10.06.2013 Views

mass-communication-theory

mass-communication-theory

mass-communication-theory

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

As with any theoretical proposition that challenges the prevailing view of the<br />

time—specifically, the limited-effects perspective—spiral of silence and agendasetting<br />

both encountered intense criticism, and their adherents had to overcome a<br />

fear of isolation and rejection from others in the discipline, just as Noelle-<br />

Neumann might have predicted. Nonetheless, these assertions of sometimes powerful<br />

<strong>mass</strong> media helped move <strong>mass</strong> <strong>communication</strong> <strong>theory</strong> toward its more contemporary<br />

stance.<br />

NEWS PRODUCTION RESEARCH<br />

news production<br />

research<br />

The study of how<br />

the institutional<br />

routines of news<br />

production inevitably<br />

produce<br />

distorted or biased<br />

content<br />

Chapter 10 Media and Society: The Role of Media in the Social World 303<br />

During the past four decades, several studies have been conducted on the production<br />

and consumption of news content (Crouse, 1973; Epstein, 1973; Fishman,<br />

1980; Gans, 1979; Gitlin, 1980; Tuchman, 1978; Whiten, 2004). Most of the<br />

research we discuss in this section was undertaken by British and American sociologists<br />

during the 1970s and 1980s. Their purpose was to critically analyze how<br />

journalists routinely cover news. Most of this research supports theories about the<br />

intrusion of media into politics as well as cultural commodification theories (see<br />

Chapter 11).<br />

W. Lance Bennett (1988, 2005a) surveyed news production research literature<br />

and summarized four ways in which current news production practices distort or<br />

bias news content:<br />

1. Personalized news: Most people relate better to individuals than to groups or<br />

institutions, so most news stories center around people. According to Bennett<br />

(1988), “The focus on individual actors[s] who are easy to identify with positively<br />

or negatively invites members of the news audience to project their own<br />

private feelings and fantasies directly onto public life” (p. 27). Thus personalization<br />

helps people relate to and find relevance in remote events. It does this,<br />

however, at a cost. “When television news reports about poverty focus on an<br />

individual’s situation rather than on poverty more generally,” wrote New<br />

York Times Magazine editor Alexander Star, “viewers look for someone (the<br />

poor person or someone else) who caused the hardship. But this … is to<br />

avoid the whole complicated process that brought someone grief. Stories call<br />

our attention away from chance, the influence of institutions or social structures,<br />

or the incremental contributions that different factors typically make to<br />

any outcome. And they follow conventions that verge on melodrama: events<br />

are caused by individuals who act deliberately, and what those individuals do<br />

reflects their underlying character. This, to put it mildly, is not how most<br />

things happen (2008, p. 10). Reality becomes little more than a series of<br />

small, individual soap operas.<br />

2. Dramatized news: Like all media commodities, news must be attractively packaged,<br />

and a primary means of doing this involves dramatization. Edward Jay<br />

Epstein (1973) provided the following quotation from a policy memorandum<br />

written by a network television news producer: “Every news story should, without<br />

any sacrifice of probity or responsibility, display the attributes of fiction, of<br />

drama. It should have structure and conflict, problem and denouement, rising<br />

action and falling action, a beginning, a middle, and an end. These are not only<br />

the essentials of drama; they are the essentials of narrative” (pp. 4–5).<br />

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).<br />

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.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!