Page 135 - Myths for the Masses An Essay on Mass Communication

Mass Communication and the Meaning of Self in Society

in other instances, standards of trust are based on ideological
grounds, even on pure empathy with particular topics, or on a per-
sonal attraction to a style of presentation – and a presenter – rather
than on the quality of the content.
In any case, there is no effective recourse, legal or otherwise, for
an audience in the event of incomplete or faulty information –
besides libel, slander, or invasion of privacy.There may be an appeal
to honesty or the maintenance of standards, but the process of mass
communication lacks guarantees that protect against untruthfulness
or error and operates on retaining audience confidence. There is
also an assumption that personal judgment, based on competence
or satisfaction, must guide the ultimate decision regarding trust in
the objectivity of the public discourse. But given the pervasiveness
of mass communication in all of its forms and its total penetration
of the public sphere, the cancellation of a newspaper, or a cable tele-
vision service, the refusal to watch television or listen to radio, even
the rejection of literature as a source of insights, may not resolve
problems of mistrust. Public knowledge and experience continue to
rely on the flow of mass-mediated realities that are reflected in the
daily conversations that permeate the public sphere. There is no
escape from the collective world view of a media industry that
seems less divided over the discursive strategies of representation,
including the ideological thrust of the discourse, than over territor-
ial issues pertaining to influence and control over the public sphere.
There is a new objectivity, however, expressed in an active
language that challenges the traditional myth of (American) jour-
nalism, with a disclosure of identity and ideology and an insistence
on fairness and accuracy that gives a new meaning to the relation-
ship between mass communication and public interest. It is a prac-
tice that is most typically – but not exclusively – identified with
marginal media, which oppose and confront the hegemonies of
knowledge production that define social, economic, and political
realities – and which strive to offer alternative world views that are
based on knowledge as a cultural construction at a concrete histori-
cal moment. By taking this approach they hope to secure public
participation in a critique of traditional constructions of reality
that encourages independent thought regarding the shape of the
world.

123