Page 247 - Culture Society and the Media

CULTURE, SOCIETY AND THE MEDIA 237

Before telling this story in greater detail, however, it may be useful to identify
here certain shifts of paradigmatic or methodological character that seem more
central to the state of the art as it is increasingly being conceived

1. A shift from focusing on attitudes and opinions in the study of media effe
to a focus on cognitions. Some examples of studies which represent this new
emphasis will be presented on pp. 250–60. This change of focus raises, however,
an important question, namely whether changes in cognitions are, indeed,
prerequisites for changes in attitudes. While there is no doubt that the two are
related, the causal links between them, so far little explored, may be rather
2. A shift from defining effects in terms of particular changes to defining them
in terms of a structuring or re-structuring of cognitions and perceptions.
This is related to the previous shift, and is probably most clearly
demonstrated in research into the so-called ‘agenda-setting function’ of the
mass media, as well as the role of the media in audience ‘constructions of
social reality’.
3. A proliferation of models of the mass communication process, which have
yielded alternative definitions of the nature of effects. The linear model,
which specified the components of the communication process as
comprising a source, a channel, a message and a receiver, and focused on
changes in receivers’ mental states induced by stimuli relayed through prior
phases of the process, has been complemented by other approaches,
including: ‘uses and gratifications’ studies, in which the emphasis is placed
on members of the audience actively processing media materials in
accordance with their own needs (Blumler and Katz, 1974); convergence
and co-orientation models, which emphasize the exchange of information
among individuals in interaction so as to move towards a more common or
shared meaning (McLeod and Chaffee, 1973); and a ‘chain reaction’ model
of communication effect, in which the impact of the mass media is found
not only in the addition of effects upon individuals but also in how other
people throughout the social structure react to the influenced individuals’
example (Kepplinger and Roth, 1979).
4. In considering the sources of communication effect, some shift away from
an earlier preoccupation with partisan advocates, as originators of messages
that might or might not influence voters, to an interest in the less purposive
but potentially more formative contributions to public opinion that stem from
the political news and reports fashioned by professional communicators. In
the earlier view, the professionals were conceived of chiefly as ‘gate-
keepers’, admitting or shutting out those messages of advocates that might
eventually affect the audience. In recent work, however, they figure more
often as ‘shapers of public consciousness’ in ways that may even dictate
what advocates must do to stand a chance of winning electoral acceptance.