mass-communication-theory

294 Section 4 Contemporary Mass Communication Theory
INSTANT ACCESS
The Knowledge Gap
Strengths Weaknesses
1. Identifies potentially troublesome gaps between
groups
2. Provides ideas for overcoming gaps
3. Presumes reciprocity and audience activity in
communication
4. Is grounded in systems theory
1. Assumes gaps are always dysfunctional; not
all researchers agree
2. Limits focus to gaps involving news and
social conflicts
3. Can’t address fundamental reasons for gaps
(e.g., poor schools or limited access to information
sources)
And although we have to act in that environment, we have to reconstruct it on a
simpler model before we can manage with it” (p. 16). If you remember our discussion
of Lippmann in Chapters 4 and 5, then you know that he concluded that
average people just can’t be trusted to make important political decisions based on
these simplified pictures. Average people have to be protected, and the important
decisions have to be made by technocrats who use better models to guide their
actions. Thus modern agenda-setting notions derive more or less directly from a
mass society perspective. Critics have noted this connection.
Although he did not specifically use the term, Bernard Cohen (1963) is generally
credited with refining Lippmann’s ideas into the theory of agenda-setting.
“The press is significantly more than a purveyor of information and opinion,” he
wrote. “It may not be successful much of the time in telling people what to think,
but it is stunningly successful in telling its readers what to think about. And
it follows from this that the world looks different to different people, depending
not only on their personal interests, but also on the map that is drawn for them
by the writers, editors, and publishers of the papers they read” (p. 13).
Parenthetically, it’s hard to ignore the limited-effects bias in Cohen’s thinking. He
first argued that the press is rarely successful in telling people what to think, but
then said that the world looks different to different people depending on what
the press offers them. Another way of interpreting this is that Cohen took a mass
society perspective and revised it to make it compatible with the limited-effects
perspective.
Cohen’s writing became the basis for what we now call the agenda-setting
function of the mass media. This perspective might have lingered in obscurity had
it not been empirically confirmed by research conducted by Maxwell E. McCombs
and Donald Shaw (1972). They explained their interpretation of agenda-setting:
“In choosing and displaying news, editors, newsroom staff, and broadcasters play
an important part in shaping political reality. Readers learn not only about a
given issue, but how much importance to attach to that issue from the amount
of information in a news story and its position…. The mass media may well
determine the important issues—that is, the media may set the ‘agenda’ of the
campaign” (p. 176).
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.