Audience Theories
Before any piece of media text is created the audience needs to be considered. All media texts are catered towards a specific demographic or else it has no meaning. Because of this audiences receive, read and respond to media in a certain way, of which analysts have attempted to decipher and explain how exactly this media is transferred and used.
Thus, certain effects models have been formed by said media analysts in order to deconstruct the relationship the relationship between audience and text, one of these being 'The Hypodermic Needle Model.' This theory dates back to the 1920's, when media was really beginning to be produced commercially and to a global audience. The model now perhaps seems crude as it states the idea that audiences merely passively intake information via the media without any attempt on their part to challenge or assess the data. In a world fresh off of the back of the First World War wherein propaganda was in full swing this is perhaps an idealised concept. This theory in itself suggests that audiences are merely unconscious mass beings with the incapability to formulate their own opinions, or that their opinions are not relevant to the reception of the text and that we are blindly manipulated by media producers.
The 'Two-Step Flow' is a more modernly advanced idea, based on the assumption that audiences are not brain-dead drones. Paul Lazarsfeld, Bernard Barelson and Hazel Gaudet analysed voters decision makings during the 1940 presidential campaign. Their findings suggested that the information that was flowed to the voters was filtered through 'opinion leaders' who then communicate their own views to the less active associates, of whom are hugely influenced. Therefore the general audience formulate their own perspective through a 'two-step flow' that reduces the power of the media and highlights the importance of social factors.
During the 1960's the Uses and Gratification model came into play. This was based on the introduction of television and the evident proof that audiences did take the media into their own hands and deconstructed it how they saw fit. Audiences were far from passive- they were individuals who each had their own opinions and responses. In 1948 Lasswell suggested the following functions for how media texts play into individuals and society:
-Surveillance
-Correlation
-Entertainment
-Cultural Transmission
To which Bulmer and Katz expanded on, stating that, in 1974, individuals might use a text for the following purposes:
-Diversion (escapism for reality)
-Personal Relationships (e.g. looking towards soap operas for family life)
-Personal Identity (finding yourself reflected in texts, learning behaviour from texts)
-Surveillance (useful information e.g. weather reports)
While i have already mentioned this in a previous post the Reception Theory should also be noted. Based on Stuart Halls encoding/decoding model, it states that the text is encoded by the producer and decoded by the reader, perhaps resulting in major differences in the readings of the same code. However a producer can draw upon certain recognised codes and conventions and position the audience to result in a general agreement on what the code means- a preferred reading.
Thus, certain effects models have been formed by said media analysts in order to deconstruct the relationship the relationship between audience and text, one of these being 'The Hypodermic Needle Model.' This theory dates back to the 1920's, when media was really beginning to be produced commercially and to a global audience. The model now perhaps seems crude as it states the idea that audiences merely passively intake information via the media without any attempt on their part to challenge or assess the data. In a world fresh off of the back of the First World War wherein propaganda was in full swing this is perhaps an idealised concept. This theory in itself suggests that audiences are merely unconscious mass beings with the incapability to formulate their own opinions, or that their opinions are not relevant to the reception of the text and that we are blindly manipulated by media producers.
The 'Two-Step Flow' is a more modernly advanced idea, based on the assumption that audiences are not brain-dead drones. Paul Lazarsfeld, Bernard Barelson and Hazel Gaudet analysed voters decision makings during the 1940 presidential campaign. Their findings suggested that the information that was flowed to the voters was filtered through 'opinion leaders' who then communicate their own views to the less active associates, of whom are hugely influenced. Therefore the general audience formulate their own perspective through a 'two-step flow' that reduces the power of the media and highlights the importance of social factors.
During the 1960's the Uses and Gratification model came into play. This was based on the introduction of television and the evident proof that audiences did take the media into their own hands and deconstructed it how they saw fit. Audiences were far from passive- they were individuals who each had their own opinions and responses. In 1948 Lasswell suggested the following functions for how media texts play into individuals and society:
-Surveillance
-Correlation
-Entertainment
-Cultural Transmission
To which Bulmer and Katz expanded on, stating that, in 1974, individuals might use a text for the following purposes:
-Diversion (escapism for reality)
-Personal Relationships (e.g. looking towards soap operas for family life)
-Personal Identity (finding yourself reflected in texts, learning behaviour from texts)
-Surveillance (useful information e.g. weather reports)
While i have already mentioned this in a previous post the Reception Theory should also be noted. Based on Stuart Halls encoding/decoding model, it states that the text is encoded by the producer and decoded by the reader, perhaps resulting in major differences in the readings of the same code. However a producer can draw upon certain recognised codes and conventions and position the audience to result in a general agreement on what the code means- a preferred reading.
Comments
Post a Comment