Page 95 - Myths for the Masses An Essay on Mass Communication

Mass Communication and the Promise of Democracy

On one hand, a smaller segment of society – the upper classes –
is intimately tied to the processing of information – and the cre-
ation of entertainment – which derives from expert sources, like
quality newspapers, specialized journals or magazines, highbrow
broadcasts, and serious film, besides theatrical performances and clas-
sical concerts. Together, these sources of intellectual and creative
insight constitute a comprehensive and complex foundation for
advancing practical knowledge and participating in the affairs of the
state. Their communicative strategies include the perpetuation of a
language of domination that finds its expression in the performance
of mass communication. One is reminded of Roland Barthes’s
observation about the bourgeois oppressor, who conserves the world
through myths and in a language that aims at eternalizing.
On the other hand, the majority of individuals – or the lower
classes – are denied access to these resources, both for economic
reasons and also because of a serious lack of bourgeois competen-
cies, ranging from literacy and levels of education to social or
political engagement in a critical response to a mediated reality.
Confounded by exposure to various forms of mass communication,
such as television or radio, these individuals are without any real
opportunity for a comparative approach to other sources of infor-
mation or entertainment. This is not a matter of taste, or taste cul-
tures, but a question of choice, and not only in the interest of
participating in the discourse of a bourgeois society, but also for the
sake of strengthening class identity.
Reliance on media organizations for specialized, technical knowl-
edge by an educated elite has become the foundation of a new
patronage system that privileges a sophisticated generation within
the bourgeoisie, which benefits from technologizing mass commu-
nication. The resulting information gap continues to produce cul-
tural, social, and political divisions that reinforce a two-class society
of information-rich and information-poor individuals, with dire
consequences for the survival of democracy. Paradoxically, mass
communication, originally conceived of as an instrument of social
control in some of its forms, is rapidly changing into a privilege of
social, political, and cultural elites, capable of making public judg-
ments because they can be informed. Mass communication, in this

83