This week’s lecture was focused on agenda setting, and was absolutely jam-packed with information, so please excuse this novel of a blog.
Agenda setting is described by the University of Twente as “the creation of what the public thinks is important”. It can be defined somewhat more verbosely as “the process of the mass media presenting certain issues frequently and prominently with the result that large segments of the public come to perceive those issues as more important than others. Simply put, the more coverage an issue receives, the more important it is to people
(Coleman, McCombs, Shaw, Weaver, 2008).” The picture below depicts this:
As Dr Redman explained, “Agenda Setting is a theory, but like all good, solid theories is all a bit obvious really!” From what I weaned from this lecture, this theory is that the more coverage a program receives, the more important people think it is.
There are 4 types of agendas:
1. Public
2. Policy
3. Cooperate
4. Media
All of which are interrelated and responsive to each other. However, it is with Media Agenda Setting that we, as JOUR1111 students are most interested in. The diagram below shows the connection between these types.
The “real world indicators”, as seen in the diagram, connect audiences to the news.
There are two basic assumptions of media agenda setting:
1. The Mass media do not merely reflect and report reality, they filter and shape it.
2. Media concentration on a few issues and subjects leads the public to perceive those issues as more important than other issues.
Therefore, it is not the fact that media has the ability to set an agenda that is sinister, but there can be sinister choices in what is selected to portray. McCombs supported this, stating
“Agenda setting is not always the diabolical plan by journalists to control the minds of the public but ‘an inadvertent by-product of the necessity to focus’ the news”. However, Noam Chomsky disagrees rather whole heartedly “the real mass media are basically trying to divert people. Let them do something else, but don’t bother us (us being the people who run the show). Let them get interested in professional sports, for example. Let everybody be crazed about professional sports or sex scandals or the personalities and their problems or something like that. Anything, as long as it isn’t serious.”
This Agenda Setting Theory can be dated back to the 1920’s, when Harold Lasswell suggested that the mass media “injects” direct influence into its audience. This injection was known as the “Magic Bullet”.
Adolf Hitler knew the power of this “bullet” and, along with Leni Riefenstahl (a German film maker), produced such propaganda films as The Triumph of The Will (a link to this film can be found below).
Walter Lippmann supported the position that people rely on the images in their minds in formulating judgments more that by thinking critically. He went on to state, "Yet in truly effective thinking the prime necessity is to liquidate judgments, regain an innocent eye, disentangle feelings, be curious and open-hearted."
McCombs and Shaw first defined media agenda setting in 1968, and came up with the hypothesis that mass media have large influence on audiences by their choice of what stories to consider newsworthy and how much prominence and space to give them. This theory may seem obvious to us nowadays.
There are two main levels of agenda setting. Dr Redman specified these: “the first is, for the most part, studied by researchers and emphasizes the major issues and the transfer of the salience of those issues. At this level the media suggest what the public should focus on through coverage. The second is essentially, how the media focuses on the attributes of the issues. The media suggests how people should think about an issue.” However, this may be a two way street. As many stories reflect processes of information trading between journalists and sources where each is seeking to manipulate the other.
The media sets an agenda “because they can” (Redman, 2011), having three major effects on its audience, including:
1. Transferring issue’s salience from the news media to the public
2. Transferring issue’s salience for both issues and other objects such as political figures
3. Elite media often sets the agenda for issues in other media
Bernard Cohen supported this idea, stating “the press 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”.
There are seven parts to the Media agenda setting “family”.
1. Media Gatekeeping entails what the media chooses to reveal to the public.
2. Media Advocacy is the purposeful promotion of a message through the media.
3. Agenda Cutting is when the truth or reality that is going on in the world isn't represented, because interest is more important than the importance of the issue. For example, AIDS taking a backseat to Justin Beiber’s new haircut.
4. Agenda Surfing is the name given to the media’s tendancy to follows its audience’s trends, and influence people’s opinions.
5. The diffusion of News is the process through which an important event is communicated to the public. It is the thought put into the how where and why or when news is released.
6. Portrayal of an Issue will influence how it is perceived by the public.
7. Media Dependence. The more dependent a person is on the media for information, the more susceptible that person is to media agenda setting. Today, sites like Facebook and Twitter have revolutionized media dependence, with instantaneous updates.
The strengths and weaknesses of the agenda setting theory are displayed in the slides below (created by Bruce Redman, 2011)
The last point made in the lecture noted how the internet has revolutionized the 24 hour news cycle. This can be noted in a change in prime time, from one in time for the 6pm news, to three prime times at 6am, when people check their phones or Ipads when they wake up, 12 noon, at lunch breaks and 3 pm in the afternoon when there is little else to do at work.
We then spoke about the power of “spin” with the example of the Climate Change issue. It was made clear that the media can be a powerful force in alter people’s opinions.
No comments:
Post a Comment