Page 178 - Decoding Culture
P. 178

THE RISE  F   THE READE R    171
                                               O
           subjects' points of view and, in so doing, understand social activity in
           its context. But that would be true also of symbolic interactionism,
           or, indeed, any of the many alternative research methodologies that
           emerged  in  1970s  sociology  and  cast  themselves  in  broadly
           'phenomenological' terms.
             Compared with the classical form, then, what is missing from
           the recent audience research version of 'ethnography' is extended
           participant observation. As  Moores  (1993:  33)  observes  of Lull
           (1980):  'his project is one  of the few audience  ethnographies  to
           have  relied chiefly  on  long  periods of participant observation',  a
           strategy Lull adopted to minimize disruption caused by the inves­
           tigator and thence allow a fuller appreciation of the role of everyday
           family activities. In contrast, most audience research in the 'ethno­
           graphic'  tradition  has  utilized  open-ended  and  semi-structured
           interview techniques  rather than participant observation, some­
           times with individuals, sometimes with groups.  In this respect, a
           more appropriate term for this style of inquiry would be 'qualitative
           audience research', which catches its distinctiveness more  effec­
           tively  than  does  'ethnography'.  However,  the  usage  is  widely
           established by now, and even recent writers on 'ethnography' more
           generally, such as Hammersley (1992: 8), tend to use the term as
           interchangeable with 'qualitative method'. While it is unfortunate to
           lose the holistic sense conveyed in the expression 'an ethnogra­
           phy', provided that no one assumes that 'audience ethnography' is
           distinguished by application of systematic participant observation,
           then the label will make little difference.
             What does make a difference is the researcher's understanding
           of the purpose of such research and of the epistemology that the
           methodological practice presupposes, and here it is vital to recog­
           nize the ways in which audience ethnographies  depart from the
           classic naturalist-empiricist  model.  Morley  (1992:  183)  has  sug­
           gested  that the  ethnographic  approach  to  communication  'rests





                              Copyrighted Material
   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183