introduction-to-communication-science

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

Table of Contents 1.

The Beginnings of Communication Science ................................................................... 3 An Introduction to Communication Science ....................................................................... 3 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 3 What is communication? ................................................................................................ 4 Concepts........................................................................................................................ 5 Theories ......................................................................................................................... 6 Transmission of communication ..................................................................................... 7 Reception, signs, and signification ................................................................................. 9 Cultural approach ......................................................................................................... 11 The three approaches compared ................................................................................. 12 A Short history of communication science ....................................................................... 13 A Short History of Communication Science .................................................................. 13 Greek and Roman Rhetorica ........................................................................................ 14 Two schools of Classical Communication Science ....................................................... 15 Rhetorical theory .......................................................................................................... 16 The Dark Ages of Communication Science .................................................................. 18 A Renaissance of our field ........................................................................................... 20 The printing press as an agent of change .................................................................... 21 Towards a modern communication science ................................................................. 22

2. Technical Approaches to Communication Science .......................................................... 24 The Linear Effect-Oriented Approach .............................................................................. 24 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 24 The power of propaganda and the all-powerful media paradigm .................................. 25 Needles, bullets and Martians ...................................................................................... 26 Powerful media put to the test ...................................................................................... 28 Minimal effects ............................................................................................................. 29 Powerful Media Rediscovered ...................................................................................... 30 A revolution in the media landscape: the rise of television............................................ 32 Negotiated media effects.............................................................................................. 33 The Reception and Signification Perspective ................................................................... 34 1|Page

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science An introduction to the reception and signification perspective ...................................... 34 Message construction .................................................................................................. 36 Active audiences .......................................................................................................... 37 Selective processing .................................................................................................... 38 Cognitive shortcuts....................................................................................................... 39 Central and peripheral route......................................................................................... 41 Getting through the filter ............................................................................................... 41 Encoding, decoding and the construction of meaning .................................................. 43 3. Cultural and Social Approaches to Communication Science ........................................... 44 The cultural approach ...................................................................................................... 44 Introduction to the cultural approach ............................................................................. 44 Producing and maintaining culture ................................................................................ 46 Making sense of the world ............................................................................................ 47 Popular culture: Reflection or illusion? .......................................................................... 48 Cultural studies: Birmingham and Toronto .................................................................... 50 Cultural groups ............................................................................................................. 51 How to fit in? ................................................................................................................ 52 Conclusion: Cultural conformity and relativism .............................................................. 54 Student Questions and Debate ........................................................................................ 55 Introduction Questions and Answers .......................................................................... 55 Metaphors .................................................................................................................... 56 The role of media in society ........................................................................................ 57 More metaphors on the role of the media in society.................................................... 58 Primary and secondary research ................................................................................ 60 What’s new about new media? .................................................................................... 61 Globalization: village versus tribes ............................................................................ 63 About the exam ........................................................................................................... 65

2|Page

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

1. The Beginnings of Communication Science An Introduction to Communication Science Introduction Welcome to the course Introduction to Communication Science. My name is dr. Rutger de Graaf. I’m a lecturer at the Department of Communication Science of the University of Amsterdam. We’re now standing in the courtyard of the het Oost-Indisch Huis, the seventeenth century headquarters of the Dutch East-India Company. In this historical landmark over 150 scientists study and teach the science of communication.

This course is a so-called MOOC. This a new trend of online courses, initially designed by Stanford and MIT. MOOC stands for a Massive Open Online Course. It’s massive in the sense that it’s open to a potentially much larger audience that our normal courses which are of course limited to the available space in a classroom. A MOOC is completely open. Which means it’s free of cost and designed so that everyone, also without any specific experience in the field, can enter. Finally, all our lectures, class materials, self-evaluation tests and exams will be available through an online portal. This of course gives new options to our teaching environment. You can download all captions for instance. Also, additional links and tips for further content will be offered at the end of each class. Next to this, there is a small community in which you can ask questions or share your thoughts on this week’s content.

In this ten-part course we will cover some of the basic theories, models and concepts from the field of communication. In this first class I’ll talk about the scope of our field of study; what exactly is communication and how does our discipline relate to other studies like sociology and psychology? In future weeks we’ll discuss the history of communication theory. Obviously people have been communicating since the dawn of men, but when and why did communication theory arise? After that we’ll use three dominant approaches to the field to discuss our topic further: firstly we’ll look at communication as a means of persuasion, both from a political and a corporate angle. The second perspective is that of communication processing, which is, simply put, how we give meaning to a message. The final part of this course will focus on social and cultural aspects of communication, group dynamics, and audience formation.

3|Page

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science To test your recall and understanding of each topic, I will often add some MC questions that you can use for self-evaluation.

What is communication?

The most simple definition is that communication is each act of transmitting information.

Information in the broadest sense of the word: including thoughts, ideas and emotions. Giving someone a bouquet of flowers is communicating a certain message. Adding to that gift a verbal compliment (you’re pretty) is another separate act of communication. Blushing because you have just received flowers and a compliment is again another form of communication. As social animals we communicate day in day out with spoken words, nonverbal gestures, signs and symbols. Sometimes we use media to communicate a message. Media are the channels that we use to communicate. Scholars don’t really agree on the definition of the word media.

Television, Internet, Radio, Mobile Phones, the soapbox we stand on to give a speech. They are all technical media in a way. Things we constructed to amplify our communication. In the more broader definitions, we can include our hands, voice and eyes, that we all use to communicate somehow, in the list of communication channels, of media. In general however, whenever we discuss mediated communication, or THE mass media, we only mean the first category.

Over the years scientists from different scientific disciplines have studied these channels for communication and all these different forms of communication. The results of their studies have formed the basis of the relatively new science of communication.

Even today, many scholars in other disciplines study the exact same communication phenomena as we do. We share theories and models and often use the same methods to analyze and describe our field. It is therefore useful to be aware of how these other disciplines are connected with ours.

To get an idea of the different levels of communication and how they are connected to other scientific disciplines, we can look at the so-called pyramid of communication.

On the highest level of this pyramid we find societal communication, which is by its very nature aimed at a large mass audience. Therefore mainly historians, political scientists and sociologists studied this perspective.

Under that is the level of institutional communication that is performed by political parties, organized religions, large corporations and such.

4|Page

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science Then comes the level of group communication. Groups are audiences that feel a high level of group identification, for instance a family or a fan club. Both institutional and group communication are in the field sociologists and cultural anthropologists.

We have now arrived to the level of interpersonal communication, basically the communication between two or more people. Both sociologists and psychologists Finally there is the level of intrapersonal communication. This would be the communication you have with yourself. With this we mean all information processing, thinking, internalizing information and the process of giving meaning to the world around us. Of course this approach leans heavily on the discipline of psychology.

Concepts We’ve just seen that different scientific disciplines all study communication. Of course they focus on different aspects of communication. Some scholars want to understand the workings of the media infrastructure, others focus on the social importance of communication, political communication effects or one of many alternative perspectives.

It’s not surprising that communication is studied by so many from so many angles. It fills our lives and society, we spend tremendous amounts of time communicating ideas, sharing thoughts, absorbing new information, being entertained or persuaded somehow.

Communication simply put enables us to function as social, cultural and political animals.

It makes sense that these different perspectives have led to a wide spectrum of scientific thought on the topic of communication. In this course we’ll go out and explore some of them and try to find our way in this wild jumble of theories, models and concepts. Perhaps a good starting point therefore is to begin with a brief definition of ‘theory’, ‘model’, and ‘concept’.

A concept is a word or set of words that represent an idea. It’s of course important to clearly define the concepts we use. Let’s take the concept of ‘identity’ for instance. It’s easy to imagine two (or more) very different interpretations about what constitutes an identity. Is it how one views oneself, or perhaps we should also take into consideration how ones identity is perceived by others. Or is that particular concept better described perhaps with the word ‘image’?

Often scientists squabble over definitions, and rightly so, because it should be clear what we talk about. These discussions sometimes never stop, and why would they? Different people 5|Page

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science give different meanings to a word, and who can say which are the ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ definitions?

At most we can speak about preferred or dominant definitions of concepts but even these usually change over time and from context to context.

In this course I will often stop to define certain key concepts. I would like to stipulate that these definitions are unfortunately more often than not quite disputed. If you are following this MOOC and you had some previous classes in communication or perhaps you have worked in communication or read books or articles about the topic don’t be surprised when I will define things slightly different than you have learned. For instance, when I said that media are every channel that we use to communicate (so this would include the voice) it’s very possible that you have learned previously that only technical channels are considered media (which would exclude the voice). Because both definitions, and many more, exist in the scientific field.

To make things more difficult, scientists, like many professionals, sometimes give every day words a different meaning. If I would ask a random person in the street the definition of the word ‘text’, most will agree that a ‘text’ is a message made up out of some type of letters.

Communication Scientists however regard each carrier of communication as a text. So a movie, a song a painting they are all ‘texts’ in our eyes, ready to be ‘read’ by an audience.

Theories Concepts play an important role in all theories. Theories in their simplest definition are all statements about reality that seek to explain or predict the relation between phenomena. For instance, the theory of gravity predicts that if I drop a pen, it will fall to the floor. A specific predicted result, derived from theory, we call a hypothesis.

Whenever we visualize these statements. This is called a model. Usually the arrows and lines in these models represent hypotheses. The box on the left in this model represents the presumed cause, dropping the pencil. We call this the independent variable. The other is the presumed effect, or the dependent variable. If we change our example and look at the theory that giving someone a gift causes them to like you better. Than the independent variable here is gift keeping and the dependent variable is how much you are being liked by someone.

So we can proof or disproof our hypotheses, and in extension the connected theory, by actually dropping a pen or giving a gift and check if the results corresponds with the expected result.

6|Page

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science In other words, we test and improve our theories through research. This can be primary research, where we collect our own data. Or by studying the results of others, so called secondary research. We have several main means in our field to gather data. The first is observation, simply observing the phenomenon. Secondly we conduct experiments, where we try to limit to amount of interfering variables so we can actually proof a causal relation between the dependent and independent variable. We also use surveys, which is a questionnaire spread amongst a sample or respondents. The results are usually quantified.

For a more in depth exploration of attitudes we conduct qualitative interviews. Finally we study the message itself. This is called content analysis. It can be done systematically, where the results are later quantified. Or it can be done in a qualitative fashion.

Of course this is the ideal scientific situation. In reality many theories can’t be tested. For instance because we cannot observe the presumed relation. The theory that ‘everything happens for a reason’ might be true, but we don’t really have access to the methods to test this. Sometimes a theory will combine a set of theories. For instance The Uses and Gratification Theory is a complex theory that we will discuss in depth in a later in class. The point for now is that it contains several ideas about reality. 1) People make conscious decisions regarding their use of media. 2) People are conscious of their media-related needs.

3) People select the media that is best suited to fulfill their need. These are only a few elements this theory, but my point is that even though these different statements can be tested and proven or disproven as separate theories, they are still part of the same theoretical framework and therefore collectively labeled as Uses and Gratification Theory. So the definition of theory is not as easy as we first thought.

Some theories don’t even predict anything but serve more as perspectives on reality or to sum up an approach. They tell us it is important to study some aspects of that reality more thoroughly. For instance ‘stakeholder theory’ tells us we should study the stakeholders in any situation and be aware of their various interests and agendas. These perspectives are sometimes called theory, but we also use the words paradigms or approaches, since they don’t really fit the dominant definition of scientific theory. That definition stresses that theories have predictive value. And these paradigms or approaches serve more as view glasses, which we use to study the world. They amplify some aspects of reality and guide our research.

Transmission of communication When we talk about theories, the first theory to discuss, is the basic transmission model. This model reflects dominant thought on communication, by proposing communication as a linear 7|Page

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science process. That starts with a sender, creates a message and somehow ends up with an audience, a receiver. Laswell, in 1948, made this model explicit. To understand the process of communication, according to Laswell, we need to consider Who, says What, in which Channel, to Whom, and with what Effect Of course, many things can go wrong in this process of communication. When I talk to someone and a car drives by, it might cause a distraction or it's roaring engine might drown out my voice. My conversation partner can have other things on his mind and there are many other things that can cause a disruption of effective communication. It's important to note, by the way, that communication, in this linear way of looking at communication. It’s only effective when the desired effect is reached. When the message successfully reaches, and is correctly interpreted by the receiver.

That many things can distort a correct transmission becomes clear in the transmission model that Shannon created. This model of communication embodies five elements, like the model of Laswell. The first element is Sender, which is obviously the person or persons that create a message. Then comes the Message itself. Thirdly, the Channel that is used to send the message. Another word for this channel is of course medium and the different channels that exist are collectively named media. The next element is, like in the Laswell model, the Receiver. And finally again, we see the Effect.

Here we clearly see that in each of these stages so-called 'Noise' can disrupt the correct transmission. In our field we define noise as 'Everything that can cause a disruption in the flow of communication'. So, in our example, the car that passes by can create many forms of noise.

The sound of its loud engine causes confusion because someone can't hear me correctly or miss what I'm saying entirely. So, that's one form of noise. Another form is the distraction that it creates for my partner, so he doesn't really pay attention to what I'm saying and therefore misinterprets or forgets my message and the desired effect is not reached. The important thing with these models is that they see communication as a linear process and this in itself has led to an emphasis on effects. We want to know if communication has a desired effect.

This is a very influential way of looking at communication. It's also very different from another approach that we will explain further in the next section of this MOOC.

8|Page

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

Reception, signs, and signification During the sixties critics stood up, they objected against this linear effect oriented approach.

They argued that many people give a different meaning to a message than was intended, but why should that be wrong? Instead, they focused on the recipients of communication and how they give meaning to a message, using their own unique toolkit with their own backgrounds and experiences, knowledge, emotions, et cetera. So in this model, this nonlinear model, there is no wrong outcome, there is no wrong communication. Everyone gives meaning to a message in their own unique way.

This idea was hardly new. Scientists had studied the phenomenon of polysemic messages for a long time. Polysemic meaning exactly that, different people interpreting a message in a different way.

According to these scientists each act of communication relies on a communication system without which we wouldn’t understand each other. The study of these systems is called semiotics or semiology, the so called study of ‘signs’ and ‘signification’. A sign is basically everything that communicates something. A spoken word, a gesture, a glance, a photo, a cartoon, a written sentence, a hieroglyph, they are all signs. The process of giving meaning to these signs is called signification. Without going to deep into this fascinating topic, it’s important to briefly discuss the influence of semiotic theories on mass communication theory.

This approach views communication not as a linear process but as an exchange of meaning.

The sender puts meaning in a message and the receiver takes meaning from a message.

Under influence of semiotic theories, communication scientists became more interested in the reception of a message and acknowledged that communication can have multiple valid outcomes.

Let’s look at this classic model, proposed by linguist Roman Jacobson in 1960. He starts with familiar elements from Shannon’s transmission model: An addresser sends a message to an addressee using a channel.

He added to the model elements from semiotics, like the idea that every message refers to something outside of the message which he called context. Also, the specific form that our communication take, for instance a written word, made up of letters, is called a code.

9|Page

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

Successful communication, according to Jacobson, can only exist when all these elements are in place. However, each act of communication has one dominant function that relates to one of the elements in this model.

When the primary purpose of a message is to communicate the emotions and attitudes of a sender this is called the emotive function. For instance when I write a love letter to my girlfriend.

The second function is conative. If a receiver is directly addressed to do something specific.

An example is a commercial that tells us to “buy this flavour of ice cream!”.

The referential or descriptive function corresponds with the context and happens when a message primarily describes a situation. Perhaps a news report is a good example.

Sometimes the main purpose of communicating is to keep the lines open, when we have coffee each week with a friend for instance. This is called a phatic function and relates to the channel.

A poetic function means that the message is an end in itself, a painting for example that aims at being a beautiful and aesthetically pleasing piece of art.

Finally there is the metalingual function, when we use communication to explain the codes that we use. For instance a dictionary. Another example is the explanation I’m giving right now In which we are discussing concepts from the field of semiotics.

By focusing on the meaning of a message, signs, signification and the main function of a message, Jacobson has given us a model that is very different from the transmission model.

It’s also a good starting point to discuss a third perspective that offers again a new angle with which to view our field.

10 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

Cultural approach We have just discussed an alternative to the linear effect oriented approach. One that looks at message construction and interpretation and leaves room for multiple meanings of a message. The third perspective I want to discuss is a continuation of this line of thought but shifts the focus to cultural and social aspects of communication. This approach deals with how we use communication to give meaning to the world around us, construct our own social reality, the role of communication in group dynamics and social interaction.

This perspective makes use of insights from the field of sociology, social psychology and anthropology, where much attention is given to the social context in which communication takes place. It sees communication as the means to share and reinforce ideas, thereby constantly creating and adapting our culture. Also it sees people as social animals, as such we are constantly involved in social group dynamics.

To illustrate this approach, let’s examine this communication model, proposed by Newcomb as early as 1953. The model starts out with two familiar elements: sender and receiver. Let’s call them person A and person B Newcomb thought that the main purpose of communication is to maintain some sort of balance, a harmony or equilibrium in a social system. He therefore introduced a new element, the social environment that person A and person B share. We’ll call this shared social environment X for now.

These three elements are all connected to each other in one social system, if one element changes, this changes the relationship of the three.

I will give an example. Let’s say person A is David, person B is Shirley. Shirley and David are colleagues in the same department, so this is their shared social environment. If David quits his job to work somewhere else this means that they no longer have the same shared social environment, namely, their workplace and shared office lunches. This will inevitably change the relationship between Dave and Shirley.

Perhaps they’ll decide they enjoyed their lunch breaks so much they will now have coffee each month, even though they don’t work together any more, thereby going from colleagues to friends.

11 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science In another scenario David changes jobs within the company and now becomes Shirley’s boss.

This will also influence their relationship somehow. Will they still continue to have friendly lunches each day?

X can take many forms, the place you work, political allegiance, a group you belong to, it can even a person. Let’s say X is another co-worker named Ellen. David and Shirley both like Ellen, until Ellen and Shirley get into a fight. Now David’s relationship with the both of them will change, he might choose sides, or set himself up as a neutral party. Regardless of his choice, a new social balance will be found, and equilibrium restored. This according to Newcomb is the main function of communication.

Later other scientists have continued with this idea, making other theories that specifically looked at mediated, individual, mass or group communication. In later weeks we’ll go more in depth on this.

To go back to the core of Newcomb’s model, and also the core of this third approach: communication helps us get along with each other, make sense of the social world around us and enables us to function as social animals. Therefore, it’s crucial for a stable and healthy society. Without communication we cannot feel part of society. We can’t position ourselves in social reality, for instance by aligning ourselves with in-groups <groups we want to belong to> or opposing ourselves against out-group <groups we don’t want to belong to> Central to this approach is the notion that people construct a cultural and social reality by constantly communicating values, attitudes and ideas. This idea is sometimes called social constructionism.

The three approaches compared We’ve made a very broad distinction between three perspectives on our field.

The first approach is the linear transmission perspective. Correct communication in this perspective causes the desired effect. Therefore this approach tends to focus on effects of communication.

The second approach sees communication as the production and exchange of meanings. It is concerned with the construction of messages using signs, and the process of extracting meaning from these messages, signification. The interpretation of communication can lead to different but equally valid outcomes.

12 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science The third approach looks at how we use communication to construct our social reality. It examines the many ways we connect with people around us, by constantly sharing ideas and thereby constructing, reinforcing (or deconstructing) our identity. This perspective sees communication as the binding force of every society, group and culture. The potential to bind of course goes hand in hand with a potential for group deconstruction, audience fragmentation and cultural alienation.

Obviously there are many more ways to distinguish schools of thought. And I would like to point out that these categories are by no means fixed or universally agreed upon.

But for this introductory course I will use these basic perspectives as a useful tool to categorize some of our more widely used theories and models.

In the following week I will go back in time to talk with you a bit about the history of communication science. Then we will discuss in each week after that one of the three basic perspectives, the linear effect oriented approach, the reception or signification approach and the cultural approach.

If you want to know more about the topics we discussed this week, there are links to further readings, movies, and websites in the online environment of this MOOC. Also, try to test your recall by answering some MC questions and join the discussion on our online forum. I hope to see you next week!

A Short history of communication science A Short History of Communication Science Welcome in week 2 of our MOOC, I hope you’ve enjoyed our format. You have I hope done some self-evaluation tests and checked out the further readings section of the online environment. Since we discuss most theories only briefly, through this section you can explore it further. Also, visit the forum. Please feel free to give any constructive feedback that you might have in the thread ‘what do you think of our MOOC? We’re very curious what you like or don’t like. Also if you want to discuss a topic further, start a discussion on our forum or join one of the discussions that others started. I’ll often help out by posting answers to recurring questions here.

13 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science This week we’re going to talk about the history of communication science. And I’d like to stress that last part. Because we’re going to talk about when people starting talking and especially writing about communication. So even though we could talk for hours about the presumed communication methods of prehistoric man and ancient civilizations after that, about the earliest forms of communication, theories on the development of language, the introduction of mediated communication, through symbolism in rock art and figurines and such, we are not going to do so. We are not going to discuss the oldest musical instruments or the first writing we’ve found, nor the power of communication through architecture and useable items like coins. Why? Because we have no record that these civilizations thought about communication on a Meta level and constructed theories about its existence or use.

Instead we’re going to start our journey here in Ancient Greece. Because the writings of the Ancient Greeks and after that Romans are the oldest books about our topic to survive.

Starting with the earliest Communication Science of the Greeks and Romans we’ll talk about Medieval times and subsequent lack of Communication Science in those days. Then the rise of printed texts, the very important Enlightenment and Renaissance of our field. We’ll end this week’s MOOC with the nineteenth century industrialization and its impact on the communication landscape. Next week we’ll continue with twentieth century communication theory.

Greek and Roman Rhetorica So let’s start by briefly exploring the Classical World of the Greek and Romans. We’ll begin in the fifth century before Christ, Ancient Greece. Instead of one country we should recognize that in these times Greece was a collection of independent city-states, some were at war with each other, and others were allied. A growing number of city-states was adopting democratic elements in their government such as people’s assemblies, elections, chosen government officials and such. Even though many cities still had kings or a council of nobles the political power of citizens was growing, and with it the need for a better understanding of the workings of mass communication. It’s therefore not surprising that the science of communication thrived in Ancient Greece. Important historical figures like Socrates, Plato and Aristotle were involved in academic debate on the subject. But besides being an academic science it was in this time foremost an applied science. There were teachers and academies that taught the main principles of public speaking, reasoning and persuasion. Ambitious politicians were wise to learn the different ways of approaching an audience. And not only politicians, but also lawyers and businessmen were schooled in these matters and made extensive use of it in 14 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science their field. Military commanders like Xenophon and Alexander the Great had studied the subject at the feet of famous philosophers and used what they learned to keep up moral of their troops.

So what did the media landscape look like at this time? We already established that public speaking was important. Greeks made extensive use of symbolic and figurative art, in their architecture, decorative and useable artifacts. There was a huge diversity of genres in theater and literature. The alphabet had been rediscovered in the sixth century and books, scrolls, pamphlets and other written media quickly found a place in the media infrastructure. Many people, not only the rich and noble, could read and write and most cities had one or several libraries. The most famous library, that of Alexandria, reputedly contained hundreds of thousands of handwritten scrolls.

Over the years the power of the Greeks dwindled and was broken by the Romans who adopted many Greek ways. It’s therefore not surprising that they too learned and try to be perfect on Greek theories on communication. Together Greek and Roman times span a millennium of history. So it’s obviously a huge oversimplification to discuss the entirety of classical thought on communication in a three minute MOOC section. But we’ll try nonetheless, because their ideas were the basis for scientific thought on communication during the Middle Ages and Renaissance and therefore in many ways the foundation on which our modern discipline is built. For a more in-depth and nuanced picture I refer to the Little Box of Nuance in the online environment of this course and the follow opportunities I give in other sections.

Two schools of Classical Communication Science We can make a broad distinction between two schools of classical thought on communication.

The first school sees communication as a way to discover the truth of things.

This school started with the famous philosopher Socrates and his student Plato. They put a huge emphasis on the role of discourse and logical argumentation in the communication process. It’s called the dialectic method: which is simply put that logical and rational discussion will help us resolve differences by finding out which viewpoint is true. Therefore man’s ability to reason is paramount for a civilization to flourish and advance. Here we have, in a nutshell, the purpose of communication, to express and critically weigh the value of ideas, and eventually to discard or perfect them in correlation with their objective worth. As models go, this one is obviously quite linear. Good communication is rational communication that helps us to find ‘the truth’ in ideas.

15 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

We can see why so many philosophers who were interested in natural science and finding out how the world worked, were attracted to this school of thought. Later, Medieval monks were also charmed by this classical idea of communication to reach the truth. It was in their opinion a way for pre-Christian Greeks and Romans to see the greater truth of God. So even though they were not Christians, the writings of Plato and such were copied by Christian monks and have survived while so many books of their contemporaries haven’t. Usually we only know they existed because Plato and such refer and react to them.

This second school of Greek communication science was called Rhetorica. Derived from the Greek (rhḗtōr) which means "public speaker". Rhetorica taught the ability to perceive all means of persuasion in any given scenario, according to Aristotle in one of his books on the topic. So it was very much an applied science, where the practicality of theories decided their worth.

The main purpose was not to find truth but to persuade someone, so essentially to make something seem like the truth even if it wasn’t. Proponents of this school were also called sophists, and were often attacked vehemently by natural philosophers like Socrates and Plato, who above all else searched for the truth. Later, many sophist writing was purposely not copied by Medieval monks for this same reason.

Despite the disapproval among natural philosophers, Rhetorica was extremely popular in the Classical world. Not only in Greece but in Rome too the ability to win people over through speeches was crucial for political or social advancement. Caesar, Marc Anthony, Octavian, they were all trained in and sometimes wrote about the art of persuasion. Usually they had studied the basics of Rhetorica in Greece itself. Luckily some books on Rhetorica did survive.

Most notably those by the Greek philosopher Aristotle and the Roman statesman Marcus Cicero So what exactly did they teach? We’ll talk about some basic rhetorical theory in the next section.

Rhetorical theory In the Art of Rhetoric Aristotle somewhat bridged the gap between the sophist and dialectic method. As a student of Plato he was well versed in the use of the dialectic method or rational argumentation. But he did not share Plato’s dislike of Rhetorica and wrote an extensive treatise on persuasive theory. In which rational arguments definitely played an important, but not an exclusive part.

16 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

Aristotle focuses on the sender aspect of communication. And he uses a simple model to explain the different stages of sending a message. First the topic of the message is determined. This is the invention stage of communication. Then the style of the message is determined. Thirdly and finally the message will be delivered. A politician might have a topic she wants to talk about. She will then choose her words carefully, what tone should she use?

And thirdly choose the manner of delivery, she might choose to publish a pamphlet or give a speech. Let’s say she gives a speech. Now comes the stage of delivery: she will use her stage performance, her gestures and intonation, to strengthen her message.

Successful communication, which leads to persuasion, has three building blocks: Logos, Pathos and Ethos.

Logos is the use of reason. Basically it resembles what Socrates and Plato taught: rational arguments based on facts and logic. Our politician for instance might use some statistics to back her argument.

Ethos is the ‘character’ or more precise the perceived trustworthiness, likeability and intelligence of the sender. Many persuasive arguments focus on personal traits like this. Our politician might try to convince us that we should listen to her because she is the expert on this field. Without rational backing, this is a so-called authority argument. Or she will tell her audience ‘when have I ever lied to you?’ thereby making it a trust issue and trying to increase her own credibility. Or she will try to attack the trustworthiness of her opponents. Or try to gain sympathy by hugging a child in front of an audience. This has little to do with rational persuasion but might be very effective nevertheless.

Under pathos fall all other emotional appeals, which try to make the audience feel something.

For instance by appealing to fears, hopes, likes, dislikes or sense of humor. Aristotle tells us to do this by using stories, examples and exaggeration.

Next to Aristotle the most noteworthy classical scholar whose writings survived the ages was the Roman lawyer, senator, governor and Consul Marcus Tullius Cicero. Cicero whose speeches and treatises have been studied throughout the ages by students of history and communication. The same speeches that gained him so much power in the Roman Republic and allies like Octavian, who later became the first Emperor of Rome. Also gained him dangerous enemies, like the general Marc Anthony. In the end it was this enmity that caused 17 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science his decapitation during the Roman. His powers of communication had been such a thorn in his enemies’ eyes, that killing him wasn’t enough. When his head was displayed in Rome, they stuck needles in his tongue to punish it for all the harm it had done.

You can pick up recent translations of Cicero’s books, like De Inventione (on the invention stage of communication), De Oratore, (about the delivery), or the popular handbook Rhetorica ad Herennium in most book shops today. And recognize that even though its written two millennia ago, most of the theories are still applicable today. An anecdote about Cicero for instance tells us that he would sometimes purposely drop his papers while walking to the speech area. His audience then would feel sympathy because that this “accident” could also happen to them. He seemed more human and fallible and therefore likeable to them.

So rhetorical theory combined larger Meta models on communication and communication goals with ‘smaller’ practical tips on how to achieve these goals, how to seem right, or believable, nice, intelligent et cetera. In short, there was a lively academic and widely practiced communication science in the classical world. As years went by and the Roman Empire collapsed in to the dark Middle Ages these ideas all but disappeared into the cellars of monasteries, and libraries of Eastern scholars. If they survived at all.

The Dark Ages of Communication Science In the Middles Ages the importance of public speaking grew less. The political system was completely different of course so citizens were basically left out of the political decision making process. They couldn’t vote and held little political power, beyond the power to rebel. But seeing that the ruler elite were practiced warriors who wielded deadly weaponry and impressive armour, both extremely expensive, even this was usually not much of a choice.

Although Rhetorica was taught in Medieval universities to a small elite, it had by no means the importance of classical times.

Not only was there little to no communication science in the Dark Ages, the communication landscape had also changed drastically since Roman times.

Alfabecy numbers had dropped rapidly since the decline of Rome. Almost none could write or read with perhaps some exceptions among the ruler and religious elite. But even among them evidence suggests readership was not high and probably very limited to those of very high stations or devoted to academic life in a monastery. It makes sense that written media became less and less widespread. Important mass communication channels were instead 18 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science oral or figurative in nature. Town criers, architecture, statues and (religious) art were still used to reach a large audience. Coins were other examples of visual media that communicated something, typically who was in charge at a certain time. The channels of choice were well suited for communicating who was in power and how citizens should behave. As we know the Church played an important part in this and worked hand in hand with worldly leaders to get this message through. Often there were agreements between rulers and clergymen that at the start or end of the Sunday mass more worldly news on taxes, wars and other things citizens should know, were communicated to the assembled people. Since most people went to church, this was for centuries a very effective method to get a message out amongst the people if the need arose. Other media also focused on visual and oral communication: plays and theatre still existed but theatres did not hold the audiences of thousand as they did in Classical times. Although written media had almost disappeared as a means of mass communication, printed pamphlets with etchings or other figurative depictions were sometimes used. In this pamphlet people were informed with use of visual representation.

Some people might think: they printed pamphlets? Havenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t we learned that the printing press was invented in the fifteenth century by Johannes Gutenberg? Well, actually the printing press already existed long before this time. However, it was quite expensive to print something because basically every page had to be carved out in wood, stone or metal. Because the potential audience that was able to read (and pay! was small, it was usually simply not worth it. So what was this printing innovation of Gutenberg that everyone always puts so much emphasis on? It was actually the very cunning introduction of the clichĂŠ, a small letter that could be put in a box to make words and sentences. When the printing was done, the box was emptied and new words and pages could be formed. This innovation made it much quicker and cheaper to print texts and is therefore rightly credited as a turning point in European history and a huge catalyst for the Renaissance. Of course this technical revolution would probably never have had a huge impact if there hadnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t been an audience to read and buy books at the same time, which was the result of several long and complicated historical trends towards a higher alfabecy level and the rise of a potential audience with buying power.

Not coincidentally while the mass communication landscape started to flourish again with the rise of print media, scholars again started to discuss the topic of communication on a Meta level. So started the Renaissance, not only of art, science and literature, but also of our scientific discipline.

19 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

A Renaissance of our field It was among other things the rediscovery of classical texts by Aristotle and Cicero that started a renewed interest in philosophy, art and the natural and social sciences. Starting in 14th century Florence, the Renaissance quickly spread out to the rest of Europe, paving the way for the Early Modern time. This was to a large degree thanks to the new printing possibilities that Gutenberg’s invention made possible. Also, the role of Eastern scholars should not be overlooked. In 265 the Roman Empire had been split in a Western and Eastern half. When the Western Roman Empire fell in the fifth century its traditions and sciences lived on in the Eastern Roman Empire of Byzantium. In the Dark Ages of Western Europe, Byzantine scholars still kept extensive libraries of classical literature and continued studying the science of Rhetorica (although its importance had declined since advancement in the empire was much less dependent on public speaking and more on connections and status).

Why is this relevant for the Renaissance and subsequent Early Modern times? Well, in the fourteenth century Byzantine power was crushed by the Ottoman Empire. The fall of its capital Constantinople in 1453 led to a huge exodus of scholars and artists from the Empire into Western Europe, feeding the growing intellectual Renaissance with their work, thoughts and books.

At the same time there was in many countries a shift of power. Religiously there was turmoil in Europe because of new ideas that led to The Reformation and rise of several new religions.

Most successful was of course the Protestant Church. The Roman Catholic Church lost its religious monopoly and now had to compete for the faith of the European people. Closely linked to this was a more worldly power struggle. Democratic ideas from antiquity again gained wide interest. The introduction of effective weapons like the crossbow, the longbow and the first fire arms gave the relatively untrained citizenry more military power to enforce their claims for more political power. That any peasant could now kill a knight with a wellplaced crossbow bolt was a lesson that wasn’t learned quickly by the ruler elite. But after several successful uprisings and military coups, the idea that it was practical to win the favor of the masses, grudgingly became more accepted among the continent’s religious and worldly rulers.

It’s not surprising then, that next to scientific thought, arts and literature, also the printing industry boomed as this graph clearly shows. Gutenberg’s innovation can be dated in the 1430’s and at the end of the fifteenth century the printing industry had already spread through Europe and produced more than twenty million copies. A century later this number increased 20 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science to 200 million. Another century later one billion books were produced. We’ll take a closer look at this printing revolution and its importance for thought on communication in the next section of our MOOC.

The printing press as an agent of change In the previous section we discussed the printing revolution. Shortly after the innovations by Gutenberg, millions and later billions of printed copies spread throughout Europe.

Not only books rolled of the presses. Especially short books and leaflets, collectively named pamphlets, were printed to entertain, persuade and inform readers. From the sixteenth century these pamphlets were in many ways the new mass medium, giving information and opinion on current affairs, spreading the news and commentary on that news throughout Europe. It was through pamphlets that many religious and political debates were fought out.

It was pamphlets that informed multitudes about great military victories or defeats, about the gossip that surrounded the European royal houses. Pamphlets had many styles. They could be serious or very funny. They were written for the learned and those who could hardly read, and everyone in between.

In sixteenth century Venice the first newspaper was published, and quickly after this also German, Dutch and English newspapers appeared. But these newspapers didn’t reach a mass audience, as they remained for a long time a medium for the elite, with a small readership and focus on foreign political news.

Pamphlets however discussed foremost domestic and even local news. Readership could be quite high and there is a lot of evidence that suggests that they were read out loud in market places and in taverns for people who couldn’t read. Illustrations and attention gaining covers further added to their popular appeal.

This graph shows that, in the Dutch Republic, every newsworthy event or crisis was accompanied by hundreds of pamphlets. The first peaks are important moments in the EightyYears War (1568-1648) in which the Dutch won their independence from Spain.

Hundreds of pamphlets were published when the Republic was attacked by France, Münster and Cologne at the same time in 1672. A hateful pamphlet-campaign put the blame at the feet of two leading politicians, which led to their deaths by a public lynching. i Historical evidence suggests that political enemies of these politicians were behind the smear campaign that led to their deaths.

21 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science Examples like these showed contemporary scholars the powers of mass communication. It clearly paid off to heed public opinion and to be able to use mass media like the influential pamphlet press. Scholars like Niccolo Machiavelli <1469-1527> approached the topic of mass communication from this political power angle, using elements from antiquity and combining these with new ideas. This approach was the starting point of a truly modern communication science. Weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ll look at how that evolved in the next and final section of this week.

Towards a modern communication science We have strolled with huge steps through the history of communication science starting in the sixth century BC, through Antiquity, the Middle Ages, the Renaissance and into Early Modern times. The nineteenth century is often seen as the starting point of modern times and characterized by industrialization, the rise of nationalism, birth of political parties, birth of socialism and subsequent emancipation of the masses. The rise of the media as a socialpolitical and financial power is closely connected to this. The media were able to influence, make people rich and form or break communities. Letâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s briefly go over nineteenth century thought on this.

First of all we should recognize that despite the power and influence of mass media in former times, all of this increased substantially in the nineteenth century. Since much more people were able to read and write, the potential audience for print media grew enormously. At the same time new print technologies and methods for making papers made it easier and cheaper to produce books, pamphlets, magazines and newspapers. It became more profitable to cater to the tastes of a mass audience and therefore literature specifically designed for popular tastes was booming. Special magazines for women, books for children, newspapers for members of a political party, pamphlets aiming at villagers in one specific village: it was all becoming part of daily reality. Most noticeably was the transition from pamphlets as the primary print medium for news and debate to newspapers. Although they had existed for a long time, it was only in the nineteenth century that newspapers started to cater to a popular audience, hence becoming a true mass medium. The new newspaper followed the journalistic format set out by press barons like William Stead, Joseph Pulitzer and Randolph Hearst in which the news had to be interesting and attention gaining. New genres like the reportage, cartoon, illustration and later the photo, the column, featured article and interview were quickly adopted throughout the world. Financing of the paper also changes: the old newspaper was often dependent on government subsidies, for which they promised to publish announcements. The new newspaper wanted a large audience since they got their money form sales and advertisements revenue. It was less dependent and therefore often critical of 22 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science the government and did its best to find entertain, opinionate and inform on all matters, not only political. Crime, agriculture, sports, theater, music, household appliances, they were now all part of the weekly – and when the appearance rate increased - daily news.

Because of these changes, more media, new audience groups and new technologies that made printing easier and cheaper, the media landscape became an economic force to reckon with. Also politically the importance of mass communication increased and the attitude of politicians changed.

In the previous section I explained that scholars started to argue for rulers to be more attentive to public opinion and the power of mass communication. At first the idea behind this was purely pragmatic. Later, it was connected to the enlightened democratic ideal that governments are for the people, and therefore should listen to the people. New political theories proposed that the government were in some sense representatives of the people.

Mass media were not only a way to influence those people, but also a reflection of public opinion, and a check on the misuse of power by the government.

It’s important to note that scholarly thought had now evolved to the point that all the different channels of mass communication were now collectively labeled as being part of one political institute. In the nineteenth century this institute began to be referred to as ‘The Fourth Estate’.

A term coined by Edmund Burke <1729-1797>. Media as ‘The Fourth Estate’ are instrumental for any nation, because they function firstly as a channel between government and people, secondly as a barometer of public opinion, and thirdly as a check on the use of power by rulers.

The lesson that it paid to listen to your citizens was driven home quite dramatically with the French Revolution in 1789 when the masses rose and executed king Louis XVI and many nobles. We can only imagine the shock that went through Europe as this set a dangerous precedent. We’ll not go in to the historical ramifications of the French Revolution. It’s enough to note that the subsequent nineteenth century saw many concessions toward democratic ideals in most European countries. The attitude toward mass communication changed as well. The idea grew that media had a political power to be either feared or harnessed. Before the nineteenth century, legislation in many countries had been aimed at controlling the media landscape, punishing authors that criticized the government, banning pamphlets, books or newspapers that were deemed politically or religiously subversive. However, these measures proved unsuccessful as forbidden fruit tastes the sweetest and authors were able to move 23 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science and get their work printed in other countries relatively easy. The Dutch Republic for example was for many a place where basically everything could be published, as long as you kept friendly towards the city’s government of course.

In the nineteenth century most countries changed their stance towards media governance.

They actually adopted ‘The Fourth Estate’ principle in their legislation when they explicitly promised freedom of the press in their constitutions. Journalists at the same time gained higher status, receiving for instance special clearance to be at government meetings.

Politicians started to make more and more use of the powers of the Fourth Estate instead of trying to suppress it. Political campaigns were now becoming media scripted events.

Important politicians also had close ties with newspapers. Often as editor-in-chief or financial backer.

At the end of the nineteenth century, the mass media were widely acknowledged as an economically, politically and socially powerful institute. Scholarly thought recognized mass communication as an integral part of our society. The stage was set for the further development of scientific thought on communication in the twentieth century. We’ll talk about that next week. I hope to see you then.

2. Technical Approaches to Communication Science The Linear Effect-Oriented Approach Introduction Welcome in week 3 of our MOOC Introduction to Communication Science. Hopefully you enjoyed the classes of last week and learned a bit more about the history of communication science and the context in which it developed. It was of course a history in a nutshell, so don’t forget to check out ‘the little box of nuance’ and the suggestions for further reading. Have you added to the lively discussions developing on our forum? As you might remember from our first class, I have divided the main theories in our field in three broad approaches, The first approach is the linear transmission perspective that focuses so much on effects of communication, this was for a long time, and perhaps to some extent still is, the dominant approach in our field. A perspective that is largely concerned with the presumed effects of mass (mediated) communication, or in other words, the power of the media.

24 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science I’ll talk about this type of theories and how they developed in the twentieth century this week.

The second approach was the processing and signification approach, which will be the topic for next week. After that, we’ll discuss the third approach that focuses on how we use communication to construct our social and cultural reality.

But for now, we’ll focus on linear effect oriented theories and the developing ideas on the power of the media. We left off last week at the end of the nineteenth century, start of the twentieth century when scholarly thought had now accepted the idea that the media were a political, economic and social force to be reckoned with. The eighteenth and nineteenth century had been riddled with practical examples of their persuasive powers. People were surrounded by a rich media landscape. Different channels, most noticeably print media like pamphlets, newspapers and magazines clamoured for attention. New audience groups had been discovered and quickly targeted. The political parties that were born in the nineteenth century already had faithful followers at the turn of the century. Their party media could count on a returning audience. These political press served as signposts, telling their voters the viewpoints of the party and engaging other parties in lively media debates. Freedom of the press was seen by politicians as necessary for the media to fulfil its purpose as a fourth estate, a political institute and check on government power, and therefore press freedom was adopted in many constitutions all over the world.

It’s not surprising that economists, political scientists and sociologists respected the power of and sometimes voiced an opinion on mass communication. But it was not yet a full-fledged scientific perspective. This would soon change.

The power of propaganda and the all-powerful media paradigm After several years of rising political tensions, World War I erupted in the year 1914. I have to be careful not to make this into a history class, but it’s important for us to realize the impact of this war on our topic.

First of all that the war was brewing was quite apparent for all in the Western World.

Newspapers, magazines gave a lot of attention to the political and military manoeuvring on the European continent. In short, some in the media landscape were actually campaigning for an aggressive stance and seemed to be looking forward to a coming conflict. Perhaps under the misconception that it would be a short and relatively clean skirmish that would restore the preferred balance of power. In reality, populations all over the world were bombarded with patriotic messages and a call to arms. Of course this wasn’t the only content 25 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science in the media landscape, but several years later, scientists that studied what had happened, noticed the two correlating variables: 1) media that were campaigning for war and patriotism and 2) a motivated, patriotic population, set for war and many men volunteering to be a soldier in one of the bloodiest wars the continent had seen.

When the war started, all sides made use of massive propaganda campaigns. Another important concept from our field, what is propaganda? It’s often referred to as ‘one-sided’, ‘biased’ and ‘unobjective’ communication. Jowett and O’Donnel (1999:6) define propaganda as ‘the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behaviour to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist’. The world had in 1916 never seen such a huge ‘push’ to influence so many at the same time with use of mediated communication. The political and military leaders had perhaps learned their lessons from the ancient Greeks and Romans. They too wielded the sword of communication as if it was just one other weapon in their arsenal, piercing the mind with its persuasive message.

Again, scholars who studied events directly after the WOI noticed a correlation between 1) an intensive propaganda attempt and 2) all kinds of effects that were assumed to be the effect of this propaganda. It was seen as a reason why soldiers marched cheerfully into war. Why the home front showed such a uniform support and respect for their military. Why enemy soldiers decided to defect in mass, to be imprisoned in military camps for the remainder of the war.

The importance of World War I on communication theory is, to put it simple: it created a huge belief in the power of mass communication through the media. We call this the all-powerful media paradigm.

Needles, bullets and Martians The correlation between presumed cause and effect during World War I had massively increased the belief in the power of the media. It was seen by many as an immensely powerful tool, either for good or ill. Therefore, not only scientists but governments too wanted to understand how persuasion through mass communication worked. Scientists all over the world received funding to further study these phenomena, which of course fuelled research in to this area. Persuasion through mass communication was a hot topic, both as a danger and as a potential solution for many problems. Economists were looking for ways to use the media to turn the financial crisis of the twenties and thirties. Sociologists thought that the 26 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science media could be used to strengthen or weaken role patterns, and they used these ideas to study the emancipation of women for instance.

All of these scientists basically studied the question: how could one guard against the power of the media, and how you could harness its potential for your own benefit? Underlying is of course the premise the media have a huge effect on the behaviour of people.

Also commercially the all-powerful media paradigm thrived. The advertising industry boomed.

Also, market research agencies started to study who read or listened to which medium. Media organizations needed this info to sell more ads for better prices. These commercial market researchers further added to existing knowledge on the media landscape and its audiences.

They also standardized techniques to conduct audience research, for instance by large-scale surveys which were then statistically analysed via a fixed format and repeated by others all over the world. The market research industry quickly grew and maintained its own standards on high quality research. Many students who studied these issues in the university went on to work in one of the growing research firms, using their theories and methods in a more practical setting, but with the same dominant attitude prevailing that media have a potential for great effects on the behaviour of their audiences.

We call the theory that mass media have a direct, immediate and powerful effect on its audiences the hyperdermic needle theory. Basically the sender ‘injects’ the message into the audience with use of the media. The audience is seen as passive and more or less unable to resist and immediately affected. It should be noted that effects, in this perspective, are seen as: - short term - immediate - focused on change rather than reinforcement, and finally -uniform among the audience, which means that audience factors are not really important Another word for this theory is the ‘magic bullet’ theory, another cool name for basically the same metaphor: a sender ‘fires’ his message into the brain of a receiver with use of mediated communication.

Scholars found many examples of the presumed power of mass communication and went forth to study these systematically. The most famous example is perhaps that of the Martian Invasion of 1938, when multitudes panicked because of a radio show in which Mars attacked 27 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science the earth. We’ll discuss this example in the next section of our MOOC, first from the perspective of the all-powerful media, then from a different angle.

Powerful media put to the test In New York, October 1938, CBS aired a radio drama about a Martian Invasion. Director Orson Wells had adapted H.G. Wells’s famous book War of the Worlds for the radio. Most of the show consists of news reports on the on-going Martian attack. It starts slowly with an interview with a leading astronomer. Nothing seems very wrong yet, as the interview is followed by a weather report and performance of an orchestra for the listeners home. While the story progresses the reports become more frantic and describe several losing battles of the human army.

This example is often used to illustrate the power of mediated communication since the broadcast reputedly led to mass panic. Newspapers report that thousands ran scared into the streets, fires broke out and we get the idea that complete pandemonium ensued. This would of course indicate exactly what the magic bullet theory predicts: immediate, short term, uniform effects among the masses.

However, scientists that studied this incident, most notably Paul Lazarsfeld and Herta Herzog, actually found evidence that suggested a more nuanced picture. First of all, many people had tuned in long after the show started, thereby missing toe introduction that explained it was a show. More importantly, they found that contextual factors had influenced the collective reaction. It was 1938 and news media had informed their audiences on the potential of an upcoming war with Germany. So people were forewarned that a war might happen. Research showed that some who panicked actually missed the part about the Martians and assumed it was a German invasion that took place.

Another important finding was that newspapers had probably exaggerated the ‘widespread panic’ that followed the broadcast. Reality was perhaps less sensational: yes hundreds of thousands were frightened to some degree, but in reality most of them had not acted on their fear, no evidence of hysterical screaming masses in the streets, no suicides by people who wanted to stay out of the hands of the Martians.

Later Lazarsfeld again criticized the magic bullet theory, this time together with Berelson and Gaudet when they disproved the hypothesis that voters were persuaded to vote for Roosevelt because of his extensive campaign.

28 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

These studies are examples of a line of questioning in to the all-powerful media paradigm by scholars. They were systematically testing the magic bullet hypothesis and had been unable to reproduce the presumed effects in an experimental setting. Also scientists found that often in cases of presumed huge effects in real life scenarios, like the Martian Scare of 1938, there were many other variables to take into consideration, besides media influence. Because these critical notions were the result of a long list of scientific studies. We call this paradigm, the powerful media paradigm put to the test.

Minimal effects I just explained that the belief in the all-powerful media had fuelled academic research into the topic of mass communication. Although many anecdotes, like the Martian Attack of 1938, seemed to indicate great effects, further scientific exploration actually failed to prove this hypothesis. Many researchers now argued that the effects of mass communications had been overestimated. Also the idea of a passive audience that is either shot or injected was also rejected.

World War I and later World War II propaganda was again looked at in this light and scholars, like the influential psychologist Carl Hovland, found that audience members were often not passive at all but quite able to select messages and block persuasive attempts. Especially when they were aware aforehand that there was going to be a persuasion attempt (this is the so called inoculation theory, the core premise of which is basically that a prepared audience is better able to resist persuasion). Also they found that it was often difficult to prove the power of media in reality because there are too many variables in real life to reliably ascertain the effect of one specific variable like media influence.

When Lazarsfeld, Berelson and Gaudet studied the effects of the Roosevelt presidential campaign of 1940, they found that people were not swayed by the campaign efforts. There was some influence but this had more to do with reinforcement of a position someone already had than with change. Another element of the magic bullet theory was debunked by this. Also the researchers found that people were in fact influenced quite a lot, not by the media but by so called opinion leaders. Opinion leaders are those who influence and inform the people around them. Typically opinion leaders expose themselves to media on order to be informed and reinforce their standpoints with arguments.

29 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science A so called two step flow model was proposed where people are influenced by opinion leaders. The media use of these opinion leaders was of course very different than the old powerful media model would suggest. They actively sought out media they wanted to use, made selections based on their own opinions, wants and needs. So basically they are quite powerful and not easily manipulated at all.

The powerful media paradigm was discarded and scholars like Lazarsfeld proposed a ‘minimal effects’ theory instead. Media are only one of many variables in a situation, and often not the most influential one by far. People are more likely to be persuaded through social means and therefore media use and influence should be studied from this perspective. Not viewing the audience as uniform and passive but in fact taking into consideration audience factors, seeing that effects can differ from person to person and group to group.

This approach can be characterized by a famous quote from Berelson "Some kinds of communication, on some kinds of issues, brought to the attention of some kinds of people, under some kinds of conditions, have some kinds of effects." (1949) Although the minimal effects paradigm was becoming more popular, two things happened that sparked a new popular belief in the powerful media idea. Firstly we gradually learned more and more about the Holocaust. The world needed theories that explained how this could have happened and why so many had kept silent during the reign of Hitler. Secondly a new mass medium quickly rose to prominence, drastically changing the media landscape and people’s daily lives. Television.

Powerful Media Rediscovered While scientists all over were adhering to the minimal affects hypothesis, a different contrary trend led to a so-called rediscovery of the powerful media paradigm. One important reason for this were the many presumed effects of communication during the Second World War. Not only historians but sociologists too pointed at the concerted propaganda efforts of both the Allied and Axis forces. Specifically the situation in Nazi Germany that had caused so many to agree with and later not object to Hitler’s policies was an important theme for study. This new paradigm that formed, the Powerful Media Rediscovered was slightly more nuanced then the older Powerful Media paradigm. Scientists had learned from the studies of Lazarsfeld and Hovland and such that direct, immediate and uniform effects were difficult to prove. But ever since World War II there was a growing body of scientific work forming that suggested strong 30 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science long term, indirect and personal effects. New theories on powerful media were more nuanced than the older ones, and saw the effects more in terms of reinforcement than actual change.

Not only scientists objected to the minimal effect theory: popular belief in the Powerful Media Paradigm remained strong, and only grew after the war. Many people working in advertisement, political campaigning or in the media could not come to terms with the minimal effects thesis and added anecdotal evidence that further supported the idea of a powerful media. World War II propaganda had in the popular eye been extremely influential (even though scientists were still arguing this) because it had helped create a huge social support for the war effort.

The idea that the media had failed pre-war Germany was also apparent. Why hadn’t the Fourth Estate stopped to rise of Hitler? What was the use of a check on government power if it didn’t stop something like this from happening? These and other instances (were media owners misused their powers for instance) led to a Commission on Freedom of the Press to investigate the democratic role of the media. In 1947 they published their report, which is still the basis for most modern thought on this, and concluded that yes, like the fourth estate model the press is crucial for a healthy political system, because they serve as a platform for opinions of the people and serve as a check on government power. However, unlike the Fourth Estate model, which included that the media should be free of any constrictions, the Commission proposed a) that in order for the media to serve the people, there should be guidelines that govern media behaviour. b) That the basis of these guidelines should be a feeling of social responsibility. This is why this model is called the social responsibility model. c) The Commission stated that every political institute needs check and balances, therefore also the media can’t be completely without restrictions. There is room for government interference in extreme cases. d) However, it is preferable to avoid extreme measures, therefore the media should govern themselves through a system of a professional codes of ethics, upheld by a self-imposed regulatory body.

It is this Social Responsibility Model that is in fact dominant today. Every country has of course its own variation, but usually there is some system were media organizations adhere to the rules set out by a committee made up of media professionals. They don’t hold any official legislative power but media organizations agree that this court can fine them and such whenever the professional code is breached.

31 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science The introduction all over the world of this new system of media governance clearly shows that (despite the fact that scientifically the issue was under debate) the powerful media idea was still widespread. This belief further increased with the rise of television.

A revolution in the media landscape: the rise of television Earlier I pointed toward World War II as a reason for the popular and scientific reluctance to accept a minimal effect conclusion. A second reason was the arrival of television in the 1950s and 1960s as a new medium with even more power of attraction than its predecessors. The effects of television were presumed huge, but not in the old ‘magic bullet’ way. Not so much direct, short term and uniform, but: a) Long term, with repeated exposure. One new theory called cultivation proposed that after repeated long term exposure audiences tend to shift towards the dominant media viewpoints on matters. b) Indirect effects, much more attention was given now to indirect effects like associated effects. For instance, when we see a commercial of a muscular man eating ice cream we might not run into the shop to immediately buy an ice-cream, but perhaps after several commercials like this, we will associate this particular brand with a healthy appearance, thereby increasing the likelihood that we’ll prefer this brand. These types of effects are also typically longer lasting that the bullet and needle effects. c) Personal effects. Now it was appreciated that one audience member is not the same as the other. Effects therefore are pluriform and have to be studied in context. A violent cartoon might have a completely different effect on a child that watches it alone than on a child that watches it with siblings or parents. d) Reinforcement rather than change. Studies increasingly indicate that reinforcement effects are quite strong, people remember and process content selectively, based on their own knowledge and predispositions. Therefore things that connect with their preferred reality will sooner be processed. A topic that we’ll discuss more in length in the next weeks by the way.

Television was in so many ways a new platform: it captivated its audience, created new worlds within a media reality. Television shows had a huge impact. Unlike the paper, people watched TV together, so in many ways it was a social medium as well. It was a topic for discussion in everyday life. You could quickly isolate yourself if you weren’t aware of new programs and shows on television. Hypermediality, when people reference media content, became one way of opening yourself up or closing yourself of to a group. We can imagine the new co-worker who is the only one who hasn’t seen a new series on TV. He’ll probably feel as though he’s less part of the group now. And probably, to some extent, this is true. Television became a 32 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science preferred way to spend time, alone or together, shows and series were a way to identify yourself, as an audience member or even a fan of that particular program.

Social Learning, when people learn skills or how to behave in situations in a social setting, proved to be quite effective through television. Even though I have never been in a fire, I have some idea of what to do and avoid because of many movies and series. If these ideas are correct of course remains to be seen, but I do have some inkling based on media exposure.

Just like I think I know what to expect in a courtroom, space shuttle or dinosaur attack. Not because of direct experience, but through mediated experience.

Other scholars established Socialization effects or television. Socialization is when we learn norms and values in a social way. Just like we learn from our parents, family and friends, we learn from television as well.

All of these effects were probably not unique for television compared to other media, but they were very apparent in television.

So was probably the rise of television more than anything that caused a final paradigm, a compromise between minimal and powerful effects. This is the dominant paradigm of today, that of negotiated media effects.

Negotiated media effects The final paradigm I want to discuss with you this week is a compromise between the minimal effects and powerful media perspectives. Combining elements of both models the negotiated media effects model states that media and communication in general (not only mass, the focus is broader than that) have a potential for great power.

Effects can be short term, direct, immediate, after one shot exposure et cetera. However, more often, strong and enduring effects are based on long term, repeated exposure where the content reinforces rather than changes the audienceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s beliefs.

This perspective: - combines the insights of political en economical scholars with those of psychologists, sociologists and even cultural anthropologists - looks at human development and sees persuasion as something continuous. Something that is not to be avoided, because we need it to function. It canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t be avoided without losing that which connects us with others. Many studies with children were now done, to find out more about the role of communication during crucial development phases. Also, many 33 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science societal problems, like crime, prejudice, aggressive and anti-social behaviour were now linked to communication, either as a cause or a possible solution (often both).

- Sometimes tries to back qualitative statements with quantitative data, thereby aiming to measure the subjective.

- Looks at all kinds of effects. Agenda setting for instance is a theory that proposes that the media don’t tell us what to think, but what to think about. The media agenda therefore influences the public agenda, if the marriage of some celebrity is much discussed in the news it will probably feature higher on the public perception as well. The media tell us which items are important, where important things happen and why. The amount of attention given to environmental pollution by the media causes a higher percentage of people thinking about this subject and a higher percentage of people evaluating environmental pollution as a serious/important problem.

A second theory is framing. Frames define problems, shape possible solutions and basically help a person deconstruct a message in a particular way. In these photos the same news event, the tearing down of Saddam Hussein’s Statue, is depicted. The frame is however quite different, thereby probably changing how we deconstruct the message.

We can see that these types of theories no longer focus on the intention of the sender but rather on message construction and deconstruction. So no longer the linear effect oriented approach but a focus on the construction and the reception of a message. On processing and signification.

We are going to continue with that topic, next week. I hope to see you then!

The Reception and Signification Perspective An introduction to the reception and signification perspective Welcome back to Introduction to Communication Science. This is week 4 of our course. So far we have talked about the history of our field (in week 2) and last week we discussed the linear effect-oriented approach. I’m glad to see the course is inspiring many discussions on our forum. I’m also grateful for your many remarks about the course and suggestions for further reading. You’ll see that I have frequently added your suggestions to our Little Box of Nuance section. So thanks for your help improving this course, this is what a MOOC is all about!

34 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

As you know by now I’m using a very broad distinction into three schools of thought to discuss our field. I’ve said before that these categories are by no means fixed, but I find them useful nonetheless. First the linear transmission perspective; then a new focus on reception and signification; and at roughly the same time a focus on social and cultural effects of communication.

The topic for this week is the second approach: the reception and signification perspective (or perhaps I should say perspectives, because there is a distinction here that I will cover later). Next week we’ll talk about communication as a social and cultural force.

I will use week 6 to answer questions you might have. Post your questions on our forum. I’ll make a selection of recurring themes and further explain some of the more complicated theories and concepts that we discussed. Week 6 is all about class interaction, so let me know which topics you want to cover in week 6.

Week 7 is very exciting because it is our exam week! You need to do the self-evaluation tests each week and pass the exam to complete this course and get a certificate of accomplishment.

In week 8 we’ll discuss the exam and look back at our MOOC. It’s a behind the scene look on how it was made, why it was made and for who it was made. I would also love to say something about who you are, what your background is and why you enrolled in this course.

There is already a survey in place to get this information. It would be great if you participate.

Okay, back to the topic at hand. Last week we started with the linear perspective. I explained how the First World War fuelled research into our field and led to a belief in direct and uniform effects. The audience was seen as passive and defenceless against mass communication as a hypodermic needle or magic bullet. Later this belief in the power of the media became more nuanced. When scientific studies failed to prove the all-powerful media hypothesis, this led to the more sceptical minimal effects hypothesis. But World War Two and the rise of television clearly showed that mass communication indeed could have huge effects under some circumstances. It was now appreciated that effects were not always direct, uniform and short term but quite often non-immediate, long term, indirect and different from person to person.

Eventually the negotiated effects paradigm balanced a belief in powerful effects with the notion that the audience was actually capable of selecting and blocking messages and using them for their own ends. This line of thought was also very apparent in the reception and 35 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science signification approach that had gradually developed since the sixties. We'll further discuss this approach this week.

Message construction I explained in our first class that in the nineteen sixties communication scientists started to pay more attention to message construction and deconstruction under the influence of semiotics and literature studies. From literary theory we adopted the idea that everything that communicates something is a ‘text’ that can be ‘read’.

The most influential model from semiotics was perhaps this nineteenth century model by Ferdinand de Saussure in which he explained that a sign was made up of two things. 1) A signifier, which is the form of the sign and 2) the concept it represents, the signified.

This word: ‘love’ is a set of black lines to a white background in this case on your computer screen. That’s the signifier. The signified is the concept of love.

If we take a traffic light. The signifier is a red light hanging over the road. The signified is the idea that you have to stop.

But, the process of giving meaning to this sign, in other words: the signification, is not the same for everyone. Although it’s quite clear for most people that they have to stop for a red light, for Judith it also means that she will arrive late at her job interview. She will react very differently to the red light than Megan, who was not in a hurry at all.

Semiotics tells us that there are two levels of signification: denotation and connotation.

Denotation is the first order of signification, the explicit meaning of a sign (in this case a red light). Connotation is the second level of signification, it is what the denotation represents, all associated meanings (in this case it means stopping, but is also results in anger and frustration for Judith because she might be late at her interview).

We can easily imagine different people reacting very differently to this sign, adding their own unique background to the signification process. So imbedded in this model is the idea of polysemic messages. Messages with a different meaning for different people. Some signs have a widely shared connotation. On a denotative level it’s a black little drawing against a white background. On a conative level most people will recognize this as the representation for the ladies room. Of course on a very personal level the connotation will still vary depending on how desperate someone needs to use the toilet!

36 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

The Jacobson model from 1960 is a clear example of how these ideas were adopted by communication scientists. It combined the well-known transmission perspective (sender, message and receiver) with several of the elements we just discussed (but with a different name): Each message, according to the Jacobson model, refers to something outside of the message: a context. A red traffic light refers to the concept of stopping. A love letter refers to the concept of ‘love’.

Another new element was the explicit mention of the ‘code’ of a message, which is the form that a message takes (in semiotics the ‘signifier’). So in our two examples the codes are a red light and a letter consisting of words written in a specific language. This latter code requires a complicated skillset. One has to be able to read but also know the specific language in which it was written. Then, when the explicit meaning was read, the individual audience member can add his or her own associations to the signification process. Creating a unique outcome on a receiver level.

Active audiences The idea that message deconstruction requires certain skills, and varies from person to person depending on their background, knowledge and predispositions certainly supposes a lot of audience activity. Traditionally the audience was seen as massive, uniform and passive.

Unable to select or block messages. Therefore media organizations and advertisers, whenever they commissioned an audience study, were mostly interested in how many people were exposed to a message. They basically wanted to know their so called ‘reach’ since the number of people you reach is an important indicator of the economical worth of advertising space. Advertisers paid more for a spot in media with a high reach.

But, when gradually the idea of the powerful audience came into sway, reach became a more complicated concept. Instead of the simple definition ‘amount of people that are exposed to a message’ Roger Clausse (1968) proposed the following hierarchy of reach. First the ‘message offered’ (Let’s say I’m doing a direct mail campaign. This level of reach would be the amount of letters that I sent out), the second level is ‘message receivable’ (the amount of people that have a mailbox and are therefore able to receive my letter), thirdly ‘message received’ (this is the amount of people that actually received my letter. Please note that this is the traditional reach definition). On a fourth level is ‘message registered’ (since we can imagine many people will throw away this letter they didn’t ask for without reading). And fifthly, 37 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science ‘message internalized’ the highest level of audience activity, everyone who read the letter and thought about it.

Commercially the highest level of audience activity, internalization, is obviously worth more to advertisers and hence media organizations than merely the people who receive a message. So not only scientists, but also market researchers, were very interested in audience activity and the question how and why people select certain messages for consumption. Why they choose to be part of an audience.

This was also something new, compared to the traditional passive audience paradigm, that people chose to be an audience member, they made conscious decisions about which media to use. And they did this to fulfil their media-related need, because they wanted to be informed, be entertained, pass the time, belong to a group or any other reason. This idea of an active audience that was aware of their media-associated needs was already studied in the early 1940’s. In the sixties the theme was rediscovered and made explicit in the Uses and Gratification theory. Many important scientists like Katz, Blumler and McQuail made use of this theory and further explored the issue. They focused on the needs of audience members.

Primarily they tried to answer the question why people use certain media. This theory sees people as actively seeking out the media that suit their needs best. If I want to laugh I’ll watch a sitcom on TV. For an evening of safe suspense, you might pop in a DVD of some exciting new detective series or read an exciting book or comic book. Everyone is aware of which media serve their needs best. So the next person might not choose a book, but will reach the same goal by using a computer game. If you want to know something about communication science one person might read a book on the topic and the other will follow this MOOC. Or you can do both of course, compare the two and start a discussion on our forum.

Selective processing Uses and Gratification studies taught us that people were actively seeking out media to fulfil their needs. It makes sense that when people are able to open themselves up to specific content, they can also close themselves off to certain messages.

Closing oneself off to messages may be seen as a coping mechanism. Scientists who studied the brain discovered that, since we are constantly bombarded with sensory input, in order to make sense of the world around us, and not get overwhelmed, we are very adept in blocking unnecessary input and on the other hand selecting and amplifying relevant data. Note that these processes are usually subconscious, meaning that they also occur when we do not 38 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science intend to filter out information. A simple example of this, in a crowded room our brain will filter away background noise and conversations that we are not interested in, focusing on the people we are talking to. Amplifying their voice and blocking other sounds. But if someone in one of those other conversations would suddenly drop our name, we would probably hear that. Our brain knows that we are probably interested when people start gossiping about us!

Hastorf and Cantril studied this phenomenon in 1954. They asked several university students from Princeton and Dartmouth to count the amount of violations in a Princeton-Dartmouth football game. Princeton students reported more Dartmouth violations and Dartmouth students had ‘seen’ more Princeton violations. Both groups, despite the fact that they had to observe seemingly simple and objective facts, had processed the message in a different way, filtering out unwanted information – whenever their own team made a violation – and amplifying information that corresponded with their predispositions.

These and similar findings later led to the proposal of the so called Hostile Media Effect. In 1982, the first major study of this phenomenon was undertaken by Vallone, Ross and Lepper.

Pro-Palestinian students and pro-Israeli students were shown the same news and asked to count the amount of pro- and anti-Israeli and pro- and anti-Palestinian references. Both sides found that the media were biased against their side. Pro-Israeli students counted more antiIsrael references and fewer pro-Israel references than the students who favoured the Palestinians. And vice versa.

These studies indicate that there is an actual difference of perception between members of the same audience. They see, hear, remember and process messages differently on a subconscious level. This is called a cognitive bias. We think we are objectively watching the news or a sports game but in reality our mind is already serving as a filter: making selections and blocking out unwanted information.

There are many reasons why a cognitive bias can take place. We’ll discuss some of the main ones in the next section of our MOOC.

Cognitive shortcuts The study of cognitive biases tells us that we process information subjectively. Sometimes to the extent that our perceptions get distorted, clouding ‘simple and objective’ facts like the amount of violations in a football match.

39 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science Having cognitive biases is in many cases a very effective and healthy phenomenon because people simple cannot handle balanced processing of all input. Can you imagine being conscious all the time of all your senses? You’ll probably be overwhelmed in seconds! It’s great that our mind is able to subconsciously make all of these processing decisions. Although we may be inclined to see biases as limitations, we could also view them as cognitive shortcuts since they speed up information processing.

Perhaps the best known theory about cognitive biases is the theory of cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive Dissonance is a theory from psychology that explains how people handle conflicting feelings, ideas or beliefs. I’ll explain this with an example. Roger feels he is a well-read intellectual. His friends start talking about the classic book War and Peace. Everyone has read it except Roger. The belief that he is a well-read intellectual clashes with the fact that he is the only one amongst his friends who hasn’t read this classic. The theory predicts that Roger will try to avoid the discomfort of this cognitive dissonance. He can do this in three ways: 1) by making one of the discordant factors less important, 2) by adding new elements to his beliefs that make the picture fit (create consonance), 3) and finally by changing one of the clashing factors.

So to avoid cognitive dissonance Roger could say: well, who cares if I’m well read. It’s not that important! Or not having read one classic hardly makes me illiterate! Or, he could create consonance by adding new elements to his beliefs For instance by thinking that – being an intellectual - he obviously hangs out with other well-read intellectuals. It’s therefore not surprising that his friends have read the classic. Finally he could change his view: either by thinking “apparently I’m not that well-read” or “War and Peace is actually greatly overestimated as a work of literature” The theory explains how people balance their beliefs with reality. Sometimes this can lead to enormous opinion changes. The classic example of this is the fable of the Fox and the Grapes

by Aesop. In the English translation “Driven by hunger, a fox tried to reach some grapes hanging high on the vine but was unable to, although he leaped with all his strength. As he went away, the fox remarked, 'Oh, you aren't even ripe yet! I don't need any sour grapes.'”

Aesop sums up the moral of the story “People who speak disparagingly of things that they cannot attain would do well to apply this story to themselves”.

40 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science The fox had clearly reduced cognitive dissonance by changing his beliefs (the third option) and deciding that the grapes he had craved before were actually sour. Now you also know the origin of the expression ‘sour grapes’.

Central and peripheral route A very different theory that makes use of the cognitive shortcut idea is the Elaboration Likelihood Model or ELM in short. It was proposed in 1979 that information can be processed through a central or a peripheral path. When recipients process via the central route they think about a message extensively. The message passes through the different processing stages. The peripheral route, however, is a shortcut. It’s activated by so called ‘peripheral cues’ like humour, credibility of the source, fear, or desire. The theory tells us that persuasive attempts should take into consideration the predispositions of the audience, specifically a) the motivation to understand a message and b) the ability to understand that message. An example. Tom wants to buy a car. He wants the best one out there within his price range so he is a) motivated to compare information on cars. Also let’s assume Tom is b) able to understand the information that different brochures and websites give him. Because Tom is both motivated and able, the central route of persuasion will yield the best persuasive result.

Having sexy models on the hood of his car will less likely persuade him. His friend Charles is also looking for a car. He is perhaps able to compare cars but actually not so motivated to go through all of these sites and brochures. Therefore the peripheral cue of the sexy model will perhaps work on him.

These are just some examples of many theories on cognitive shortcuts. It’s important for every student of communication to understand to some degree how and why cognitive shortcuts work. Everyone has them. Because, even though cognitive shortcuts do not always lead to the best logical decisions, they save a lot of time and energy!

Getting through the filter In the previous sections we talked about message construction and audience activity. We saw that people – contrary to the traditional mass audience paradigm - are actually quite adept at selecting the messages they want to process (both on a conscious level, by selecting specific media for consumption and an unconscious level because of cognitive shortcuts).

We all have our own shortcuts or filters based on our personal background, experiences, interests et cetera. But studies also suggest different ways in which our cognitive shortcuts

41 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science are actually influenced by mass media. So maybe in some ways, our filters are not so personal and unique after all.

Some messages for instance, go through our filter because the media tell us that they are important, that we should concern ourselves with them, form some sort of opinion on them.

Last week I discussed the agenda-setting theory, which proposes exactly this: the media don’t tell us what to think, but they do influence what we think about. McCombs and Shaw asked people, in their study of the 1968 presidential election in the United States, what the most important election issues were. Interestingly enough, the results corresponded to a large extent with the amount of attention these items were given by the local and national news. Of course we could assume that news professionals were keen observers of public opinion and therefore the news media serve as a mirror of the public agenda. But McCombs and Shaw suggested the exact opposite: that the amount of media attention influenced the public agenda. They called this theory Agenda Setting. The idea in its simplest form is that media tell us which (news) events are important, who important people are and where important things happen. The theory is usually used in relation to the news. Since the seventies, many studies have added to our knowledge of agenda-setting.

One important later addition to the theory is the concept of priming. Researchers noticed that people, when asked to evaluate political candidates, use the criteria that the media give attention to. It’s called priming. I will explain: if the media give a lot of attention to, let’s say the near-extinction of pandas, then people are primed to connect this item to their evaluation of political candidates. So basically they will start by asking “what is politician X’s view on panda extinction and how does he or she plan to battle it?” If the media give a lot of attention to the economy, then people will link this to their evaluation. A movie review can also prime the potential audience, if the review goes on and on about the special effects, then the audience is more likely to include the special effects in their evaluation process. If the review focuses more on the storyline, than the audience is primed to pay attention to that. You can see how priming is an addition to agenda-setting, media don’t persuade people to think this or that, but they do influence what people think about (when evaluating).

Of course some items won't receive any media attention at all. This has become a separate field of study within communication science called Gatekeeping. It is, simply put, the study of how the filtering process of the media works. Gatekeeping theory addresses the question why some items are let through the ‘gate’ while others are filtered out. Media professionals who can make the decision to admit topics through the gate (or keep them from them from the 42 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science media agenda) are called gatekeepers. The theory was proposed by Lewin in the nineteenforties (Lewin, Kurt. "Forces behind food habits and methods of change". Bulletin of the National Research Council). While the theory originally focused on the mass media, today the theory also addresses interpersonal communication.

So before messages can reach our own personal filter, they are first filtered by gatekeepers in the media. If you think about, it’s a miracle that messages reach us at all!

Encoding, decoding and the construction of meaning We talked this week about a lot of different aspects of message construction and processing.

I want to end with Reception Theory, because it bridges this week’s perspective with the cultural approach that we will discuss next week.

Stuart Hall 1974/1980 is often mentioned as one of the frontrunners of reception theory (also known as reception analysis or audience reception). It’s a theory that focuses on how the recipient receives and gives meaning to a message. Hall – influenced by Semiotics- saw communication as a negotiation between sender, text, and receiver.

A communicator ‘encodes’ a message with meaning. Recipients take meaning from that message. Hall called this ‘decoding’. We talked before about the use of codes and signs in a text. In a way the reader ‘negotiates’ with the text, relying on his or her knowledge, experiences, cultural background, et cetera. This negotiation can lead to different outcomes, the principle of polysemic messages: the idea that messages can be interpreted by many people in many different ways. The opposite of polysemic messages are monosemic messages, messages that have only one meaning. Umberto Eco uses the terms open or closed texts.

Perhaps it would be more useful to see the distinction between open and closed texts as a dimension, where some texts leave more room for interpretation than others. A math formula is relatively closed, while an abstract painting is relatively open. Likewise, a painted portrait is considered more open than a photo portrait. But an abstract painting would in comparison be even more open. It’s all relative.

To explain his views further, Hall came up with the encoding/decoding model in which he explains the different ways a receiver can decode a message.

43 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science Let’s say Rose publishes a brochure. Rose is a conservative politician and argues in her pamphlet for more use of nuclear energy as an alternative for the use of fossil fuels. There is going to be an election on this and Rose want people to vote for her. It is read by Jake. The sender – politician Rose - has some intent when she encoded or composed her message.

1) If Jake completely internalizes the message and decodes it in the way Rose intended, he agrees and is going to vote for her. This is the ‘preferred reading’. According to reception theory this is more likely to occur when Jake and Rose share a cultural background. For instance if Jake is sympathetic towards the conservative party. If there is a higher cultural proximity between sender and receiver, there is a higher likelihood of a preferred reading taking place.

2) Of course, Jake could also partly decode it in the preferred way, but also reading it partly different. Stuart Hall called this a ‘negotiated reading’. For instance Jake could agree with Rose’s arguments but he decides to vote for someone else.

3) 3) A third way of decoding this message would be total rejection by Jake. He reads Rose’s pamphlet but completely disagrees and he concludes Rose is completely wrong and doesn’t deserve his vote. This is an ‘oppositional reading’. This is more likely to occur if Jake and Rose are, culturally, further apart. If, for instance Jake is a staunch supporter of liberal politics.

You can see that implicit in Reception Theory is the idea that communication serves as a carrier, reflection and producer of culture. This theory therefore bridges this week’s and next week’s topics.

The construction/signification approach and the cultural approach complement each other. I would like to end this week’s MOOC by emphasizing that in fact these perspectives on communication are intertwined. Next week we’ll discuss this further when we cover the cultural approach. I hope to see you then!

3. Cultural and Social Approaches to Communication Science The cultural approach Introduction to the cultural approach Welcome in week 5. I want to thank everyone who has already participated in the survey and I would like to urge the rest of you to give us a minute of your time to answer some questions about yourself and your motivation to follow a Massive Open Online Course on Communication Science. I’ll present the results in week 8 in our ‘MOOC about the MOOC’.

44 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science As you can see in the course outline, we have come to the end of the scripted part of this course. Because this week, week 5, is actually the last week I had prepared. If you finish week 5 you have heard everything that I set out to discuss with you in this introduction course. There is of course much more to say about communication. That’s why next week is all about what you want to cover. We have been working day and night on eight new lectures, inspired by your comments on our forum. Next week, we will visit some new topics and revisit a few theories that deserve a bit more exploration.

Okay, but what are we going to do this week? Where were we? We have moved from the history of our field, to theories that view communication as a one-way process with only one correct meaning to theories that focused more on message construction and deconstruction.

This week I’ll talk about the cultural approach that sees communication as a carrier and building block of our social and cultural world.

In the last lecture of week 4 I already explained that this cultural approach should be seen in light of the increased focus on recipients and the signification process. It’s typical that Stuart Hall, a frontrunner of the reception perspective, also studied and put a large emphasis on cultural and social aspects of communication. He explained that cultural proximity effects the transmission of a message. In simple words people will understand each other better when the different parties are culturally closer to each other. A simple example of this is language, one of many indicators of culture. It’s more difficult to understand someone from a different country simply because they speak in a different language. And if countries, like Britain and The United States, share a language that tells you they have some sort of cultural link. Hall explained that communication can either identify someone as ‘belonging’ to a culture of a group for instance, or show that they do not belong. Also, culture is something that changes all the time and has to be renewed. We have to keep communicating or we’ll lose touch with our culture. You can imagine if someone hasn’t left his house for years, the world will have changed! Our hermit might feel like a cultural outcast because of it. Finally communication is necessary to make sense of the social world around us. Therefore when you study recipients and how they give meaning to a message, it makes sense to also study cultural effects.

So you can see that this week’s perspective is a continuation of last week’s. They actually developed and became more prominent at the same time, in the sixties. We’ll start our exploration there.

45 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

Producing and maintaining culture We have been talking about culture and communication, but what is culture exactly? Let’s start by defining this tricky concept. There are, as always, many definitions in the field. Some see culture as an internalized, and shared, set of unstated assumptions, procedures, ways of doing things that have been internalized to the extent that people do not argue about them (Triandis, 1972). Other definitions focus more on the fact that culture identifies us. It creates a feeling of belonging or not-belonging, for instance this definition by Hofstede who sees culture as “the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes one group (nation, society) from another” (Hofstede, 1991).

One of the earliest and most influential definitions is by Edward B. Tylor (1832-1917) who defined it as “that complex whole, which includes knowledge, belief, art, law, morals, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society.” Important elements in this definition are the fact that people share culture. This process of sharing makes us belong in society. So culture has everything to do with our own individual identity, with a feeling of belonging to society, to a larger group and to a cultural framework.

The study of human culture, and the differences between cultures, became a core research theme of the scientific discipline of Anthropology. One of the questions anthropologists, and most notably Franz Boas (1858-1942) raised was how universal is human culture and how can we study it? Boas introduced the principle of cultural relativism, which meant that there is not one universal human culture but in fact many different ones, each equally valid in its own context.

Scientists should, according to Baos, acknowledge this diversity, which is difficult because we intuitively tend to see our own culture as ‘right’. Still we can overcome this cultural bias by studying, observing and participating in different cultures. And what should they study, observe? Basically everything! Since culture is communicated through all kinds of cultural acts: dance, song, literature, interpersonal interaction, daily routine, behaviour, et cetera. It’s all part of the cultural framework that identifies a society.

These ideas became the dominant approach of cultural and social anthropologists in the twentieth century. Their influence spread out to other scientific disciplines, like communication science, in the nineteen sixties. This culminated in the foundation of the very influential Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies in 1964. This centre inspired scientists all over the world to study cultural aspects of communication. It prospered under the leadership 46 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science of its foremost scientist and later he also became the director of the Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies: Stuart Hall. You might remember from last week that he was also the leading scholar in the field of Reception Theory, the theory that focused on the recipients of communication and how they give meaning to a message and use communication to give meaning to the world. This idea fitted neatly within the Cultural Approach. Let’s further explore this in the next section of our MOOC.

Making sense of the world You might recall from our first class the Newcomb model. One of the basic models we covered in our first week. The model contains the elements A, B and X. A is the sender, B is the receiver and X is some shared social factor that 1) influences the relationship between A & B and 2) is influenced itself by this relationship. Let’s say A is Anton and B is Barbara. Anton and Barbara are friends and both like the movies of the famous director Xavier.

Xavier’s new movie comes out and Barbara absolutely hates it, she thinks it’s pretentious and boring. The relationship between Barbara and Xavier has changed. She is not such a big fan anymore. As a result the relationship between Anton and Barbara might change as well, since they now completely disagree on their appreciation of this movie and Xavier’s directing. Also, Anton’s relationship with Xavier might change, perhaps he will start to see this movie in a new light as a result of Barbara’s criticism or he will defend him avidly and as a result become an even bigger fan.

This model is important because it is one of the first communication models that include the idea of a social environment that influences the communication process and is itself influenced by the communication process. It contains the idea that communication is used to construct and maintain a social reality. A reality that’s very personal for every individual.

This theory, that communication is a building block of a social reality became popular in the nineteen sixties. In their influential book ‘The Social Construction of Reality’ (1966) Berger and Luckmann's argue that all knowledge about everyday reality, all knowledge that we take for granted, even simple and even objective ‘truths’, are actually born from and maintained by social interactions. We ‘know’ that lying is wrong, that boys play with cars, that motorcycles are cool, that we should obey the law, because as children and adults we are programmed by parents, friends, family, class mates, and indirectly by mediated communication, with ideas of what is real. We are socially taught seemingly fixed ‘rules’ and ‘truths’ that are in reality social constructs. This reality is unique for every individual. Our own reality lives, evolves and dies

47 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science with us and in a way we are at the centre of it. This is the theory of social constructionism that was further developed by scholars in the sixties and seventies.

A key element of social constructionism is that people do not construct reality by themselves.

We need to communicate with others to make sense of the world. To understand the ‘rules of live’ and know where we belong and don’t belong. This perspective completely challenged the idea that reality is fixed and objective, and that the truth of that reality can be proven by scientists. This meant that scientists, according to social constructionists, had to study how reality was formed in the mind of people, how they use social interaction and mediated communication to create and maintain their personal image of reality. New, more qualitative, deeper and explorative methods were required for this. Communication scientists borrowed new methods from anthropology, sociology, political sciences and literature studies to gain insight in how reality, or culture, is formed with use of communication. New popular methods were in-depth interviews, textual analysis and historical and socio-political analysis. Scientists, like the adherents of the Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, were also more and more interested in the social and political context in which communication was produced and received. We’ll discuss that further next.

Popular culture: Reflection or illusion?

In an earlier section we talked about the principle of cultural relativism. In other words, the idea that different cultures exist at the same time. Even though all of these cultural realities are equally valid, some are more popular than others. Popular cultures are communicated on a large scale and both through personal and mediated communication. The umbrella term for these types of cultures is popular or pop culture. Scientists are, for different reasons, very much interested the study of this so-called pop culture. They study carriers of pop culture, like songs, movies, literature, game shows, video games and basically everything that is deemed popular and communicates mainstream values, ideas and ‘truths’.

Interest in this field has increased since the sixties. That’s why I want to briefly discuss this research theme with you. First of all, why are we interested in pop culture? Many different reasons actually. I’ll name a few without any particular order: Pop culture is often seen as a reflection of mainstream society. The idea is, if we study pop culture we learn how society works, which rules and truths are in place and where power resides. Do you recognize the influence of social constructionism?

48 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science To continue this line of thought, pop culture is considered a building block of a shared social reality. That it is surely worth studying!

Some scholars oppose this reflection thesis. They argue that pop culture is actually artificially created. It is in fact a fake culture, or a fake consciousness. It is not a reflection of mass society but in fact something created by powerful members of the elite, who control the media landscape. These powerful few created pop culture to keep themselves in power.

That’s, according to this theory, the main function of pop culture, to maintain the current power structures. So pop culture is designed to keep the masses ignorant. To distract the audience and keep their thoughts away from the unfair distribution of wealth and power in the world. To teach people to obey the law and powerful institutions. To keep some knowledge from the public agenda and keep people’s mind on other inconsequential things like scandals involving actors or rock stars, or what’s going to happen on tomorrow’s soap opera. This also explains why pop culture, according to many scholars, does not provoke thought, is unoriginal, and of low quality.

This theory was first developed by members of the Frankfurter School. A group of loosely affiliated scientists that were particularly active in the nineteen twenties, forties and sixties.

They were not only scientists but also very politically active. Their theories and findings were often used to show the need for social change and emancipation. Frankfurter scholar were often accused of being Marxist. And not without reason. Indeed, the Frankfurter School tried to explain why the revolution that Marx had predicted, where labourers of the world would revolt, hadn’t happened. Their answer in a nutshell: because pop culture, communicated through mass media, is specifically created to prevent it. To keep us docile. In a way, the media serve as ‘opium for the people’, creating a passive audience that’s is unlikely to start a revolution. If you want to connect theories, this Frankfurter approach actually fitted nicely with the old mass audience paradigm that we covered in week 3. This traditional audience paradigm saw the masses as passive and unable to select and block messages.

Even though the Frankfurter School does not have many supporters today, their negative views on popular culture is now often seen as somewhat elitist, it is historically important because of they were the first to focus their questions on how pop culture was created and how it related to a larger societal context. We’ll talk about several more modern approaches to pop culture in our next section.

49 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

Cultural studies: Birmingham and Toronto In our previous section we talked about the interesting but somewhat outdated Frankfurter School. Let’s discuss two other, more modern, schools: The Birmingham and the Toronto School. Like the Frankfurter School the Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, championed by Stuart Hall, was also very much interested in power structures, communicated through pop culture. A central theme in the Birmingham School was the theory of Hegemony. The core idea of which is again that pop culture communicates the dominant cultural framework. This framework, per definition, even without actually being artificially designed that way, communicates that dominant power structure, who is in power, what the rules are, who to obey, what is considered ‘good behaviour’ et cetera. This cultural hegemony appears implicitly in all carriers of pop culture: literature, songs, movies, game shows, soap operas, bill boards, commercials, newspapers, et cetera. So even without knowing it, we are constantly being programmed with rules and truths that benefit the status quo.

In later years the Theory of Hegemony lost its importance. Fiske for instance takes a very different approach. He sees the worth of pop culture in its universal appeal. The fact that many people respond to a certain music album it is an indicator of its cultural quality. It is in other words in synch with the dominant social reality. You can see that Fiske actually sees popularity as an indicator of quality. Quite a difference from the Frankfurter School that regarded pop culture as an oppressive tool designed to keep us ignorant and passive. If a movie appeals to millions of people it is culturally closer to than an elitist theatre performance that only a handful of people visit and appreciate. Note that this way of looking at quality actually gives a lot more power to the audience. It assumes that if many people like something, it has cultural worth.

A very important alternative to the Birmingham School is the Toronto School. This approach focuses more on the channels of communication, the media themselves. Marshall McLuhan is the most important scientist in this school of Cultural Studies. His famous quote is “the medium is the message” (1962). He meant that culture is influenced more by the characteristics of a medium than by the actual content. The cinema, for instance, is all about the experience of going to a theatre. Perhaps you go on a date with someone, buy popcorn, wait for the movie to start, talk about the previews, sit in the dark together et cetera. All of this is influenced by the particular channel. You have probably experienced something like this yourself. Do you still remember the specific movies it was you saw? You could just as easily see the movie at home, saves a lot of money and you can pause it if you need to go to the toilet. The movie experience in the cinema and at home are of course completely different, not because the content is different but the channel you use is. McLuhan explains that media all 50 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science have their own characteristics that imbed themselves in the experience. If I tell a joke to your face it will be different than if I send it to you by a text message. That’s why, according to McLuhan, we should study that way specific channels, change and form our culture. New media will by their very nature always disrupt the status quo because they allow for new ways of communicating, new ways of shaping reality.

Technologies, according to McLuhan in his ground-breaking book ‘The Gutenberg Galaxy’ (1962) are not only things we use to make life easier, they actually re-invent us as people. For instance the printing revolution, made possible by the innovation of the printing press, completely changed the way people interacted, how they formed ideas and shared cultural values and truths. With every large media revolution, like the printing revolution, the rise of the newspaper and television mankind was culturally re-invented. It allowed new ways for people to talk to each other, to connect. New ways to pass the time. New ways to give meaning to the world around us and explore the difficult question of who we are. McLuhan predicted in 1962 the rise of television and computers have ushered in an electronic age that will again force society to restructure itself to deal with issues like increased feelings of uncertainty, social fragmentation and globalization. I would like to discuss these topics with you, in our next chapter.

Cultural groups One defining trait of culture is that it identifies us in relation to other people. We've talked about his before: a shared culture corresponds with a higher feeling of belonging. A cultural distance can create a feeling that you don’t belong. Imagine John, an adventurous traveller from Amsterdam. John takes a trip to the Amazon to live for a while amongst a tribe there. This tribe will have a different language, different music, customs, behaviour, a different way of celebrating birthdays, perhaps even some different morals than John is used to. Even though John has a great time, he feels, because of these differences, that he is not part of their culture.

When after a few months he lands in Amsterdam and embraces his friends and family, he immediately feels at home again and experiences a sense of belonging. People in the airport are already culturally closer to him than the very friendly, but culturally different, tribe he has visited.

So culture helps us identify where we belong, with what group we fit in. But it's not really that simple is it? Because we are not members of only one culture. This is another important thing: there are cultures on all kinds of levels. Within Western Culture for instance we can make many subdivisions like Western European Culture, Dutch Culture et cetera. You can even 51 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science distinguish culture on a very specific group level, for instance within one group of friends, coworkers, fans of a popular television series, hobbies, special interests, moral values, your fashion sense, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, you name it. Being in a group means sharing something with the other members. Being a member of a group therefore has everything to do with your own personal identity and the group identity. That's why being part of a group carries emotional weight. It is this shared element, the shared culture that creates a feeling of belonging.

Let's take another traveller, Maud. Maud also just returned, not from the Amazon but from a long holiday in Spain. In Spain, she has become a huge fan of Flamenco-dancing. She had many other Flamenco enthusiasts to share this passion with, but back in the Netherlands, her friends and family there don't really know the dance. Luckily there is the internet, and Maud soon finds webpages where she can discuss his dance and share music with people from all over the world. Maud is now in fact a member of a global cultural group of Flamenco fans, next to being part of the Dutch culture, the Amsterdam culture, and many other groups she feels connected with.

Of course, things don't always stay the same. Maud might lose her interest in Flamenco after a while, leaving the group or making membership a less important aspect of her identity. Or the dance itself might undergo changes, splitting up the groups in conservatives and progressive Flamenco lovers. All this is completely natural. It is in fact an important element of the principle of cultural relativism is that cultures change all the time. Many things can cause sudden culture shifts like new technology, population shifts, resource shortages, new art forms, wars, political decisions and many more, but itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s important to realize that change is also inherent to culture, so suddenly or gradually change will occur. You can imagine that all this change and cultural diversity causes much uncertainty in our lives. That's why, even if we are not always aware of it, we are constantly communicating to minimize the discomfort of uncertainty, to adjust, to keep in touch with cultural reality, with society and the groups we identify with or want to belong to. We'll explore this further in our next section.

How to fit in?

In the previous section we talked about groups and how they are formed and maintained by constant sharing of cultural communication. Ideas, values, rules, this can all be part of a group identity. And simple being a member doesn't bring you any guarantees for the future. Since cultural reality is in constant motion, we need to keep communicating to keep fitting in, to 52 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science reduce our uncertainty of how to behave, what values are dominant, which ideas are accepted et cetera.

Many theories have been created around this idea. For instance the Uncertainty Reduction Theory (Berger and Calabrese, 1975). They said that people a) live in constant uncertainty about the world around them, their position in it and the cultural rules in place and b) that we use communication to reduce our uncertainty. There are according to this theory, three main communication strategies to deal with uncertainty. I'll explain with use of an example from my own experience. I visited a wedding reception recently and had with me an envelope as a gift.

I wasn't quite sure however what I was supposed to do with the envelope. Give it to the happy couple? Hand it in somewhere? It was a tightly scripted event and I had just witnessed the master of ceremonies freak out about some detail so I felt some pressure to do the correct thing. Basically three options were open. 1) First of all, I tried to see what other people did. So I tried observation. Berger and Calabrese called this the passive strategy. I didn't really see anyone doing anything with gifts but perhaps they had already done so earlier. Observation did not help in my case. 2) Secondly, I started asking other wedding guests, friends I knew, what I was supposed to do. This is an active strategy. In my example, this also didn't help because the people I asked had the same question. 3) The third and final strategy is the interactive strategy, asking someone at the source of the uncertainty. In my case I went to the master of ceremonies and heard there was a box for envelopes in the other room, I was not supposed to give it to the wedding couple themselves since that would hold up the line. I was glad I asked.

Whenever we find ourselves in a new and uncertain situation we need to culturally adapt with use of communication. This could also apply to a new topic. Even amongst a group of people who know each other longer, a new topic can still generate much uncertainty, since no-one knows yet what the dominant group view will be. There is a well-researched tendency amongst people to feel pressured by the dominating opinions in a group. This is called group pressure.

It's sometimes portrayed as explicit, young kids trying to convince their friends: "Don't be dull, come on and come to the dance on Saturday!" But a perhaps more interesting form of group pressure is implicit: the group does not have to explicitly pressure their members, since they will adopt dominant group behaviour and express dominant group views without being told to.

We call this 'conformity'.

Famous examples of this are the Asch experiments, conducted in the fifties. In its simplest form: the test subject is asked to sit in a group. He thinks they are all test subjects there but in 53 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science reality he is the only one, the rest is all in on the experiment. A picture of a line is shown and next to that a picture of three lines. The group is asked to say out loud which of the three lines is the same length as the first line. The task is simple. First everything goes as it should and the test subject is feeling more and more comfortable. But then, the fake test subjects start giving wrong answers. A startling 75% of the test subjects went along with the group in at least one case. So they gave a wrong answer under this implicit group pressure. These results have of course sparked a series of studies that tried to reveal why people fold under group pressure and why people find it so difficult to openly disagree with public opinion. More on this in our next section.

Conclusion: Cultural conformity and relativism We have just discussed the fascinating phenomenon of conformity. People adjusting their behaviour as a result of group pressure. After the Second World War, scientists looked to these type of theories to explain why so many people had kept quiet during the reign of Hitler.

Quite obviously during the War there was a very real fear of punishment, but also according to Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann, a fear of being socially isolated. Her theories explain exactly how conformity works on a large scale. Noelle-Neumann (1974) supposes that people are in essence social animals. Therefore we need to be part of our social environment.

Consequently, we are afraid that if we disagree with dominant views in society, we will isolate ourselves.

And we know, according to Noelle-Neumann, exactly how to behave to prevent this. Because we have become very good in monitoring public opinion, in seeing which views and actions are popular and which are taboo. Because of our fears, there is a tendency to keep silent whenever we disagree with popular views, and not voice opinions that are unpopular. She called this the Spiral of Silence, because if everyone is silent about their disapproval, of let's say Hitler, then others will observe this and are more likely to keep silent themselves as well.

Thus, conformity breeds more conformity and it becomes possible that a silent majority is following the lead of a very loud minority. Although the theory was developed with Second World War Germany in mind, but applies in many current situations, both on a societal level and a group level. It explains how we use uncertainty reduction strategies to tweak our behaviour and even our own views, to fit in better socially and culturally.

Okay, these are some theories out of many that cover how we use communication to give meaning to the world around us, to construct as you will a cultural reality. We have also talked this week about how we don't do this by ourselves, but in fact constantly create and maintain 54 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science this reality within cultural groups and society as a whole. Leading in fact to many cultural realities existing at the same time. The principle of cultural relativism. On the other hand some theories suggest one dominant cultural reality, communicated on a large scale through pop culture and strengthened by people's tendency to conform to public opinion. Well, this ends this week's lectures on the cultural approach. But the discussion will continue. What do you see around you? Cultural relativism or indeed one dominant culture? Scholars are still divided on the issue. So, I'm very curious where you stand in this debate, let us know on the forum!

Next week: In only five weeks we went with the speed of lightning through a complicated forest of scientific thought. It was of course necessary to take some shortcuts on the way and leave some things out in order to reach our destination in time. And I’m thoroughly impressed with how fast you have all processed such a huge amount of information in such a short time and without any actual class interaction outside of the virtual world. Next week we have time to slow things down a bit and focus on issues that could use some more attention. It’s all about your input. Many of you have already added suggestions on our forum that I will use. So next week a lecture completely inspired by your feedback. I hope to see you then!

Student Questions and Debate Introduction Questions and Answers Welcome to our last week before the exam. I hope you are up to speed with everything. If not, take the time to go over the lectures you missed, take a tour on the forum and read the text files we have made available. You can download all subtitles, so basically the texts of each lecture. And the answers of the MC questions are now below each week’s practice questions, also downloadable. This was a recurring request on our forum that we have been working on for a while. It is now available. I hope it helps you in preparing for the exam.

This is week 6 of our course. As you know we already covered everything we set out to do in the previous weeks, discussing at a rapid pace some basic models and concepts, the history of our field and the linear, construction/signification and cultural approaches to communication theory. This week is an unscripted week that I want to use to go over some student questions.

I received approximately 200 questions to cover this or that item. Some questions were posted on our forum; some came through Twitter and Facebook. Even some per email, even though I temporarily hid my email address in the university database, you were quite adept in finding me! No worries, all suggestions were welcome, and I wish I could cover them all, but as every 55 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science week, we have 8 short lectures, so I’ve made a selection based on how many times a topic was requested and how well it fitted with our course goals. One very important thing. I will add questions to the exam about these topics by the way, so in that aspect, this week is no different than others.

We only had a few days to prepare so we have kept things basic this week. You will be seeing me some more than usual and we have kept the visuals simple, but hopefully as effective and entertaining as before. I hope you enjoy them. Oh, and let us know what you think of this week’s more lean approach. We are learning just like you!

Metaphors I received several questions about the use of metaphors throughout this course. A metaphor is a figure of speech, when we describe something by calling it something else. So it’s an implicit comparison. If I call an enterprise a ‘sinking ship’ everyone will know it’s doomed to fail. If parents call their kid’s room a pig sty, they think it is a huge mess LIKE a pig sty. By the way: if they would actually say “your room is so dirty, it looks LIKE a pig sty’, that would officially be a simile, an explicit comparison, not a metaphor (which is as I said implicit).

Quite some metaphors have passed in these last weeks: fourth estate, hypodermic needle, the media agenda, to name just a few. “Why do scientists do this?” asked one student “It seems a bit strange to me that people who are trained in only talking about facts and things they can prove use all of these colorful expressions” And indeed we do, they are in fact quite important in scientific and non-scientific discussions about our field.

That is why this is the first question I want to cover: metaphors, why do scholars use them?

Well, the answer to this is quite simple really: because they are such a powerful communication device. Metaphors contain a wealth of information, that most people immediately grasp, all buried beneath a simple concept. A good metaphor has a high level of shared connotation, in other words, most people will have the some associations. Most will understand that the hypodermic needle theory has this name because it refers to directly injected messages that have an immediate effect. That the audience has no defense for it. All of this associated meaning automatically pops up when you think about a hypodermic needle.

Therefore metaphors are well-suited to discuss complicated issues. And using metaphors saves a lot of time. Probably most people will understand what you mean with a metaphor

56 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science intuitively and without further explanation. So, if you are arguing a greater point and don’t want to pause to explain each step on the way, metaphors are a useful tool.

If I compare the audience of a message to a group a spoon-fed babies, then everyone will understand that don’t mean that audience members are new to this world, or that they are regarding this world with curious ever-learning eyes. No, I am saying that the audience is 1) not active 2) not blocking information 3) not selecting channels or content 4) all experiencing communication (their food which is fed to them) in the same way. If you think about it, a lot was communicated implicitly when I used this metaphor. And it took a lot more time to explain it. That’s why we use them in science.

But this is all a bit abstract of course. So in the next section I want to discuss some actual metaphors that we use in our field. And you will see how much information one metaphor actually contains.

The role of media in society I received many variations of the question: What role do our media have in society?

Let’s start by saying that scientists see many roles for the media. Since we were discussing metaphors earlier I want to show the wide variety of possible answers by discussing some popular metaphors that are used to discuss the media’s role in society.

A popular metaphor in discussions is always the window, by which we mean of course that the media give us a wider view of the world, enabling us to see more of the world than our own experiences allow. Metaphors contain a wealth of information, hidden in one seemingly simple concept. A similar metaphor for example, but different on one important detail, is the mirror metaphor. A mirror, like a window, refers to the fact that the media widen our horizons.

I have never travelled to the North Pole, still documentaries and movies give me an idea of what it’s like out there. But, the mirror metaphor allows for a distortion of this reflection.

Obviously, the picture the media paint is not exactly the North Pole, but in fact an incomplete, and therefore distorted, image. Selections have been made and we see only parts of the North Pole, no matter how well-made the documentary is. Even a 24/7 webcam that shows us the North Pole only shows us a part of reality. Therefore, instead of a mirror, scholars sometimes use the metaphor of tainted mirror or broken mirror, to indicate that the reflection is not pure.

Much research is focused on these selection processes, what gets attention and what doesn’t.

You might remember that we call these types of studies gatekeeping studies. This approach 57 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science views each medium as a gatekeeper, stopping some content and letting other items through.

So this is another metaphor that we use frequently. A similar comparison is the filter metaphor, basically indicating the same thing; the media only show us part of reality.

Some theoretical approaches go even further, they claim that media show us a fake reality, hiding the truth from us. Remember the Frankfurter School? Scholars from this school of thought argue that pop culture is created by the powers that be to keep the masses ignorant and keep their minds from revolting. The media, in this theory, work as opium for the people.

They keep us quiet, distract us and keep us happy with non-thought provoking entertainment and tabloid journalism. Think back to ancient Rome when the Caesars kept the powerless population from rising up against the elite with free gladiatorial games, chariot races and theater shows. The media in these types of theories also function as a screen. They block us from reality, showing a fake, soothing, non-thought provoking reality in return. Think back to the propaganda of the First World War for instance. Even when Germany was clearly losing, their propaganda pretended they were still winning, ignoring defeats in the news and basically showing a completely false picture of the war.

Now that we are talking about propaganda, another metaphor that’s often used are the wellknow hypodermic needle or magic bullet comparisons, referring to the media as a means of persuasion, ‘injecting’ or ‘shooting’ the audience with messages to which they have no defense, creating instant effects. Would-be persuaders are of course always looking for the magic keys of persuasion in order to manipulate and control. In these theories, journalists are not critical of governments and big corporations. Basically the media are a lapdog of the elite.

More metaphors on the role of the media in society In our previous section we talked about several metaphors on the role of media in society. We ended with several metaphors that stressed the manipulative powers of the media landscape.

Luckily, most metaphors on the media’s role are not so negative.

Many scholars today look at the internet and the wealth of information there and see a perfect platform, podium or forum for people to get their voices heard. Religious or political groups have their own media that serve as a signpost. Essentially ‘showing the way’ to their followers and explaining the world from their specific perspective. An example of this is the political party press or the newsletter of a church.

58 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science The threshold to go online where you can potentially reach a huge audience is of course relatively low if you compare it with other media that have a high reach, like television, radio or newspapers for instance. So many voices and opinions can be heard online, audience members can basically stroll around in this market place of ideas and take what they want, what suits their needs and interests. And through all of these channels, people find each other, find others with the same tastes and views, allowing them to connect with each other. From that perspective media create a social or cultural network and form the glue that holds modern society together.

Is your mind already dazzling from all of these metaphors? Just a few more to drive home the point: with all of this richness of content, both online and offline, it becomes easy to drown in an ocean of information. Thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s why we need search engines and opinion leaders to help us navigate these treacherous waters.

Fortunately the media also function as teacher, educating us and making us more informed.

Sometimes they protect us from danger, like a sheep dog or guardian, for instance by explaining the health hazards of smoking in anti-smoking campaigns. Media can also take on the role of the even more protective watchdog, this is when the media protect us by exposing

59 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science the misuse of power, for instance by politicians. The classic example of this is the Watergate Scandal when a journalistic exposé forced American president Nixon to resign.

As you can see from this long, but still incomplete list: there are many metaphors that we use to discuss this complicated topic, the different roles of media in our society. Why don’t you help us expand this list, on our forum?

Primary and secondary research I received several requests to tell you a bit more about the difference between primary and secondary research methods and explain a bit when we use the first and when the second.

The most basic distinction between primary and secondary research is this. Primary research is when we use original data. It is simply put, new data Secondary research is when we study the results of others. Because these results are often published in scientific journals and books, we also refer to this as a literature study. And because you often sit behind a desk reading these articles, it’s also named desk research.

Secondary research is basically the systematic review of existing knowledge.

So when do scholars perform primary or secondary research? Well, we often do both in different stages of a larger study. Let’s say I’m interested in the effects of fear appeals in antismoking campaigns. More specifically: I want to know if a Dutch anti-smoking campaign should make more use of them in order to become more effective. I will start by exploring the existing literature on the use of fear appeals, anti-smoking campaigns, health campaigns in general, studies in to why people smoke, when people block fear appeals, et cetera. I systematically collect all this secondary data, basically the research findings of others, and analyze these results in order to come up with some expectations of what would happen if we would use more fear appeals in Dutch anti-smoking campaigns. In some cases, if time, money or practicality forces us to limit ourselves to a literature study, this is where my research ends.

But often, if I want to really understand something and delve deeper in to the question, I want to study this further and in more detail. Existing studies might have been conducted in other countries for instance, so I’m wondering if these results will also be true in the Netherlands.

Or, it’s also possible no study has looked specifically at this target group or what happens over 60 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science a prolonged period in time. A review of the existing literature can leave us with a thousand questions and things we want to check or explore in more detail.

So now I need to conduct my own, primary, research. My desk research has left me with several research hypotheses that we will set out to prove or disprove with original data. If the research findings you find in the literature are reliable I should be able to replicate them. This is why replication of existing studies, sometimes with only one small variation, is an important scientific tool. In order to be sure of what we know, we keep checking it and keep changing the research context slightly to see if that makes a difference.

Of course next to checking the reliability of existing data, primary research also allows us to radically expand on existing knowledge by adding completely new research variables, leading to new insights into previously unexplored relationships.

So in a nutshell: we usually start with secondary research. That’s why, whenever we discuss research methods, we should not forget this important category. Many questions have already been asked and answered by scholars all over the world and a systematic review of existing data will allow us to formulate hypotheses and more specific research questions. The introduction of digital search engines has greatly increased our ability to find and use existing studies, our ability ‘to stand on the shoulders of giants’ as it were. Famous words by Newton, now the motto of Google scholar.

After we have studied existing knowledge we test our expectations and further expand on this by conducting primary research, if we have the time and money that is.

What’s new about new media?

I received a couple of requests to say something about ‘new media’. There is of course a lot to say about this, but for now I want to limit myself to a quick discussion on new media theory.

Before we continue, could you think about some old media? Just note the first ones that pop up in your mind. And which media are new? I asked this question in many classrooms: usually my students mention mobile phones, the internet, tablets or blue ray discs as new media. Old media that are mentioned are the newspaper, books, television and radio.

Take a few seconds to think about why you consider this medium old and the other new. What is the definition of a new medium?

61 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science While you are thinking about this, I want to share with you the following, typical quote, from a scholar: “[The new medium] will create forgetfulness in the learners' souls, because they will not use their memories (…). [Learners] will be hearers of many things and will have learned nothing; they will appear to be omniscient and will generally know nothing; they will be tiresome company, having the show of wisdom without the reality.”

What medium do you think this critical scholar had in mind? The internet? You often hear people say things like this about the internet. But this quote is actually about the written word by the famous philosopher Plato. Plato wrote these critical notions on the written word around 360 Before Christ.

There are many historical quotes very similar to this one referring to other media that were new at one time in history, like the first printed books in the Late Middle Ages, the new phenomenon of the popular newspaper press in the nineteenth century, radio in the early and television in the late twentieth century. The point I’m trying to make is this: it’s important to realize that all media were new at one time or another. Because it’s easy to fall into the trap of only seeing our current new media, internet, mobile media and such, as new. This has led some scholars to come up with very specific definitions of new media, claiming that new media are always interactive, promote user participation, et cetera. But is this useful? Basically what we are seeing here is new media theory built around specific and only current examples, like the internet or mobile media. These types of theories explain what’s happening right now, but you can’t really use them to explain the phenomenon of new media in general. These theories, built around the new media of today, hardly fit the situation where the written word was introduced or the book printing revolution changed the face of Europe. Also, in designing theories to fit current examples lies another danger, because it’s very probable that these theories become outdated as soon as a new medium arises.

Therefore, many scholars argue against the practice of creating new media theories to fit current examples. The influential Marshall McLuhan gave a great example when he proposed his own theories on new media, not by dwelling on modern-day examples, but by skipping back and forth through time, showing in fact that his theories apply in all of these historical and modern situations. One of his main observations was in fact that all of these media revolutions throughout history were always caused by a new technology. This perspective is called technology determinism, because important shifts in human development are, in the end, attributed to innovations in technology. The printing revolution was made possible by 62 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science Gutenbergâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s innovation of the press. The internet was made possible because computer networks were developed. Et cetera. Another important conclusion of McLuhan was that all of these shifts in the media landscapes had huge effects in society: the printing revolution led to the Renaissance and Enlightenment. The rise of the internet has heralded a modern digital information age.

Other scholars have followed in the footsteps of McLuhan, even though they donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t always agree with his views, they too strive to formulate theories and definitions on New Media that capture the entirety of the new media phenomenon, and not only current examples.

Globalization: village versus tribes A few students asked me to say something about cultural globalization. What is cultural globalization and what kind of trends do we see?

Remember how in week 6 we discussed that culture, and in fact our own perception of reality, is both formed and maintained by communication? Cultural communication is basically all communication, because we always implicitly communicate values and ideas, even when we are listening to seemingly meaningless music, or watching an entertaining soap opera, or reading a simple comic book: they all communicate something about the culture in which they were produced.

Well, cultural globalization is, simply put, an international reach of cultural ideas and values, as a result of a global communication of messages. According to most scholars there was always some extent of globalization as people travelled throughout history. Historical developments, like wars, colonization, increased international trade, increased education, increased international tourism. These trends were all reasons for a growing interest in international affairs and created the context in which an international communication landscape could develop. But the rate of globalization has increased with the reach of our mass media. It started slowly with cultural carriers that travellers took home, like little statues, jewelry or coins. The globalization pace quickened with the rise of print media. Books, pamphlets and newspapers made international travel of cultural messages more widespread.

In the nineteenth century for example, English and American newspapers were read throughout the world. Perhaps this is also the start of a dominance of an Anglo American culture in global communication.

63 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science Movies and television programs were again a new step in the globalization trend. A picture says more than a thousand words. Well these new audio visual media brought pictures and sounds. And again, they were mostly Anglo-American TV shows and movies that travelled the world.

These cultural messages did not only travel the world, they also influenced the people they encountered. People felt culturally connected through movies and television series and such with people on the other side of the globe.

The globalization trend has only increased in recent years, mainly due to the rise of digital and mobile media that a) give us immediate access to a rich assortment of cultural content from basically every country in the world and b) allows us to communicate with people in other countries easily and instantly.

It is quite clear that today we have an international communication landscape that exists in a variety of media like books, magazines, newspapers, radio, television, cinema and the internet. But what exactly is its effect on the formation of culture throughout the world?

As you know, culture creates a feeling of belonging. That cultural messages are now spread internationally is, according to some, reason to believe that a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;global villageâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; is emerging, where people feel connected with each other, regardless of their country of origin. The global culture that is communicated through our mass media is the binding force of this village. It connects us. Optimists believe that all this cultural sharing will lead to 1) greater understanding and 2) a lessening of cultural misunderstanding and conflict.

However, other scholars see a very different trend. Yes, people are now forming groups with others from other countries, but at the same time, societal cohesion in general is weakening as a result. Members of these groups feel more connected to the group than to society. This trend is called tribalism, and in fact means that as smaller groups become culturally stronger they become more and more isolated from larger society. These groups form modern day tribes. Their strong group culture is carried by their own specific channels with their own culturally approved content. The group identity becomes increasingly different from mainstream society that it in fact starts to oppose it. Therefore, scholars that believe in this new tribalism trend actually predict more cultural misunderstanding and more conflict as a result of this.

64 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

About the exam In the final clip of this Question and Answer week I want to answer some questions I received on the exam. What to expect? The exam consists of one hundred multiple choice questions.

Each question has, just like the weekly practice questions, three possible answers, only one of which is correct. I have tried to make the questions comparable to what you are used to, so I donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t expect any surprises there. The topics are of course everything that we discussed in the weekly lectures, and just to avoid misunderstanding, that also includes this week's contents. The contents of the Little Box of Nuance, however, are not part of the exam. I will ask you to define concepts, name theories and models, mention important scholars, technological innovations, pick the correct approach that fits one particular statement. All of these things. Basically everything that we practiced. Well I recommend that you use the text files we've made available of the lecture transcripts and the practice questions. I'm sure they will come in handy.

Just something else. I can imagine it's very tempting to use offline or online help while making the exam. But I strongly recommend against this. As you know, your certificate and grade is solely for yourself. It does not give you university credits and it is not comparable to our regular certificates. It is a certificate of participation. An indicator of your interest in our field, and your personal commitment and dedication to follow this course through. Therefore, make it a real reflection of your knowledge and understanding of our course contents. Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m sure you will value it more that way.

I wish you good luck for next week.

65 | P a g e

MOOC Introduction to Communication Science

66 | P a g e