mass-communication-theory

Chapter 6 The Rise of Limited-Effects Theory 167
high levels of political activism that would occur if everyone took a strong interest
in politics.
These arguments reject Libertarian theory (Chapter 5). If voters don’t need to
be informed, or if informing them might actually lead to political disorder, then
there is no need for media to deliver information. Research findings demonstrated
that uncensored and independent media typically failed to diffuse political information
to most people. If so, what political role should media be expected to play? To
reinforce the status quo except in times of crisis? Was there really a need for media
to serve as a public forum as Libertarian theory had assumed? Or as Dewey had
advocated, to systematically educate the people so they could be critical thinkers
as well as informed voters? If so, how should this forum operate and what
resources would be necessary to make it work effectively? Limited-effects research
findings were quite pessimistic concerning the effectiveness of such a forum. They
implied that such a public forum would serve little purpose except for the handful
of people who were already well informed about and engaged in politics. These
conclusions directed researchers away from the study of mass media and the formation
of media policy and toward political parties, political socialization, and the
institutions of government such as legislatures, political executives such as the president,
and the legal system. These topics soon dominated the research agenda in
political science.
The political perspective implicit in these arguments became known as elite
pluralism. During the 1960s, elite pluralism strongly challenged traditional forms
of democratic theory and was widely debated in political science. Elite pluralism
claimed to be scientific because, unlike classical democratic theory, it was based
on empirical data. V. O. Key provided one of its best formulations in Public Opinion
and American Democracy (1961). Like Lazarsfeld, Key was optimistic in the face of
apparently discouraging voter data. His book emphasized the strength and enduring
value of the American political system, even if it fell short of being a classical
democracy.
In some respects, elite pluralism is as contradictory as the two terms that make
up its label. Elite implies a political system in which power is ultimately in the
hands of a small group of influential persons, a political elite. Pluralism refers to
cultural, social, and political diversity. It implies a political system in which many
diverse groups have equal status and representation. Can there be a political system
that is based on both—a system in which power is centralized in the hands of the
few but in which the rights and status of all minority groups are recognized and
advanced? Not only did V. O. Key argue that it is possible to combine these two principles,
he also cited study after study that he interpreted as demonstrating that our
political system already accomplished this.
Like the other examples of limited-effects theory, elite pluralism assumes that
media have little ability to directly influence people. Thus media alone can’t fundamentally
alter politics. It rejects Libertarian notions and argues that media, in the
name of stability, should reinforce political party loyalties and assist parties to
develop and maintain large voter coalitions. Media shouldn’t be expected to lead
public opinion but, rather, should reinforce it. If change is to occur, it must come
from the pluralistic groups and be negotiated and enacted by the leaders of these
groups.
Copyright 2010 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.