mass-communication-theory

168 Section 3 From Limited-Effects to Critical Cultural Theories: Ferment in the Field
INSTANT ACCESS
Elite Pluralism
Strengths Weaknesses
1. Explains a stable U.S. social and political
system
2. Is based on wealth of empirical data
3. Is a well-developed and cogent theory
It is important to recognize that in constructing his perspective on American
society, Key, like most limited-effects researchers, went far beyond the narrow
insights provided by his research. Although the ideas he advanced were consistent
with the data available to him, other conclusions were equally reasonable. But
when Key wrote his book, this was not well understood. His ideas gained widespread
acceptance as a definitive interpretation of the data, and his talents as a
writer also lent force to his theory.
C. WRIGHT MILLS AND THE POWER ELITE
1. Legitimizes an undemocratic view of
U.S. politics
2. Goes well beyond empirical evidence
for conclusions
3. Is too accepting of the status quo
4. Paints a negative picture of average people
and their media use
Opposition to elite pluralism came from across the political spectrum. The debate
in many ways foreshadowed the ferment over all forms of limited-effects theory
that arose in the 1970s and 1980s. Most classical democratic theorists were offended
by and disdainful of elite pluralism. They argued that if the present political
system was not a true democracy, efforts should be made to move the system in
that direction, however difficult. Either we should recapture the essence of democracy
as envisioned by the Founders, or we should take steps to break the power of
existing elites. To opponents, elite pluralism was a rationalization of the status quo
providing no direction for future development.
In an era when respect for normative and grand social theories was declining,
however, it was hard for classical democratic theorists to defend their views against
a “scientific” theory like elite pluralism. During the Cold War, with the American
political system seemingly locked in mortal combat with a ruthless totalitarian foe,
it’s not surprising that people would find elite pluralism attractive. After all, it suggested
that the American political system was stable and resilient, even if not perfect.
Maintaining this system didn’t require radical change, just some tinkering to
make sure that various pluralistic groups were routinely co-opted into the system
and that political elites were bound by informal rules stopping them from engaging
in demagoguery.
The opposition to elite pluralism from the political left was spearheaded by
C. Wright Mills, a Harvard sociologist and, as mentioned earlier, the man who
served as field director for Lazarsfeld’s Decatur research project. Mills was well
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.