journalists, experts, etc.).
2. Measure the exposure of audience members to the chosen contents, no mean
task in circumstances where political messages may be surrounded by much non-
political matter (e.g. entertainment programmes on TV) and exposure may be
due more to habit than choice, entailing low levels of attention in turn.
3. Postulate likely dimensions and direction of audience effect to be tested,
which could include the following foci, each presenting unique measurement
problems: policy information; issue priorities; images of politicians’ qualities as
leaders; attitudes to the various parties’ strengths and weaknesses; voting
preferences.
4. Specify whatever conditional factors might facilitate, block or amplify the
process of effect—such as, say, those of sex, age, educational background,
strength of party loyalty, motivation to follow a campaign, acceptance of a
medium’s political trustworthiness, etc.
Yet after taking all this trouble, the research worker is unlikely to contemplate
a sizeable difference of outlook between groups more and less exposed to the
relevant media stimulus. It should not be concluded from the modesty of such
findings that, say, political campaigning in the mass media is normally
ineffectual or that messages and images transmitted through the media are
powerless to alter audience perspectives. As we shall see later in this chapter,
researchers who in recent years have entered the political field to harvest
evidence of effects have not returned entirely empty-handed. But their results
have not in the main been simple or clear-cut, and overall may be summarized as
showing (1) that the media constitute but one factor in society among a host of
other influential variables; (2) that the exertion of their influence may depend
upon the presence of other facilitating factors; and (3) that the extent and
direction of media influence may vary across different groups and individuals.
As Comstock (1976) has put it, commenting especially on the impact of
television:

There is no general statement that summarizes the specific literature on
television and human behaviour, but if forced to make one, perhaps it
should be that television’s effects are many, typically minimal in
magnitude, but sometimes major in social importance. (Comstock, 1976)

Ideological differences also divide certain proponents and critics of media
effects research. Liberal-pluralists are initially more likely than Marxists to
pursue research into the political effects of mass communication for a variety of
reasons. They are more prepared to regard an election, for example, as a
meaningful contest between advocates of genuine alternatives, the rival
campaigning efforts of which merit study. They will tend to define political