critical thinking for mass communication

Mass Communication, Media, and Culture - An Introduction to Mass Communication

(32 reviews)

ISBN 13: 9781946135261

Publisher: University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing

Language: English

Formats Available

Conditions of use.

Learn more about reviews.

Reviewed by Jenny Dean, Associate Professor, Texas Wesleyan University on 2/27/24

This book is pretty comprehensive, but it is getting old in the media world where things are changing at a great pace. The basic text is good, but needs supplementary materials to truly keep pace with technology today. read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 3 see less

Content Accuracy rating: 3

I am sure the book was accurate when it was published, but the world keeps changing, and it isn't as current as it needs to be. But, it still isn't bad for a free book to access.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 3

Once again, same issue. The book is almost seven years old and hasn't been updated. The issue is that the examples and illustrations are getting to be a bit dated. I suspect that there aren't any updates of this book planned, which is unfortunate. If updated, this would be a fantastic read for students.

Clarity rating: 5

It is simple to read and is easily accessible. It meets the needs of a young college student.

Consistency rating: 5

Yes, the textbook is internally consistent in terms of terminology and framework.

Modularity rating: 5

It is well-subdivided and easy to access. Good use of subheadlines. It is a smooth read, and easy to find information through headers, subheads, headlines, and blocks of type.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 5

Everything is presented in a clear and concise manner.

Interface rating: 5

This textbook comes in a wide variety of formats and can be accessed by almost everyone through one method or another. It was super easy to access.

Grammatical Errors rating: 5

The text is clean and clear of errors.

Cultural Relevance rating: 3

I don't think this book is as inclusive as the typical book written today. This is simply because times have changed, and the need for inclusive and culturally sensitive books has escalated exponentially from the time this book was written. It needs more culturally relevant examples. I wouldn't say that anything in the book is culturally insensitive or offensive, but it isn't as diversified as it needs to be.

This is an excellent book for an introduction to mass communication or an introduction to media and society course. It covers all the basics that I would expect to cover. It just needs some updating which can be done through supplementary materials.

Reviewed by Ryan Stoldt, Assistant Professor, Drake University on 12/15/22

Comprehensiveness rating: 4 see less

Understanding Media and Culture: An Introduction to Mass Communication thoughtfully walks readers through popular media and connects these media to questions about culture as a way of life. The book undoubtedly is comprehensive in its scope of American media but largely fails to consider how media and culture relate in more global settings. The book occasionally references conversations about global media, such as the differences between globalization and cultural imperialism approaches, but is limited in its engagement. As media have become more transnational their reach and scope (due to technological access, business models, and more), the American focus makes the text feel limited in its ability to explain the relationship between media and culture more broadly.

Content Accuracy rating: 5

The text is accurate although it has limited engagement in some of the topics it explores. As such, this would be a good introductory text but would need to be paired with additional resources to dive into many topics in the book with both accuracy and nuance.

Many of the sections of the book are relevant, as the book often contextualizes media through a historical lens. However, the more current sections of the book (such as the section on the Internet and social media) have become outdated quickly. These, once again, would be useful starting places for classroom conversation about the topic but would need to be paired with more current readings to hold a deeper conversation about social media and society today.

Some terms could be further explained, but the text is overall well written and easy to understand.

Consistency rating: 4

The book pulls from multiple approaches to researching and discussing media and culture. The introductory chapter draws more heavily from critical media studies in its conceptualizations of the relationship between media and culture. The media effects chapters draw more heavily from more social scientific approaches to studying media. The author does a nice job weaving these approaches into a consistent conversation about media, but different approaches to studying media could be more forwardly discussed within the text.

The author has made the text extremely easy to use modularly. Chapters are self-contained, and readers could easily select sections of the book to read without losing clarity.

The book employs consistent organization across the subjects discussed. Each chapter follows a similar organizational structure as well.

Interface rating: 4

Because the text is so modular, the text does not flow easily when read on the publisher's website. Yet, downloading the text also raises some issues because of strange formatting around images.

I have not seen any grammatical errors.

As stated previously, the book is extremely biased in its international representation, primarily promoting Americans' engagements with media. The book could go further in being more representative of different American cultures, but it is far from culturally insensitive.

Understanding Media and Culture would be an extremely useful introductory text for a class focusing on American media and society. A more global perspective would require significant engagement with other texts, however.

Reviewed by David Fontenot, Assistant Professor, Metropolitan State University of Denver on 11/15/22

The text comprehensively covers forms of media used for mass communication and includes issues towards emerging forms of mass communication. read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 5 see less

The text comprehensively covers forms of media used for mass communication and includes issues towards emerging forms of mass communication.

Content Accuracy rating: 4

In some places there is nuance missing, where I feel brief elaboration would yield significantly clearer comprehension without bias or misleading associations about media's influence on behavior.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 5

Still relevant and up-to-date with a valuable emphasis on issues related to internet mass media.

Very readable, with little jargon. Definitions are presented clearly and used in subsequent discussions.

Internal consistency is strong within the chapters.

Modularity rating: 4

The majority of chapters can be taken independently, with only a few larger structural pieces that lay the foundation for other sections.

The book takes an historical approach to media, which lends itself to a logical progression of topics. I might suggest, however, that for most students the material that is most accessible to their daily lives comes last with such an approach.

Interface rating: 3

The downloaded file has some very awkward spots where images seem clipped or on separate pages than the content that reference them. I only viewed this textbook in the online downloaded PDF format.

Grammatical Errors rating: 4

No grammatical errors have jumped out at me in sections read so far.

There are quite a few opportunities to include discissions of media and culture that don't seem so anglo-centric but they are passed up.

I am using this textbook as the basis for an interdisciplinary class on media and the criminal justice system, and in that regard I think it will serve very well for an introductory level textbook. It provides a concrete set of core ideas that I can build off of by creating tailored content to my students' needs.

Reviewed by Elizabeth Johnson-Young, Assistant Professor, University of Mary Washington on 7/1/22

Appropriately comprehensive. Having some more up-to-date citations, particularly in the media effects theories criticisms section (with some more explanations) would be beneficial--perhaps supplementing with some ways these have been updated would... read more

Overall, content is clear and accurate.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 4

Mass media may always need updating, but this is appropriate and up-to-date.

Clarity rating: 4

Is an accessible text in terms of clarity and provides necessary definitions throughout in order to provide the reader with an understanding of the terminologies.

Text introduces terms and frameworks and uses them consistently throughout.

Small, easy to read blocks of text--could easily be used in a variety of courses and be reorganized for a particular course.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 4

Topics presented clearly and in an order that makes sense.

Easy to read through and images clear and displaying readily. It would help if there was a way to move forward without having to click on the table of contents, particularly in the online format.

No errors that stick out.

While appropriately comprehensive for an intro text, more examples and/or acknowledgment of who has been left out and those impacts could be helpful in the social values or culture discussions.

Overall, this is a great text and one that could be used in full for a course or in sections to supplement other communication/media studies courses!

Reviewed by David Baird, Professor of Communication, Anderson University on 4/18/22

I don’t know if any intro textbook can cover “all areas and ideas,” but this text was adequate to the task—basically on par with any other textbook in this space. I didn’t see a glossary in the chapters or an index at the back of the book. On the... read more

When the text was published, it would have been considered “accurate.” The content was competently conceptualized, well written and reflective of the standard approach to this kind of material. I didn’t notice any egregious errors of content aside from the fact that the book was published some years ago is no longer very current.

The primary weakness of the book is that it was published more than a decade ago and hasn’t been updated for a while. The text is relevant to the focus of the course itself, but the examples and illustrations are dated. For example, the book uses a graphic from the presidential election of 2008 in a treatment of politics, and “Who Wants to be a Millionaire?” is an example of current television programming.

I conducted a text search that tabulated the number of references to the following years, and these were the results: 2010: 588 2011: 49 2012: 8 2013: 4 2014: 0 2015: 2 2016: 0 2017: 0 2018: 1 2019: 1 2020: 0 2021: 1 2022: 1

The references to the more-recent years tended to crop up in forward-looking statements such as this one: “With e-book sales expected to triple by 2015, it’s hard to say what such a quickly growing industry will look like in the future.”

The second part of the question referred to the implementation of updates. I doubt that any updates are planned.

The text is well written and meets the usual standards for editorial quality.

The framework and "voice" are internally consistent.

The chapter structure provides the most obvious division of the text into accessible units. Each chapter also has well-defined subsections. Here’s an example from one chapter, with page numbers removed:

Chapter 13: Economics of Mass Media

Economics of Mass Media Characteristics of Media Industries The Internet’s Effects on Media Economies Digital Divide in a Global Economy Information Economy Globalization of Media Cultural Imperialism

This aspect of the text makes sense and is largely consistent with similar textbooks in this area.

The text is available in these formats: online, ebook, ODF, PDF and XML. I downloaded the PDF for purposes of my review. The formatting was clean and easy to work with. I didn’t notice any problems that made access challenging.

I can’t say with certainty that a grammatical error or typo can’t be found in the textbook, but as I noted above, the writing is strong. I’ve seen much worse.

Cultural Relevance rating: 4

The text seems to be around a dozen years old now, so it doesn’t include discussion of some of the high-profile perspectives that have surfaced in more recent years related to race, ethnicity, sexuality, etc. However, the book does discuss examples of media issues “inclusive of races, ethnicities, and backgrounds,” and this material is presented with sensitivity and respect.

This is a reasonably good resource for basic, intro-level definitions and explanations of some of the major concepts, issues and theories in the “Mass Communication” or “Media and Society” course, including:

• functions of the media • gatekeeping • media literacy • media effects • propaganda • agenda setting • uses and gratifications

The textbook also offers the standard chapters on the various media—books, newspapers, magazines, radio, television, etc. These chapters contextualize the various media with standard accounts of their historical development. My feeling is that much of the historical background presented in this book is more or less interchangeable with the material in newer textbooks.

However, the media industries have changed dramatically since the textbook was written, so all of the last decade’s innovations, developments and controversies are entirely missing. Of course, even a “new” textbook is going to be somewhat dated upon publication because of the book’s production timeline and the way that things change so quickly in the media industries—but a book published in 2021 or 2022 would be far more up-to-date than the book under review here.

The bottom line for me is that if one of an instructor’s highest priorities is to provide a free or low-cost textbook for students, this book could work with respect to the historical material—but it would have to be supplemented with carefully selected material from other sources such as trade publications, industry blogs and news organizations.

Reviewed by Kevin Curran, Clinical Assistant Professor, Loyola Marymount University on 3/21/22

This is one of the most comprehensive media studies books I’ve read. It attacks each media platform separately and with sufficient depth. That is followed by economics, ethics, government/law, and future predictions. Takeaways attend of each... read more

Takeaways attend of each section will aid comprehension. Exercises at end of sections could be jumping off point for discussions or assignments. Chapters end with review and critical thinking connections plus career guidance.

The Chapter 2 rundown on both sides of media theories and summary of research methods was well-done.

Everything about this tome is good, except for its dating.

The book is well-researched and provides valuable, although often dated, information. The author used a variety of sources, effective illustrations, and applicable examples to support the points in the book.

It can be very hard to keep up with constant changes in the mass media industry. This book was reissued in 2016, but it has not been revised since the original copyright in 2010. The dated references start on page 2 when it speaks of Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey as existing, when that circus ceased in 2017. The medium-by-medium exploration is well done, although the passage of time affects the end of each chapter.

Adoption of the book as-is will mean developing an update lesson for each chapter. For example, while smartphones are mentioned, they had not achieved saturation status at the time this volume was published.

The points are presented clearly. References with hyperlinks are available at the end of each section for those who still have questions or want more information. However, it is possible that because of the age of the book, some of those links may no longer be available.

The media chapters each follow a similar pattern in writing and order.

This will break up easily. The first chapter gives a good taste of what is to come. The book provides a comprehensive look at the history and influence of each medium individually. The last group of chapters necessarily contains many flashbacks to the medium sections.

It follows a logical pattern from the introduction to the individual medium chapters to the “big picture” chapters. That does require signposting between the two sets of chapters that some might find frustrating.

Interface rating: 2

The book is a standard PDF with links. The scan could have been better, as there is a lot of white space and illustrations are inconsistently sized. Users hoping for lots of interactivity are going to be disappointed.

The book is well edited. It is hard to find errors in writing mechanics.

The authors took a broad view of the mass media world. The music chapter was very well done.

Reviewed by Lisa Bradshaw, Affiliate Faculty, Metropolitan State University of Denver on 11/26/21

This textbook, downloaded as a 695-page PDF, contains 16 chapters and covers a variety of media formats, how they evolved, and how they are created and used, as well as issues related to media impact on society and culture. It is quite comprehensive in its coverage of media for the time of its writing (copyright year 2016, “adapted from a work originally produced in 2010”).

Content seems accurate for its time, but as technology and media have evolved, it omits current references and examples that did not exist when it was written. There does not seem to be bias and a wide variety of cultural references are used.

As mentioned previously, this textbook’s copyright year was 2016, and it was adapted from a 2010 work. It’s not clear how much of the content was updated between 2010 and 2016, but based on the dates in citations and references, the last update appears to have been in 2011. Even if it had been updated for the year 2016, much of the information is still out-of-date.

There is really no way to write a textbook about media that would not be at least partially out of date in a short time. This text’s background and history of the evolution of the various media forms it covers is still accurate, but there is much about the media landscape that has changed since 2010–2016.

Due to the textbook’s age, references to media platforms and formats such as MySpace, Napster, and CDs seem outdated for today’s media market. The textbook refers to previous political figures, and its omission of more recent ones (who were not on the political landscape at the time of writing) makes it seem out-of-date. To adapt it for modern times, these references need to be updated with fresh examples.

The writing level is relatively high. A spot check of the readability level of several passages of text returned scores of difficult to read, and reading level 11-12 grade to college level. The author does a good job of explaining technical terminology and how different media work. If adapting the text for students with a lower level of reading, some of the terminology might need to be revised or explained more thoroughly.

The text is consistent in its chapter structure and writing style. The order of topics makes sense in that chapters are mostly structured by media type, with beginning and end sections to introduce each respective media type in general, and conclude with a look to the future.

If adapting and keeping the same structure (intro to media in general, coverage of different media types in their own chapters, and main issues related to media), this 695-page textbook could be condensed by eliminating some of the detail in each chapter. There are a number of self-referential sentences that might need to be removed. If adapting the text to a more specific subject, the instructor would need to go through the text and pick out specific points relevant to that subject.

Each chapter introduces the respective media type and concludes with a summary that reflects on the future of that type and how it might evolve further. The chapters overall follow the same structure for consistency: overview, history, the media in popular culture, current trends, and potential influence of new technologies, with end-of-chapter Key Takeaways, Exercises, Assessment, Critical Thinking Questions, Career Connection, and References.

The text is well written and logically structured and sequenced. Despite its length, it’s easy to find information, as it’s ordered by chapters that address each media type and major issues related to media, and each chapter has a parallel structure with the others, all following mostly the same pattern.

I did not notice grammatical errors. The text is clearly and accurately written, and appears to have been thoroughly copyedited and proofread.

Cultural Relevance rating: 5

I did not notice cultural insensitivity in the text. A wide variety of cultural references are used. Examples from around the world and from many different cultures are included, including discussions of digital divide and inequity issues related to media access in disadvantaged populations.

Reviewed by Adria Goldman, Assistant Professor of Communication, University of Mary Washington on 7/11/21

The text nicely breaks down different forms of mass communication. The text provides some historical background and discussion of theory to provide context for discussing mass media, which is all useful in helping students understand media and communication. There is not much discussion about the cultural significance of media. If using the text in a course, supplemental readings on the significance of culture and diversity, the importance of media representation, and media influence on an individual level (ex: impact on identity), would be especially helpful for a course exploring media and culture. The text does not feature a glossary or index, however the bolding of key concepts throughout the text is helpful in defining key terms.

The content is error-free. More discussion on culture would provide a more accurate account of mass communication and its significance.

The subject is very relevant and the book features topics important for a discussion on mass communication. As mentioned in other parts of this review, there is not much diversity featured throughout the text, which can impact the relevancy of the material to audiences and impacts the relevancy of the content in discussions on mass media and society. Updates would be straightforward to implement.

The text is clear and easy to follow.

The text is consistent in its use of terms and its framework. Since the book title mentions a focus on culture, an interesting add-on would be to have each section (on a specific type of mass communication) feature a discussion of culture and its significance.

The text's modularity is useful. It looks like it would be easy for students to follow and for instructors to re-structure in order to fit their course design.

The information follows a logical order, beginning with a discussion on the significance of mass communication and then going into each type.

No issues with interface noted.

No glaring grammatical issues noted.

Cultural Relevance rating: 2

There is not much focus on the significance of culture. More discussion on the role of race, class, sex, gender, religion and other elements of identity would be helpful in exploring mass communication--past, present, and potential for the future. The text could also use an update in images and examples to include diverse representation and to further communicate the role of culture, diversity, and representation in communication and mass media.

The book provides an understanding of mass communication that would be easy for undergraduate college students to follow. The optional activities would also spark interesting discussion and give students the opportunity to apply concepts. Students using the text would benefit from (1) more discussion on culture's significance in media and communication and (2) more diversity in the images and examples used.

Reviewed by Brandon Galm, Instructor in English/Speech, Cloud County Community College on 5/4/21

One of the strong suits of this particular resource is its comprehensiveness, with topics ranging from specific mass comm mediums to the intersections/impacts of media on culture, politics, and ethics. There's enough here to easily cover a full... read more

The content is well-sourced throughout with a list of references at the end of each chapter. The hyperlinks on the references page all seem functional still. Hyperlinks within the chapters themselves--either sending the reader to the reference list or to the articles themselves--would be helpful.

As of this review writing, some of the content is relatively up-to-date. However, with a quickly changing landscape in mass communications and media, certain chapters are becoming out-of-date more quickly than others. The information discussed is more current than most of the information cited. The structure of the book lends itself to easy updating as technologies and culture shift, but whether or not those updates will take place seems unclear with the most recent edition being 5 years old at this point.

All information is presented in a way that is very clear with explanations and examples when further clarification is needed.

For a book covering as many different topics as it does, the overall structure and framework of this textbook is great. Chapter formats stay consistent with clearly stated Objectives at the start and Key Takeaways at the end. Visual examples are provided throughout, and each chapter also includes various questions for students to respond to.

Chapters are broken down into smaller sub-chapters, each with their own sub-headings hyperlinked in the Table of Contents. Each sub-chapter also includes the above-mentioned Objects, Key Takeaways, and questions for students. Chapters and/or sub-chapters could easily be assigned in an order that fits any syllabus schedule and are in no way required to be read in order from Chapter 1 to Chapter 16.

I would like to have seen the book laid out a bit differently, but this is a minor concern because of the overall flexibility of assigning the chapters. The book starts with broad discussions about media and culture, then shifts into specific forms of media (books, games, tv, etc.), then returns to more broad implications of media and culture. Personally, I'd like to see all of those chapters grouped together--with all of the media and culture chapters in one section, and all of the specific forms chapters in another. Again, this is a minor issue because of the overall flexibility of the book.

As mentioned above, hyperlinks--including in the Table of Contents and references--are all functional. I would have liked to have hyperlinks for the references in the text itself, either as a part of the citation or with a hyperlinked superscript number, rather than just in the references page. All images are easily readable and the text itself is easy to read overall.

No grammatical errors that immediately jumped out. Overall seems clear and well-written.

The text provides lots of examples, though most do come from US media. The sections dealing with the intersections between media and culture are similarly US-centric.

Overall, a solid introductory textbook that covers a wide range of topics relevant to mass communications, media, and culture. The text is bordering on out-of-date at this point, but could easily be updated on a chapter-by-chapter basis should the publisher/author wish to do so.

Reviewed by Dong Han, Associate Professor, Southern Illinois University Carbondale on 3/30/21

It covers all important areas and topics regarding media, culture, and society. Different media forms and technologies from printing media to social media all have their own chapters, and academic inquiries like media effects, media economics, and media and government also receive due attention. This textbook will meet the expectation of students of all backgrounds while introducing them to theoretical concerns of the research community. Its chapter layout is properly balanced between comprehensiveness and clarity.

Its content is accurate and unbiased. The textbook is written with ample research support to ensure accuracy and credibility. References at the end of each chapter allow readers to track sources of information and to locate further readings.

It is up-to-date in that the major cultural and media issues it identifies remain highly relevant in today’s world. However, since it was first produced in 2010, some more recent occurrences are not part of the discussion. This is not meant to be a criticism but a reminder that an instructor may want to supplement with more recent materials.

It is written with clear, straight-forward language well-suited an introductory textbook. The chapter layout, as mentioned earlier, is easy to access.

The book is consistent in terms of terminologies and its historical approach to media growth and transformation.

Each chapter is divided in sections, and sections in turn have various reading modules with different themes. For undergraduates taking an introductory course, this textbook will work well.

The topics are presented in an easy-to-access fashion. The textbook starts with a general overview of media and culture and a persistent scholarly concern with the media: media effects. Then it moves through different media in alignment with the chronological order of their appearance in history. The last few chapters focus on important but non-technology-specific topics including advertising and media regulations. For an introductory textbook, it is very accessible to the general student body.

The textbook does not have significant interface issues. Images, charts, and figures all fit well with the text.

There are no grammatical errors.

The textbook has a number of examples of minority cultures and ethnicities. It does not, however, have ample discussions on media and culture phenomena outside of the US, except those that have had significant impact on American culture (e.g., Beatlemania).

All considered, this is a very good textbook to be used in an introductory course. It is comprehensive, easy-to-read, and can help prepare students for future in-depth discussions on media, culture, and society.

Reviewed by Elizabeth Johnson-Young, Assistant Professor, University of Mary Washington on 7/6/20

Comprehensive text regarding mass communication, culture, and effects. The historical perspectives are helpful for understanding, particularly as it goes on to focus in on convergence throughout the text. A more complete glossary or index would be helpful for terms for an introduction text, but key terms are highlighted and defined throughout. Extra examples would help throughout, particularly with theories and research methods.

Accurate, up to date information on history, concepts, and theories.

The information focuses on important historical moments, theories, cultural impacts, and moves to the present with ideas and examples that will likely remain relevant for quite some time.

Clear, easy to read text that would benefit introductory students of mass comm.

Introduces terms and concepts and then utilizes them throughout.

The separation of the larger text into smaller sections is incredibly helpful and makes reading and assignments of readings easy, leading also to the ability to separate into sections that would be appropriate for any course organization.

Organization is logical and easy to follow. Importantly, because of the modularity, it would also be easy to re-organize for one's course.

Navigation works, images clear and detailed.

No glaring grammatical errors.

The examples and images demonstrate diversity in race and also provides examples outside of the United States, which is important. There is some diversity in terms of gender and sexual diversity, more of which would be beneficial and various sections would be appropriate for that inclusion.

This is an excellent and comprehensive text for intro students that includes important historical moments and thorough coverage of main concepts and theories in the field, with a diverse set of moments and examples.

Reviewed by Emily Werschay, Communication Studies Instructor, Minnesota State University System on 10/22/19

Overall, this textbook is quite comprehensive in covering various channels of media, particularly from a historical perspective, and would work well for an introductory course. It features the same focused areas of content that are in my current publisher textbook and incorporates elements of culture as well. It does not provide a glossary or index, which would be helpful, but key terms are in bold.

The text contains accurate research with clearly-cited references that give credibility to the content.

The historical content is well-crafted. The text provides a clear and informative introduction to the history of media and does well with the rise of newspapers, television, and movies. You will not, however, find a reference more recent than 2010, which means any advancements in media and technology in the past decade are not covered. An instructor using this text would have to supplement content on current types of media such as streaming television and music services and the current debate of social media shifting toward news publishing in terms of content delivery. While the text includes culture and political climate of the past, much would need to be supplemented for the last ten years.

The text is professional and well-written. It is well-suited to a college reading level.

The chapter format, writing style, and overall presentation of information are consistent throughout the text. I appreciate the defined learning outcomes and key takeaways pulled out in each chapter.

The text is divided into clear chapters focusing on one medium at a time, much like other publisher texts for mass communication. For example, books, newspapers, magazines, music, radio, movies, and television each get their own chapter. Each chapter begins with clearly defined learning outcomes, and features key takeaways, exercises, assessments, and critical thinking questions at the end, as well as a section on career connections.

The topics are presented in chronological order from the history of mass communication, through the various mediums, and finally to the future of mass communication (though most will find the content particularly about recent and current trends will need to be supplemented as it is outdated).

I didn't find any problems with the interface as it is a standard text that can be viewed as a PDF, but an index would really help navigation. I will say that it's not particularly user-friendly, so I may try integrating the online format chapter-by-chapter into D2L so that I can break it up by modules and add links to make it more interactive with supplemental resources.

Professional, well-written text with no errors.

I don't believe readers will find any of the text culturally insensitive or offensive. The text is focused on U.S. media, however, so some supplemental content may be needed.

This textbook is very comprehensive and will work well for an introductory course. It covers the same focus areas as my publisher text, so I feel comfortable switching to this textbook for my Introduction to Mass Communication course with the awareness that it does not cover the past decade. I will need to provide supplemental information to update examples and cover current topics, but that is generally accepted in this particular field as it is continually changing with advancements in technology.

Reviewed by Bill Bettler, Professor, Hanover College on 3/8/19

This text is comprehensive on several levels. Theoretically, this text echoes the framework employed by Pavlik and McIntosh, which displays sensitivity to convergence. However, this text understands convergence on multiple levels, not just the three employed by P and M. This text is well-researched, with ample citations on a whole host of media topics. Each chapter has multiple ways that it tests the reader, with "Key Takeaways," "Learning Objectives," etc. And finally, the text features chapters on the history and development of key historical media, as well as key emerging media.

Some students find Pavlik and McIntosh a bit too transparent in their Marxist assumptions. While this text certainly introduces Marx-based theories about media, it seems to do a better job of contextualizing them among several other competing perspectives.

Some of the popular culture texts felt a bit dated--for example, opening the "Music" chapter (Chapter 6) with an extended case study about Colbie Caillat. Unfortunately, this is the nature of mass media studies--as soon as books come into print, they are out of date. But I have a hard time imagining my mass communication students being inspired and engaged by a Colbie Caillat case study. I'm not sure what the alternative is; but it seemed worth mentioning. Other examples are much more effective and successful. The historical examples from different types of media are well-chosen, thoroughly explained, and insightful. Also, this text discusses emerging media more successfully than any other texts I have used.

The style of this text is straightforward and scholarly. It seems to strike an effective balance between accessibility and specialized language. For example, key concepts such as "gatekeeper" and "agenda setting theory" are introduced early and applied in several places throughout the text.

Like Pavlik and McIntosh, this text uses the concept of "convergence" to explain several key phenomena in mass communication. Unlike P and M, this text understands "convergence" on more than three levels. Like P and M, this concept becomes the "glue" that holds the various topics and levels of analysis together. As mentioned before, this text is especially effective in that it introduces foundational concepts early on and applies them consistently across succeeding chapters.

On one hand, this text rates highly in "modularity," because I could imagine myself breaking its chapters apart and re-arranging them in a different order than they are presented here. This is in no way meant as a criticism. I routinely have to assign chapters in more conventional texts in a different order. The fact that the technology involved in delivering this text makes it easier to re-arrange is one of its best selling points. The reason I scored this as a "4" is because some of the chapters are quite dense, in terms of volume (not in terms of difficulty). Therefore, I could see students perhaps losing focus to some degree. I might combat this by making further breakdowns and re-arrangements within chapters. This is not a fatal flaw--but it does seem like a practical challenge of using this text.

As mentioned above, some of the chapters are quite dense, in terms of volume. Chapter One is such a chapter, for example. I could easily see Chapter One comprising two or three chapters in another textbook. Consequently, there is a likelihood that students would need some guidance as they read such a dense chapter; and they would likely benefit from cutting the chapter down into smaller, more easily digestible samples. On the other hand, the Key Takeaways, and Learning Objectives, will counteract this tendency for students to be overwhelmed or confused. They are quite helpful, as are the summarizing sections at the ends of each chapter.

I did not encounter any problems with interface. In fact, the illustrations, figures, charts, photographs, etc. are a real strength of this text. They are better than any other text I have seen at creating "symbolic worlds" from different forms of media.

The writing style is professional and free of errors.

This is a genuine concern for mass media texts. Media content is a direct reflection of culture, and today's culture is characterized by a high level of divisiveness. I did not detect any examples or samples that were outwardly offensive or especially controversial. But, perhaps, there is a slight bias toward "the status quo" in the case studies and examples--meaning that many (but certainly not all) of them seem to be "Anglo," Caucasian artists. Looking at the "Music" chapter, for example, some popular culture critics (and students) might lament that Taylor Swift is an exemplar. While this choice is undeniable in terms of the popularity of her recordings and concerts, some might hope for examples that represent stylistic originality, genre-transcending, and progressive ideas (Bruno Mars, Kendrick Lamar, Jay-Z, Beyoncé, Lady Gaga, etc.).

I have been using the same text for seven years (Pavlik and McIntosh). I have decided to adopt Understanding Media and Culture: An Introduction to Mass Communication. It is simply more thorough in its sweep of history and contextualization of culture, more multi-layered in its theoretical perspectives, and more rich in its examples and insights. This books is recommendable not just as an open source text, but as it compares to any conventional text. Students will benefit greatly from reading this text.

Reviewed by Hsin-Yen Yang, Associate Professor, Fort Hays State University on 11/29/18

Understanding Media and Culture: an Introduction to Mass Communication covers all the important topics in mass communication and media history. It also provides case studies, Key Takeaways, Exercises, End-of-Chapter Assessment, Critical Thinking Questions, and Career Connections in every chapter. Although this book does not provide a glossary, the comprehensiveness of the book still makes it a great textbook choice.

While the information was accurate and the discussions on key issues were supported by good references, it was odd to see the questionable formatting and quality of the first reference on page 3: Barnum, P. T.” Answers.com, http://www.answers.com/topic/p-t-barnum. --> First of all, Answers.com is not considered as a credible source by many scholars and the other half of the quotation marks was missing.

The major weakness of this book is the fact that many of the references were outdated. For example, on page 479, the statistics in the section, "Information Access Like Never Before," the cited reports were from 2002 and 2004. When discussing topics such as Net Neutrality, digital service providers, new policies and technologies, the urgency for updated information becomes evident. However, as the author correctly pointed out: "Although different forms of mass media rise and fall in popularity, it is worth noting that despite significant cultural and technological changes, none of the media discussed throughout this text has fallen out of use completely."

The writing in this book is very clear and easy to understand. The colored images, figures and tables should be very helpful in terms of student comprehension and engagement.

The framework and terminology are consistent throughout the book.

Each chapter can be assigned to students as a stand-along reading, and can be used to realign with other subunits should an instructor decide to compile reading within this book or from different sources.

Each chapter follows similar flow/ format: the history, evolution, economics, case studies and social impact of a mass medium, followed by Key Takeaways, Exercises, End-of-Chapter Assessment, Critical Thinking Questions, Career Connections and References. It was easy to navigate the topics and sections in this book.

I downloaded the book as a PDF and had no problem to search or navigate within the file. The book can also be viewed online or in a Kindle reader.

I spotted a few minor formatting or punctuation issues such as the missing quotation marks stated earlier, but no glaring errors as far as I know.

While it mainly focuses on American media and culture, this book contains statistics and cases from many countries (e.g. Figure 11.7), provides many critical thinking exercises and is sensitive towards diverse cultures and backgrounds.

Overall, this is a high-quality textbook and it contains almost all the key issues in today's media studies in spite of the somewhat outdated data and statistics. The strengths of this book are: Excellent historical examples, critical analysis and reflections, clearly defined key issues and in-depth discussions. Even when using the most recent edition of textbooks, I always research for updates and recent cases. This open resource textbook makes an outstanding alternative to those high-priced textbooks.

Reviewed by Hayden Coombs, Assistant Professor, Southern Utah University on 8/2/18

Perhaps the best quality of this text, Understanding Media and Culture is a very comprehensive textbook. I have used this text in my Mass Media & Communication course for two years now. Each chapter focuses on a different type of medium, starting with the earliest books and working its way up to the latest technological advancements in mass media. Other beneficial topics include: Media & Culture, Media Effects, Economics of Mass Media, Media Ethics, Media and Government, and the Future of Mass Media. These topics provide a solid base for a 100 or 200-level introductory communication course. They also were written in a way that each chapter provided sufficient material for a week's worth of discussion.

This book was written in a very unbiased manner. It is completely factual, and not much room is left for subjective interpretation. The discussion questions allowed multiple themes and schools of thought to be explored by the students. Because this book is intended for an introductory course, the information is fairly basic and widely-accepted.

My biggest issue with this title was that the latter chapters were not written with the same quality as the first ten or so chapters. However, that was the thought I had after the first semester I used this text. Since then, multiple updates have been written and the entire text is now written in the same high-quality throughout. Because this title is being constantly updated by its authors and publishers, the text is never obsolete.

Terminology is clearly defined, and students have little trouble finding definitions in the glossary. Because this text is written for an introductory course, there are not many intense or confusing concepts for students to understand.

Consistency rating: 3

As previously mentioned, the biggest struggle I've had with this text is the fact that the latter third was not written to the same quality of the first ten chapters. However, this issue seems to have been remedied in the latest edition of this text.

The modularity was the biggest selling point for me with this text. Our semester runs 15 weeks, the same number of chapters in this text. I was able to easily focus our classroom discussions and assignments on the chapter theme each week. The text also provides plenty of material for two or three discussions.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 3

The text starts by introducing some basic concepts like culture and effects. From there, it focuses on ten different types of media (books, newspaper, radio, television, etc.). The concluding three chapters go back to concepts such ethics and the future of mass media. While not a major issue, there was a major difference in the tone of the two types of chapters.

This text is available in .pdf, kindle, .epub, and .mobi formats, as well as in browser. While nothing fancy or groundbreaking in terms of usability, it is simple and all of my students were able to download the format that best suited their individual needs.

The text contained no grammatical errors that I noticed in the latest edition, a tremendous improvement from the first semester I used this text.

I did not find the content to be culturally insensitive or offensive in any way. It used a variety of examples from the world's history, but I found none of them to be inherently offensive. The subject matter and the fact that this is an introductory text probably assist with the cultural relevance because it is easy to understand, but the themes rarely get into "deep" discussion.

This is a fantastic text. Comparing it to other texts for my COMM 2200 Mass Media & Society text, this textbook was not only easier for my students to understand, but it was written and compiled in a way that made teaching the material enjoyable and easy. I have recommended this book to the other instructors of this course because it allows our students to save money without sacrificing anything in terms of content or learning.

Reviewed by Heather Lubay, Adjunct Faculty, Portland Community College on 8/2/18

Overall the book is comprehensive, covering everything from books to radio to electronic media & social media. Each topic has a descent amount of information on both the history and evolution, as well as where we are today (though, as tends to be the nature of the industry, the “today” piece gets outdated quickly. However, the text covers the topics that most other texts of this subject cover as well. I would have liked to have seen just a bit more depth and analysis, instead of the broad, surface-level coverage.

The text is fairly accurate, though, with the rapid rate of change, it’s difficult to be accurate shortly after publication. Using sites such as MySpace as an example, or only looking at movies put out through about 2007, impacts the accuracy as society has changed and moved on. Students in 2018 are given more of a historical perspective from when they were kids more so than having a representation of what media means in today’s world.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 2

This is a hard one because the historical information stands the test of time, but many of the examples fall short for today’s students. The Social Media chapter still references MySpace and Friendster as current platforms and only goes as far as FaceBook & Twitter. The author makes it a point to clarify when the book what published, which helps, but, again, it’ll be hard for a current student to see past that when they’ve grown up with the platform being discussed as “new” and have moved on.

The book is fairly fast-paced and easy enough to follow for lower level or beginner students. Examples are easy to follow and the key takeaway boxes and exercises help further basic understanding.

The chapters are fairly consistent, covering the basic history, evolution, and influence/impact.

The text can easily be used as formatted, or broken up into sections and moved around.

The organization is fairly straightforward. Earlier forms of mass communication are covered first, moving on to newer forms. Once students have a basic understanding of each form, they can then move on to topics like ethics, government, and economics, which need that basic understanding to fully grasp the larger concepts.

The book is easy to navigate with had no issues viewing the photos or charts.

The book is well written and free of any gratuitous errors.

The book does a good job of focusing on US media and society. It uses pretty typical examples, though it could incorporate more relevant examples to today’s students. Some case studies reference minority groups, but it would have been nice to see even more examples featuring minority groups. Also, Using YouTube as a “new” viewing outlet and discussing “The war between satellite and cable television” and DirectTV versus Dish makes the cultural relevance more towards older generations than younger ones.

Overall the book does a great job with the history of mass communication and society. It would work for any lower level course. However, the examples are fairly out of date and the instructor would have to present more recent and relevant examples in class.

Reviewed by Randy (Rachel) Kovacs, Adjunct Associate Professor, City University of New York on 6/19/18

I like the way that the author has broadened the scope of the book to incorporate so many aspects of culture, society, politics and economics that some people would be inclined to distinguish from the mass media, when in reality, all these aspects of contemporary life are intertwined with and influenced by media messages. It provides an historical retrospective but also shows how convergence and constantly-evolving technologies have driven the way consumers use the media and the way producers will use those technologies to rivet the attention (and influence the purchasing choices) of today’s consumers. The text incorporates the most salient areas of media’s evolution and influence.

The book appears to be objective and adopts a critical but non-partisan perspective. It presents data, including media laws and policies, accurately, and the cases it cites are well documented. The author provides sufficient references to support the facts he states and the conclusions he draws. Caveat--The media landscape and technologies are constantly evolving, so the book is accurate for its time of publication but needs to be updated to include new developments.

The way that the author integrates the historical perspective with current roles of social media in is a clear indication of its relevance. The dates may change, as may the celebrities, industrialists, spokespersons, and there may be geopolitical and cultural shifts, but the author’s explanation of theories/principles and the cases selected show how mass media power and influence are here to stay. The author advances the salient issues at each juncture and contextualizes so they we can relate them to current events. The book could be updated but is still has relevance/longevity.

The book is written in a language that is accessible to the layman/beginning student of mass media. The cases that are boxed, and key takeaways at the end of each chapter further distill what is already explicated. There are many concrete facts but a minimum of jargon and any terms used are adequately explained.

The framework and the terminology are consistent. There is also a consistent structure in terms of the visual layout and breakdown of each chapter’s sections, which makes the material far more accessible to students. It’s reassuring in a way, because students know where to go in each chapter for clarification of terms and restatement of the major media developments or areas of impact.

The book’s content is broken down within chapters into (pardon the expression) digestible chunks. The way each subsection is organized makes sense. The major sections where media, developments, policies, etc., are first introduced are illustrated by boxed portions and then reiterated clearly at the end of the chapter with small, chunked takeaways and questions that challenge the students to ponder issues more deeply. The modules are distinguished by color, typset, size of font, etc. which is aesthetically appealing.

The organization makes sense and the topics segue smoothly from one area of media focus to another. Also, the way the book opens with an overview of mass media and cultural is a good starting point from which to document specific historical eras in the development of communication and to transition from one era of communication to another within a context of technology, politics, industry and other variables.

: The text does not have any interface issues, as it is easy to navigate, all illustrations, charts, and other visuals are clear and distortion-free. All features of the book are legible and all display features are legible and functional.

The book is grammatically accurate and error-free.

The book represents a range of cultural groups in a sensitive and bias-free way. Its discussions of media with regard to both dominant cultures and various minority cultures is respectful, bias-free, and non-stereotypical. It is culturally relevant and inclusive.

For many years, I have used a textbook that I have regarded as very high quality and comprehensive, but as it has become increasingly expensive and out of reach financially for many of my students, I find it hard to justify asking my struggling students to add another financial burden to them. Why should I when they can use this OER textbook? I am seriously considering using Understanding Media and Culture in future semesters and recommending it to my colleagues.

Reviewed by Stacie Mariette, Mass Communication instructor, Anoka-Ramsey Community College on 5/21/18

This OER is very comprehensive. I used it for an online course as a PDF textbook. While this discipline evolves faster than any other communication area I teach, this book remains solidly grounded in a wide variety of resources and foundational... read more

As I use it more often, I find myself wanting to update it only for examples regarding the evolution in technology/platforms and the societal/cultural changes that result – not to change the historical content of what is already there.

I haven't come across any factual errors at all.

The examples in this book are often dated. This is my one very mild criticism of this text and only reflects the nature of the information. As we grow into new media and adapt as a society to those delivery methods, it's only natural. I actually use updating the examples in the textbook as an assignment for students.

Some closer to up-to-date examples that I have added into my teaching of the course and to the materials are:

"Fake news" and social media's role in spreading it, especially in terms of Facebook and the last election

Data mining and algorithm practices

"Listening" devices and digital assistants, like Siri and Alexa

The subculture of podcasts

Business models – both for artists and consumers – of streaming services across all media

The chapter on convergence is short and could be a text all on its own. Information relating to this topic is sprinkled throughout the book, but the concept itself is so important to analyze that I like to think about it on its own. This is an area I will beef up in future semesters for my own students.

Streaming services and online journalism overall are two areas that I have noted to update and reference in nearly every chapter.

The short segments and snippets of information are very helpful and clear for students. It's all very digestible and the vocabulary is at just the right level.

The discussion questions and further reading/information are placed in logical places in each chapter. And this consistency helps the reader understand their prompts and what to do next – and additionally the important topics to take away.

I love how this text can be reordered very easily. Since it's so comprehensive, I actually omit a couple of the chapters (radio and magazines) to take the info at a slower pace and have never struggled with remixing other chapters.

In fact, I plan to blend Chapters 11 and 16 (Social Media and New Technology) for my upcoming semesters and have no doubt the text and materials will allow for this.

I like how the chapters primarily focus on one medium at a time. From there, the structure of evolution, technological advancements, social/cultural implications and then a look at trends and emerging controversies helps to build to exciting and relevant discussions and for students to have the backdrop to bring their own insights.

The interface is reliable and easy-to-use. I deliver it as a PDF within my online classroom software. I have never had issues with students downloading and reading on multiple devices – or even printing and referencing – based on their preferences.

This book is very concise and grammatically crisp. It's clear that the authors of the version I am using valued precision in their language and it helps students to see this resource as high-quality!

Cultural and societal relevance are important in this discipline and it's purposely covered in each and every chapter. However, as I mentioned earlier, the examples are outdated in many cases. So I layer this into class discussions and supplement with further readings and assignments. Some of the topics I add are: Representation in entertainment media, like TV and film, for example how the #MeToo movement gained ground based on the film industry Ways that online gaming culture is permissive of the communication of –isms, like sexism and racism Ways that social media and screen time are impacting attention spans, interpersonal relationships/communication and child development How citizen-sourced video and reporting differs from that of trained journalists and how important the differences are The section on media effects is helpful and thorough. I always include a key assignment on this topic. It's also an area I plan to emphasize even more in the future – particularly the idea of tastemaking and gatekeeping. There are many crossovers to many examples that are more up-to-date than the version of the text I have been using.

I love this book and it is on-par with many others I have reviewed for my Introduction to Mass Communication class.

Reviewed by Stacy Fitzpatrick, Professor, North Hennepin Community College on 5/21/18

The presentation of the historical context of media evolution in the US is clear and reasonably detailed, providing a good foundation for an introductory level course. As other reviewers have mentioned, this text was published in 2010 and is out of date in multiple areas, particularly with respect to media laws and regulation, social media, and newer developments of technology (e.g. preference for streaming television, technological and social advancements in gaming). Beyond needing updates to reflect newer advancements in media, this text would benefit from more attention to global media structures, including how they vary across political systems and how they impact how citizens use media to communicate. Additionally, an index and glossary would be helpful for navigation.

I am basing this on the fact that this was published in 2010. Considering the publication date, the factual content for that particular time frame is presented accurately, clearly cited, and reasonably unbiased. There is perhaps an unintended gender bias in the presentation of some content (e.g. Sister Rosetta Tharpe is absent in the music section, as is Nina Simone), though this could be a result of a broader, societal gender bias. Images, charts, and graphs are used well and clearly explained.

The historical content is fine, but the text is almost 9 years out of date and there is a great deal of content that needs to be updated. Making the necessary updates may take some time since the content is tightly written and there are reflections of the date of publication throughout the examples used, images presented, and media discussed. Using this text in class would require the instructor to provide supplemental content on newer advancements in media.

This text is appropriate for a freshman/sophomore level course and reads well. Important terms are defined and each section includes an overview to set a context and clearly defined learning objectives.

The language, terminology, and organization of the text is consistent throughout. This makes moving between chapters easy since they follow a similar format.

With a few exceptions (chapters 1 and 2), the text lends itself well to using different sections at different points. Where there are self-references, there is typically a hyperlink to the section referenced. This is useful for those reading the text online, but less useful if printed sections of text were used.

Chapters 1 and 2 clearly present a structure that the following chapters follow. The only chapter that seems to really break that flow is Chapter 16, but that is more a result of the text being so out of date than a significant change in structure.

I found the online reading format the easiest to navigate. The Word and PDF versions are somewhat more awkward to navigate without using a search keyboard function.

There were a couple minor typos, but no significant grammatical errors that might impact comprehension. The readability assessment (via MS Word) indicated a reading grade level of 13.1, which is consistent with lower division college coursework.

There is a heavy focus on US media, which is acknowledged early on in the text. More integration of content related to global media would strengthen the text. There should be more examples that integrate multiple forms of diversity, such as gender, ability, age, sexuality, race, and ethnicity. Additionally, without an update, younger students may not understand some of the references. For example, younger students in 2018 don’t know Napster as a file-sharing site since it has rebranded to become a streaming site more similar to Spotify.

It would be great to see an update in the content of this text for 2018 that also incorporates broader perspectives of multiple identities and global perspectives. As is, I would use sections of the text and supplement that content with more current examples and issues. Balancing the cost of textbooks in this field with the quality and recency of the content is an ongoing challenge.

Reviewed by Craig Freeman, Director, Oklahoma State University on 5/21/18

The book covers all of the topics you would expect in an inter/ survey course. read more

The book covers all of the topics you would expect in an inter/ survey course.

The book does a good job of accurately surveying mass communications. Good job sourcing information.

The most recent citations are from 2010. That's just too far in the past for a rapidly changing subject like mass communication.

The book is clear and easy to read. Well written.

The book is internally consistent, with recurring sections.

The book does a good job breaking the information down into smaller reading sections.

The book follows the standard structure and flow for introductory texts in mass communication.

The interface is fine. It's a big book. Would appreciate active links to help skip chapters.

No grammatical errors.

I would appreciate a little more diversity in the examples used.

Really wish the authors would update this a bit. It does a great job with the history. Needs updating on the modern issues.

Reviewed by Kateryna Komarova, Visiting Instructor, University of South Florida on 3/27/18

Comprehensiveness rating: 2 see less

The title Understanding Media and Culture: An Introduction to Mass Communication suggests that we are looking at a comprehensive introductory text. In my opinion, this book is the most valuable to GE courses and entry level courses across Mass Communication disciplines, as it does excellent job in covering the fundamentals of mass communication. The textbook is heavy on history, which is a great thing.

I found the content to be accurate and, to my knowledge, error-free.

In comparison with other introductory texts, the content is generally up-to date with current trends. Yet, the distribution of attention towards various forms of media tends to be slightly disproportional. For instance, print magazines alone (essentially, one of many forms of print media that’s experiencing a stable continuous decline) receive as much attention as all forms of social media altogether. As a communications practitioner and an instructor, I was pleased to see information on the merge of paid media and social media (content partnerships and native advertising being the prime examples, albeit these particular terms were not used by the author). On the other hand, some aspects of current media landscape (such as the role of mobile apps, for instance) could be explored further.

The text is written in simple, easy-to-understand language and would be appropriate to non-native speakers.

I find this text to be consistent in terms of terminology.

The book is organized in rather non-trivial fashion, without a unified approach to chapter categorization. Yet, I found this approach refreshing. I loved that the author suggests specific learning outcomes for each section (example: "Distinguish between mass communication and mass media"), key takeaways, and practical exercises. The question bank provided as part of this textbook is a treasure box! It’s a great resource that allows me to have more fun in the classroom by asking interesting questions that wake up the students and generate some amazing answers. The chapters are designed to be used selectively, in no particular order. Big plus.

The content is presented in chronological pattern: from past to future. Other than that, I did not trace much consistency in the material. For instance, Media and Culture is followed by Media Effects, after which the author switches to reviewing various forms of media (Radio, Magazines, Newspapers, etc.). The chapters to follow are Economics of Mass Media and Ethics of Mass Media. I find to be an advantage, as the subsections may be used selectively, and the order may be easily redesigned.

I read the textbook online via the Open Library portal http://open.lib.umn.edu/mediaandculture/chapter/1-2-intersection-of-american-media-and-culture/ . I found the navigation to be very easy. Good interface.

I did not spot any grammatical errors.

I found the content USA-centric. For this reason, it may have limited application to global courses (such as Global Citizens Project courses offered at USF). The majority of case studies are drawn from the United States; much attention is paid to the history of mass media in the USA and current U.S. legislation safeguarding privacy. In today’s increasingly globalized culture and economy, a broader outlook on media and culture may be expected. More international references would enhance the points made by the author. It is important for students to understand that major trends in mass communication, such as convergence of the media, are not unique to the United States. Similarly, increasing media literacy should be positioned as a global, rather than national, priority.

It is a great introductory text that provides a current overview of various forms of media and highlights the role of mass communication in society.

Reviewed by Joel Gershon, Adjunct Professor, American University on 2/1/18

The book should be the perfect fit for my course Understanding Media, as it indeed covers all of the subject matter of the course. The problem is that it is not up to date and therefore detracts from the complete picture that each one of these topics delves into. For example, the music section poses the question: How do the various MP3 players differ? It refers to Spin as a magazine (it ceased its print operations in 2012). Or in the section on television, there is a question about the war between satellite and cable television. I think the winner of that is neither, as streaming a la carte is what people are talking about in 2017 as the direction TV is going in.

This criticism, of course, is obvious and easy. It's actually an exhaustive book that does contain a wealth of useful information, although no glossary or index – glaring omissions. Unfortunately, it suffers from not being up to 2017, when we are living in an up-to-the-second world. Especially in a field like media studies, it makes this book unusable in its entirety. The chapter ethics and economics aren't as badly out of date.

It is accurate for the time it was written in, but in today's world, much of this doesn't hold up. Just one example, there is the claim that Reader's Digest has the third highest circulation of all magazine, which is no longer the case in 2017. It is not in good shape. Even the references to "President Obama," obviously show that it was written a different era with a very different landscape for the media world. Still, the great majority of it appears to be represented fairly, albeit in an outmoded way. It's just that the trends and latest innovations in 2010 won't even make sense to a college freshman whose frame of reference likely came about three years after

Content is up-to-date, but not in a way that will quickly make the text obsolete within a short period of time. The text is written and/or arranged in such a way that necessary updates will be relatively easy and straightforward to implement.

Obviously, this is a major weak link of the textbook. I've already commented on this, but I think any time the textbook is referring to MySpace or Friendster in a way that suggests that they are viable social media sites, it makes itself into a caricature of an outdated guide.

No real problem here. The book is fully clear, well-written and to the point. The problem is that the point was made in 2010. That said, there is no glossary or index.

Again, this book is solid as a foundational textbook to get students the basic information regarding the history and meaningful cultural highlights of different forms of media. From radio to media and democracy, the lessons are thorough and contain useful and important information. It's just that some of this information is outdated.

The book is quite easy to read, the organization is fine and reads like any typical textbook. I will say that there have been advancements made, and that this book should be more interactive and multi-media if it wants to keep up with the Joneses.

It's fine in this regard. The writing itself is great and it's broken up nicely. Very readable and I wish it was up to date because it's a solid textbook.

This is fine for 2010, but there is no interactivity or video or things to let us know that we are in 2017.It's basic and fine, but nothing stands out are particularly innovative.

Written well. No issue here at all.

Again, this is the fatal flaw of the book. It's just not going to be persuasive if it doesn't manage to maintain the sensibilities of someone in 2017. Between politics and technology there have been extreme shifts in the media in the past few years and a book like this would need to be updated monthly to stay relevant. It could work as a historical document to see how people thought in 2010, but not really as a relevant book today.

Reviewed by Suzi Steffen, Instructor, Linn-Benton Community College on 6/20/17

This text is rather comprehensive, at least for the time it was published. It covers pretty much any topic one might want to cover in a Media and Society or introductory media and communications class, though for those interested in topic areas like journalism, advertising, and public relations, this textbook is much more about the history of those areas than how they are surviving and functioning today (and that's fine with me; I can update with information that's more recent). There is no index (at least in this form), and there is no glossary, but terms are well-defined within each chapter and within pull-out boxes as well. It would be incumbent upon the professor and students to keep some kind of glossary or wiki, which is not a bad idea for a media history/media and society class in any case.

Often in a textbook for media and society or media history, one can see the author's world view shining through - is capitalism too much for media? Should media creators take an "unbiased" view of the world? How is a medium influenced by the way it is funded? The book has a solid conversational tone and is authoritative on its history, but I might prefer a little more analysis of media ownership and consolidation. As for accuracy, yes, the facts seem quite accurate to the best of my knowledge, and the text is written (and edited) by someone with a journalist's view of language - it's useful, it's best done well, and occasionally it lends itself to some essayistic moments.

I'm not sure there's a way to write a book like this that can keep it relevant past the month in which it was written, much less seven years later. Many of the examples the author uses to illustrate music, social media, books, newspapers (some of which don't exist anymore), magazines (ditto), etc., are simply no longer relevant. It *is* interesting to read about what the author thought was relevant at the time, and what the author thought would last, but this kind of book needs almost constant updating during this time of constant media churn and reinvention. I am giving it a 3, but really it's more like a 2.5 as any instructor would need constantly to find new examples that students will understand.

The book is accessible and lucid, absolutely. As with any history of a large discipline, the book contains a fair amount of jargon that is relevant to each portion of the subject matter covered, and the book is good about not only giving context and giving definitions but also setting aside boxed or special areas for examples that reinforce what it's talking about. The key takeaways at the end of each chapter, added to the exercises that are meant to help the students understand what's important in the dense historical detail and context of each chapter, are helpful as well.

This book is wonderfully consistent with terminology and the framework it employs to discuss media across a wide range of areas. From the beginning of each chapter, where an introduction lays out the plan of the chapter, to the end of each chapter - where a box of "key takeaways" explains what students should have learned - the book keeps a tone of very slightly amused detachment, mixed with earnest passion for certain topics, throughout, which is utterly consistent with how media people actually live their lives.

The text is definitely modular. It's written in a way that could easily be read in various chunks as the instructor or professor wishes to assign it. Blocks of text are broken up with images, a few charts, and a few stories that are boxed and that illustrate examples of topics within the chapters.

I think it's hard to know how to organize a media history/media and society textbook. Do you start with the printed word? But then, what about radio? Should radio come closer to magazines or closer to movies and TV? In that case, where do audiobooks and podcasts go? So, even as any instructor would grapple with these sorts of questions, the book is laid out in a way that made sense to the author - and that can be ripped apart and reassigned by each instructor. There's no need to read economics at the end of the course; perhaps, despite the fact that it's at the end of the book, it should come at the front end of the course - and because it's modular enough for flexibility, that's not a problem.

I read the textbook on my desktop Kindle and on my phone. It's not super with the images or charts, and the boxed questions and exercises at the end are especially hard to take. This interface could use a little attention, at least in the Kindle applications area. It's not impossible; it just needs some work.

No errors that I saw, though a textbook without at least a few grammatical errors is a miracle.

It's hard to say whether it's culturally insensitive or offensive because, well, I'm a white woman. I note that it talks about U.S. media's places (different for advertising, PR, newspapers, etc.) in the Civil Rights Movement and to a certain extent it discusses the ways that major media have been controlled or run by men, by white men, by straight white men. But I don't think the text addresses any of these things in the depth or with the clarity of thought that one would like to see in 2017. (Yes, it's a 2010 text.) In gaming, in Twitter discussions, in talking about newspapers or online media, the book is simply behind the times, and that makes it culturally problematic if not insensitive.

I am reluctant to adopt this book with students who really need more recent examples to make sense of how things are going now, today, in 2017, though it's also relevant for them to learn the history of how we got here (if anyone can really understand that at this point). I'd love to use a newer edition if one comes out. I might use or adapt parts of it along with other readings for my media and society class in 2018, but I'll be cautious about that.

Reviewed by Shearon Roberts, Assistant Professor of Mass Communication, Xavier University of Louisiana on 6/20/17

The textbook hits the standard areas for a typical Introduction to Mass Communication course: evolution of media industries, media and society, media effects and theories, media law and ethics, the digital age, and global media. It is comprehensive in its case studies and historical events that are typically taught for an Introduction to Mass Communication course. The text is current as there is a chapter on the Internet and Social Media and several chapters look at the digital revolution as it impacts media industries. There is no glossary or index, however. Instructors will have to rely on chapter sections for lesson planning.

From Gutenberg to Apple and Google, the book provides content that is accurate on the development of media. The author thoroughly cites case studies and provides questions for critical thinking about issues affecting media industry trends and on the impact of the media on the public. Statistics, data and trends are appropriately cited for reference check on accuracy of estimates.

Case studies and citations stop at 2010. However, the author makes projections for media trends up to 2020. Since media industries are most vulnerable to yearly change, the information in the book holds for now, although the positions of some of the digital media players have changed since the book has come out. However, the author is careful to clarify dates for events that were transformative for media industry changes, at the point in which these events occurred, even if changes have occurred since the book was published in 2010. Within another 5 years, the book is likely to need some updates to digital age developments.

The language used is accessible for a first year student taking an Introduction to Mass Communication course. The theory, ethics and law chapters are broken down for a 1000-2000 level course. The case studies and critical thinking boxes are useful in helping to break down and apply a wealth of information in the text for students to conceptualize the importance of historical events and their social or cultural impacts.

The author is clear on defining media industries, digital convergence and common theories in mass communication.

Instructors can easily use the text as is, or piece together sections on history, digitization and media and society from several chapters, depending on the instructor’s preference.

The text follows the standard logic for media introduction courses moving students through print, to audio, to film to broadcasting and to the digital age. The author wisely weaves in the impact of new media in each of these phases of evolution so the student does not have to wait until the end of the text to see the impacts of the changes of the industry, as they understand media to be today.

While the interface is simple, all graphics and text boxes, as well as assignments are designed similarly throughout the text and easy to locate as an e-text for student work.

Sentences throughout the text are concisely written and the text appears thoroughly proofed.

It was important for me to see examples of race, gender and global dimensions of the media represented as case studies, assignments and critical thinking in the book. From using The Birth of a Nation and its outcry from the NAACP in the film chapter to the rice of BET, or the understanding stereotyping of African Americans in TV, this book has relevant examples that relate to minority students or for a Historically Black University. I did however see no mention of the black press, or the work of alternative media in introduction narratives left out of the mainstream media. However, most introductory media textbooks, also leave this out. If this is an interest area for diverse students, unfortunately instructors are left to source that information themselves. But the most prominent case studies for diverse groups can be found in this text.

It was surprising to discover such an open-textbook as the cost of Intro to Mass Communication textbooks are typically over $100 and students only use this textbook once. This is a valuable resource. I hope the author would consider updating in a few years for recent developments and important case studies such as the #BlackLivesMatter movement and President Donald Trump's election for an examination of media literacy.

Reviewed by Gwyneth Mellinger, Professor and Director, School of Media Arts & Design, James Madison University on 6/20/17

The book covers all of the subject areas typically touched on in a media and society survey course; however, the discussions within chapters would benefit greatly from more examples and, in some cases, greater detail in explanation. I often thought the content was pretty thin. This was particularly so in Chapter 2, where the treatment of effects theories and media studies controversies required much more supporting discussion to be relevant to undergraduates. The greatest weakness in the text, and the specific reason I would not adopt it for my own course, is that the book's engagement of social and digital media is, for the most part, woefully out of date and separated into discrete chapter segments, rather than synthesized into discussions directly. A text on media and society assigned in 2017 cannot be comprehensive if it does not engage media in a way that makes sense to the students who are reading it. There is no index or glossary.

Content Accuracy rating: 2

There is no bias in the text and historical detail appeared to be represented accurately. Again, I question whether a book written in 2010, which lacks full context for the subject matter, can accurately reflect media and society for students in 2017. For example, in 4.6, online journalism is represented as blogs and online newspapers. That is an accuracy issue for today's students.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 1

The book is out of date. Examples and context stop at 2010, and many cultural references will not resonate with current students, which is the point of examples and cultural context. The Beatlemania example early in the book and the references to 2009 in the opening paragraphs advertise the lack of currency. Significantly, the book cannot be easily updated in its current form because its approach and perspective are also out of date. By failing to integrate social media and the Internet into the central narrative, the book emphasizes legacy media in a way that is no longer relevant.

The book is clearly written, though additional examples and context would be helpful in places.

The narrative is consistent in terminology and framework.

The modularity of the text would allow use of sections of the text at different points in a course.

The content in Chapter 11 on evolution of the Internet and the impact of social media belongs near the beginning, not the end, of the text. In addition, the impact of media economics on content is downplayed by sequestering this discussion in Chapter 13. Each chapter on legacy media ends with a section on the impact of new technology on that medium. These sections feel tacked on.

There were no interface issues. That said, the book lacked the visual engagement used by many media and society texts to capture and maintain the interest of today's students.

The text is clean. Of note, the text correctly uses "media" as a plural noun. There was, however, this awkward subheading at 1.2: "What Does Media Do?"

The text is not culturally insensitive. It acknowledges cultural imperialism and the digital divides as issues. There are examples of media content that would be deemed inclusive. That is not to say, however, that today's students would find the examples culturally relevant. The book is written from their grandparents' perspective.

Without irony, the unknown author of the text includes in a media literacy checklist and discussion (1.8) the advice that students should scrutinize the identity and credentials of authors. This same section warns against anonymous online sources. This is a conceptual problem with this particular online text. It's not clear why the author wants to distance her/himself from the project, but it creates a question of credibility.

Reviewed by Elizabeth England-Kennedy, Assistant Professor, Rhode Island College on 4/11/17

The book is extremely comprehensive. Not only does it include all forms of mass media, but it intelligently and thoughtfully addresses critical concepts such as ethics and culture. Photojournalism (especially the work of muckrakers such as Jacob Riis) is not included, and investigative reporting is too briefly addressed, although including advocacy journalism was a sound choice. There is no index or glossary. The lack of a glossary is surprising since key words are already highlighted in text.

The text is accurate and information is fairly represented and free of personal bias. No errors were found.

This is the most concerning characteristic of the book: The information has long-term relevance and is written in a highly readable way that will enhance its longevity. However, the examples tend to be temporally but often not generationally up-to-date and positioned for longevity. For example, beginning the book with an example that is this far removed from today's undergraduates' world may lessen their interest in reading further, as opposed to beginning with more focus on Beatlemania and then moving to an example of an artist/group more accessible to their generation. Additional examples used later in the book are drawn from recent time frames, but may not be commonly accessed. This is the only aspect of the book that would make me hesitate to adopt it.

The text is written in lucid prose that is accessible to introductory readers, though individuals whose first language is not English could have some difficulty reading independently. However, with minimal pre-reading guidance (e.g., introducing concepts that will be included in an upcoming reading assignment, instruction on how to use the Learning Objectives and Key Takeaways to best effect), these readers should also be able to understand and effectively use the text. Context is given for jargon/technical terminology, and definitions are generally clear.

The text is consistent in format, terminology, framework, and tone.

Modularity rating: 1

The book is clearly divided into relatively short subsections that are logically sequenced. Longer sections tend to be broken up by images, all of which are relevant examples of concepts being discussed in the section. The Learning Objectives, Key Takeaways, End-of-Chapter Assessments, and Critical Thinking Questions sections for each module are useful for guiding student reading and could be easily adapted into learning exercises and assessments such as discussions, quizzes, exams, and writing assignments. The Career Connection section at the end of chapters is innovative, and could be especially useful for students considering majors in communications-related fields. Chapters and sub-sections could be used independently in reading packets or rearranged without their being weakened, making it a more flexible resource or textbook.

The organization is clear. Sections are clearly labeled and of approximately the same length. Titles of chapters and subsections are logical and clear. Topics are logical laid out: An overview of foundational concepts in the first two chapters frames the remaining chapters effectively. The remaining chapters are organized in a historically-logical order. This structure is well-designed to helps readers better understand how an increase in the number and forms of media channels impacts audiences and media effects. Chapters are also internally well-organized and could be used separately as desired.

There are no interface difficulties. Pictures are clear and free of distortion. Navigation is clear and easy to use. Because the sections are short, reader interest should be maintained despite the low level of images included. Multiple platforms can be used.

The text contains no grammatical errors. A nice touch by the author is to clarify and model the correct grammatical usage of "medium" vs "media."

No cultural insensitivity or offensiveness was found. The author acknowledges that the book is focused on US media and includes culturally diverse examples. Topics such as cultural imperialism are addressed specifically. Related topics such as cultural appropriation and marginalization are referenced, although these specific terms are not necessarily used (e.g., the latter is addressed in the chapter on music as an outcome of the oligopoly in music without using the term "marginalization"). This could have been taken further; for example, the section on "Issues and Trends in Film" does not address concerns about "whitewashing" or lack of diversity in Hollywood movies and the section on Independent films does not address movies that countered these trends (e.g., the work of Spike Lee and Robert Rodriguez). However, the book lays the groundwork necessary for a discussion of such concepts in class or for use of supplemental materials that build on this text.

The book could be used as a stand-alone for an introductory class. Sections could be used in more advanced classes as supplemental readings or in reading packets.

Reviewed by Kevin Smith, Instructor, Chemeketa Community College on 2/15/17

This text is comprehensive in its coverage of all major media platforms and key general concepts related to mass media. There are times (e.g. Chapter 2: Media Effects) when some concepts are defined vaguely, but this is not indicative of the book as a whole. There is no glossary nor index, but most terms are defined well in the context of each chapter. The review sections at the end of each chapter would also help students organize and recall relevant information as they study. There is little that I feel is missing from this textbook that would be appropriate for an introductory mass media course.

A neutral, objective tone is struck throughout, with no apparent errors or gaps in coverage of major media and concepts. To the best of my knowledge, I believe this text to be free of errors, although it needs to be updated.

While this text is outstanding in its coverage and clarity, it is now seven years out-of-date and needs to be updated. A text on mass media should reflect the most recent changes in technology and economic and political contexts.

This text appears to be written for college freshmen and sophomores. Perhaps even upper-level high school students could successfully grasp its content. Most jargon particular to the discipline is defined and illustrated thoroughly.

The text is rigorous throughout, with even weight given to all concepts. There are occasional overlaps between chapters in coverage of terms (e.g. media bias), but nothing that seems sloppy or out-of-place. The historical overview of media technologies blends seamlessly with the beginning and later chapters on media studies concepts.

The structure of the book lends itself exceptionally well to divisibility, while demonstrating the ability to maintain its own internal coherence. The text seems designed for a semester-long course, so those looking to use it for quarters or with students whose expected reading loads might be lighter will find it easy to pull only what they need from it without sacrificing clarity.

The book's content is designed expertly, with introductory chapters leading into a chronological overview of the history of media technologies (books to social media). The text concludes by expanding its scope to cover more general concepts (e.g.media ethics) that scaffold on previously discussed ideas. This framework would greatly aid students in comprehending central ideas in media studies as they relate to specific technologies and historical periods.

I did not notice any problems in this area, although a cover might be helpful in identifying the text.

I noticed some minor typos, but nothing that reflects poorly on the high level of discourse and mechanical aspects of the text.

The text employs examples that would be helpful to students as they seek to understand mass media in diverse settings. There was no inappropriate content noted. The text is respectful and inclusive in this sense.

The end of chapter summaries, takeaways, exercises and critical thinking questions are outstanding and would serve any instructor well in designing a course with relevant activities tied directly to the text, while also pointing to other sources in contemporary mass media. The book is an invaluable resource that deserves the attention of a group of scholars who can update its content in order that it be more relevant to students.

Reviewed by Amy Rawson, Professor, Century College on 2/8/17

Interestingly, this textbook was more comprehensive than I originally expected. The text covered all of the major areas to be expected in a mass communication textbook: Media, Books, Newspapers, Magazines, Radio, Movies, TV, Games, Internet & Social Media, Advertising & PR, Economics, Ethics, Media & Government and the Future of Mass Media. However, I am giving 4 stars because there is no index or glossary which I deem especially important for a mass communication textbook.

The textbook is accurate. I also like the chapter on the future of mass media. The textbook seems to be error-free and unbiased. Each chapter section includes a few learning objectives and a few "key takeaways." There are also exercise questions at the end of each chapter section. The examples in the exercise questions are dated. It would be nice to have more current examples. However, I would prefer questions about the chapter at the end of the entire chapter or at the end of each section in addition to the objectives, takeaways and exercises. Thus, I am giving 4 stars for outdated examples.

I agree with another reviewer that the examples are a bit dated (which quickly happens in a mass communication textbook). This affects the credibility of the overall text. For example, in Chapter 16.1 Changes in Media Over the Last Century the example box titled "Pay-for-it Content: Will it Work?" is from 2009! This is 2017.

The textbook is written in clear and easily understood language. It is accessible and comprehensible. It would be nice to have a glossary for students for the mass communication jargon.

The text seems to be consistent with terminology and framework. However, the textbook seems dated overall and new terminology and frameworks could be added to make it more relevant and interesting for students.

The modularity of the textbook is good. It is easily and readily divisible into smaller reading sections that can be assigned different points within the course. I like the division of the chapters into subsections.

The organization/structure/flow of the textbook is good. However, I agree with another reviewer that the textbook is too lengthy. In my opinion, 647 pages is too long. Although I have used other textbooks of similar length, there are many more vivid visuals for students and more timely information and examples.

The text is free of significant interface issues that may confuse or distract the reader.

The text contains no grammatical errors.

The textbook examples for cultural relevance could be more current.

Thank you for this opportunity. I like the idea of an open textbook and would be interested in doing more reviews in the future.

Reviewed by Tom Grier, Professor, Winona State University on 8/21/16

The book is comprehensive, covering the study of media and its intersection with culture, through an in-depth look at each of the major mediums, then content considerations, economics and ethics issues related to the mass media. read more

This text seems accurate. I didn't find glaring errors of fact in my reading. Though, as I will mention later in my review, many of the examples used in the text are now several years outdated, when more recent examples or case studies would be more relatable to a youthful college audience.

This is one area where I find some difficulty with the book -- as is the case with every text of this type. The world of media is ever-changing and fast-changing. The historical information about the invention, early adoption, and improvements to the mediums of mass communication (books, newspapers, radio, television, etc.) are fine. A few of the examples and case studies used to describe events related to the media feel outdated. This is most apparent in Chapters 1 and 2 on Media and Culture and Media Effects. Examples from 2010 and 2011, are not relative to college freshmen in 2016 who were in middle-school and probably not paying attention when these things happened. Therefore, the longevity of this text is limited, unless it is updated-revised at least every third year.

The author's writing style is informative and engaging. While the writing is clear and understandable, the chapters often get too deep and try to cover anything and everything in a particular content area-- or sub-chapter, when a couple statements and one case study would suffice.

I found the chapter formatting, writing style and narrative flow to be consistent from chapter to chapter.

Here, the text shines. First, it is broken into chapters that are easily identifiable and segment the content nicely. Within each chapter are several sub-chapters that allow readers to read and absorb material in smaller chunks. This will be helpful to the learning styles of younger people today.

For the most part, I agree with the author's organization and flow. My only thought, and it's just an opinion, is: Chapter 2 on Media Effects should be moved to Chapter 14, so it comes after the major media categories and then the economics of the media, and just before the ethics and law of media. To be fair, most mass media textbooks follow this same organization. When I teach the class, I always move the "effects" chapter to later in the semester, after I've discussed the media types, their history and development.

A second thought, I'd hold the footnoted source credits to the end of each chapter, or preferably to the end of the book. The sometimes very long list of footnoted sources between each sub-chapter stops the flow for readers that may wish to read a full chapter.

I downloaded the PDF version, and read that. I found the interface cumbersome. I wish paragraphs were indented. I wish it was easier to navigate from chapter to chapter or topic to topic without scrolling, scrolling, scrolling. I wish there was an easy way to get to a Table of Contents with one click, and then from there click topic-anchored reference points to skip to specific information sought.

I wish it had an index that had anchor links. I realize this would be a large undertaking to create and connect the links. But that would make searching and finding specific information easy and fast. If I was a college student studying for a chapter quiz or exam on the foundations of radio, I might like to scoot to the Index and click on Radio-Invention, or on Marconi and be led instantly to that content within the text.

And, probably an easy fix, I wish it was more evenly spaced. In my opinion, there should consistently be two spaces between sub-headed sections or sub-chapters. In most places in this text, a new, bolded subhead appears on the very next line under its preceding paragraph. This looks jammed and messy.

I have no problem with the grammar. It's clear, easy to follow, and written to be accessible to a college audience. I used the Gunning Fog Index to test several paragraphs throughout the text and found some of the writing aimed at an audience with 10-11 years of formal education, and in a few cases more than 15 years of education. The average of my selected readings came out at 12-13 years of education -- perfectly appropriate for a freshmen-level college course.

Other than my hope for some more recent case studies and examples, I find the text to be culturally relevant. A few of the examples mention MySpace, Napster and Kazaa as internet entities with which the audience should be familiar. In reality, today's college freshmen know almost nothing of these three internet terms. In my current Media and Society class, less than ten percent of the class had ever had a MySpace account. They had heard of MySpace, but really knew nothing. No one in the class knew about Napster or Kazaa first-hand... perhaps had heard of them in another class.

This text feels too long. This is a difficult thing. The author includes everything he feels needs to be discussed in each chapter. But it's too much for a college freshman-level class. Example: The chapter on Music is more than 50 pages long. While I agree college students should be able to read this much each week for a class, I'm confident they will not read this much. I believe the text could be condensed quite a bit while maintaining the content necessary to make it meaningful at the freshman level. It's a complete text, and would make a nice reference tool -- with better indexing and searching links within the body -- but it won't work at an entry level to the study of media. At my university, the "Media and Society" class is a 100-level course, used as a general education class that can fulfill a categorical credit-need for all students, not just Mass Communication majors. And we consider the class a "feeder" to the major, introducing students to the study of media and hopefully igniting an interest in students to consider a career in media, and therefore declare a Mass Communication major. This book, with its depth, might be more appropriate in an upper-vision media studies course.

Reviewed by Nick Marx, Assistant Professor, Colorado State University on 1/7/16

The text is a broad and comprehensive overview of all relevant forms of media today. Although this is a common organizational approach for survey textbooks of media, this particular volume utilizes it in a particularly clear and cogent manner. Instructors approaching media and culture from a mass comm/journalism standpoint are much likelier to find this text useful than are instructors who approach media and culture from a perspective emphasizing critical/cultural studies, historical poetics, and/or aesthetics.

Content is accurate and strikes appropriately diplomatic tones where contentious issues might arise that concern social and cultural power.

The text is quite relevant for the most part, but by the very nature of its subject matter will undoubtedly require updates every few years. Framing the intro of the "Future of Mass Media" chapter with a specific device--the iPad--rather than the set of cultural protocols such devices foster, for example, might prove to be one area where instructors redirect conversations after the next new device inevitably cycles through.

The text is lucid and easy to follow. The book is ideal for introductory-level courses, but is likely too survey-oriented for courses beyond that level.

The text is consistent in structure, tone, and subject matter.

Here the book really excels at guiding students through a programmatic approach to studying media. Each section of history/description is followed by useful discussion prompts and activities, easily lending itself to course adoption.

The book flows logically. Some medium-specific chapters might arguably be collapsed into others, but their separation provides instructors with a good range of options for organizing lesson plans as they wish rather than having to proceed sequentially.

The text is a cleanly organized PDF, but is quite cumbersome to navigate internally. At 700+ pages, there's no table of contents and little in the PDF that allows for quick and easy browsing without intense scrolling. I'd recommend a hyperlinked TOC and some mechanism that affords instructors/students the freedom to teach/read in a modular, not linear, fashion.

The book is very clean and free of any obvious errors.

The book appropriately qualifies and focuses on the US media context, drawing on a good diversity of examples throughout.

Reviews prior to 2016 are for a previous edition.

Reviewed by Robert Kerr, Professor, University of Oklahoma on 1/12/15

This book devotes almost 800 pages to achieving an impressive level of comprehensiveness, considering the vast subject material upon which it focuses. Moving from Gutenberg’s 15th-century invention of the movable type printing press, through the beginning of the contemporary media age launched by the introduction of the telegraph in the mid 19th century, on into the explosive era opened with the beginnings of wireless communication, and ultimately into the revolution of Internet communication that by 2008 meant that U.S. households were consuming 3.6 zettabytes of information annually, the equivalent of a seven-foot-foot tall stack of books that covered the entire nation and represented a 350 percent increase from just three decades previously. This book manages to cover that remarkable series of media developments, and actually a good bit more, while keeping it all in broader context and without getting bogged down in the tedium of too much minutia from any one topic area.

This reviewer came across no errors of fact nor any pattern of bias in presentation.

The author of any text on this subject is faced with the challenge of achieving up-to-date content on a subject that explodes with new developments faster than any static text could ever stay fully up to date on for long. This text addresses that challenge by focusing on presenting a fully, dynamic framework that is so fully developed that it provides readers with a quite useful and enduring framework for considering crucial issues of media and culture in a manner that should give it a considerable shelf life. That framework is designed to help readers understand not only today’s media landscape but to consider what may be ahead for that landscape in terms of the future of media and culture.

The text breaks down relevant concepts and terminology with lucid, accessible prose so that even readers at the most introductory level should be able to always understand the discussion. Throughout the text, it very clearly helps readers think about each concept and related elements very clearly and in context that illuminates their significance.

This book’s use of terminology and framework is remarkably consistent. The author clearly has an instinctive, unified understanding of the essential dynamics driving the media world as it has evolved, exists today, and is unfolding going forward, and consistently discusses all topics in a context that never loses connection with that broad, fluid picture.

Chapters are organized into small modules, short subsections that by and large can stand alone and could be reorganized as an instructor might find more useful for the purposes of particular courses. Each chapter and each subsection includes highly useful learning objectives, key takeaways, and exercises, links to source materials and end-of-chapter assessments.

The book begins with a thorough overview that takes the reader quickly through a multifaceted assessment of the relationship between media and culture. With that foundation established, it moves into discussion of what is understood about the complex subject of media effects. Then it moves into narrower topics within the broader view considered so far, moving on to discussions of books, newspapers, magazines, music, radio, movies, and television, and then on to more recent developments such as electronic games, the Internet and social media. Then it steps back again to consider broader media influences such as advertising/PR, the role of economics in shaping the nature of mass media, ethical considerations, and government influence, before concluding with a substantial discussion of the future of mass media. The final chapter very effectively brings together the many strands of discussion from preceding chapters and synergizes them with a forward looking discussion of what the media future may hold. A table of contents within the book pdf itself would be helpful, as would content outlines at the beginning of each chapter. However, each chapter does contain very good breakdown highlights of each subsection’s learning objectives, key takeaways, and exercises, as well as extensive links to source materials and end-of-chapter assessments.

There do not seem to be any interface problems. The book is easy to navigate and the images/charts are displayed clearly, without distortion. Display features are presented quite distinctly and effectively throughout and should present readers with not distractions or confusion. The layout is somewhat visually plain, compared to many websites and even many traditional textbooks with more graphically elaborate designs, but the simple layout is easy to negotiate. The number of images/charts is not abundant, but is sufficient.

Grammar is used correctly throughout -- including use of the term “media” as a plural noun, which even too many academics have begun to use incorrectly as a singular term. It even includes an explanation of why it is incorrect to make that term singular, despite its popular usage in such manner. The text is very well written throughout, lively and to the point, with an easy flow that should enable readers to move through it almost effortlessly.

Over the course of this 761-page book, the reader is taken through an extensive range of discussion examples that span a multitude of races, ethnicities, and backgrounds. This reviewer did not detect any instances of cultural insensitivity or offensiveness.

This book is written well enough to be of general interest as a stand-alone read, apart from the context of its use as a textbook.

Reviewed by Doug Trouten, Professor, University of Northwestern - St. Paul on 7/15/14

The text covers all of the major forms of media and significant related topics (advertising, media economics, ethics, etc.). While the text lacks a dedicated chapter for journalism, this topic is covered at length in some of the other chapters. No... read more

Content is accurate and free of glaring errors. Although written in a personal, conversational tone, the text avoids obvious personal bias.

The content is up-to-date, including discussion of social media and references to recent works of media criticism. The rapid development of new media makes it likely that some of the material in this (or any) book will quickly seem dated, but the most time-sensitive material is confined to a few chapters, which should facilitate future updates.

The book is written in clear, easy-to-understand language that should appeal to today's college-age reader.

The text shows good consistency, introducing key ideas early and using them to facilitate understanding of material covered in subsequent chapters.

The chapters are clearly divided into subsections, each with clearly stated learning objectives, key takeaways and learning exercises. Most subsections could stand on their own, and chapters focusing on specific forms of mass media could easily be rearranged or skipped if desired.

The topics are presented in a logical fashion. After introducing basic ideas about media and culture and media effects, the text moves to discussion of various forms of media in chronological orders, and ends with chapters on various mass media applications and issues, such as advertising, public relations, ethics and government regulation.

The text is a basic PDF, with fixed line breaks that limit display options. Most URLs are live links. Footnote numbers and references to chapter sections look like links but are not, which may confuse some readers. A format better-suited for e-readers would be welcome.

The text strives to be culturally neutral, and should not offend any particular group of readers. The text clearly focuses on the U.S. media context, and acknowledges this limitation early on.

This is an impressively comprehensive overview of mass communication, written in a clear and engaging manner. Discussion questions and exercises are helpful resources for classroom use. A glossary, index and more flexible e-format would make this text even more useful. This text is a welcome addition to the field, and will serve students and teachers well.

Chapter 1: Media and Culture
Chapter 2: Media Effects
Chapter 3: Books
Chapter 4: Newspapers
Chapter 5: Magazines
Chapter 6: Music
Chapter 7: Radio
Chapter 8: Movies
Chapter 9: Television
Chapter 10: Electronic Games and Entertainment
Chapter 11: The Internet and Social Media
Chapter 12: Advertising and Public Relations
Chapter 14: Ethics of Mass Media
Chapter 15: Media and Government
Chapter 16: The Future of Mass Media

Ancillary Material

University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing

About the Book

According to the author, the world did not need another introductory text in mass communication. But the world did need another kind of introductory text in mass communication, and that is how Understanding Media and Culture: An Introduction to Mass Communication was birthed.

The only question was: What would be the purpose of another introductory mass communication text?

Understanding Media and Culture: An Introduction to Mass Communication was written to squarely emphasize media technology. The author believes that an introduction to mass communication text should be a compelling, historical narrative sketching the *ongoing evolution* of media technology and how that technology shapes and is shaped by culture — and that is what he set out to deliver with his new textbook.

Today's students are immersed in media technology. They live in a world of cell phones, smart phones, video games, iPods, laptops, Facebook, Twitter, FourSquare, and more. They fully expect that new technology will be developed tomorrow. Yet students often lack an historical perspective on media technology. They lack knowledge of the social, political and economic forces that shape media technology. This is not knowledge for knowledge's sake. It is knowledge that can help them understand, comprehend, appreciate, anticipate, shape and control media technology.

With this focus, Understanding Media and Culture becomes an appropriate title. Indeed, the title has particular significance. Marshall McLuhan's Understanding Media is a key text in media studies. Written in the 1960s, Understanding Media was the subject of intense debates that continue to this day. Its central message was that the technology of media — not their content — was their most important feature. In a typically pithy phrase, McLuhan said, "The medium is the message." The title, Understanding Media and Culture: An Introduction to Mass Communication , situates the introductory text in a large, engrossing theoretical conversation.

The goal is to adopt a textbook that will support and complement your teaching of this course. Understanding Media and Culture: An Introduction to Mass Communication will support an engaging and interesting course experience for students that will not only show them the powerful social, political and economic forces will affect the future of media technology, but will challenge students to do their part in shaping that future.

Contribute to this Page

Professional
International

Select a product below:

Connect Math Hosted by ALEKS
My Bookshelf (eBook Access)

Sign in to Shop:

My Account Details

My Information
Security & Login
Order History
My Digital Products

AP/Honors & Electives
my.mheducation.com
Open Learning Platform

Connect Math Hosted by Aleks

Business and Economics

Accounting Business Communication Business Law Business Mathematics Business Statistics & Analytics Computer & Information Technology Decision Sciences & Operations Management Economics Finance Keyboarding Introduction to Business Insurance & Real Estate Management Information Systems Management Marketing

Humanities, Social Science and Language

American Government Anthropology Art Career Development Communication Criminal Justice Developmental English Education Film Composition Health and Human Performance

History Humanities Music Philosophy and Religion Psychology Sociology Student Success Theater World Languages

Science, Engineering and Math

Agriculture & Forestry Anatomy & Physiology Astronomy & Physical Science Biology - Majors Biology - Non-Majors Chemistry Cell/Molecular Biology & Genetics Earth & Environmental Science Ecology Engineering/Computer Science Engineering Technologies - Trade & Tech Health Professions Mathematics Microbiology Nutrition Physics Plants & Animals

Digital Products

Connect® Course management , reporting , and student learning tools backed by great support .

McGraw Hill GO Greenlight learning with the new eBook+

ALEKS® Personalize learning and assessment

ALEKS® Placement, Preparation, and Learning Achieve accurate math placement

SIMnet Ignite mastery of MS Office and IT skills

McGraw Hill eBook & ReadAnywhere App Get learning that fits anytime, anywhere

Sharpen: Study App A reliable study app for students

Virtual Labs Flexible, realistic science simulations

Inclusive Access Reduce costs and increase success

LMS Integration Log in and sync up

Math Placement Achieve accurate math placement

Content Collections powered by Create® Curate and deliver your ideal content

Custom Courseware Solutions Teach your course your way

Professional Services Collaborate to optimize outcomes

Remote Proctoring Validate online exams even offsite

Institutional Solutions Increase engagement, lower costs, and improve access for your students

General Help & Support Info Customer Service & Tech Support contact information

Online Technical Support Center FAQs, articles, chat, email or phone support

Support At Every Step Instructor tools, training and resources for ALEKS , Connect & SIMnet

Instructor Sample Requests Get step by step instructions for requesting an evaluation, exam, or desk copy

Platform System Check System status in real time

Introduction to Mass Communication , 12th Edition

Format options:.

Lowest Price!

Connect from $201.33

Textbook Rental (150 Days Access)

Rent for a fraction of the printed textbook price
Complete text bound in hardcover or softcover

Loose-Leaf Purchase

Unbound loose-leaf version of full text

Shipping Options

Next-day air
2nd-day air

Orders within the United States are shipped via FedEx or UPS Ground. For shipments to locations outside of the U.S., only standard shipping is available. All shipping options assume the product is available and that processing an order takes 24 to 48 hours prior to shipping.

Note: Connect can only be used if assigned by your instructor.

Connect + Loose-Leaf

Comprehensive online learning platform + unbound loose-leaf print text package
Connect includes homework , study tools, eBook, and adaptive assignments
Download the free ReadAnywhere app to access the eBook offline

* The estimated amount of time this product will be on the market is based on a number of factors, including faculty input to instructional design and the prior revision cycle and updates to academic research-which typically results in a revision cycle ranging from every two to four years for this product. Pricing subject to change at any time.

Instructor Information

Quick Actions ( Only for Validated Instructor Accounts ):

Table of Contents
Author Bios
Accessibility

In today’s media rich world, Introduction to Mass Communication keeps media literacy and culture at its core. Using examples of the past to show how mass communications got their roots and keeping current with the present emerging technologies and trends, Introduction to Mass Communication gives students a deeper understanding of the role media plays in both shaping and reflecting culture. By understanding and evaluating the ways in which media convergence is changing the landscape of media today, students are encouraged to think critically about their own roles in society as active media consumers. Through this cultural perspective, students learn that audience members are as much a part of the mass communication process as are the media technologies and industries. The new edition maintains its commitment to enhancing students’ critical thinking and media literacy skills. New and updated material in this edition reflects the latest developments in new digital technologies and highlights the most current research in the field. With Introduction to Mass Communication , students will have access to a suite of assessments and presentation tools to help them become successful and confident communicators in the workplace, including: - Video Capture powered by GoReact™ is the best way to give feedback on student presentations. It makes assigning and providing personalized feedback easy and it helps improve student outcomes and confidence. - SmartBook 2.0 provides a personalized and adaptive learning experience for students, while highlighting the most impactful communication concepts the learner needs to study at that time. - Application-Based Activities are highly interactive, automatically graded, learn-by-doing exercises that provide students a safe space to apply their problem-solving skills to real-world scenarios. - Writing Assignments offer faculty the ability to assign a full range of writing assignments to students (both manual-scoring and auto-scoring) with just-in-time feedback.

Part 1 Laying The Groundwork Chapter 1 Mass Communication, Culture, and Media Literacy Chapter 2 Convergence and the Reshaping of Mass Communication Part 2 Media, Media Industries, and Media Audiences Chapter 3 Books Chapter 4 Newspapers Chapter 5 Magazines Chapter 6 Film Chapter 7 Radio, Recording, and Popular Music Chapter 8 Television, Cable, and Mobile Video Chapter 9 Video Games Chapter 10 The Internet and Social Media Part 3 Strategic Communication Industries Chapter 11 Public Relations Chapter 12 Advertising Part 4 Mass-Mediated Culture in The Information Age Chapter 13 Theories and Effects of Mass Communication Chapter 14 Media Freedom, Regulation, and Ethics Chapter 15 Global Media Glossary Index

About the Author

Stanley Baran

Stanley Baran earned his Ph.D. in communication research at the University of Massachusetts after taking his M.A. in journalism at Pennsylvania State University. He taught for 4 years at Cleveland State University, eventually moving to the University of Texas. He led the Department of Radio-TV-Film’s graduate program for 6 of his 9 years in Austin and won numerous teaching awards there, including the AMOCO Teaching Excellence Award as the best instructor on that 40,000-student campus, the College of Communication’s Teaching Excellence Award as that college’s outstanding professor, and Utmost Magazine’s Student Poll for best instructor. Dr. Baran moved to San Jose State University in 1987 and served 9 years as chair of the Department of Television, Radio, Film, and Theatre. At SJSU he was named President’s Scholar as the University’s outstanding researcher. Now, he teaches at Bryant University, where he is the founding chair of that school’s Communication Department. Among his other experiences shaping this book are service as a Fulbright Scholar and his many years of professional activity in audience research, writing for radio, and producing for television. Dr. Baran has published 10 books and scores of scholarly articles and sits or has sat on the editorial boards of six journals. His work has been translated into half-a-dozen languages. He is a skilled boater and a tenor saxophonist for the Wakefield, Rhode Island, Concert Band. He is married to Susan Baran and has two very cool children, Matt and Jordan, who grew up much faster than he wanted.

Creating accessible products is a priority for McGraw Hill. We make accessibility and adhering to WCAG AA guidelines a part of our day-to-day development efforts and product roadmaps.

For more information, visit our accessibility page , or contact us at [email protected]

Need support? We're here to help - Get real-world support and resources every step of the way.

Company Info

Contact & Locations
Trust Center
Diversity, Equity & Inclusion
Social Responsibility
Investor Relations
Social Media Directory
Place an Order
Get Support
Contact Customer Service
Contact Sales Rep
Check System Status

Additional Resources

Permissions
Author Support
International Rights
Purchase Order
Our AI Approach

Follow McGraw Hill:

25 Mass Communication Theories: A Comprehensive Take on what shapes Mass Media

In a world increasingly driven by information exchange, the role of mass communication in shaping our perceptions, behaviors, and decisions cannot be overstated. Welcome to our deep dive into the riveting realm of mass communication theories . A space where we dissect, discuss, and demystify the complex mechanisms that dictate how information is shared and processed on a large scale. Whether you’re a seasoned communication professional, a budding scholar, or simply a curious mind, this exploration promises to be both enlightening and engaging.

Understanding the theories of mass communication is more than just an academic exercise. It’s a key to unlocking the potential of strategic communication in our personal and professional lives. It’s about gaining insights into how messages are crafted, disseminated, and interpreted, and how these processes impact our society. With a blend of compelling data, authoritative insights, and a dash of wit, we’ll journey through these theories, uncovering their relevance in today’s hyper-connected world. So, get ready to be captivated, challenged, and ultimately, empowered with a new understanding of the power of communication.

25 Mass Communication Theories

Agenda-setting theory.

This theory posits that media has the power to determine which issues are important to the public. The Agenda-Setting Theory , coined by Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw in the late 1960s, is a concept in mass communication that asserts the media’s power in shaping public perception of what issues are important. It suggests that the media doesn’t necessarily tell us what to think, but rather what to think about. The crux of this theory lies in the media’s ability to influence the salience of topics within the public sphere. For instance, if news outlets consistently cover climate change, the public will perceive it as a critical issue needing attention. Conversely, issues that receive little to no media coverage may be perceived as unimportant, regardless of their actual significance. An example of this can be seen in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. Media outlets heavily focused on the personalities of the candidates rather than their policy positions. As a result, the public discourse was centered around the candidates’ character traits rather than the policies they proposed. The Agenda-Setting Theory was born out of a study McCombs and Shaw conducted during the 1968 U.S. Presidential Election. They found a strong correlation between what the media highlighted as important issues and what voters perceived as important issues. This led to the conclusion that the media was setting the agenda for public discussion. In today’s digital age, the Agenda-Setting Theory remains highly relevant. With the advent of social media, the power to set the agenda has become even more potent. News outlets, influencers, and even ordinary individuals can shape public perception of what issues are important, thus steering the direction of public discourse.

Cultivation Theory

critical thinking for mass communication

The Cultivation Theory , developed by George Gerbner in the mid-1960s, is a social theory which examines the long-term effects of television on its viewers’ perceptions of reality. Gerbner, a professor of communication , proposed that the more time people spend ‘living’ in the television world, the more likely they are to believe social reality aligns with the reality portrayed on television. At the crux of the Cultivation Theory is the concept of the “mean world syndrome”. This suggests that individuals who watch a lot of television are likely to perceive the world as more dangerous and violent than it is. For instance, if someone watches a lot of crime shows, they may develop an exaggerated fear of becoming a victim of crime, even if they live in a relatively safe area. This is because their perception of reality has been ‘cultivated’ by the images and ideas presented on television. The theory was initially formulated during a time when television was the primary medium for entertainment and information. However, its implications extend to our current era, where mass media consumption has diversified across various platforms like social media, streaming services, and online news outlets. In the context of modern mass communication, the Cultivation Theory remains highly relevant. Today, it’s not just television but also digital media that has a profound impact on how we perceive and understand the world around us. For instance, constant exposure to picture-perfect lives on Instagram can cultivate a belief that everyone else’s life is happier and more successful, causing feelings of inadequacy or dissatisfaction. Similarly, continuous exposure to violent news stories can create a perception that the world is more dangerous than it is.

Spiral of Silence Theory

The Spiral of Silence Theory , first introduced by German political scientist Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann in 1974, is a sociological and psychological theory that explains why people are reluctant to express their opinions when they believe they are in the minority. The theory suggests that this self-censorship stems from the fear of isolation, a fundamental human instinct. Individuals, fearing social isolation or reprisal, tend to remain silent rather than voice unpopular views. This creates a spiraling effect, where the perceived majority opinion becomes even more dominant as minority voices quiet down. For example, consider a workplace scenario where the majority of employees agree with a new policy introduced by management. An employee who disagrees might choose to remain silent rather than voice their dissent, fearing ostracization or negative repercussions. This silence further reinforces the perceived popularity of the policy, creating a ‘spiral’ of silence. The Spiral of Silence Theory has its roots in the study of public opinion, particularly in the context of mass media and its role in shaping societal norms and perceptions. Noelle-Neumann’s theory was a response to the observation that public opinion seemed to have a powerful influence over individual behaviors and attitudes, even when it didn’t align with personal beliefs. In the modern context, the Spiral of Silence Theory has significant relevance in the realm of mass communication, particularly in the age of social media. It helps explain phenomena like ‘echo chambers’ or ‘filter bubbles’, where individuals are more likely to be exposed to similar viewpoints and less likely to encounter dissenting opinions. This can lead to a skewed perception of public opinion, further exacerbating the spiral of silence. Understanding this theory is crucial for communicators, marketers, and influencers who aim to encourage open dialogue, foster diversity of opinion, and challenge dominant narratives. It also highlights the importance of creating safe spaces for minority voices and dissenting opinions to be heard and respected.

Uses and Gratifications Theory

The Uses and Gratifications Theory , a popular approach in media studies, posits that individuals actively seek out specific media sources to satisfy particular needs or desires. This theory challenges the traditional notion of passive media consumption, arguing instead that consumers play an active role in choosing and interpreting the media they consume based on their personal and psychological needs. For instance, a person might choose to watch a comedy show to fulfill their need for relaxation and entertainment, or read a newspaper to satisfy their need for knowledge and staying updated. In the realm of digital media, one might use social media platforms like Facebook to satisfy their need for social interaction and community. The Uses and Gratifications Theory evolved in the 1970s, during a time when researchers began to shift their focus from what media does to people, to what people do with media. This shift was driven by the growing dissatisfaction with the limited effects perspective, which posited that media had a direct and powerful influence on audiences. Scholars like Elihu Katz, Jay G. Blumler, and Michael Gurevitch were instrumental in the development of this theory, emphasizing the active role of the audience in their media consumption.

In the era of digital media, the Uses and Gratifications Theory is more relevant than ever. Today’s consumers have an unprecedented level of control over their media consumption, with the ability to choose what they want to consume, when they want to consume it, and on what platform. Moreover, the rise of social media has added a new dimension to this theory. Social media platforms not only satisfy traditional needs like information and entertainment but also fulfill social and interactive needs. For instance, users might use Instagram to express their creativity, LinkedIn for professional networking, or Twitter for real-time news and discussions.

Media Dependency Theory

Suggests that the more dependent an individual is on the media for having his or her needs fulfilled, the more important the role the media plays in the person’s life

The Media Dependency Theory , conceptualized by Sandra Ball-Rokeach and Melvin DeFleur in 1976, proposes that the more an individual relies on media to meet their needs, the more significant the role media will play in their life. This theory is grounded in the idea that people use media to understand their world and create social realities. The degree of a person’s dependency on media varies based on the number and quality of their direct real-life information sources and experiences. For instance, a person living in a remote area with limited social interaction may rely heavily on television or social media to understand the wider world. Here, the media plays a pivotal role in shaping their perceptions and beliefs. On the other hand, someone living in a bustling city with diverse social interactions may have a lesser dependency on media as they have more direct sources of information and experiences. The Media Dependency Theory emerged during the mid-1970s, a period marked by significant societal changes. The Vietnam War, Watergate scandal, and civil rights movements were dominating the media landscape, and people were increasingly turning to media sources for information and understanding. Recognizing this shift, Ball-Rokeach and DeFleur developed the theory to explain the growing power and influence of media on individuals and societal perceptions. In today’s digital age, the Media Dependency Theory is more relevant than ever. With the advent of the internet and social media, people’s reliance on media for information, entertainment, and social interaction has increased exponentially. Media platforms have become primary sources for news, shaping public opinion and even influencing political outcomes.

For instance, consider the role of social media in recent political campaigns. Candidates use platforms like Twitter and Facebook to communicate directly with voters, bypassing traditional media outlets. Voters, in turn, rely on these platforms for information about the candidates, making them more susceptible to the messages conveyed through these channels.

Social Learning Theory

The Social Learning Theory , primarily developed by psychologist Albert Bandura in the 1960s, posits that individuals learn and acquire new behaviors by observing others. This theory was a groundbreaking shift from traditional learning theories which emphasized learning solely from direct experience. Bandura proposed that we could also learn by watching others and modeling their behavior, hence the term ‘observational learning’.

At the heart of the Social Learning Theory is the concept that individuals observe the behavior of others, and the consequences of those behaviors, and subsequently decide whether to replicate the behavior based on its perceived rewards or punishments. This process is often referred to as vicarious reinforcement.

For instance, consider a child who observes their older sibling being rewarded for completing household chores. The child, seeing the positive outcome (reward), may be motivated to replicate the behavior (doing chores) in hopes of receiving a similar reward. The Social Learning Theory also introduced the idea of self-efficacy, which is the belief in one’s ability to succeed in specific situations or accomplish a task. Bandura argued that self-efficacy plays a crucial role in determining what we learn and how we behave.

In the context of modern mass communication, the Social Learning Theory holds significant relevance. The rise of social media and digital platforms has amplified the opportunities for observational learning. For example, individuals may observe the behaviors and lifestyles of influencers, celebrities, or peers on social media and may be motivated to emulate these behaviors, whether it’s adopting a certain fashion style, buying a recommended product, or even adopting a particular viewpoint or attitude.

Moreover, marketers and advertisers often leverage the principles of Social Learning Theory to influence consumer behavior. By showcasing the positive outcomes of using a product or service through testimonials, reviews, or influencer endorsements, they tap into the audience’s propensity for observational learning, encouraging them to purchase and use the product.

Gatekeeping Theory

The Gatekeeping Theory , first introduced by social psychologist Kurt Lewin in 1943, is a critical concept in mass communication and journalism. It underscores the power that journalists, editors, news directors, and other media professionals have in controlling the flow of news.

At its core, the Gatekeeping Theory prescribes that these “gatekeepers” decide what information becomes news and what does not. They are the ones who filter the vast amount of information, selecting the stories that are deemed important or relevant and discarding the rest. This process is influenced by various factors, including the gatekeeper’s personal beliefs, organizational policies, societal values, and the perceived interests of the audience.

For instance, consider a news editor working in a national newsroom. They are inundated with numerous stories every day – from political developments and economic news to celebrity gossip and local events. It’s their job to decide which of these stories will make it to the front page or the prime-time news slot. They might prioritize a significant political event over a celebrity scandal, deeming it more newsworthy and relevant to their audience.

The Gatekeeping Theory emerged during World War II, a period when information control was crucial. Lewin’s research was initially focused on the food choices and shopping habits of housewives, but his findings were soon applied to mass communication, revolutionizing the way we understand news dissemination.

In today’s digital age, the relevance of the Gatekeeping Theory has evolved. With the proliferation of social media platforms and the democratization of information, the traditional gates are being bypassed, and the power to control information is shifting to the audience. However, gatekeeping still exists, albeit in a different form. Algorithms on social media platforms now act as the new gatekeepers, filtering and personalizing the content we see based on our online behavior.

Despite these changes, the Gatekeeping Theory remains a vital tool in understanding the dynamics of news production and dissemination. It highlights the power dynamics in media organizations and the role of journalists in shaping public discourse. It also raises important questions about objectivity, bias , and the responsibility of media in a democratic society.

Two-Step Flow Theory

The crux of the Two-Step Flow Theory lies in its proposition that information dissemination from the media to the general public is not a direct, one-way flow. Instead, it occurs in two distinct stages. First, opinion leaders – individuals who are active media users and who interpret media messages in their own way – absorb the information. These opinion leaders then pass on their interpretations to a wider population, thus indirectly shaping public opinion.

For instance, consider the launch of a new smartphone. The media broadcasts information about its features, price, and availability. Opinion leaders, such as tech bloggers or influencers, pick up this information, analyze it, and share their opinions with their followers. These followers, in turn, are influenced by the opinion leaders’ interpretations and make their purchase decisions accordingly.

The Two-Step Flow Theory was first introduced by sociologist Paul Lazarsfeld, Bernard Berelson, and Hazel Gaudet in the 1940s, based on their research during the 1940 Presidential election in the U.S. They found that people were more likely to be influenced by interpersonal relationships than direct media messages, challenging the then-dominant “ Hypodermic Needle Theory ” or “Magic Bullet Theory” which suggested that mass media had a direct, powerful, and immediate effect on audiences.

In the context of modern mass communication, the Two-Step Flow Theory is highly relevant, especially with the rise of social media platforms. Today, influencers, bloggers, and other opinion leaders play a pivotal role in shaping public opinion on everything from consumer products to political ideologies. Brands and organizations often leverage these opinion leaders to effectively communicate their messages to the target audience.

Hypodermic Needle Theory

Suggests that media messages are injected directly into the brains of a passive audience Hypodermic Needle Theory , also known as the Magic Bullet Theory, is a model of communication suggesting that an intended message is directly received and wholly accepted by the receiver. The theory was developed in the 1920s and 1930s after researchers observed the effects of propaganda during World War I and the influence of advertising in the 1930s.

The crux of the Hypodermic Needle Theory is that mass media has a direct, immediate, and powerful effect on its audiences. The media ‘shoots’ or ‘injects’ its messages straight into the ‘vein’ of the audience, who passively receive the message without any opportunity for negotiation or interpretation. The audience is seen as a ‘sitting duck’ waiting to be injected with appropriate information.

For instance, consider an advertising campaign for a new smartphone. According to the Hypodermic Needle Theory , if the advertisement is compelling enough, viewers will immediately be influenced to buy the smartphone. The theory assumes that the audience is a homogeneous group that is uniformly susceptible to the messages.

However, this theory has been largely criticized for its simplistic view of communication. It underestimates the power of individual interpretation and the influence of cultural and social contexts. The audience is not merely passive but actively interprets and makes sense of the messages based on their individual experiences and beliefs.

Despite its criticisms, the Hypodermic Needle Theory is still relevant in today’s mass communication landscape. It underscores the potential power of the media in shaping public opinion. However, the rise of digital and social media has made the communication process more interactive and complex, challenging the one-way, direct influence model of the Hypodermic Needle Theory.

Selective Exposure Theory

The Selective Exposure Theory is a concept in psychology that suggests individuals prefer to access information that aligns with their beliefs and values, while actively avoiding information that contradicts them. This theory is rooted in the idea that humans are naturally inclined to seek consistency in their beliefs and attitudes.

The theory was first proposed by psychologist Leon Festinger in the 1950s as part of his broader theory of cognitive dissonance. Festinger suggested that we experience discomfort when we hold two conflicting beliefs or when our behavior doesn’t align with our beliefs. To reduce this discomfort, we either change our beliefs or behavior, or we avoid information that highlights the inconsistency.

An everyday example of this theory in action can be seen in the realm of politics. People tend to consume news from sources that align with their political beliefs. A conservative might choose to watch Fox News and avoid CNN, while a liberal might do the opposite. They selectively expose themselves to viewpoints that confirm their existing beliefs, while avoiding those that challenge them.

In the age of digital media and mass communication, the Selective Exposure Theory has gained even more relevance. With the advent of social media and personalized news feeds, people have more control over the information they consume. This leads to the creation of “echo chambers” or “filter bubbles” where one’s beliefs are continuously reinforced while opposing views are filtered out.

This theory is of particular interest to marketers and advertisers as it can help them understand their audience’s behavior and tailor their messages accordingly. Knowing that consumers are more likely to engage with information that aligns with their beliefs, marketers can craft messages that resonate with their target audience’s values and needs.

However, the Selective Exposure Theory also raises ethical concerns. It can lead to a polarized society where people only hear one side of the story, leading to a lack of understanding and empathy for different viewpoints. Therefore, media outlets and individuals must strive for balanced information consumption and critical thinking. 11.

Framing Theory

The crux of the Framing Theory lies in its definition: it is a communication theory that suggests media not only reports on events but also shapes the way audiences understand and interpret the meaning of these events. In essence, the media ‘frames’ our understanding of the world around us.

For instance, consider a news story about climate change. If the media frames this issue as an imminent disaster, the audience will likely perceive it as a serious problem requiring immediate action. Conversely, if the media frames climate change as a contentious debate, the audience might view it as a less pressing issue.

The Framing Theory has its roots in the field of sociology, but it became more prominent in mass communication research in the 1970s. Scholars such as Erving Goffman and Robert Entman pioneered the study of media framing. Goffman, in his 1974 book “Frame Analysis,” suggested that people interpret what they see and hear based on their previous experiences and societal norms.

Fast forward to the present day, the Framing Theory remains highly relevant in mass communication. In an era of information overload, media outlets often use framing to simplify complex issues and guide the audience toward a particular interpretation. This can be seen in the way political issues are framed during election campaigns, or how public health crises like the COVID-19 pandemic are reported.

However, the power of framing also comes with ethical responsibilities. Media professionals must be aware of their influence and strive to present balanced and fair frames that respect the diversity of audience perspectives. As consumers of media, we also need to be critical of the frames presented to us and seek out multiple perspectives to form our understanding.

Priming Theory

The Priming Theory is a psychological concept that suggests exposure to one stimulus influences the response to a subsequent stimulus, without any conscious guidance or intention. The term “priming” refers to the process by which exposure to certain information or experiences can influence an individual’s thoughts, feelings, or behaviors later on, even if they are not aware of the connection. This theory has its roots in cognitive psychology and it has been extensively studied since the 1970s.

In the context of media and communication, the Priming Theory suggests that media images, messages, or experiences can stimulate related thoughts in the minds of audience members. For example, a commercial for a fast-food restaurant might not only make viewers think about the specific brand advertised, but also stimulate thoughts about hunger, convenience, or the pleasure of eating. These related thoughts can then influence the viewer’s subsequent behavior, such as their decision to buy fast food.

In the history of this theory, it was initially studied in relation to memory recall. Researchers found that exposure to a certain stimulus could “prime” an individual’s memory, making related information more accessible. Over time, this concept has been applied to various fields, including marketing and mass communication. Marketers use priming to influence consumer behavior by subtly suggesting certain ideas or associations.

In modern-day mass communication, the Priming Theory remains highly relevant. With the rise of digital media, audiences are constantly being exposed to a myriad of stimuli. Advertisers and content creators can use priming to guide audience behavior in subtle ways. For instance, a news article about climate change might prime readers to think more about environmental issues, influencing their subsequent actions such as supporting green initiatives or reducing their carbon footprint.

Symbolic Interactionism

Symbolic Interactionism is a sociological theory that emphasizes the role of symbols and language as core elements of all human interactions. Developed by American sociologist George Herbert Mead in the early 20th century, this theory posits that people act towards things based on the meaning those things have for them, and these meanings are derived from social interaction and modified through interpretation.

In the context of Symbolic Interactionism , the ‘self’ is not a static entity but a dynamic one, constantly being shaped and reshaped through interactions with others and the larger social world. For example, a teenager may see himself as a ‘rebel’ due to the reactions and feedback he gets from his peers and society for his actions and behaviors. The ‘rebel’ label becomes a symbol that influences his self-concept and guides his future actions.

This theory has a rich history, with roots in the work of early sociologists and philosophers like Max Weber and Charles Horton Cooley. However, it was George Herbert Mead who is largely credited with its development. Mead believed that the mind and self were directly shaped by social interaction, not biological factors, a radical thought at the time.

In the modern context, Symbolic Interactionism has profound implications for mass communication. It helps us understand how media messages are interpreted by individuals within their unique social contexts. For instance, a political advertisement might use the symbol of a ‘lion’ to represent strength and leadership. However, the way this symbol is interpreted can vary greatly among individuals, depending on their personal experiences and social backgrounds.

Moreover, with the advent of social media, Symbolic Interactionism takes on even greater relevance. The ‘self’ is continually being presented and re-presented online, shaped by the ‘likes’, comments, and shares we receive. The symbols we use to represent ourselves in these virtual spaces – from the profile pictures we choose, to the emojis we use – all play a part in the ongoing construction of our digital ‘self’.

Media Richness Theory

The Media Richness Theory, introduced by Richard L. Daft and Robert H. Lengel in 1986, suggests that the effectiveness of a communication medium depends on its ‘richness’ – its ability to convey information accurately and quickly. The ‘richness’ of a medium is determined by four factors: the capacity for immediate feedback; the use of multiple cues like voice, body language, and words; the use of natural language rather than formal, structured language; and the personal focus of the medium.

For instance, face-to-face communication is considered the richest medium as it allows for immediate feedback, utilizes multiple cues, employs natural language, and has a high level of personal focus. On the other hand, a medium like email would be considered less rich as it lacks immediate feedback and the use of multiple cues.

The Media Richness Theory was developed in the context of organizational communication, where Daft and Lengel were trying to understand how managers could select the most effective communication medium to reduce uncertainty and ambiguity in their organizations. Their research identified a spectrum of media richness, with face-to-face communication at one end and written documents at the other.

In today’s digital age, the Media Richness Theory holds significant relevance. With the proliferation of various communication channels – from social media and instant messaging apps to video conferencing tools – understanding the ‘richness’ of each medium is crucial for effective communication.

For instance, a brand launching a new product might choose to do a live video presentation (a rich medium) to fully showcase the product and allow for immediate feedback through comments or reactions. However, for routine updates or announcements, a less rich medium like email or a social media post might suffice.

The Media Richness Theory also helps in tailoring marketing messages. For instance, emotional or complex messages that require a high degree of understanding and empathy might be better communicated through rich media like video or personal storytelling, while simple, straightforward messages can be effectively delivered through less rich media like text messages or posts.

Diffusion of Innovations Theory

Mass Communication Theories: Diffusion of Innovation Theory

The Diffusion of Innovations Theory , first proposed by sociologist Everett Rogers in 1962, is a model that seeks to explain how, why, and at what rate new ideas and technology spread through cultures. The theory is built around the premise that adopters of any new innovation or idea can be categorized into five distinct groups based on their readiness to adopt: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards.

The crux of this theory is that each category of adopters is influenced by different factors and communication channels. For instance, innovators are willing to take risks and are often the first to adopt a new idea or technology. They rely heavily on scientific sources and close contact with other innovators. Early adopters, on the other hand, are more discrete in adoption choices than innovators. They use judicious choice of adoption to help them maintain a central communication position in their social networks.

A classic example of the Diffusion of Innovations Theory in action is the adoption of smartphones. Innovators were the first to adopt this technology when it was still new and expensive. Early adopters came next, influenced by the positive experiences and reviews of the innovators. The early and late majorities followed suit, with the laggards being the last to adopt this technology, often only doing so when it became a necessity.

Since its inception, the Diffusion of Innovations Theory has been widely applied in various fields, including marketing, public health, and mass communication. In the realm of mass communication, this theory is particularly relevant as it provides a framework for understanding how information spreads across different segments of the population. It allows communication strategists to identify key influencers within a network (innovators and early adopters) and target them to speed up the diffusion process.

In the digital age, this theory is even more pertinent. With the rapid proliferation of new media technologies and platforms, understanding the diffusion process can help businesses and organizations to effectively roll out new products, services, or campaigns, ensuring they reach their target audience in the most efficient way possible.

Knowledge Gap Theory

Beige Minimalist Monthly Sales Line Chart Graph Instagram Post

Information is not distributed equally in society, leading to a gap between information-rich and information-poor people. The Knowledge Gap Theory was first proposed by Philip J. Tichenor, George A. Donohue, and Clarice N. Olien from the University of Minnesota in 1970. The theory suggests that there is a significant disparity in the acquisition of knowledge between people who have access to information and those who do not. According to the theory, this gap is primarily due to differences in socioeconomic status, education level, and the amount of media exposure.

In simpler terms, the theory posits that people with higher socio-economic status tend to have better access to information and are more equipped to comprehend and use it. On the other hand, people with lower socio-economic status have less access to information and often lack the necessary skills to understand and use it effectively. This disparity leads to a “knowledge gap” in society.

For example, in the context of health information, an individual with a higher socio-economic status may have better access to health-related information through various sources such as the internet, health magazines, and personal doctors. They are also more likely to have the education and comprehension skills to understand this information and use it to make informed health decisions. Conversely, an individual with lower socio-economic status may not have the same access to this information or the ability to comprehend it, leading to a knowledge gap.

This theory has significant implications in the field of mass communication, especially in the era of digital information. With the advent of the internet and digital media, access to information has increased exponentially. However, the knowledge gap persists due to disparities in digital literacy and access to digital resources. This has led to a new form of knowledge gap known as the “digital divide”.

In the modern context, the Knowledge Gap Theory underscores the importance of ensuring equal access to information and promoting digital literacy. It also highlights the role of mass communication in bridging this gap by making information accessible and understandable to all sections of society. It serves as a reminder for copywriters and marketers to consider the diverse backgrounds of their target audience and craft messages that are not only persuasive but also accessible and comprehensible to everyone.

Elaboration Likelihood Model

Explains how attitudes are formed and changed. The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) is a theory in psychology that describes how attitudes are formed and changed. Developed by Richard E. Petty and John Cacioppo in the 1980s, this model suggests that persuasion occurs through two distinct routes: the central route and the peripheral route.

The central route involves careful scrutiny and thoughtful consideration of the message’s content. This route is typically engaged when the audience is highly involved, interested, and motivated. For instance, if a person is considering buying a new car, they might pay close attention to the car’s features, safety ratings, and customer reviews. They are likely to be persuaded by strong arguments and factual evidence.

On the other hand, the peripheral route involves less cognitive effort and is influenced more by superficial cues such as the attractiveness of the speaker, the length of the message, or the credibility of the source. For example, a person might choose a soft drink because they like the celebrity endorsing it, not necessarily because they believe it’s the best product.

In modern-day mass communication, the ELM is highly relevant . Advertisers and marketers often use both routes to persuade their target audience. For instance, a skincare brand might use a celebrity endorsement (peripheral cue) while also providing scientific evidence about the effectiveness of their product (central route). Understanding the ELM can help copywriters craft more persuasive messages by targeting both the thoughtful and superficial influences on their audience’s attitudes.

Moreover, this model underscores the importance of understanding your audience’s level of involvement and interest. For highly involved audiences, copywriters should focus on creating compelling, evidence-based arguments. For less involved audiences, attention should be given to enhancing the attractiveness and credibility of the message and its source.

Social Judgment Theory

Perception and evaluation of an idea by comparing it with current attitudes. Social Judgment Theory , first proposed by psychologist Muzafer Sherif in 1961, is a communication theory that focuses on how people perceive and evaluate ideas by comparing them with their current attitudes. It is based on the premise that people have a range of opinions on a certain topic, known as the latitude of acceptance, rejection, and non-commitment. These latitudes serve as benchmarks against which new ideas or messages are judged.

For instance, let’s consider a person who is a staunch environmentalist. When exposed to a message advocating for stricter pollution controls, they are likely to judge this message favorably, as it aligns with their latitude of acceptance. On the other hand, a message promoting the benefits of coal mining would fall within their latitude of rejection and would be judged unfavorably. A message that is neutral or ambiguous about environmental issues might fall within their latitude of non-commitment.

The theory was developed in the context of social psychology, but it has since found broad application in the field of mass communication, particularly in the areas of persuasion and attitude change. It helps communicators understand how to craft messages that will be accepted and internalized by their target audience. For example, a public health campaign aiming to change attitudes about smoking might use Social Judgment Theory to craft messages that fall within the audience’s latitude of acceptance or non-commitment, thereby increasing the likelihood of attitude change.

In today’s digital age, the Social Judgment Theory is still highly relevant. With the rise of social media and other digital communication platforms, messages are disseminated more widely and rapidly than ever before. Understanding how audiences judge these messages can help communicators craft more effective, persuasive content. Whether it’s a political campaign, an advertisement, or a public health message, Social Judgment Theory offers valuable insights into how to influence attitudes and behaviors.

Cognitive Dissonance Theory

We strive for consistency in our beliefs. If a belief and a behavior conflict, we are likely to change the belief to fit the behavior. Cognitive Dissonance Theory , proposed by social psychologist Leon Festinger in 1957, is a powerful concept that explains the inner tension or discomfort we feel when our beliefs and behaviors are inconsistent. This theory is based on the premise that as humans, we have an inherent desire for harmony in our thoughts, beliefs, and actions. When there is a discrepancy or dissonance, we strive to reduce it and achieve balance or consonance.

An example of cognitive dissonance could be a person who is conscious about their health and fitness but also enjoys smoking. The conflict between their health-conscious belief and the behavior of smoking creates dissonance. To reduce this dissonance, they may either quit smoking (change behavior) or convince themselves that smoking doesn’t significantly affect their health (change belief)

Festinger’s Cognitive Dissonance Theory has had a profound impact on fields like psychology, marketing, and mass communication. It has been extensively used in advertising and persuasion, where marketers create a sense of dissonance in consumers’ minds about their current product (creating a problem) and then present their product as the solution (resolving the dissonance).

In modern-day mass communication, cognitive dissonance plays a crucial role in shaping public opinion and behavior. News outlets and social media platforms often exploit this theory to sway public opinion. For instance, they may present information that contradicts the audience’s current beliefs, causing discomfort and making them more open to new perspectives.

Overall, understanding cognitive dissonance is essential for effective communication and persuasion. It allows us to craft messages that resonate with the audience, create a need for change, and guide them toward the desired action.

Communication Accommodation Theory

People adjust their communication to fit the group they are addressing. The Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT) is a sociolinguistic theory that explores why and how people modify their communication style to match the people they are interacting with. Developed by Howard Giles, a professor of communication, in the 1970s, this theory was initially called the Speech Accommodation Theory. It was later renamed to encompass all forms of communication, not just speech.

The crux of CAT is the concept of ‘accommodation,’ which refers to the adjustments people make in their speech, vocal patterns, gestures, and overall communication style to ‘accommodate’ or match their interlocutor. These adjustments are not just about fitting in; they are also about creating a sense of identity and belonging, reducing social differences, and fostering positive social bonds.

For example, when a person moves to a new region, they might initially speak with a distinct accent that sets them apart from the local population. Over time, they may start to adopt the local accent and speech patterns to blend in and be accepted by the community. This is a practical example of CAT in action.

CAT has a significant role in modern mass communication . In the era of global marketing campaigns and social media, understanding and applying CAT can help brands communicate more effectively with their diverse target audiences. For instance, a global brand might use different communication styles and messaging for its campaigns in different countries, accommodating the local culture , language, and preferences.

Moreover, CAT is also relevant in the context of social and political discourse. Politicians often use accommodation strategies to appeal to different demographic groups. They adjust their language, tone, and even body language to resonate with the audience they are addressing, whether it’s a group of blue-collar workers, university students, or senior citizens.

Expectancy Violations Theory

The Expectancy Violations Theory (EVT) is a communication principle that suggests we have established norms and expectations for human behavior and when these expectations are violated, we pay more attention to the violator. This theory was first proposed by Judee K. Burgoon in the late 1970s as a means to predict and explain the effects of personal space violations.

The crux of EVT is that it’s not necessarily the violation of expectations that causes discomfort or draws attention, but rather how the violation is perceived. For instance, if a person who is generally reserved and introverted suddenly becomes boisterous and outgoing, this unexpected behavior would be a violation of our expectations for that person. However, whether or not this violation is viewed positively or negatively would depend on various factors such as our relationship with the person, the context, and the perceived intention behind the violation.

For example, imagine a scenario where a typically stoic professor unexpectedly cracks a joke in the middle of a serious lecture. This behavior violates students’ expectations, thus drawing their attention. If the joke is well-received, the violation could enhance the professor’s rapport with the students. However, if the joke is inappropriate or poorly timed, it could negatively impact the professor’s credibility.

In terms of its relevance in modern-day mass communication, E VT is particularly significant . With the rise of digital media and social platforms, the line between personal and public space has blurred, and the potential for expectancy violations has increased. When a celebrity or public figure behaves in a way that deviates from their established persona, it often triggers a flurry of media attention and public discussion. For instance, a celebrity known for their wholesome image posting a controversial tweet would be an expectancy violation, and would likely result in increased public scrutiny.

Moreover, EVT is also used as a tool in advertising and marketing. Advertisers may deliberately violate expectations to grab the audience’s attention. For instance, a company known for serious, straightforward ads might suddenly launch a humorous, quirky campaign. This violation of audience expectations can make the advertisement more memorable and impactful.

Narcotizing Dysfunction

The Narcotizing Dysfunction is a theory that emerged from mass communication research. It was first coined by sociologists Paul Lazarsfeld and Robert Merton in the mid-20th century. The theory suggests that as mass media floods people with a high volume of information on a particular issue, these individuals tend to become indifferent or apathetic to it. They mistake their knowledge or awareness of the topic for actual action or involvement.

For instance, consider the issue of climate change. It’s a topic that has been extensively covered by the media, with countless articles, documentaries, and news reports dedicated to it. Due to this constant exposure, many people feel that they are well-informed about the issue. However, this awareness does not necessarily translate into action. People tend to believe that being informed is equivalent to participating or contributing to the cause, which is not the case. This is the crux of the Narcotizing Dysfunction.

This theory is more relevant today than ever before, given the omnipresence of digital media. The internet, social media, and 24/7 news cycles bombard us with information, often leading to information overload. This can result in apathy and a false sense of action, as outlined by the Narcotizing Dysfunction theory.

To counter this dysfunction, it is essential to promote active engagement with issues rather than passive consumption of information. As a society, we must strive to move beyond mere awareness and towards informed action.

In the realm of persuasive writing and marketing, understanding this theory can be crucial. It highlights the need for messages that not only inform but also inspire action. This can be achieved by crafting compelling narratives, making the audience feel a part of the solution, and clearly outlining the steps for them to take action.

Media Ecology Theory

The Media Ecology Theory , originally proposed by Marshall McLuhan, posits that the medium through which information is communicated significantly influences the message itself. It’s not just the content that matters, but the medium through which it is delivered also plays a crucial role in shaping the perception of the message.

McLuhan famously stated, “The medium is the message,” suggesting that the medium used to send a message can impact how the message is received and interpreted. For example, a message delivered through a television commercial may be perceived differently than the same message delivered through a radio advertisement or a newspaper article. The medium used can affect the tone, context, and overall reception of the message.

The Media Ecology Theory also asserts that media environments, the sum of all communication outlets, play a pivotal role in shaping human perception, understanding, feeling, and value. The medium, therefore, becomes an extension of ourselves, influencing how we perceive and interact with the world.

The Media Ecology Theory emerged during the mid-20th century, a time of rapid technological advancements and societal changes. Marshall McLuhan, a Canadian professor, and philosopher, is widely regarded as the father of media ecology. His work focused on understanding the effects of media, technology, and communication modes on human perception and behavior.

In the era of digital communication, the Media Ecology Theory is more relevant than ever. The proliferation of new media platforms like social media, blogs, podcasts, and streaming services has dramatically changed the way messages are delivered and received.

For instance, social media platforms have transformed the way businesses communicate with their customers. Brands can now deliver personalized messages to their target audience, fostering a more intimate and engaging relationship. However, the same platforms have also been used to spread misinformation, demonstrating the significant influence of the medium on the message.

Third-Person Effect

People believe others are more affected by media messages than they are themselves. The Third-Person Effect is a fascinating psychological theory that was first proposed by sociologist W. Phillips Davison in 1983. The core concept of this theory is that individuals tend to believe that mass communications (such as advertisements, news reports, or public service announcements) have a greater influence on others than on themselves. This perception gap, where one underestimates the impact of media messages on one’s own behavior while overestimating its effect on others, is the crux of the Third-Person Effect.

For instance, consider a television commercial for a fast food chain. While many viewers might believe that such advertising would influence others to eat more fast food, they might simultaneously believe that they themselves are immune to such persuasion. In reality, however, they may be just as influenced as they perceive others to be.

Since its inception, the Third-Person Effect has been widely studied and applied in various fields, particularly in mass communication and marketing. It has been used to explain various societal behaviors and attitudes, such as public support for media censorship, the spread of fake news, and the perception of political campaign effects.

In the modern age of digital communication, the Third-Person Effect theory remains highly relevant. With the proliferation of social media and the increasing personalization of advertising, individuals are exposed to more persuasive messages than ever before. Understanding this theory can help marketers and advertisers craft more effective communication strategies. It can also help individuals become more aware of their susceptibility to media influence, encouraging a more critical consumption of media content.

Critiquing Media

To acquire media literacy, we can read the findings of cultural and social science researchers who have studied various aspects of the media. However, both models have their limits; thus, it’s important to view their conclusions with a critical eye. We can also learn to critique media content ourselves in a methodical, disciplined way. Whatever approach we use to develop media literacy, it’s helpful to always keep in mind the benefits of a critical perspective.

Evaluating Cultural and Social Scientific Research

Examining the findings of both cultural and social scientific research on media can help us follow a critical process that consists of describing, analyzing, interpreting, evaluating, and engaging with mass media. But the two models have strengths and weaknesses that are important to keep in mind. The cultural model is best at recognizing the complexity of media culture and providing analyses that draw on descriptive, critical, historical, ethnographic, political, and economic traditions. Yet this model has a downside: Although cultural studies can help us see media from new perspectives, the conclusions laid out in a particular study may simply be the author’s interpretation. Thus, they may not necessarily explain cause-and-effect connections in situations other than what the author examined.

The social scientific model seeks to develop and test theories about how the media affect individuals and society in measurable ways. This approach produces conclusions based on hard numbers, which policy makers often find comforting. It may suggest a clear chain of cause and effect, or at least a statistical relationship between the media and an effect.

But like the cultural model, the social scientific model has limits, too. For example, the options provided in a multiple-choice survey question might not cover all the possible responses that participants could give. As a result, researchers obtain an incomplete picture of how people respond to particular media. Also, definitions of what is being measured may confuse things. To illustrate, researchers might count a bonk on the head shown in a movie as an act of violence, even though the event could be purposeful, accidental, deserved, or part of a character’s fantasy. Researchers can thus neglect to ask more nuanced questions, such as whether accidental incidents of violence have a different effect on movie viewers than do purposeful acts of violence. Finally, many social scientific studies are limited to questions that their funding sources—the government, media industry associations, or granting agencies—ask them to study. This situation further constrains the scope of their research.

Ultimately, though, the quality of any media research—cultural or social scientific—depends on the nature of the questions asked and the rigor of the method used. Often, “triangulating” with two or more approaches to test a question makes for much stronger conclusions. For those of us seeking to strengthen our media literacy by consulting research, the best approach may be to balance findings on a particular question from both the cultural and the social scientific models.

Conducting Our Own Critiques

If we want to conduct our own critiques of specific media, we’ll need a working knowledge of the particular medium being addressed—whether it’s a book, a TV show, a song, a movie, a video game, a magazine, a radio show, or some other form. For example, suppose our goal is to develop a meaningful critique of the TV show Dexter (in which the main character is a serial killer), Rush Limbaugh’s conservative radio program, or weekly magazines’ obsession with Kate Middleton. In each case, we will need to thoroughly familiarize ourselves with the show, program, or magazines in question and start thinking about what messages they seem to be conveying. As we begin this process, we will also need to transcend our own preferences and biases. For instance, we may like or dislike hip-hop, R&B, pop music, or country, but if we want to criticize the messages in one or more of these musical genres intelligently, we need to understand what they have to say and consider why their messages appeal to particular audiences.

Familiarization and a certain amount of self-conscious detachment, then, are the preliminaries of a rigorous process that moves beyond matters of taste or, worse, a cynical, wholesale dismissal of culturally significant experiences. Becoming truly media literate requires mastering this critical process and applying it to everyday encounters with the communication media. The process encompasses five steps: Description, Analysis, Interpretation, Evaluation, and Engagement (see “ The Critical Process behind Media Literacy ”).

Benefits of a Critical Perspective

Developing an informed critical perspective on the media enables us to participate in a debate about media’s impacts on our democracy and culture. For instance, on the one hand, the media can be a force for strengthening our democracy and making the world a better place. Consider the role of television in documenting racism and injustice in the 1960s—coverage that encouraged the Civil Rights movement. Or consider how the cultural traditions surrounding sports and games can build bridges between peoples even as it generates a backlash (see “ Media Literacy Case Study: Football, Fútbol , and Soccer ”).

On the other hand, the media have helped create a powerful commercial culture in our nation—a culture in which fewer and fewer multinational corporations dominate our economy and generate more and more of the media messages we consume. A society in which only a few voices are telling us stories about what’s important, what our values should be, and how we should behave is hardly a healthy democracy.

Because the media constitute forces for both good and ill, it’s that much more important for each of us to think carefully about which media we consume; what messages we draw from those media; and how those messages affect our actions, the quality of our lives, and the health of our democracy. We also need to ask questions, such as the following:

Why might some people continue clinging to either/or thinking about media (such as high-brow versus low-brow books or movies) when so many boundaries in our society have blurred? Does this either/or thinking reflect a desire to keep people in their “proper” socioeconomic class?

What does it mean that public debate and news about everyday life now seem just as likely to come from Oprah, The Daily Show , or bloggers as from the New York Times or the NBC Nightly News ? 9 Can we no longer distinguish real news from entertainment? If so, does this affect how well informed we are?

How can we hone our awareness of the economic interests fueling the messages delivered through the media we consume? For example, do you listen to a talk show on a radio station that survives on advertising revenue? If so, ask yourself how the host might distort information (e.g., deliberately inciting conflict between guests) to attract more listeners and therefore bring in more advertising revenue. (Advertisers only want to spend money on ads that will reach as many people as possible.) If such distortion is taking place, how reliable is the information you’re consuming by listening to the show?

Unfortunately, we can’t rely only on professional media critics or watchdog organizations to do all the work of critiquing the media for us and analyzing their effects on our lives. Each of us is responsible for doing some of that work ourselves. As you read through the chapters in this book, you’ll learn more about each type of media—and you’ll hone your ability to examine each with a critical eye.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

15.3 Mass Communication and Ethics

Learning objectives.

Discuss patterns of ownership and control as they currently exist in the media.
Explain the relationship between the media and globalization.
Evaluate the diversity (or lack thereof) of representations in the media and discuss potential effects.
Employ media-literacy skills to evaluate media messages.

Given the potential for mass communication messages to reach thousands to millions of people, the potential for positive or negative consequences of those messages exceed those of interpersonal, small group, or even public communication messages. Because of this, questions of ethics have to be closely considered when discussing mass communication and the media. In this section, we will discuss how media-ownership regulations, globalization, and representations of diversity tie in with mass communication ethics.

Media Control and Ownership

Media interests and ownership have become more concentrated over the past few decades as a result of deregulation. Deregulation refers to the overturning or revising of policies that were in place to ensure that media outlets serve the interests of the public and include diverse viewpoints, programs, and ownership. Deregulation occurred as a result of the rapid technological changes in the 1980s and 1990s, including the growth of cable and satellite outlets. The argument for deregulation was to make the overall market for network, cable, satellite, and other media outlets more competitive.

Restrictions on the number of radio and/or television stations a single person could own have lessened over the years, allowing individuals to control multiple media outlets.

Gerogeri – radio tower – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

Timeline of Changes Made by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) (Austin, 2011)

1954–84. National ownership is limited to seven stations and each station is required to be in a separate geographic market.
1984. The FCC expands ownership to twelve stations as long as the number of stations owned doesn’t reach more than 25 percent of the national market
1996. The Telecommunications Act eliminates a maximum on number of stations that one person or entity can own, as long as they do not reach more than 35 percent of the national market.
2003. Cross-media ownership rules are relaxed, which allows for a person or entity to own both newspaper and broadcast outlets and radio and television outlets. The FCC increases the maximum audience one person or entity can reach to 45 percent of the national market, but Congress intervenes and reduces that to 39 percent.

The pressure to lessen regulations came as media outlets struggled to keep up with increased competition and technological changes and saw mergers and consolidations as a way to save money and keep a competitive edge. Television was one of the first forms of electronic mass media to begin to merge. Companies that you’re familiar with now but probably didn’t know were once separate entities include Time-Warner Cable (formed from the 1989 merger of Time, Inc. and Warner Communications, Inc.). General Electric, a company we may know for making refrigerators and stoves, bought the NBC television network in 1986. These are just two of the many megamergers that have occurred in the past few decades. [1] The merger of these media companies was meant to provide a synergy that could lower costs and produce higher profits by, for example, merging Disney (with its expertise and market share of children’s entertainment) and the broadcast network ABC (with its expertise in television and news).

As computers and the Internet began to enter households, media companies wanted to take advantage of the prospect of providing additional media services under one umbrella. Media convergence refers to the merging of technologies that were previously developed and used separately (Rayner, Wall, & Kruger, 2004). One such convergence that affects many if not most of you reading this book is the creation of broadband Internet access through existing cable lines and the bundling of cable and high-speed Internet services. This marked the beginning of a rush, on the part of media conglomerates, to own the methods of distribution for media messages as a means of then controlling the devices and technology that can be used on them. A recent and well-known example of this was iPhone’s exclusive contract with AT&T. For the first few years that iPhones were on the market, AT&T was the only service provider that worked with the phones. To handle the data load needed to service all the new phones, AT&T had to rush and spend millions of dollars to upgrade its cellular network. These moves help preserve the media conglomerates’ power, because smaller, independent, or competing companies cannot afford the time, resources, and money needed to build a competing or even functional distribution mechanism.

Consolidated media ownership has led to a decrease in localism in terms of local news and local reporters, radio DJs, and editors (Austin, 2011). Since business is handled from a central hub that might be hundreds or thousands of miles away from a market the media outlet serves, many of the media jobs that used to exist in a city or region have disappeared. While media consolidation has led to some structural and cultural changes in the United States, similar forces are at work in the process of globalization.

Media and Globalization

Globalization refers to a complex of interconnecting structural and cultural forces that aid the spread of ideas and technologies and influence the social and economic organization of societies. Just as modernization in the form of industrialization and then later a turn toward an information-based society spread across the globe, so do technologies and the forms of media they create. In all these cases, the spread of ideas, technologies, and media is imbalanced, as we will discuss more later. This type of cultural imperialism is often criticized as being a part of globalization, and scholars acknowledge that cultural imperialism is largely achieved through media messages (Siapera, 2012).

Media imperialism refers to the domination of other countries through exported media and the values and ideologies they contain (Rayner, Wall, & Kruger, 2004). Just as corporations have helped further globalization, media companies have expanded into multinational conglomerates in such a way that allows them to have power and influence that is difficult for individual nations to regulate or control. During the first seventy or so years of electronic mass media, countries could more easily control messages that were sent through cables or other hard structures. For example, telegraph, telephone, and television lines could be cut and even radio television stations that broadcast over the airwaves could be taken offline by cutting the power to the transmitter. As more information became digitized and sent via satellite, countries had much more difficulty limiting what could get in and out of their borders.

Media-fueled cultural imperialism is critiqued because of the concern that the imported cultural images and values will end up destroying or forever changing the cultural identity of the countries being “occupied” by foreign media. The flow of media is predictable and patterned. The cultural values of more-developed Western and Northern countries flow via media messages to the global East and South, mimicking the flow of power that has existed for centuries with the western and northern hemispheres, primarily Europe and the United States, politically and economically dominating countries in the southern and eastern hemispheres such as those in Asia, South America, and Africa. As with any form of imperialism, the poorest countries are the ones who are the most vulnerable and subjected to the most external control (Rayner, Wall, & Kruger, 2004). The reason more-developed countries dominate the media in other countries stems from available resources and knowledge needed to produce and transmit media content. Developing countries lack the same level of infrastructure (such as fiber-optic cables and satellite systems), technical expertise, and technology needed to produce their own content, which makes it cheaper to purchase Western, predominantly US American, content to fuel the growing desire of people in these countries to have access to media. This creates a negative cycle in which poorer countries use what resources they do have to carry Western content, which prevents them from investing in additional organic and local content and creates a demand for more Western content. Critics have also focused on the quality of the content that is exported, which is only representative of a narrow range of Western identities and values. Content tends to be dramatized programs like Baywatch , which at one point was the most-watched television program in the world. Dramas are preferred because humor is more likely to be lost in translation, while viewers can often identify with stock plot lines in dramas, which make the shows easier to translate and attracts a larger audience. The downside to this is that these narrowly chosen shows that run over and over in a specific country contribute to a stereotypical view of what life in the United States is like.

Not all the discussion of and scholarship on globalization and the media is negative. More recently, much research has focused on the notion of cultural hybridity and the ways in which some cultures take in foreign, predominantly Western media messages and representations and integrate them into existing cultural beliefs and practices. For example, one scholar writes about a quartet in Africa that takes European chamber music and incorporates African rhythms and another group that takes American hip-hop music and gives it a more traditional African flair (Rayner, Wall, & Kruger, 2004). Additionally, the emergence of social and personal media allows users in specific countries to generate their own content and adopt and utilize media platforms in their own ways. As we will learn later, social and personal media have been used to overthrow oppressive governments and to increase the flow of information in places where it was once restricted. So, in these cases, we can see that the ability of certain forms of communication to cross borders has led to positive change.

We can even examine the spread of personal media and social media as an example of globalization. Here, rather than a specific message or set of cultural values being distributed around the world, a platform was made available and adopted in a more democratic, less imperialistic way. Social media, unlike more traditional modes of media, bring people together in more self-determined ways. For example, people can connect over the Internet to a blogger with a shared interest and interact with one another via comments or other means.

Media and Representation

Another area of concern for those who study mass media is the representation of diversity (or lack thereof) in media messages. The FCC has identified program, ownership, and viewpoint diversity as important elements of a balanced mass media that serves the public good (Austin, 2011). This view was enforced through the Fairness Doctrine that was established in 1949 and lasted until the early 1980s when it began to be questioned by those in favor of media deregulation. The Fairness Doctrine was eventually overturned in 1987, but the FCC tried in 2003 to reinstate policies that encourage minority ownership of media outlets, which they hoped in turn would lead to more diverse programming. It remains to be seen whether or not minority-owned media outlets will produce or carry more diverse programming, but it is important to note that the deregulation over the past few decades has led to a decrease in the number of owners of media outlets who come from minority groups.

Scholars have raised concerns about the number of characters from minority groups on television relative to the groups’ percentage of the population. Perhaps even more concerning is the type of characters that actors from minority groups play and the types of shows on which they appear. Whether we want them to be or not, the people we see featured in media messages, especially those who appear frequently on television, in movies, in magazines, or in some combination of the three, serve as role models for many that view them. These people help set the tone for standards of behavior, beauty, and intelligence, among other things. Social learning theory claims that media portrayals influence our development of schemata or scripts, especially as children, about different groups of people (Signorielli, 2009). For example, a person who grows up in a relatively homogenous white, middle-class environment can develop schemata about African Americans and Latina/os based on how they are depicted in media messages. Cultivation theory, which we discussed earlier, also supports the notion that media representations affect our perceptions and actions. Since media messages, overall, are patterned representations, they cultivate within users a common worldview from the seeds that are planted by a relatively narrow set of content. For example, people in television shows are disproportionately portrayed as middle-class professionals. In reality, about 67 percent of people working in the United States have blue-collar or service-industry jobs, but they only make up about 10 percent of the people on television (Griffin, 2009).

Even though the majority of workers in the United States classify as blue-collar or service workers, they only make up about 10 percent of the people on television.

Brian Statler – Blue Collar Project – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

African Americans, Latina/os, and women are underrepresented in television, and people over the age of sixty-five are the most-excluded group (Griffin, 2009). Studies show that there is less diversity in mediated messages relative to the population as a whole and that the images and messages in the media contain certain themes that rely on stereotypes and further reduce the complexity of our society. Over time, these recurring images and messages affect what we think and how we view the world. In particular, research based on social learning and cultivation theories find that people who watch more television have views that reflect what they see in the programming they watch.

Looking specifically at television, representations of African Americans on prime-time shows (those that air between 7 and 11 p.m.) are actually proportional to their percentage of the population. Whites, however, are overrepresented, meaning there is a larger percentage of white people on prime-time shows than there is in our actual population. This disparity can be accounted for by pointing out that Latina/o, Native, and Asian Americans, as well as African American females, are underrepresented if not invisible in much of the media (Signorielli, 2009). For example, a study of minority characters on prime-time television between 2001 and 2008 found that Latina/os make up 5 percent of the characters despite being 16 percent of the population.

As the number of minority-focused programs, especially sitcoms, has decreased in the past ten years, minority characters have diffused more into other shows. While this integration is positive in some ways, there are still many examples of shows on which a minority character is the lone person of color or gay or lesbian person. From the view of social learning and cultivation theory, this is problematic, since many people, especially children, may form their early perceptions of difference based on interactions with characters in media messages. So unless viewers intentionally seek out diverse programming, they will likely mostly see people with dominant identities represented in the media they consume (Signorielli, 2009).

Unfortunately, there has been a similar lack of diversity found among new media. In a first-of-its-kind study of gender representation in online news sources, the Global Media Monitoring Project found after analyzing news stories on seventy-six websites in sixteen countries that only 36 percent of the stories were reported by women, and women were the focus of only 23 percent of all the stories written (Global Media Monitoring Project, 2012). Another look at popular, blog-style news sites such as The Huffington Post , The Daily Beast , Slate , and Salon found that representations of minorities conformed to stereotypes. For example, African Americans were featured primarily in stories about athletics, Latino/as appeared in stories about immigration, and Native and Asian Americans were absent (Jackson, 2012). Even when a major source for online information like The Huffington Post tries to include more diverse viewpoints, it does so under criticism. The website decided to add a section focused on information and news of interest to African Americans after adding twenty-six other sections ranging from information on travel to divorce. Although the editor of the section wanted to have a nuanced discussion about race, many of her ideas were discounted because they were not “buzzy enough,” meaning they might not attract enough readers. So instead of starting a dialogue about race, most of the stories featured on the first day were more “buzz worthy” and, ironically, written by white reporters (Jackson, 2012).

Some people who study and/or work in the media view media diversity as a means of expanding public dialogue, creating a more-informed citizenry, and enhancing our democracy through positive social change. Some online news sources have taken up such a call, but they fall short of the popularity or profitability of more mainstream news outlets. The online investigative news outlet ProPublica has received positive attention and awards for their coverage of a wide range of issues, including stories that focus on underrepresented communities. [2] The advent of new and personal media makes it easier for individuals and independent rather than corporate-owned media outlets to take advantage of new technologies and platforms to produce quality media products on a budget. As consumers of media, we can also keep a critical eye open for issues of representation and seek out media that is more inclusive and diverse. This type of evaluative and deliberate thinking about the media is an important part of media literacy, which we will discuss next.

Developing Media Literacy

Media literacy involves our ability to critique and analyze the potential impact of the media. The word literacy refers to our ability to read and comprehend written language, but just as we need literacy to be able to read, write, and function in our society, we also need to be able to read media messages. To be media literate, we must develop a particular skill set that is unfortunately not taught in a systematic way like reading and writing. The quest to make a more media-literate society is not new. You may be surprised, as I was, to learn that the media-literacy movement began in the 1930s when a chapter of the American Association of University Women in Madison, Wisconsin, created a newspaper column and a radio program called “Broadcast on Broadcasts” that reviewed and evaluated current media messages and practices (Dunlop, & Kymnes, 2007). Despite the fact that this movement has been around for eighty years now, many people still don’t know about it.

Media literacy isn’t meant to censor or blame the media, nor does it advocate for us to limit or change our engagement with the media in any particular way. Instead, media literacy ties in with critical thinking and listening, which we have learned about throughout this book already. Media-literacy skills are important because media outlets are “culture makers,” meaning they reflect much of current society but also reshape and influence sociocultural reality and real-life practices. Some may mistakenly believe that frequent exposure to media or that growing up in a media-saturated environment leads to media literacy. Knowing how to use technology to find and use media is different from knowing how to analyze it. Like other critical thinking skills, media literacy doesn’t just develop; it must be taught, learned, practiced, and reflected on.

Media-literacy skills teach us to analyze the media and to realize the following: [3]

All media messages are constructed (even “objective” news stories are filmed, edited, and introduced in ways that frame and influence their meaning).
Media structures and policies affect message construction (which means we need to also learn about how media ownership and distribution function in our society—a growing concern that we discussed earlier in this section).
Each medium has different characteristics and affects messages differently (e.g., a story presented on The Colbert Report will likely be less complete and more dramatized than a story presented on a blog focused on that topic).
Media messages are constructed for particular purposes (many messages are constructed to gain profit or power, some messages promote change, and some try to maintain the status quo).
All media messages are embedded with values and beliefs (the myth of objectivity helps mask the underlying bias or misrepresentation in some messages).
Media messages influence our beliefs, attitudes, values, and behaviors, including how we perceive and interact with others and how we participate in larger society.
Media messages can prevent change (intentionally presenting manipulated or selectively chosen content to inhibit change).

We learn much through the media that we do not have direct experience with, and communication and media scholars theorize that we tend to believe media portrayals are accurate representations of life. However, the media represents race, gender, sexuality, ability, and other cultural identities in biased and stereotypical ways that often favor dominant identities (Allen, 2011). Since the media influences our beliefs, attitudes, and expectations about difference, it is important to be able to critically evaluate the mediated messages that we receive. The goal of media literacy is not to teach you what to think but to teach you how you can engage with, interpret, and evaluate media in a more informed manner. Media literacy is also reflective in that we are asked to be accountable for those choices we make in regards to media by reflecting on and being prepared to articulate how those choices fit in with our own belief and value systems.

There are some standard questions that you can ask yourself to help you get started in your media criticism and analysis. There are no “true” or “right/wrong” answers to many of the questions we ask during the critical thinking process. Engaging in media literacy is more about expanding our understanding and perspective rather than arriving at definitive answers. The following questions will help you hone your media-literacy skills (Allen, 2011):

Who created this message? What did they hope to accomplish? What are their primary belief systems?
What is my interpretation of this message? How and why might different people understand this message differently than me? What can I learn about myself based on my interpretation and how it may differ from others’?
What lifestyles, values, and points of view are represented or omitted in this message? What does this tell me about how other people live and believe? Does this message leave anything or anyone out?
Why was this message sent? Who sent it? Is it trying to tell me something? To sell me something?

After asking these questions, media-literate people should be able to use well-reasoned arguments and evidence (not just opinion) to support their evaluations. People with media-literacy skills also know that their evaluations may not be definitive. Although this may seem like a place of uncertainty, media-literate people actually have more control over how they interact with media messages, which allows them to use media to their advantage, whether that is to become better informed or to just enjoy their media experience.

Key Takeaways

Media control and ownership has been deregulated over the past few decades, which has led to increased consolidation and merging of media outlets.
The media aids globalization by exporting Western beliefs and values to other countries. This trend in exporting has been termed media imperialism, since Western media tend to dominate in many countries. Certain stereotypes about the West, particularly the United States, are maintained through the narrow range of messages that are exported. Other countries do not just passively receive Western media messages, however. Some messages are reinterpreted by the local culture, creating hybrid media texts.
Deregulation has contributed to lack of media outlet ownership by minorities. Additionally, representation of most minority groups in media messages is not proportional to their numbers in the actual population. When minorities are included in media messages, it is often in stereotypical ways. Social learning theory states that these representations are important because they influence the schemata we develop about other groups of people, which points to how these distorted representations can actually influence how people think and act in their real lives.
Media-literacy skills allow us to critique and analyze the potential effects of media. Media-literate people ask critical questions about all the media messages they receive, not just the ones with which they disagree. Doing so leads people to be more accountable for their media choices and to have more control over the role that media plays in their lives.
Visit the FCC’s webpage to view its mission: http://www.fcc.gov/what-we-do . Based on what you read there, how do you think the FCC is doing?
As we learned, many of the media messages that are exported from the United States to other countries end up supporting narrow stereotypes about US Americans. What media messages do you think would be better to export in order to allow other countries to see a more “accurate” picture of American life? Try to think of several examples of television programs, movies, websites, and so on.
Think about the diversity in some of the shows that you watch. Before doing any research, write down the different cultural identities that you think are represented in a couple of your favorite shows or movies. Then go and actually research the show or movie (look up the cast online, etc.) to see if your perceptions matched up with reality. Are the shows diverse? Why or why not? If there are minority characters, are they portrayed in stereotypical or narrow ways?

Allen, B. J., Difference Matters: Communicating Social Identity , 2nd ed. (Long Grove, IL: Waveland, 2011), 29, 34.

Austin, C., “Overwhelmed by Big Consolidation: Bringing Back Regulation to Increase Diversity in Programming That Serves Minority Audiences,” Federal Communications Law Journal 63, no. 3 (2011): 746–48.

Dunlop, J., and Angel Kymnes, “Analysis of Media Literacy Curriculum: The Center for Media Literacy’s Media Kit,” Smile 7, no. 3 (2007), 3.

Jackson, J., “New Media—but Familiar Lack of Diversity,” Extra! , June 2012, accessed September 20, 2012, http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4551 .

Global Media Monitoring Project, 2010, “Who Makes the News?” accessed November 11, 2012, http://whomakesthenews.org/images/stories/restricted/highlights/highlights_en.pdf .

Griffin, E., A First Look at Communication Theory , 7th ed. (Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 2009), 351.

Rayner, P., Peter Wall, and Stephen Kruger, Media Studies: The Essential Resource (London: Routledge, 2004), 249.

Siapera, E., Understanding New Media (London: Sage, 2012), 23–26.

Signorielli, N., “Minorities Representation in Prime Time: 2000–2008,” Communication Research Reports 26, no. 4 (2009): 324.

“Media Mega Mergers: A Timeline,” Common Cause: Holding Power Accountable , accessed September 20, 2012, http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=4923181 . ↵
“About Us,” ProPublica: Journalism in the Public Interest , accessed September 20, 2012, http://www.propublica.org/about . ↵
“Core Principles of Media Literacy Education in the United States,” National Association for Media Literacy Education , accessed September 20, 2012, http://namle.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/NAMLE-CPMLE-w-questions2.pdf . ↵

Communication in the Real World Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Introductory Guide to the Study of Mass Communication

The fabric of modern society is so intricately woven with the fibers of Mass Communication, it is impossible to comprehend our lives without it. Indeed, Mass Communication so fully saturates our everyday lives, we often forget its presence – and its influence. Moreover, the technologies that make modern Mass Communication possible serve to only reify its omnipresence and power.

The technologies – often referred to by scholars and pundits as the “mass media” – can be described as the vehicles through which communication can reach the masses. In conceptualizing the mass media, many often think of the Internet – and for good reason. Some scholars estimate that upwards of four billion people are regularly connected to the Internet and that Internet traffic will be 95 times greater in 2020 than it was in 2005.

The mass media, however, is more than just the Internet. Indeed, television, radio, and even newspapers and magazines are considered part of the mass media. In this article, the evolution of the mass media – and thus, the evolution of the scholarly study of Mass Communication – is traced, and some key theories and concepts are discussed, in an effort to provide future master’s students with a foundational understanding of this area of communication that permeates almost every industry and aspect of consumer life.

Defining Mass Communication

Before tracing the evolution of mass media and Mass Communication as an academic field, it is important to first define some key terms. By and large, Mass Communication can be defined as the communication conveyed to a large audience via media. Media, in this sense, is the channel that carries this communication to the masses through electronic or printable means. While electronic forms of media – the Internet, television, and radio – certainly altered connotations of “mass” in Mass Communication, its print predecessors – magazines, newspapers, and books – laid the foundation for communication to reach larger numbers of people.

Mass Communication scholars generally employ definitions of communication similar to their colleagues studying other realms of communication. Even with its larger scope and reach, communication in Mass Communication is still thought of as the symbolic process through which meaning and, therefore reality, is constructed, shared, altered, and reified. Perhaps more so than others, Mass Communication scholars highlight the everyday-ness of media and its embedded place in our culture.

Given mass media’s unique position as a conduit, regulator, and even manipulator of communication, many Mass Communication scholars urge students – and, ideally, citizens – to become media literate. Media literacy is the ability to critically evaluate media and its contents by asking questions like: Who benefits from this form of media or type of content? What is the underlying message in this content? How does this particular form of media reinforce existing power structures? Or, conversely, does this media provide a voice to the marginalized and oppressed?

There is a persistent, if not nagging, myth (which contemporary Mass Communication scholars continually seek to dispel) that due to mass media’s omnipresence and capability to manipulate, human beings have been reduced to automatons, essentially drones controlled by corporations or governments. While there is certainly an enduring danger embedded within mass media, scholars continue to highlight that human beings – both individually and collectively – possess incredible critical thinking and reasoning skills, helping to combat this dystopian fear.

Though this myth is certainly grounded in honest fear and anxiety, the confluence of emerging media technology and an increase in education continues to enhance our critical perspective in consuming media. Indeed, each generation seems to further add to the concept of media literacy, providing valuable insight to scholars studying Mass Communication.

The Evolution of Mass Media

Well before the Internet and instant communication, mass media occupied a different realm – that of print and paper. Some scholars trace humanity’s use of written symbols in books back at least 5,000 years, but the modern conception of the book is a relatively recent phenomenon. Indeed, the first true instance of “mass” communication came in the wake of the printing press.

Contrary to common belief, Johannes Gutenberg did not invent the printing press, nor did he invent the crucial component of the printing press – moveable type. Gutenberg, did, however, create a more efficient, streamlined system of printing that made printing significantly faster, easier, and, more importantly, cheaper. The “Gutenberg Revolution” that followed was consequential to 15th Century Europe in that knowledge was no longer confined to families and small, local communities, books and pamphlets started becoming more common, and the incentive to become literate grew. However, the ramifications of this technology did not stay in Europe. Indeed, ideas and news spread much faster and, in a sense, the world grew smaller.

Several centuries later in Colonial America, mass media further evolved. Revolutionary ideas spread rapidly throughout the colonies – Thomas Paine’s Common Sense , for example, sold about 120,000 copies in the first three months after its publication, rivaling the number of copies of the Bible printed at that time throughout the colonies.

In 19th Century America, the rise of the “penny press,” or newspapers that were sold for a penny, coincided with higher literacy rates and a (slight) democratization of American politics. Building upon that and aided by the continual development of a national postal service, magazine circulation rose astronomically and reached larger and larger audiences. Juxtaposed to local newspapers, a magazine’s audience could become national, yet again altering the connotation of “mass” in Mass Communication.

The rapid development of electronic technology in the 20th Century propelled mass media to its current place of import in modernity. Pioneering this path, radio’s role cannot be overstated. Indeed, as the first electronic medium for mass communication, radio reshaped social, economic, political, and cultural structures across the world. In the 1930s, for example, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “Fireside Chats” helped assuage American anxieties about the Great Depression. Roosevelt’s radio broadcasts to the nation became a staple in American life for a time, with many Americans stating that some of their first memories were set around the fireplace listening to the president’s voice.

Furthermore, radio’s quick ascendancy in the United States led to the creation of the first broadcast networks, laying the foundation for future electronic mass mediums and instilling the “trustee principle,” or the need for government regulation of the burgeoning broadcast industry. The establishment of broadcast networks helped aid in television’s swift rise a few decades later in the 1950’s as the infrastructure was, essentially, already in place.

A Brief History of the Study of Mass Communication

Today’s Mass Communication scholars can, to some degree, trace their academic lineage to Walter Lippman and John Dewey, particularly through the famed “Lippman-Dewey” debate(s) of the 1920s and 30s that considered the role of journalism as a form of mass communication and its impact on their preferred version of democracy. At least initially, Lippman favored a journalistic approach that placed intellectual elites as the true – and better equipped – stewards of democracy, so news reporting ought to be written for these intellectuals. While Lippman saw experts as more capable of maintaining the promise of democracy, Dewey, on the other hand, advocated for journalists to write for common, everyday citizens as these citizens are democracy’s foundation.

While Lippman later wrote of the dangers of his approach, Dewey did agree that mass media and culture were becoming too much for the average citizen to comprehend. Instead of looking to experts to sift through the mess of mass culture, Dewey hoped that through communication Americans could band together to form a “Great Community,” an inclusive group comprised of various local and co-publics that were educated and civically engaged.

Almost a century has passed since Lippman and Dewey discussed and debated the nature of democracy and mass media’s impact, and even with the passage of time and the profound advancement in telecommunication technology, the core tenets of their philosophies continue to influence our perspectives on mass media and communication. Indeed, building off Lippman and Dewey, the study of Mass Communication took further shape following the Second World War. Like with the developing study of Persuasion in Communication Studies, Mass Communication researchers began to study propaganda, its effects, and the uses of mass media in spreading and combatting propaganda.

Mass Communication Theories & Concepts

In the study of Mass Communication theories and concepts, it is important to first articulate that there is no singular Mass Communication theory that encapsulates the discipline, or to which every scholar subscribes. Instead, Mass Communication scholars tend to focus on the degree to which media impacts communication, culture, and society. With the introduction of new mediums that changed the way we communicate, the nature of Mass Communication Theory also changed. Indeed, many of the theories listed below reflect the evolution of our understanding of Mass Communication with the introduction of new technology.

Additionally, many of the concepts articulated below have been repurposed in other realms of Communication Studies. For example, agenda-setting, framing, and priming continue to be analyzed by both Mass Communication and Political Communication scholars, while Social Cognitive Theory has been, and continues to be, employed by Health Communication scholars.

Agenda-Setting, Framing, and Priming : Now considered to be fundamental in the study of Mass Communication, the concepts of agenda-setting, framing, and priming all originated in the context of Communication research. Agenda-setting, or the idea that media tells us not what to think, but what to think about, helped scholars begin to articulate mass media’s impact potential and is now invariably discussed in graduate seminars in Mass Communication. Likewise, framing, or the ways in which events, people, and ideas are characterized through media depictions continues to be a tool for scholars in examining a litany of media. Finally, priming is considered to be the effect of agenda-setting and framing, as audiences are cognitively conditioned to adopt attitudes that are set by the media’s agenda and framing of particular issues or objects.

For more information on agenda-setting, framing, and priming, see our article on Political Communication Research .

Mass Society Theory : The aforementioned myth regarding mass media’s overwhelmingly negative impact on society was once a generally accepted scholarly perspective. Mass Society Theory suggests that mass media undermines the social order and human beings are vulnerable, if not entirely defenseless, to its power. Also known as the “magic bullet” theory or the “hypodermic needle” theory, Mass Society Theory is built upon the premise that human beings are simple receivers and mass media just injects ideas into our brains.

In the aftermath of the Second World War, many asked how citizens in democracies like Germany and Italy could suddenly embrace fascism. At the time, Mass Society Theory offered a relatively easy answer – and a sort of scapegoat – to how a people could turn to the horrors of fascist rule and the accompanying atrocities committed in its name. While these two examples extended credibility to the theory, we now know, of course, that mass media was not the singular culprit in the lead up to the Second World War – that a confluence of socio-economic issues helped to rapidly tear at the political seams of these countries through appeals to racism and authoritarianism.

Limited Effects Theory : Generally speaking, research on the Limited Effects of media produced several important concepts that are widely accepted today, namely that human beings are not passive consumers of media and that we actively use media for a variety of purposes and goals. Additionally, Limited Effects research helped articulate concepts like agenda-setting, framing, and priming.

Many consider Limited Effects Theory to be the natural and direct successor to Mass Society Theory. Realistically, however, Limited Effects Theory came to be simultaneously through the testing of Mass Society Theory. In examining Mass Society Theory, researchers determined that media influence can and usually is limited by individual differences, social categories, personal relationships, and level of education, thus constructing Limited Effects Theory.

More specifically, there are several other theories that help comprise Limited Effects Theory and add to its explanatory powers. Social Cognitive Theory, for example, suggests that media impacts people in a variety of ways and that people employ a learning process in consuming media. As highlighted in our Health Communication article, we may imitate what we see and hear in media, or if we do not exactly replicate what we consume, we may identify with something produced and engage in behavior that is sympathetic to its spirit. In other words, we learn from others – and media aids in this process.

Cultural Theory : Cultural Theory employs a critical, macro-level approach in examining media and its impact on society. In short, this theory argues that the meaning conveyed and debated between media and various audiences as they interact can have larger cultural impacts.

Because of its focus, Cultural Theory is inherently political, is concerned with big picture/largescale media effects, examines power and how the media is used to help those in power stay in power and oppress the marginalized, and operates to reveal the capitalistic forces at work within media. Cultural Theory, for example, has been used to some degree in studying media conglomerations here in the United States. In wielding this theory, scholars are able to highlight Disney (and other’s) cultural impact and power.

Meaning-Making Theory : This perspective suggests that as media consumers, we use media to create meaning and label experiences for ourselves. In other words, we use media as a catalyst in shaping meaning for our lives.

An enduring concept that comes from Meaning-Making Theory is cultivation analysis, or the idea that media cultivates a belief that the world they create/portray is real. This is not to say that we think the events of Game of Thrones are necessarily real, but that its portrayal of human interaction is close to reality. In other words, Meaning-Making Theory argues that the media’s depiction of human behavior, human relationships, social hierarchies, and worldviews is relatively close to reality.

As a force for good, for example, this can be used over time to alter attitudes regarding same-sex relationships, or the larger LGBTQIA Community. Indeed, shows like Modern Family , Queer Eye for the Straight Guy , and Grace & Frankie portray same-sex relationships or members of the LBGTQIA Community positively, and over time and repetition, this cultivates a positive association.

Studying Mass Communication Today

Today, Mass Communication continues to grow. As evidenced by the number of Mass Communication programs offered by universities across the country and around the world, as well as the increasing number of employers needing skilled professionals in this realm of research and practice, Mass Communication is as every bit part of our society as the technologies that make it possible. The field of Mass Communication, it seems, is synonymous with progress and modernity.

Within Communication Studies, Mass Communication is perhaps more important than ever. An example of its import is in the study of “fake news.” The recent onslaught of fake news and its socio-political consequences here in America and around the world is a communicative phenomenon ripe for Mass Communication scholars to examine. Indeed, studying fake news is not only relevant as it is occurring at this moment in time, it is crucial, as some scholars contend, to the survival of Western liberal democracy. Here, the echoes of Dewey and Lippman reverberate.

As new mass media technologies continue to develop, so too will our conceptions of Mass Communication. If the 21st Century has taught us anything thus far, it is that Mass Communication is indeed woven into the fabric of modern society, its presence, for better or for worse, integral to our survival and well-being.

Sources and Additional Resources

To learn more about the study of Mass Communication, its theoretical foundations, and societal applications, check out the following publications:

Baran, S. J. (2018). Introduction to Mass Communication (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Baran, S. J., & Davis, D. K. (2020). Mass Communication Theory: Foundations, Ferment, and Future . Oxford University Press.
Bryant, J., Thompson, S., & Finklea, B. W. (2012). Fundamentals of Media Effects: Second Edition . Waveland Press.
Jeffres, L. W. (2015). Mass Communication Theories in a Time of Changing Technologies. Mass Communication & Society , 18(5), 523–530. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15205436.2015.1065652
UC Santa Barbara. (n.d.). A Citizen’s Guide to Fake News | Center for Information Technology and Society. Retrieved October 14, 2019, from https://www.cits.ucsb.edu/fake-news

*Note: Christopher Wernecke teaches an undergraduate course on Media, Culture, and Society at Georgia State University. The content in this article was drawn from the research he conducted for his course curriculum.

Tools and Resources
Customer Services
Communication and Culture
Communication and Social Change
Communication and Technology
Communication Theory
Critical/Cultural Studies
Gender (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Studies)
Health and Risk Communication
Intergroup Communication
International/Global Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Journalism Studies
Language and Social Interaction
Mass Communication
Media and Communication Policy
Organizational Communication
Political Communication
Rhetorical Theory
Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Post-truth and critical communication studies.

Jayson Harsin Jayson Harsin Department of Global Communication, American University of Paris
https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.757
Published online: 20 December 2018

While the periodizing concept “post-truth” (PT) initially appeared in the United States as a key word of popular politics in the form “post-truth politics” or “post-truth society,” it quickly appeared in many languages. It is now the object of increasing scholarly attention and public debate. Its popular and academic treatments sometimes differ in respect to its meaning, but most associate it with communication forms such as fake or false news, rumors, hoaxes, and political lying. They also identify causes such as polarization and unethical politicians or unregulated social media; shoddy journalism; or simply the inevitable chaos ushered in by digital media technologies. PT is sometimes posited as a social and political condition whereby citizens or audiences and politicians no longer respect truth (e.g., climate science deniers or “birthers”) but simply accept as true what they believe or feel. However, more rigorously, PT is actually a breakdown of social trust, which encompasses what was formerly the major institutional truth-teller or publicist—the news media. What is accepted as popular truth is really a weak form of knowledge, opinion based on trust in those who supposedly know. Critical communication approaches locate its historical legacy in the earliest forms of political persuasion and questions of ethics and epistemology, such as those raised by Plato in the Gorgias . While there are timeless similarities, PT is a 21st-century phenomenon. It is not “after” truth but after a historical period where interlocking elite institutions were discoverers, producers, and gatekeepers of truth, accepted by social trust (the church, science, governments, the school, etc.). Critical scholars have identified a more complex historical set of factors, to which popular proposed solutions have been mostly blind. Modern origins of PT lie in the anxious elite negotiation of mass representative liberal democracy with proposals for organizing and deploying mass communication technologies. These elites consisted of pioneers in the influence or persuasion industries, closely associated with government and political practice and funding, and university research. These influence industries were increasingly accepted not just by business but also by (resource-rich) professional political actors. Their object was not policy education and argument to constituents but, increasingly strategically, emotion and attention management. PT can usefully be understood in the context of its historical emergence, through its popular forms and responses, such as rumors, conspiracies, hoaxes, fake news, fact-checking, and filter bubbles, as well as through its multiple effects—not the least of which the discourse of panic about it.

fact-checking
disinformation
attention economy
political communication
communication and critical studies

Post-truth (PT) is a periodizing concept (Green, 1995 ; Besserman, 1998 ) that refers to a historically particular public anxiety about public truth claims and authority to be a legitimate public truth-teller. However, the term is potentially misleading for at least two major reasons. First, it pertains to two different but related forms of truth: honesty, on the one hand, and factuality and knowledge (justified belief), on the other. Second, PT presents definitional problems similar to other grand periodizing concepts (e.g., modernity and modernism, postmodernity and postmodernism; industrial and postindustrial; traditional and post-traditional). It is sometimes interpreted as a time beyond, after or without truth, which could not be farther from the truth. Post-truth’s historical and cultural aspect related to shifting power relations and strategies make it an especially fertile subject for critical communication study.

How can PT be empirically known? It can be recognized in constant discursive obsession with and accusation of dishonesty, especially lying, and by the public anxiety and distrust it generates. It lies in the frequency and volume of the increasing amounts of labor to produce and attempt to debunk or clarify inaccurate or deceptive statements, the proliferation of “fact-checking” and rumor or hoax debunking organizations, usually individual businesses or wings of news organizations; it lies in the market for them, too (Graves & Cherubini, 2016 ). It lies in numerous international surveys measuring distrust (of multiple institutions and actors). It lies in a culture saturated with artifice and promotionalism. It lies in the material impact of false or intentionally misleading claims and the emotionalized public opinion they generate, from demands to and then release of a president’s full birth certificate, to rumors of a candidate’s child sex slavery ring in a Washington, DC, pizza parlor, resulting in armed confrontation. It lies in the documentation of politics and business built around the deception of artificial intelligence (bots), whose armies present the mirage of popularity or of supporters who sear their targets with brands of repugnance and chimerical flaws. It also lies in the industry of political consulting (now heavily informed by cognitive science and big data analytics, corresponding to emotionally pin-pointed, demographically microtargeted influence strategies and practices). These are a few of the ways that one empirically encounters what is being named as PT, though scholars are only beginning to provide the important critical analytical and theoretical work to explain how it is shot through with power relations and struggles.

Critical Theoretical and Philosophical Precedents

Overall, while some themes and a tradition of critique toward authoritative truth claims from the Enlightenment to its critics in Marxism and postmodernism are consistent with many aspects of PT sociopolitical conditions and theory, they differ in major ways with regard to who or what is the subject and object of (dis-)trust in the authority to (re-)present truth and use it for political purposes. They also differ greatly in their explanations for shifts in dynamics of authority, trust, and truth-telling/-believing, PT being closely associated with cognitive scientific, technological, and ethical explanations.

Enlightenment thought, in both its rationalist and empiricist strands, critiqued powerful traditional institutions of truth-telling, which it viewed as highly superstitious, yet having a monopoly on means to enforce their theories and (rationally indefensible) truth claims. Their targets of critique ranged from the relationship of religious truth to theories of human potential for thinking and political practice associated with critiques of monarchy and aristocratic class systems (Bristow, 2017 ; Israel, 2001 ).

In its questioning and politicizing of representations of reality, the Marxist tradition of ideological critique also resonates with PT theory and the world that it describes. This tradition, which runs through influential theorists such as Louis Althusser, Roland Barthes, Stuart Hall, and Slavoj Žižek, among others, takes as a starting point Marx’s idea that people become aware of class conflict in capitalism through its broad cultural forms—“legal, political, religious, aesthetic or philosophic”—while those forms are also the stuff of great illusionists (Marx, 1978 , p. 5; Williams, 1976 , p. 156).

In addition, the Marxist critique of reason and Enlightenment issuing from the Frankfurt School, with a heavy emphasis on the role of entertainment culture and 20th-century media technology, anticipates some PT themes. Horkheimer and Adorno’s influential Dialectic of Enlightenment posited that “culture industries” served the colonization of reason (including science) for capitalist exploitation, and anodyne mass media contents largely served a broad veil of socioeconomic deception, a point developed by Guy Debord in Society of the Spectacle (see also Edelman, 1988 , 2001 ).

However, PT has a particularly political, informational, and rhetorical emphasis less central to these earlier critical theories. What is more, those previous accounts broadly viewed the category of masses (the majority of citizen-consumers, nonelite without great policy decision-making power) as passive to the realities reported and views offered by news media and political figures. Post-truth, in stark contrast, emphasizes discord, confusion, polarized views, and understanding, well- and misinformed competing convictions, and elite attempts to produce and manage these “truth markets” or competitions. In PT, the idea is not that lay citizens see the world falsely through the ideology of ruling-class thinkers, but that “popular” conceptions of reality have become confusing or suspicious because of the saturation of reality representation with games of expertly researched and thus exclusive strategic deception—of pan-partisan nature. This is an instrumentalization of representation, of reality given new media technologies of surveillance and emotional message targeting as never before. While there may be points of intersection, the overall driving questions, material conditions that surround them (not the least media technological and economic ones), and sets of power relations cannot be rigorously viewed as identical.

Jürgen Habermas’s historical account of the structural transformation of the bourgeois public sphere ( 1989 ), despite the many criticisms of it, also has several key ideas that remain pertinent to theories and critiques of PT. The most important is his account of reason and public deliberation being gradually colonized by the state and staged in news media, offered for public opinion formation without deliberation by citizens who would identify the issues or problems in the first place. Habermas warned of professional political communication and polling that elites used to legitimate their hold on power through the production of public opinion. As with other precursors, from ideology critique to postmodern theory, the structural transformation of the public sphere is an important predecessor but does not capture the different historical facets of the PT condition and its analyses.

Postmodernism

Despite some claims that PT politics and society are the product of postmodern theory (McIntyre, 2018 ), PT only shares with it a general concern about knowledge, truth, and reality.

Regarding common themes, some aspects of Jean Baudrillard’s critical theory resonate more strongly with PT, especially Baudrillard’s notion, similar to Debord’s “spectacle,” that social life and subjectivity had become consumed by a techno-consumerist flood of images, simulations and hyper-reality, more real than reality (and having no necessary relationship to it) ( 1983 ). Baudrillard’s position that “illusion is the fundamental rule” resonates with PT ( 2001 ). However, his theory of causation does not stress problems of competing trust, authority, bias, political polarization, algorithmically customized experiences with perceptual and epistemic repercussions and other topics at the heart of PT conditions and theory.

Nor is there across work labeled postmodern, with rare exceptions, anything like the contemporary influence of the cognitive or neurosciences in PT. For example, the neuro-philosophical turn associated with Antonio Damasio and colleagues comes in the 1990s (Damasio’s Descartes’ Error , 1994 ), and has only more recently come to have interdisciplinary and increasingly broad public impact. Differences between PT and postmodern thought are more pronounced yet when considering PT as a condition.

A Post-Truth Condition?

Speaking of a PT condition echoes Lyotard’s influential “report on knowledge,” The Postmodern Condition ( 1979 ) and recalls its consequent public intellectual and academic panic; however, Lyotard’s focus was more on shifts regarding overarching narratives that justified knowledge claims (knowledge authorized by the Enlightenment’s residual “grand narratives” of progress, science, Marxism, and so forth). Lyotard emphasized the collapse of these metanarratives associated with a modern period, and the proliferation of less ambitious, nontotalizing explanations and justifications for knowledge ( petits récits ).

In contrast, a PT condition is not simply about the fragmentation of justifying stories for truth claims, but one beset by suspicion of truth-tellers as dishonest. Post-truth especially refers to a sociopolitical condition perceived as rifer than ever before with dishonesty and distrust, inaccuracies or false knowledge, all corresponding to a crisis of shared trusted adjudicating authorities. Systematic deception and lack of authority are furthermore reproduced by and contribute to a problem of distrust (Stoker, 2017 , pp. 35–36). In sum, the public problems for which PT is shorthand are epistemic (false knowledge, competing truth claims); fiduciary (distrust of society-wide authoritative truth-tellers, trust in micro-truth-tellers); and ethicomoral (conscious disregard for factual evidence—bullshitting—or intentional, strategic falsehoods/lying—dishonesty), the latter of which is often bracketed or abstracted into institutional logics of political strategy (Harding, 2008 ).

Citizen-audiences are fragmented in liberal democracies (Napoli, 2011 ), where thanks especially to competing truths and truth-tellers or prevalent nondialogue between them, political polarization ensues (Doherty, Kiley, & Johnson, 2017 ). Contemporary liberal democracies are said to lack common authorities, discourses, and institutions that may effectively suture these competing knowledges and authorities and reform populations into national identities that necessarily supersede partisan and ideological particularities (McCoy & McEvers, 2017 ). It is not farfetched then to speak of PT as a potential twilight of the stable liberal democratic nation-state and institutions that held it together, which partly explains the heightened discourse of panic from some quarters of popular politics and academia (Bennett & Livingston, 2018 ).

The Growth of Post-Truth in Popular and Academic Discourse

Post-truth appears to have first been used in academic and public discourse in the early 1990s, but its use increased 2,000% between 2015 and 2016 (Oxford Dictionaries, n.d. ). Two popular American books from 2004 drew attention to the anxiety about public trust and knowledge to which PT now commonly refers. In The Post-Truth Era , Ralph Keyes argued mass dishonesty had arrived. The same year, in his book When Presidents Lie ( 2004 ), Eric Alterman coined the term “post-truth presidency,” with reference to the Bush II presidency. The following year, 2005 , the Princeton philosopher Harry Frankfurt published a best-selling book On Bullshit , the latter of which, unlike lying, he said, demonstrated a simple disregard for the factuality of one’s truth claims. It was originally published as an essay in 1986 but attracted renewed interest in the new political and media context of the early 21st century . Like 2004 , 2012 was a major year for reflections on the crisis of truth and facts. James Fallows wrote about the “Post-truth media,” while Farhad Manjoo, later a New York Times technology columnist, announced the arrival of “post-fact society” in True Enough . 1 All of these seminal popular works emphasized rampant lying as the primary driver of PT politics and society. However, critical communication scholars have identified other forces at work in the production of PT. 2

There has been a recent outpouring of communication research on PT, almost entirely from quantitative methodological approaches, reflecting what some critical communication researchers describe as a neopositivist dominance in the field (Fuchs, 2017 ). These studies usually originate from well-funded quantitative and big-data-centered institutes and think tanks, government (e.g., the EU), or, alternately, from an experimental methodological individualist side, cross-fertilizing with cognitive science (cognitive biases, motivated reasoning, etc.). While the studies provide important empirical data, deeper theorization is scarce, critical theorization even scarcer (e.g., see Kavanagh & Rich, 2018 ; European Commission, 2018 ). These studies frequently end up reproducing a kind of panicked realism, nostalgia for the mass communication age, especially for journalistic gatekeeping, and result in prognostic guides for media literacy and journalistic fact-checking. The few critical communication treatments of PT point to more complex historical and structural explanations, and thus solutions. 3

Critical scholarly attention to shifts in public knowledge or belief and trust have been developing since the turn of the millennium (though their citational practices show that they often developed unbeknownst of one another). John Hartley was perhaps first to have employed PT in the communication field, in his book The Politics of Pictures (1992a), and he also proposed the idea of journalism as a truth “regime” in Tele-ology (1992b). However, he necessarily refers to a specific mass broadcast era—certainly pre-Web 2.0 and in most places pre-Internet (1992a, p. 137). He nonetheless anticipates later PT theory by focusing on blurring of fact/fiction boundaries in popular media (namely, television). While a regime generates and polices boundaries between fact and fiction (not the least in journalistic professional codes; he cites the Australian Journalists Association), hierarchies of truth and regimes are contested. Publishing and TV, he argues, are “incommensurate regimes of truth” (1992b, p. 46).

Scholars in the 1990s had begun to discuss popular culture in the context of legitimate and illegitimate knowledges as well as trust in authority, dramatized by TV series such as the X-Files (Bellon, 1999 ; Lavery, Hague, & Cartwright, 1996 ). Working on the popular fascination with “conspiracy culture,” Dean ( 1998 ) was already speaking of American society as characterized by “fugitive truth” at the turn of the 21st century . A small group of scholars continued to pursue questions of popular knowledges and politics through Foucault’s concepts of truth regimes and subjugated knowledges, with particular emphasis on conspiracy theory and gossip (Birchall, 2006 ; Bratich, 2008 ) as well as through Stephen Colbert’s satirical coinage “truthiness,” what is felt to be true (Jones, 2009 ). However, thus far, the scholarly emphasis on truth, media and politics, dominant and subjugated knowledges and power did not identify a conjunctural shift with regard to public truth and trust and had not begun to explore in depth the multiple, converging mechanisms behind such a thesis.

The Bush II administration’s propaganda apparatus and confusion around Iraq–al-Qaeda links and Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction was also a turning point for early PT scholarship. Scholars began to theorize cultural shifts issuing from causal synergies (Harsin, 2006 ; Jones, 2009 ). Jones saw truthiness as emblematic of a shift from a journalistic regime of truth, based on “truth in fact,” to one where a mix of groups (citizens, politicians, journalists, satirists) creates “believable fictions.” He drew on a notion of “truth in essence,” which pervaded a range of popular media forms (see also Jones & Baym, 2010 ). 4 These scholars stressed the waning of journalism’s privileged institutional role as truth-teller or mediator; its role was contested and, by default, shared—which resulted in liberal democratic panic, in journalism, the political establishment, and academia.

Other scholars placed far more causal emphasis on digital technology and how especially right-wing political actors used it in tandem with populist emotional rhetorical styles and the attempt to discredit institutions and experts (Van Zoonen, 2012 ). Van Zoonen described a new “ i- pistemology,” where questions of knowledge are approached “from the basis of I (as in me, myself) and Identity, with the Internet as the great facilitator” ( 2012 , p. 60). Harsin ( 2014 , 2015 , 2018 ) expanded the theory that truth regimes embedded in a digital capitalist attention/information economy were in such conflict or competition that “truth markets” (profit-seeking partisan information brokers, on the one hand; and rumor debunking and fact-checking businesses from Snopes.com to the Washington Post , on the other) were proposed within an emergent regime of PT (see also Mukherjee, 2017 ).

Post-truth Misinforms and Disinforms: Rumor Bombs, Fake News, and Lies

Post-truth appears through a repertoire of forms bearing political (mis-)use of false statements or a disregard for or misrecognition of facts, and a corresponding false belief or confusion (Andersen, 2017 ; Ingraham, 2016 ). While the larger cultural precondition, a widespread distrust of institutions that could be respected as truth-tellers across a wide ideological audience spectrum, will be explored more in-depth momentarily, one can first say that PT is associated with several major types of communication, statements or narratives, all of which are subclasses of deceptive communication: misinformation, fake news, rumor bombs, and lying. Disinformation, rumor bombs, and fake news have mass communication era antecedents in both war and security (gray propaganda) and commercial communication (advertising and public relations). All can be said to be forms of strategic communication and not mere accidental or innocent misstatements of facts.

Deliberate misstatement (disinformation) is hard to prove definitively, yet one can assume that many ambiguous, misleading, or partly false political statements are deliberate, given the fact that this genre of communication is highly professionalized and mediatized (Serazio, 2017 ). These strategic misstatements or innocent misstatements that attract receptive audiences then generate a political economic response by journalism and new businesses in fact-checking and rumor debunking (supported by advertising or, less often, donors), which is why they may be understood literally as truth markets (Harsin, 2015 ).

Post-truth is thus not simply about lies and false beliefs but also, perhaps even especially, about confusion amid a surfeit of information and influential appeals, the difficulty in discerning one from the other, the constant selective use and presentation of information and appeals for strategic political (and business) ends, and the incessant public disputes about what is (in-)accurate and (dis-)honest. Some inaccurate statements of fact are made innocently, if unethically and cavalierly (i.e., what is called bullshit, without regard for knowledge of true or false [Frankfurt, 2005 ]). But a great deal of it is deliberate, strategically aimed at disinforming as a way to manage opponents and/or govern by capturing attention.

Analytically speaking, the forms PT takes are often not well distinguished. Lies, rumors, fake news, spin, propaganda are used synonymously. Much of what is perceived as PT communication is a form of two general categories of communication (in lieu of simple information, which never appears without a communication context): disinformation and misinformation. Stahl ( 2010 ) explains a common distinction between misinformation and disinformation (though some tend to interchange the two).

Misinformation, on the one hand, is the spreading of inaccurate or false information while mistakenly thinking one is sharing accurate information (in reality, the person or organization spreading it is misinformed). On the other hand, disinformation is seen as deliberately spreading false or inaccurate information. In practice, the two are closely linked. One can spread a false statement that one took to be true, which was originally produced to misinform. Disinformers may produce misinformers. In terms of ethics, intention and effect, misinform corresponds to inaccuracy, a false statement, but not a falsehood. If the recipient of misinformation believes it, takes it as fact or true, then he or she is misinformed but not manipulated for strategic ends of the misinformer. Disinformation, however, is closer to lying, as both are dishonest. The producer of disinformation knowingly utters falsehoods, not just false statements. In between, perhaps, is the bullshitter, who, according to Frankfurt’s influential account, makes statements that may be false; the point is that he/she does not care ( 2005 ).

Rumor Bombs

While deliberate rumors (just like lies) in politics are ancient, the fact that they have become core issues with clear effects in public culture appears new, if not unprecedented. No US president before Obama felt forced to release his long-form birth certificate in response to constantly weaponized rumors that he was not born in the United States; the rumor was used to “bomb” the news agenda and preoccupy Obama’s communication professionals to respond defensively. The fact that majorities do not believe it is all the more proof of its efficacy (Dimock, July 15, 2008 ). Influential in the history of rumor scholarship, Shibutani ( 1966 ) argued that rumors were “improvised news,” a non-professional form of news-telling in conditions of information scarcity. However, in 21st-century media and politics, rumors flourish in the opposite condition: information overload (Andrejevic, 2013 ), fragmentation of attention, and decline of culture-wide authorities or truth-tellers (Harsin, 2006 , 2014 , 2015 ). Political rumors were thriving in contemporary conditions marked by a public knowledge (epistemic) and trust (fiduciary) crisis. Yet, they were not traditional rumors. Rumor bombs correspond to fake news and strategic political communication developments, which helped distinguish them from simple rumors and as a counterpart to other contemporary communication bombs (google bombs and twitter bombs, for example, which were various ways of “bombing” the field of attention). Rumor bombs referred to the core definition of rumor as a statement whose veracity is unknown or unprovable and to communication bombs as longtime forms of information warfare migrating from military to politics as “war by other means” (Caplow, 1947 ). Iraq–al-Qaeda links, John Kerry lied about Vietnam, Obama is a Muslim, and former French President François Hollande was supported by over 700 mosques—all are rumor bombs professionally operationalized in popular political struggles (Conason, 2004 ; Kessler, 2014 ; Harsin, 2018a ).

Rumor bombs normally differ from fake news in the sense that rumors may turn out to be true. Fake news is false news, though its core propositions may be contextualized by facts (for example, Hillary Clinton is a real person, and Comet Ping Pong is a real pizzeria in Washington, DC, neither fact of which makes true the associated false claim that she ran a child sex slavery ring in the basement of the said pizzeria). Furthermore, rumor bombs tend to use deliberately ambiguous or strategically polysemic claims to generate not just belief but conflict and disagreement or debate. For example, what does “links” mean in the claim there were Iraq–al-Qaeda “links” or “ties”? The claim may be more influential when “links” is not defined and left to the audience’s imagination. A rumor bomb may be accompanied by a story, attempting to provide evidence for the core claim. That evidence usually is not fake; it is just an example of poor reasoning: Obama’s name is not Christian; he has been photographed in what appears to be Muslim clothing; therefore, Obama is Muslim. The conflict and disagreement that rumor bombs produce in turn produces confusion or disorientation—a structure of feeling deep in the core of PT.

Fake news is a term of American origin, whose first use appears briefly in 1992 with regard to video news releases, news segments produced by public relations then broadcast by television news as content journalists had produced through reporting procedures (Rampton, 2005 ). It seems to have had no regular public use before 1999 , at which point it became associated with self-identified comedy news shows, such as the Daily Show , Saturday Night Live ’s Weekend Update, and The Colbert Report , which had origins in satirical “news” publications such as The Onion in the United States (Harsin, 2018a ). By 2015 , it took on a globalizing negative twist of connotations associated with PT, bound up with geopolitical propaganda and artificial intelligence (AI), or “bots” (Chen, 2015 ; Riotta, 2017 ). In an even more recent globalizing trend, “fake news” has become a popular ad hominem for discrediting any unfavorable news coverage or criticisms from opponents. Fake news was deemed such an important recent cultural form of PT that it was named and then recognized as a 2017 word of the year by Collins Dictionary (following PT as the Oxford Dictionary ’s 2016 word of the year), in an infotaining development of dictionaries to self-promote by breaking a “word of the year” that generates discussion and profits (Flood, 2017 ). Fake news is, like rumor bombs, a sub-category of disinformation, alternately called “false news” and “junk news.” Unlike rumor bombs, fake news is not usually a mix of interpretive ambiguity and fact, but it includes core false statements (things that did not happen, that do not even exist), and therefore are sometimes wrongly referred to as lies.

Consider also the difference between fake news and lies. One may assume that fake/false news is at base mere lies. But a lie is, technically, a deliberately false statement (Mahon, 2016 ). A lie is not a series of statements, but fake news suggests a story, an article, all statements contained in which are unlikely to all be false, as lies or inaccuracies. Fake news is often characterized by a core falsehood surrounded by factual statements or details. Reuters Digital News annual report for 2017 notes that

“definitions of ‘fake news’ are fraught with difficulty and respondents frequently mix up three categories: (1) news that is ‘invented’ to make money or discredit others; (2) news that has a basis in fact but is ‘spun’ to suit a particular agenda; and (3) news that people don’t feel comfortable about or don’t agree with.”

Meanwhile, the Oxford Institute for the Study of Computational Propaganda defines fake news as “misleading, deceptive or incorrect information, purporting to be real news about politics, economics or culture” (Hazard Owen, 2018 ).

Though many definitions of fake news attribute an intent to deceive for political ends, some fake news producers have intent to deceive only to make money through the attention and circulation the fake news receives, even while it can have expected political effects (belief, confusion, agenda-setting). Those effects, through exploitation by more strategic partisans who aim to spread disinformation, may have a secondary level of effects, political ones—and the secondary agent may have no interest in financial profit. Conversely, some fake news producers originally aim to deceive only for political ends. Either way, news organizations, which legitimate the fake news by making it real news that titillates large audiences, will profit from it. American CBS news executive Warren Moonves underlined this point when speaking about Trump’s 2016 rumor-bombing candidacy: “It may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS” (Bond, 2016 ; Pickard, 2017 ).

Fake news is usually the presentation of new events where the event is presented as a discovery of something hitherto hidden (Obama’s fake birth certificate allegations; allegations that Clinton sold weapons to ISIS). While in the era of citizen journalism, fake news could appear rather unadorned, thanks to easily accessible photo-editing software and web page templates, it may also appear in the style of news organizations with high production values, such as the New York Times , Le Monde , and CNN . Mimicking the style of professional journalism is the way fake news produces its credibility for some audiences; it is even reflected in web addresses (URLs), which imitate recognized news sites by inserting the words “news” or “report,” or more partisan-comforting brand names: worldnewsreport.com, winningdemocrats.com, conservativestate.com (McClain, 2017 ; Silverman, 2016 ).

All of these previously discussed forms of PT misinformation can contain lies. Yet there is a difference between them. What is lying? According to Mahon, “The most widely accepted definition of lying” is Isenberg’s: “a statement made by one who does not believe it with the intention that someone else shall be led to believe it” (Isenberg in Mahon, 2016 ).

Post-truth is perhaps most saliently marked by an emphasis on lying, constant accusations of lying (without proof) and revelations of lying (with convincing proof). While it is nearly impossible to prove definitively that there are more lies or liars today than in the past, there is clearly an observable discourse about lying, which claims that there are more, that people perceive or feel there must be more, because there is also so much empirically verifiable distrust and documentable dishonesty (a quintessential example: fake news).

In his book When Presidents Lie ( 2004 ), Eric Alterman discusses what he argues were major lies of US presidents from FDR to JFK, Johnson to Reagan. For the George W. Bush administration, Alterman coins the term “post-truth presidency” to describe the general mode of dishonesty that he saw pervading the quotidian White House communications. Alterman is correct both to emphasize the commonplaceness of dishonesty in the history of modern presidential communication and to signal something of a historic shift in the Bush regime. It is of little wonder that a public discourse heavy with accusations, perceptions, and documentations of lying could have effects on political trust and motivation.

Political communication and news practices and values have shifted in a way that favors even banalized lying, whereby “honesty is a novelty” (Corner & Pels, 2003 , p. 11). The very conditions for being considered honest and truthful have been reconfigured thanks to processes of mediatization and celebrification in politics, the internalizing of entertainment genre expectations and values in their political performances as a perceived requirement for gaining attention.

Yet, while claims of increased lying appear constantly (Manjoo, 2008 ), it would be almost impossible to prove such claims convincingly. If PT’s forms can be recognized as having particular qualities, the question remains: what are the mechanisms that have brought it about now? It is argued that multiple agents synergized more recently in ways previously not possible.

Four Synergistic Agents

Thus, while aspects of PT communication and its context have existed before (if not always) new forces have converged with old, creating a communications environment unlike anything seen before. Later theorists have referred to mediatization as a macro-category describing the way mediation has engulfed all institutions instead of, in the predigital mass communication era, these institutions having some separation from media as an institution itself (Couldry & Hepp, 2016 ; Hepp & Krotz, 2014 , p. 2; Livingstone, 2009 ). Yet while the general concepts of mediatization, hybrid media systems (Chadwick, 2013 ), or mixed media culture (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 1999 ) are useful starting points for thinking about the causes of PT communication practices, critical approaches must further examine and theorize the historically and culturally specific mechanisms of PT within the new highly datafied capitalist communication structure. Four major historical agents synergistically structure PT communication forms and practices, while having particular national conjunctural specificities, themselves deeply mediating these changes.

Face 1: Technology and Attention Economy (Speed and Cognition)

Technology is treated as a category of influence here, but with important qualifications, since it does not exist outside political economic, cultural, and other contexts and forces. Considerations of technological agency in PT production must include the fact that they do not exist free of human agency or goals. In fact, the digital mediascape is the grounds for an economy embedded in communication technology as never before, which restructures the way communication can be produced, circulated, used, and received. Strategic political communication in PT is thus inevitably parasitic on and structured by attentional capitalism. Attentional habits are then structured through the programming of apps and platforms and their algorithms. At the same time, various forms of digital technology have enabled a dizzying amount of cultural production (user-generated content) and social media platforms have permitted their potentially broad diffusion as mass self-communication (Castells, 2009 ).

However, the constant strategic uses of and attempts to manage the spaces of mass self-communication (big data analytics, microtargeting, neuromarketing, bots, trolls) likely help explain the subsequent effects on trust and truth (surveys showing little trust in digital platforms or the Internet generally, thus also suggesting users’ cynical disavowal). Mostly overlooked in the discussions of PT is the fact that the digital communication infrastructure, though identified by many citizens as a source of political news and means for political speech, is not designed to suit democratic political communication or trustworthy information but, rather, to suit recent forms of consumer capitalism, “the attention economy.” In this sense the Internet, and especially social media, in places like the United States has quickly become economically structured in a way it took American broadcast journalism years to succumb to, as Marc Gunther noted in 1999 : “Twenty years ago, there was no network news ‘business.’ The Big Three broadcast television networks—ABC, CBS and NBC—all covered news, but none generally made money doing so. Nor did they expect to turn a profit from news programming” ( 1999 ). However, it is not simply the economic embeddedness of platforms that need attention in a discussion of PT but also technologies that have enabled or “democratized” cultural production.

Part of the new production and broadcast technologies include accessible photo and audiovisual editing software, as well as platforms for mass publication or broadcast. Yet the capacity to “jam” and “hack” original content, altering it while retaining an aura of authenticity, has enabled a near constant stream of deceptions (to which AI developers are responding with “reverse image search” by Google Image or TinEye). 5

Technological developments also include the powerful influence of algorithms in structuring fields of perception and trust. Algorithms structured for networking, marketing, and constant “participation” become useful for political PT ends. Thus, repetition and illusory truth (more repeated, more likely to be judged true) is extremely important in algorithmically constructed publics, polarized politics, and filter bubbles, evidenced by studies concluding that “top fake election news stories generated more total engagement on Facebook than top election stories from 19 major news outlets combined” in the US 2016 presidential campaign (Silverman, 2016 ).

Furthermore, some PT commentary and research has put considerable causal and explanatory emphasis on algorithmic ideological filtering (echo chambers) and cognitive bias (especially confirmation bias) (Bear, 2016 ; Dieguez, 2017 ; Kavanagh & Rich, 2018 ). However, few approaches to PT so far have seen the attention economy’s techno-infrastructure as itself creating conditions unfavorable to more deliberative forms of cognition when consuming digital content (such as fake news headlines and rumor bombs). Not only is the digital communication infrastructure oriented toward profit, instead of toward dissemination of factual information, it is built for speed and constant individual movement and attention shifting, which research suggests has an impact on perception, interest, temporal reasoning, and knowledge (Carr, 2010 ; Manjoo, 2013 ; Harsin, 2014 ). Tech-focused cognitive scientists are beginning to argue that this techno-economic structure (they do not base their analyses in the structure’s embeddedness in capitalism) has effects on reasoning, long-term memory, and thus knowledge acquisition (Atchley & Lane, 2014 ). Cognition in the attention economy is typically fast, emotional, and targeted with distractions. Such an “information ecology” is not, it is argued, conducive to more deliberative political participation, thus posing challenges to proposed PT solutions, such as the necessarily slower and colder cognition required by proponents of media literacy. Technology identified as a primary cause (instead of as a secondary cause embedded in capitalism and synergizing with other agents) leads to solutions also often embedded in capitalism (self-regulation of service providers, fact-checking businesses and apps to buy—the commodification of truth).

Face 2: Journalism

Changes in journalism, such as downsizing staff while accelerating the publication pace (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 1999 , 2010 ), invited inaccuracies and vulnerabilities to hoaxes (later fake news); partly issuing from “citizen journalism,” by which everyone is now a journalist (the opposite of the progressive promise of networked journalism [Russell, 2011 ]) and which brings not just packs of watchdogs but also armies of rumor bombers and fake news purveyors. As Harwood notes, “[g]ossip, rumor and fact, truth and falsehood (with rare exceptions) have equal standard under the law and, in practice, universally coexist in the unending ‘news’ stream saturating the environment” (Harwood, 1999 ). The latter was partly explained by market pressures to grab readers’ and viewers’ attention, partly resulting in trends of infotainment and tabloidization, and politainment allowing for the repetition of rumors and disinformation as agenda-setting topics themselves (Thussu, 2009 ; Riegert & Collins, 2015 ). Market pressures are also blamed for significant amounts of public relations material that appear unidentified in news products (Bennett, 2003 , p. 175; Lewis, Williams, & Franklin, 2008 ). Finally, new apps (e.g., Bulletin) allow quick posting of citizen journalist content, while critics have warned about a “high potential for abuse,” especially for producing “fake news” (Kaufman, 2018 ). Citizen journalism app experiments are complemented on the professional end by robot (also called automated or algorithmic) journalists (Carlson, 2015 ), which risk being recuperated for strategic communication purposes, just as had been the case with human “fake reporters” under the Bush II administration (Rich, 2005 ).

In a culture of multiple institutional and professional trust deficits, journalism’s traditional credibility is threatened. If for decades, journalism relied on “authorized knowers” (Fishman, 1980 ), officials in government, business, and political organizations who were deemed knowledgeable (Epstein, 1973 ), then “webs of facticity” (Tuchman, 1978 ) become undermined in PT, for such sources, as well as their journalist-intermediaries are seen as illegitimate by millions of people. The web of facticity comes to be perceived as a web of deception that news organizations and their sources weave.

If journalism has lost authority to tell and distinguish truth, while news has a proliferating and competing cast of truth-tellers, promotional culture applies cultural pressure to journalism, politics, and everyday social relations. Its agency in PT synergy cannot be ignored.

Face 3: Promotional Culture

Promotional culture is another factor of PT cultural synergy that has been almost completely absent from public intellectual and recent computationally driven PT analyses (Harsin, 2017 ; Hearn, 2017 ). Promotional culture studies argue that culture and social relations have been powerfully transformed by the role of communication in new forms of consumer capitalism—the latter’s hyperpromotional stage, with no small effects on perceptions of honesty, truth claims, and trust-granting. According to Alison Hearn, one of promotional culture’s primary theorists:

Promotionalism names the extension of market values and commodity relations in all areas of life…. As we increasingly come to see our selves, relationships, political candidates, and social issues in terms of this logic of promotion, we can no longer determine, or read, genuinely expressive intent or determine what is truth as opposed to a lie, what is authentic as opposed to “spun.” In a population so acclimatized to the constant sell, how can we recognize or construct legitimate authority? What is the impact of the generalized public acceptance of “spin” and promotional politics on the democratic process?… [T]he logic of commodities and their promotional signs, also known as advertising and marketing, comes to dominate and structurally condition all other forms of political expression and power relations. (Hearn, 2011 )

Promotionalism’s relationship to truth has thus always been more like Harry Frankfurt’s ( 2005 ) notion of bullshit—it is agnostic toward truth in its strategies to promote attention and consumption. Promotional culture scholars view bullshit-friendly communication as having become accepted in a wider and wider array of human practices, not in the least politics (see also Davis, 2013 ). Professional bullshitters are essential to contemporary consumer economies and politics. One rarely hears about promotionalism in causal explanations of PT (and one has almost never heard of counter-attacking its origins—consumer capitalism—as a logical solution to such a powerful form of causation).

Just as the very infrastructure of contemporary communication practices, the digital attention economy, leans toward PT, so does professionalized political communication, with its modern roots in mass electric communication and mass democracy at the turn of the 20th century .

Face 4: Professional Political Communication

Promotionalism’s relationship to PT was also anticipated by Hannah Arendt in her well-known reflection “Lying in Politics,” spurred by the release of The Pentagon Papers ( 1971 ). She spoke of a “recent variety” added to “the many genres in the art of lying developed in the past: the apparently innocuous one of the public-relations managers in government who learned their trade from the inventiveness of Madison Avenue.” Arendt noted that their “origin [lay] in the consumer society” (p. 8). This importation from consumer society to politics was problematic, according to Hannah Arendt, for public relations “deals only in opinions and ‘good will,’ the readiness to buy, that is, in intangibles whose concrete reality is at a minimum” (p. 8).

The promotionalism that Arendt regarded as a threat to democracy has been discussed in political communication textbooks for several decades now as “professionalization,” a trend in elite political communication that since the onset of TV has put “image-making” at the center of politics (Lilleker, 2014 ; McNair, 2017 ). This professionalization is marked by the growth of political marketing, using highly strategized forms of influence employed by cognitive science-oriented commercial and military communication (Alic, Branscomb, Brooks, Epstein, & Carter, 1992 ; Lees, Strömbäck, & Rudd, 2010 ). One may recall here that Arendt’s influential account of lying in politics ends by emphasizing the spread of promotional communication orientations to politics, resulting in a propensity for lying, and thus contributing to PT (Arendt, 1972 ).

Several PT commentators point to the post-9/11 Bush regime’s sophisticated propaganda as a turning point in contemporary state communication. It is important to note that the conjunctural conditions of communication were and still are quite different than those of pre-Internet times, while the practice of strategic political communication, aiming at creating its own realities to which it can respond to achieve its goals, is a staple of modern mass communication influences, in the commercial and political sector. A passage from Daniel Boorstin’s influential The Image is illustrative on this point. Boorstin discusses one of the most influential theorist-practitioners of public influence in the 20th century , Edward Bernays, by way of Napoleon (indicating a cross-fertilization of military, political, and commercial communication). Of the public relations-produced realities he calls “pseudo-events,” Boorstin writes:

The power to make a reportable event is thus the power to make experience. One is reminded of Napoleon’s apocryphal reply to his general, who objected that circumstances were unfavorable to a proposed campaign: “Bah, I make circumstances!” The modern public relations counsel—and he is, of course, only one of many twentieth century creators o pseudo-events—has come close to fulfilling Napoleon’s idle boast. “The counsel on public relations,” Mr. Bernays explains, “not only knows what news value is, but knowing it, he is in a position to make news happen. He is a creator of events.” ( 1992 , pp. 10–11)

Roughly 80 years after Bernays’s confident declaration, Karl Rove, George W. Bush’s legendary spin doctor and strategist, bragged that journalists naively belonged to a “reality-based community,” while strategists like him “create our own reality,” which they (journalists) are free to “study.” Journalists will be left “to just study what we [strategists] do” (Suskind, 2004 ). The arrogance aside, of course, communication strategists are sometimes forced to respond to journalist-produced events, and perhaps more often, to events opponents publicize with the assistance of news organizations. They nonetheless lead by misleading.

Indeed, the Bush regime’s communication strategists ushered in the shifting signification of fake news registers from largely comedic to more traditional political communication (Rich, 2005 ). The Bush team used “fake reporters” and fake broadcast segments (video news releases dutifully broadcast by local newscasts) over a decade prior to the term becoming a “word of the year.” In the New York Times , Frank Rich made the crossover explicit: “The White House Stages Its ‘Daily Show,’” he wrote ( February 20, 2005 ). Writing a year before, but looking back at 2003 , Naomi Klein dubbed it the “year of the fake” in a Nation column. She wrote that 2003 was, for starters, “a year that waged open war on truth and facts and celebrated fakes and forgeries of all kinds…: fake rationales for war, a fake President dressed as a fake soldier declaring a fake end to combat and then holding up a fake turkey.” Nieman Reports spoke not just of an episode but of an “Age of Pseudo-reporting,” citing a “spate of media infamies known by the names Armstrong Williams, Maggie Gallagher, Jeff Gannon, and Karen Ryan” (Greve, 2005 ). Recently, the use of big-data-driven political marketing (even neuropolitical marketing), bots and trolls (human and non-), and censorship in several countries, contribute mightily to PT synergy (Bulut & Yörük, 2017 ; Harsin, 2015 , 2018a , 2018b ).

As Arendt foresaw, organized, systematic lying, or, more easily proven, deceptions, the bread and butter of consumer capitalism and the communications wing of the state security apparatus, have come also to be the organizing force of mediated political life. Thus, when analysts shrug skeptically at claims that there is more lying now than before, they are looking at lying and deception through a lens too methodologically individualist to comprehend the production side of it. Both consumer capitalism, deeply embedded in everyday life, and elite liberal democracy, as its communication apparatus has been structured for over 100 years, demand deceptive communication. It is systematic, strategic, highly organized. There is a structural incitement to deception.

American democracy, like most if not all contemporary liberal democracies, has been, among other things, an evolving competition of fakery. This is not to suggest it fails by comparison to some essential, purely honest democratic utopia (a fantasy, of course) but is rather to emphasize the massive scale of organization and systematicity. Now fakery is embedded in everyday commercial promotionalism as well as in mass self-communication (individual broadcasting) amid historic levels of distrust; thus, it is understandable that deception’s effects would be felt more intensely to the point of PT today. Meanwhile panics around PT disavow how embedded promotionalism and deception is in 20th – 21st-century liberal democratic political communication practices, which may suggest that such panics are a fundamental symptom of PT itself.

(Post-)Trust

The foundation of popular truth, often taken for granted in the heyday of mass communication and journalism’s monopoly on gatekeeping and authoritative truth (re-)telling, has come into greater relief in the PT moment: (dis-)trust. The sociologist Georg Simmel argued that trust is actually a “weak form of inductive knowledge,” and “very few relationships would endure if trust were not as strong as, or stronger than, rational proof or personal observation” ( 2004 , p. 179). Understanding shifts in the communicational mechanisms of trust may be seen as key to understanding the epistemic problems often discussed separately.

What is the evidence for widespread and increasing distrust? Consider, for example, declining numbers of voters in presidential and parliamentary elections across the West, where similar techniques of strategic political communication, among other things, are imitated. Countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and France have seen participation dips by 30 percentage points over the last 50 years (International IDEA, n.d. ).

Compare the decline in voter turnout with the rise of self-identified disenfranchised movements and new parties in the very same countries. On the right, one sees the Front National in France, the UK Independence Party, Germany’s AFD (Alternative for Germany), and even the insurgent democratic socialist challenge to the US Democratic Party by Bernie Sanders. Meanwhile, left “prefigurative” social-political movements such as les Indignados in Spain, Occupy in the United States, and Nuit Debout in France have stressed their alienation from liberal democracy’s lack of choices and means for a real hearing of grievances, a critique realized in their own performances of direct democracy.

Distrust is also widely self-reported. Edelman’s Trust Barometer study for 2017 featured a provocative headline announcing a “Global Implosion of Trust.” Some of their highlights across 43 countries include the following: CEO credibility at lowest point ever; trust in media fell and is at lowest point ever in 17 countries; trust in government dropped (at 41%) in 14 countries, being the least trusted in institution in half of the countries surveyed. Categories of leaders dropped in trustworthiness across the board: an all-time low of 37% for CEOs and government leaders are the least credible of all, at 29% (“2017 Edelman Trust Barometer,” 2017 ). The news media in particular suffers significant distrust, across the United States and Europe. Just over half of Americans in a 2017 survey said they trust information from the news media “some,” while about 15% trusted it “a lot” (“People have more trust in ‘my’ media than ‘the’ media,” 2017 ). However, people have more trust in their own choice of news media. Post-truth thus thrives in this context of political polarization.

Perceptions of widespread cynicism of course also have effects on trust. As Sissela Bok notes in her classic examination of lying in public life and a discussion of Hannah Arendt’s influential comments on public lying, “Even when the substitution of falsehood for truth is not total, but seems random or partial to the deceived, or when it affects matters they consider crucial, such a state of cynicism may result. For this reason, the many forms of international deception which are assumed to be merely a ‘part of the game’ by governments can have far-reaching effects on both internal and external trust” ( 1978 , p. 150). Speaking primarily of governments, she adds, in 1978 , that “there is a growing evidence that the world audiences to which propaganda is directed are becoming more distrustful…. As a result, citizens the world over have less confidence that they can influence what governments do” (p. 150). She was of course writing before the Bush administration’s strategic communication efforts to promote the Iraq War, and before the financial crisis of 2008 , among other major events in a cultural slide toward generalized distrust.

If, as Simmel and others argue, trust is a kind of crude knowledge, which may be closest to the kind of knowledge citizens exercise on public issues, pervasive deficits thereof would likely lead to not just any kind of epistemic but public epistemic instabilities. As Longino explains, “[m]uch of what passes for common knowledge is acquired from others. We depend on experts to tell us what is wrong or right with our appliances, our cars, our bodies. Indeed, much of what we later come to know depends on what we previously learned as children from our parents and teachers. We acquire knowledge of the world through the institutions of education, journalism, and scientific inquiry” (para 9, 2015 ). Consequently, “we do not know most of what we think we know.”

While 1980s and 1990s postmodern theory already flagged scholarly preoccupations with epistemic skepticism, legitimacy and reality, the contemporary focus on lying and dishonesty distinguishes PT discourse from its 1990s forerunner (Lyotard, 1984 ). Post-truth’s epistemic crisis is really an ethicofiduciary one. Its epistemic crises are the effect of distrust and dishonesty crises regarding systematic widespread deception.

It is worth noting that, in this critical synergy theory of PT, the panic about irrational duped citizens appears misplaced. Given these conditions from public relations- and hoax-infiltrated journalism, resource rich strategic political communication using sophisticated data analytics, deceptive AI (bots and trolls), cognitive scientifically informed microtargeted messages, and a widespread promotional culture of exaggerated claims and games of fakery for profit—it could be said that people would be irrational not to be highly skeptical of truth claims. The question, of course, is what kind of performances and communication successfully produce trust and truth in this climate.

Trust and Emotional Truth

Anthony Giddens ( 1994 ) has argued that modern and traditional societies differ importantly in terms of trust-granting, and that late modern societies underwent a shift from “passive trust” toward social institutions and their experts to general distrust and fleeting, “active trust” today. Trust-granting appears to have taken even more intensely restricted roles, based much of the time on performativity (rhetorical devices to produce credibility), ongoing “facework.”

If trust amid PT is short term and, if maintained, constantly renewed, how is active public trust performed and earned today? One argument is that the synergistic agencies of PT favor highly emotional communication, and that this is partly the way many subjects identify with truthful communication. This turn to emotion and affect is not based on a traditional rational/irrational, reason/emotion dualism. On the contrary, it builds on revolutions in cognitive science and neurophilosophy over the last thirty years, which holds that there is no actual separation between emotion and reason. However, they insist that the conceptual distinction be maintained since there are different degrees of emotion in reasoning, even shown to be located in different parts of the brain (Damasio, 1994 ; Kahneman, 2011 ; Westen, 2008 ). While promotional industries and political communication have for some time used this research to produce strategies (hoping especially for quick manageable affective responses), journalism is now visiting this research in order to manage visitor attention online (and probably in what remains of print and broadcast) (Song, 2013 ).

Resource-rich political and economic actors using big data analytics and sentiment analysis target audiences emotionally, hoping not simply to produce beliefs (ideological effects) but to modulate cognition, emotion, and attention, via quick likes/dislikes, shares, before moving on. In a culture of speed and attention scarcity, of exigencies and expectations of faking or exaggeration (promotionalism), slower, perhaps “quieter” civil forms of communication are suspicious to some audiences. These audiences are attracted to what appears “authentic,” which seems to periodically escape the exigencies of promotional culture (Banet-Weiser, 2012 ). These fleeting moments have been described as emotional truth and “emo-truth” (Harsin, 2017 , 2018a ).

Emotional/emo-truth theory argues that there are parallels in reality TV and popular politics regarding the way truth and trust is performed and granted. The theory is based on insights from audience studies of melodrama genres (Ang) and “fact-based” programming’s (i.e., reality TV) audiences (Hill, 2007 , p. 141; Grindstaff, 2008 ):

Emo-truth is truth where emotion serves as inference (prime or indexical sign, emotional or unconscious affective response, and presto: truth). It is felt (though not necessarily consciously), not accompanied by long temporal reasoning. It is akin to what reality TV audience scholarship has documented as trust in perceived authenticity (i.e. truth) of moments where participants lose control, get angry and aggressive, bully, or, conversely, cry. It is a variant of what Laura Grindstaff in her landmark work on sensational talk shows called “the money shot.” (Harsin, 2018b , p. 45)

With such pervasive, systematic, strategic artifice in PT society and politics, it is these ephemeral moments of emo-truth that connect with some citizen-audiences, which helps to explain the success of aggressive emo-truth masculinities, fond of insulting, spectacular claims, and of attacking political correctness, of figures such as US’s Donald Trump, Philippines’ Roderigo Duterte, and the UK’s Boris Johnson, among others in varying degrees of the style (Harsin, 2017 ). Not all PT political performance is emo-truth; and not all of its performers do it as virtuosically or constantly. The key is that the connection of trust, the lack of concern with the falsity of some truth claims, is explained by an emotional, not rational connection, and perhaps for the angriest most distrustful citizens, emo-truth’s anger and aggression is most appealing. Emotional truth and emo-truth political communication also show signs of the normalization of celebrity politics and its games of authenticity and appeal (Street, 2004 ).

Solutions to Post-Truth as Perceived Problem

If critical communication studies have offered preliminary theories of PT as a historical and cultural phenomenon, from such a diagnosis, what kind of prognosis may it offer, while shedding a critical light on popular solutions proffered less critical PT theories? The main solutions proposed thus far (mostly from the computational and cognitive scientific sides of communication study) can be summarized as the following: techno-curatives, such as AI filtering of PT claims/stories; human fact-checking, especially rooted in journalism; strategic human responses to cognitive bias; more vigorous self-regulation by social media providers; and media literacy initiatives (Kavanagh & Rich, 2018 ; European Commission, 2018 ). Each misses the entire synergy of historical and cultural causation, and therefore will not likely achieve the curative ends for which they aim. The problems viewed from a critical perspective are not all acknowledged from other perspectives, and thus lead to very different calls for change.

Techno-curative solutions respond to the perceived problem of filter bubbles and fake news circulation (misinformed citizens), calling for AI tagging and suppression of false information. These problematizations and solutions overlook that the marketing structure of social media veers toward birds-of-a-feather networks, easier for big data analysis to aggregate (construct) into markets. The bracketed ethics of attentional capitalism are overlooked, and the general structure is unlikely to be overcome. Getting attention has apparently inspired fact-checking organizations to use infotaining categories of evaluation. When they rate statements as lies (“pants on fire”! or “five Pinocchios”!) but cannot prove deliberate statement of falsehood instead of inaccuracy or bullshit, they paradoxically undermine their purported task (pointing again to the informational and attentional embeddedness in capitalism) and may simply trigger the stubborn ire of those citizens they aim to correct. Techno-curative solutions in AI also overlook the problem that many people distrust the service providers to be truth arbiters, and this is even more the case when companies like Facebook attempt to “team up” with already extant fact-checking businesses ( Snopes.com or the Washington Post , for example, or Le Monde ’s “ Décodeurs ” in France) (“Voters Don’t Trust,” 2016 ). These brands are already ideologically contaminated, distrusted. Unless widely perceived partisan providers are to team up with more mainstream old “trustee journalism” organizations, the victims of disinformation are unlikely to see the debunking (because of customized content) or trust the post’s AI tag. Posts would have to be suppressed, raising concerns of freedom of speech in countries like the United States (Fisher, 2017 ). While experiments on cognitive bias are hopeful that misinformed users gradually change opinion and perception with repeated exposure to debunkings, these experiments do not account for the fact that the structure of the attention economy is, again, not one aimed at microtargeting repeated debunkings. The debunker (trusted/distrusted) is also crucial—who do people trust with such a role, seeing as how they are distrustful of most macro-truth-tellers ?

Finally, deceptive forms of PT communication are built into the culture of liberal democracy, mediatized and dependent on highly professional strategists and practices. Few diagnoses consider this problem, and thus solutions will likely overlook and reproduce different versions of PT. Relatedly, strategic political communication produces PT forms that elude easy logical-positivist-type judgments of true or false, because they are often deliberately ambiguous. This means they require longer cognitive and critical analyses to explain what interpretations are more in accord with facts and which more errant—who is trusted enough to fulfill this role? Given the attention economy, who will engage with this necessarily longer and patience-demanding content?

A recent report by academics and journalists, sponsored by the European Union, touches upon what have become common policy recommendations (one can imply their diagnoses of cause from these proposed solutions):

1. enhance transparency of online news, involving an adequate and privacy-compliant sharing of data about the systems that enable their circulation online; 2. promote media and information literacy to counter disinformation and help users navigate the digital media environment; 3. develop tools for empowering users and journalists to tackle disinformation and foster a positive engagement with fast-evolving information technologies; 4. safeguard the diversity and sustainability of the European news media ecosystem. (European Commission, 2018 )

Compare their solutions to these alternatives, which follow from the critical PT theory articulated in this article.

If one bears in mind the fact that majorities of citizens in many countries report that they distrust news media, corporations, government, democracy, capitalism and other major institutions and traditional accepted sacred organizing discourses of social life, at the most fundamental level “fixing” PT would first of all mean recovering social trust by radically transforming:

consumer capitalism (propelled by PT communication strategies and tactics—promotional culture) and its deep mediatization in an attention economy, since the latter must be made to serve ends beyond attention capture and data harvesting for marketing, i.e. corporate profit and state surveillance;

journalism’s slide into PT infotainment, even when ostensibly trying to extinguish PT via (infotaining and polarizing rhetoric of) fact-checking; and a debate about how it should be financed and what it can and should do under current conditions of communication and culture;

the unequal resources of professional political communication used to study, quantify, construct, and control pseudopublics instead of turning such communication channels and tools over to more democratic actors, albeit with strong emphasis on ethics;

education, teaching the history of anti-democratic elite forces that from the onset of mass communication commandeered scientific knowledges, immense communication resources, and strategic skills to manipulate and control the demos, with varying degrees of success.

Unlike popular and liberal-academic approaches, critical communication approaches to PT eschew nostalgia for earlier periods of pseudodemocratic opinion and perception management, and aim to avoid reactionary (cloaked in the rhetoric of progressivism) calls to restore liberal democracy, itself catastrophically recuperated by neoliberal failures of growing economic inequality, continual post-colonial exploitation, patriarchal backlashes, and the destruction of the environment. A PT cultural condition generates panics about truth that necessarily misrecognize the deeper origins of the condition. Critical approaches to PT wrestle with PT’s nascent roots in the scene of 20th-century mass democracy/communication and consumer capitalism, while assisting with theory and critique to build a more socially just world.

Acknowledgments

My thanks go to Ergin Bulut and Jack Bratich for conversations that contributed to the development of this article.

221+ Best Project Topics for Mass Communication Students

Mass Communication is vital for students as it cultivates effective communication skills and a deep understanding of the media’s role in society. It enhances critical thinking and fosters creativity, preparing students for diverse career paths. When it comes to Project Topics for Mass Communication, students must select subjects aligning with their interests and industry trends.

However, research and analysis play a key role in ensuring projects are well-informed and impactful. Creativity is encouraged as innovative approaches set projects apart. Challenges in topic selection are addressed through guidelines, helping students navigate the process. Connecting chosen topics to future career goals enhances relevance, providing a solid foundation for a successful academic and professional journey in Mass Communication.

What is Mass Communication?

Table of Contents

Mass Communication is a dynamic field that involves creating, disseminating, and analyzing information to a broad audience through various channels. It encompasses a range of mediums, including television, radio, newspapers, and digital platforms. Mass Communication plays a pivotal role in shaping public opinion, cultural trends, and societal norms. It involves the study of communication theories, media ethics, and the impact of media on individuals and societies, making it a crucial discipline in our interconnected global landscape.

Importance of Project Topics for Mass Communication

Here are some importance of project topics for mass communication students:

1. Relevance to Industry Trends

Project topics in Mass Communication ensure students engage with current industry trends, fostering a connection between academic learning and real-world challenges.

2. Personalized Learning Experience

Selecting a meaningful project topic allows students to explore areas of personal interest, making the learning experience more engaging and tailored to their passions within the vast field of Mass Communication.

3. Contribution to Knowledge

Well-chosen project topics contribute to the overall knowledge pool in Mass Communication, offering insights, solutions, or innovative perspectives that can benefit the academic community and the industry.

4. Career Alignment

Aligning project topics with future career goals enables students to develop specialized expertise, making them more competitive and marketable in their chosen professional paths.

5. Development of Critical Skills

Working on project topics hones essential skills such as research, analysis, presentation, and problem-solving, preparing students for the multifaceted challenges they may encounter in their Mass Communication careers.

Guidelines for Selecting Project Topics

Personal Interest: Choose a project topic that aligns with your personal interests and passions in Mass Communication to maintain enthusiasm throughout the research process.
Relevance to Current Trends: Opt for topics that reflect the dynamic nature of the industry, ensuring your project remains current and contributes to contemporary discussions.
Feasibility: Consider the availability of resources and time, selecting a project that is realistic and feasible within the given academic constraints.
Potential Impact : Evaluate the potential impact of your chosen topic, aiming for research that can bring value or contribute new perspectives to the field.
Alignment with Career Goals: Select a project topic that aligns with your future career goals, allowing you to build expertise in areas directly relevant to your desired professional path.

List of Project Topics for Mass Communication Students

Here is a complete list of project topics for mass communication students in 2024:

1. Journalism and News Reporting

The Impact of Social Media on Traditional Journalism
Investigative Reporting in the Digital Age
Ethics in Journalism: Navigating the Gray Areas
Fake News and Its Effects on Public Opinion
Citizen Journalism: Empowering the Masses
The Role of Journalists in Shaping Public Policy
News Framing and Its Influence on Audience Perception
Challenges of Reporting in Conflict Zones
Solutions Journalism: A New Approach to Reporting
The Evolution of Broadcast Journalism
Sports Journalism: Beyond the Scores
Environmental Journalism: Communicating Climate Change
Media Literacy in the Age of Misinformation
Coverage of Diversity in Media
Crisis Communication: Lessons from Media Responses

2. Advertising and Public Relations

Influencer Marketing: Strategies and Impacts
Corporate Social Responsibility in Advertising
Crisis Communication in Public Relations
The Psychology of Advertising: Understanding Consumer Behavior
Branding in the Digital Age
Political Advertising: Impact on Public Opinion
Greenwashing: Deceptive Environmental Advertising
Diversity and Inclusion in Ad Campaigns
The Role of Public Relations in Building Corporate Reputation
Viral Marketing: Unleashing the Power of Social Sharing
Advertising to Children: Ethics and Regulations
Social Media Influencers: Power and Responsibility
Integrated Marketing Communication: Strategies and Challenges
Public Relations in the Entertainment Industry
Impact of Celebrity Endorsements on Brand Perception

3. Broadcasting and Film Production

Evolution of Radio Broadcasting
The Impact of Streaming Services on Traditional TV
Virtual Reality in Film: A New Cinematic Experience
Documentary Filmmaking: Advocacy through Visual Storytelling
Challenges of Independent Film Production
The Role of Film Festivals in Promoting Diversity
Live Broadcasting in the Age of Social Media
Representation in Media: Gender, Race, and LGBTQ+ Perspectives
Podcasting: Rise of a New Digital Medium
Augmented Reality in Broadcast News
Sound Design in Film: Enhancing the Viewing Experience
Cinematic Techniques in Television Production
Media and Cultural Identity in Global Cinema
The Future of 3D Technology in Film
Mobile Journalism: Filming and Reporting on the Go

4. Digital Media and Technology

The Influence of Algorithms on Content Consumption
Virtual Communities: Social Interaction in Online Spaces
Augmented Reality in Digital Advertising
Gaming and Esports: Emerging Media Trends
Cybersecurity in Media Organizations
The Impact of 5G on Media and Communication
Digital Detox: Balancing Online and Offline Life
Artificial Intelligence in Content Creation
Digital Natives: Understanding the Habits of Gen Z
E-books vs. Traditional Publishing: Changing Reading Habits
Internet of Things (IoT) and Media Integration
Online Activism: Social Media as a Tool for Change
Virtual Influencers: The Rise of Computer-Generated Personalities
Data Privacy in the Age of Big Data
Accessibility in Digital Media: Designing for Inclusivity

5. Media Management and Economics

Business Models in the Media Industry
Subscription-Based vs. Ad-Supported Media Platforms
Media Consolidation: Impact on Diversity and Competition
Crisis Management in Media Organizations
Audience Measurement and Analytics in Media
Globalization of Media Companies: Challenges and Opportunities
The Economics of News: Ad Revenue vs. Public Funding
Content Monetization Strategies for Online Platforms
Media Ownership and Its Influence on Editorial Independence
The Role of Government in Media Regulation
Media Startups: Navigating the Challenges of a New Venture
Media Literacy Education: Bridging the Gap
Branding and Positioning in Media Management
Subscription Fatigue: Challenges for Media Subscription Services
Corporate Social Responsibility in Media Companies

6. Photojournalism and Visual Communication

The Ethics of Photojournalism: Balancing Truth and Sensitivity
Visual Storytelling in the Age of Instagram
Iconic Images in Photojournalism: Impact and Legacy
Photography and Social Change: Documenting Activism
The Role of Photojournalists in Conflict Zones
Drone Photography in Journalism: Opportunities and Challenges
Cultural Sensitivity in Visual Communication
Photo Editing Ethics: Navigating the Digital Landscape
Virtual Reality in Photojournalism: Creating Immersive Narratives
The Power of Images: Influencing Public Opinion
Photography and Environmental Activism
Visual Trends in Contemporary Advertising
Photojournalism in the Age of Deepfakes
Documentary Photography: Capturing Unseen Realities
The Evolution of Image Editing Software

7. Communication Research and Methods

Quantitative vs. Qualitative Research in Media Studies
The Role of Surveys in Media Audience Analysis
Content Analysis of Social Media Discourse
Experimental Design in Communication Research
Ethnographic Approaches in Media Studies
Big Data in Communication Research: Challenges and Opportunities
Longitudinal Studies in Media Impact Assessment
Survey Sampling Techniques in Media Research
Comparative Analysis of Media Systems
Case Study Research in Media and Communication
Online Ethnography: Studying Digital Subcultures
Participatory Action Research in Community Media
Cross-Cultural Communication Research
Media Framing Analysis: Understanding Persuasion Techniques
The Use of Eye-Tracking in Media Consumption Studies

8. International Communication

Cultural Imperialism in Global Media
Media Representation of Global Conflicts
Transnational Media Flows: Impact on Local Cultures
Soft Power and Media Diplomacy
Globalization of News: Challenges for Local Journalism
The Role of International Organizations in Media Regulation
Cultural Sensitivity in International Advertising
Media and Cultural Identity in the Globalized World
Diaspora Media: Connecting Communities Across Borders
Global Media Ethics: Balancing Universal Principles and Cultural Differences
International Collaboration in Film and Television Production
Impact of Social Media on Cross-Cultural Communication
Media and Human Rights: Reporting on Global Injustices
Cultural Diplomacy through Public Diplomacy Campaigns
The Role of International News Agencies in Shaping Global Narratives

9. Health Communication

The Influence of Media on Health Behaviors
Crisis Communication in Public Health Emergencies
Media Representation of Mental Health: Breaking Stigmas
Health Communication Campaigns: Successes and Challenges
Social Media and Health Advocacy
The Role of Entertainment Media in Health Education
Vaccine Communication: Addressing Misinformation
Public Perception of Healthcare in Media
Ethical Issues in Health Journalism
Digital Health Communication: Apps and Online Platforms
Cultural Competence in Health Communication
Media Influence on Body Image and Eating Disorders
Telehealth and the Role of Media in Healthcare Accessibility
Health Communication in Rural Communities
The Impact of Health Narratives in Entertainment Media

10. Political Communication

Political Advertising Strategies and Ethics
Media Influence on Political Opinion Formation
Election Coverage: Bias and Fairness in Media
Social Media and Political Mobilization
The Role of Satire in Political Communication
Media Framing of Political Scandals
Political Communication in Authoritarian Regimes
The Impact of Political Cartoons on Public Perception
Political Debates in the Age of Live Broadcasting
Media Literacy and Informed Citizenship
Digital Campaigning: Strategies and Concerns
The Role of Political Talk Shows in Public Discourse
Political Communication and Populism
Media’s Role in Shaping Political Agendas
The Use of Social Media by Political Leaders

11. Entertainment and Pop Culture

Celebrity Culture and Media Influence
Reality TV and Its Impact on Society
Streaming Services and the Changing Landscape of Entertainment
Representations of Gender and Sexuality in Popular Media
The Influence of Music Videos on Youth Culture
Nostalgia and Remakes in Film and Television
Fandom Culture: Community and Identity
Video Games as a Form of Art and Entertainment
Social Media and Celebrity Endorsements
Cultural Appropriation in Popular Media
Influences of Japanese Pop Culture on Global Media
Diversity in Casting: Addressing Representation in Entertainment
Memes and Internet Culture: A New Language of Communication
The Impact of Social Media Challenges on Pop Culture
Cultural Critique through Comedy: Satire and Social Commentary

12. Environmental Communication

Media Coverage of Environmental Issues
Climate Change Communication: Challenges and Strategies
Environmental Documentaries: Advocacy through Film
Corporate Responsibility in Environmental Reporting
Green Marketing: Promoting Sustainable Lifestyles
Indigenous Perspectives in Environmental Communication
Environmental Activism in Digital Spaces
Wildlife Conservation Communication
Environmental Journalism and Science Reporting
Eco-friendly Practices in Media Production
The Role of Social Media in Environmental Awareness
Public Perception of Climate Change: Media Influence
Environmental Campaigns: Analyzing Effective Communication
Environmental Ethics in Advertising
The Role of Art and Creativity in Environmental Communication

13. Interpersonal Communication

The Impact of Social Media on Personal Relationships
Online Dating and Communication Patterns
Family Communication in the Digital Age
Cross-Cultural Communication in Interpersonal Relationships
Mobile Communication and Its Effects on Face-to-Face Interaction
Gender Differences in Communication Styles
Nonverbal Communication in Virtual Environments
Workplace Communication: Strategies for Effective Collaboration
Interpersonal Conflict Resolution in the Media Industry
The Influence of Friendship Portrayals in Media on Real-Life Relationships
Communication Challenges in Long-Distance Relationships
Social Media and Self-Presentation: Impacts on Identity
Communication Strategies for Building Trust in Online Environments
Parent-Child Communication in the Digital Era
Communicating Empathy: The Role of Media in Fostering Understanding

14. Educational Communication

The Role of Media in Distance Education
Digital Learning Platforms: Opportunities and Challenges
Educational Podcasts: Enhancing Learning Experiences
Social Media in the Classroom: Benefits and Pitfalls
Media Literacy Education: Curriculum Development
Gamification in Education: Using Media for Learning
Online Tutoring and the Future of Educational Communication
The Impact of Educational TV Programs on Childhood Development
E-Learning Platforms: Accessibility and Inclusivity
The Use of Augmented Reality in Educational Settings
Student-Generated Content in the Digital Classroom
Media Literacy and Critical Thinking in Higher Education
Blended Learning Models: Integrating Online and In-Person Education
Educational Campaigns: Addressing Social Issues through Media
The Role of Educational Media in Promoting Cultural Understanding

15. Cultural Studies in Media

Media Representations of Subcultures
Cultural Appropriation in Advertising and Entertainment
Identity and Intersectionality in Media
Cultural Hegemony in Popular Media
The Impact of Globalization on Cultural Identity
Queer Representation in Media: Progress and Challenges
Indigenous Perspectives in Media Narratives
Cultural Diversity in Children’s Programming
Counterculture Movements and Media Representation
Media and the Construction of Gender Roles
The intersection of Race and Media: Challenges and Progress
Cultural Sensitivity in International Media Production
Media Consumption and Cultural Identity Formation
Cultural Influences on Fashion in Media
Folklore and Mythology in Contemporary Media Narratives

These project topics span a wide range of categories within the field of mass communication, providing students with ample opportunities to explore diverse areas of interest and contribute to the ever-evolving landscape of media and communication studies.

In conclusion, the process of selecting project topics for Mass Communication is a pivotal aspect of a student’s academic journey. It goes beyond a mere academic requirement, serving as a gateway to personalized learning, skill development, and future career alignment. By adhering to guidelines, students ensure their topics remain relevant, impactful, and feasible. The ability to choose wisely not only contributes to the broader knowledge landscape of Mass Communication but also shapes individual growth and expertise.

As students embark on this journey, they discover that the thoughtful selection of a project topic is not just a task; it is a strategic investment in their academic and professional success in the dynamic realm of Mass Communication.

Science Fair Project Ideas For 6th Graders

When it comes to Science Fair Project Ideas For 6th Graders, the possibilities are endless! These projects not only help students develop essential skills, such…

Java Project Ideas for Beginners

Java is one of the most popular programming languages. It is used for many applications, from laptops to data centers, gaming consoles, scientific supercomputers, and…

What Kamala Harris has said so far on key issues in her campaign

As she ramps up her nascent presidential campaign, Vice President Kamala Harris is revealing how she will address the key issues facing the nation.

In speeches and rallies, she has voiced support for continuing many of President Joe Biden’s measures, such as lowering drug costs , forgiving student loan debt and eliminating so-called junk fees. But Harris has made it clear that she has her own views on some key matters, particularly Israel’s treatment of Gazans in its war with Hamas.

In a departure from her presidential run in 2020, the Harris campaign has confirmed that she’s moved away from many of her more progressive stances, such as her interest in a single-payer health insurance system and a ban on fracking.

Harris is also expected to put her own stamp and style on matters ranging from abortion to the economy to immigration, as she aims to walk a fine line of taking credit for the administration’s accomplishments while not being jointly blamed by voters for its shortcomings.

Her early presidential campaign speeches have offered insights into her priorities, though she’s mainly voiced general talking points and has yet to release more nuanced plans. Like Biden, she intends to contrast her vision for America with that of former President Donald Trump. ( See Trump’s campaign promises here .)

“In this moment, I believe we face a choice between two different visions for our nation: one focused on the future, the other focused on the past,” she told members of the historically Black sorority Zeta Phi Beta at an event in Indianapolis in late July. “And with your support, I am fighting for our nation’s future.”

Here’s what we know about Harris’ views:

Harris took on the lead role of championing abortion rights for the administration after Roe v. Wade was overturned in June 2022. This past January, she started a “ reproductive freedoms tour ” to multiple states, including a stop in Minnesota thought to be the first by a sitting US president or vice president at an abortion clinic .

On abortion access, Harris embraced more progressive policies than Biden in the 2020 campaign, as a candidate criticizing his previous support for the Hyde Amendment , a measure that blocks federal funds from being used for most abortions.

Policy experts suggested that although Harris’ current policies on abortion and reproductive rights may not differ significantly from Biden’s, as a result of her national tour and her own focus on maternal health , she may be a stronger messenger.

High prices are a top concern for many Americans who are struggling to afford the cost of living after a spell of steep inflation. Many voters give Biden poor marks for his handling of the economy, and Harris may also face their wrath.

In her early campaign speeches, Harris has echoed many of the same themes as Biden, saying she wants to give Americans more opportunities to get ahead. She’s particularly concerned about making care – health care, child care, elder care and family leave – more affordable and available.

Harris promised at a late July rally to continue the Biden administration’s drive to eliminate so-called “junk fees” and to fully disclose all charges, such as for events, lodging and car rentals. In early August, the administration proposed a rule that would ban airlines from charging parents extra fees to have their kids sit next to them.

On day one, I will take on price gouging and bring down costs. We will ban more of those hidden fees and surprise late charges that banks and other companies use to pad their profits.”

Since becoming vice president, Harris has taken more moderate positions, but a look at her 2020 campaign promises reveals a more progressive bent than Biden.

As a senator and 2020 presidential candidate, Harris proposed providing middle-class and working families with a refundable tax credit of up to $6,000 a year (per couple) to help keep up with living expenses. Titled the LIFT the Middle Class Act, or Livable Incomes for Families Today, the measure would have cost at the time an estimated $3 trillion over 10 years.

Unlike a typical tax credit, the bill would allow taxpayers to receive the benefit – up to $500 – on a monthly basis so families don’t have to turn to payday loans with very high interest rates.

As a presidential candidate, Harris also advocated for raising the corporate income tax rate to 35%, where it was before the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that Trump and congressional Republicans pushed through Congress reduced the rate to 21%. That’s higher than the 28% Biden has proposed.

Affordable housing was also on Harris’ radar. As a senator, she introduced the Rent Relief Act, which would establish a refundable tax credit for renters who annually spend more than 30% of their gross income on rent and utilities. The amount of the credit would range from 25% to 100% of the excess rent, depending on the renter’s income.

Harris called housing a human right and said in a 2019 news release on the bill that every American deserves to have basic security and dignity in their own home.

Consumer debt

Hefty debt loads, which weigh on people’s finances and hurt their ability to buy homes, get car loans or start small businesses, are also an area of interest to Harris.

As vice president, she has promoted the Biden administration’s initiatives on student debt, which have so far forgiven more than $168 billion for nearly 4.8 million borrowers . In mid-July, Harris said in a post on X that “nearly 950,000 public servants have benefitted” from student debt forgiveness, compared with only 7,000 when Biden was inaugurated.

A potential Harris administration could keep that momentum going – though some of Biden’s efforts have gotten tangled up in litigation, such as a program aimed at cutting monthly student loan payments for roughly 3 million borrowers enrolled in a repayment plan the administration implemented last year.

The vice president has also been a leader in the White House efforts to ban medical debt from credit reports, noting that those with medical debt are no less likely to repay a loan than those who don’t have unpaid medical bills.

In a late July statement praising North Carolina’s move to relieve the medical debt of about 2 million residents, Harris said that she is “committed to continuing to relieve the burden of medical debt and creating a future where every person has the opportunity to build wealth and thrive.”

Health care

Harris, who has had shifting stances on health care in the past, confirmed in late July through her campaign that she no longer supports a single-payer health care system .

During her 2020 campaign, Harris advocated for shifting the US to a government-backed health insurance system but stopped short of wanting to completely eliminate private insurance.

The measure called for transitioning to a Medicare-for-All-type system over 10 years but continuing to allow private insurance companies to offer Medicare plans.

The proposal would not have raised taxes on the middle class to pay for the coverage expansion. Instead, it would raise the needed funds by taxing Wall Street trades and transactions and changing the taxation of offshore corporate income.

When it comes to reducing drug costs, Harris previously proposed allowing the federal government to set “a fair price” for any drug sold at a cheaper price in any economically comparable country, including Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Japan or Australia. If manufacturers were found to be price gouging, the government could import their drugs from abroad or, in egregious cases, use its existing but never-used “march-in” authority to license a drug company’s patent to a rival that would produce the medication at a lower cost.

Harris has been a champion on climate and environmental justice for decades. As California’s attorney general, Harris sued big oil companies like BP and ConocoPhillips, and investigated Exxon Mobil for its role in climate change disinformation. While in the Senate, she sponsored the Green New Deal resolution.

During her 2020 campaign, she enthusiastically supported a ban on fracking — but a Harris campaign official said in late July that she no longer supports such a ban.

Fracking is the process of using liquid to free natural gas from rock formations – and the primary mode for extracting gas for energy in battleground Pennsylvania. During a September 2019 climate crisis town hall hosted by CNN, she said she would start “with what we can do on Day 1 around public lands.” She walked that back later when she became Biden’s running mate.

Biden has been the most pro-climate president in history, and climate advocates find Harris to be an exciting candidate in her own right. Democrats and climate activists are planning to campaign on the stark contrasts between Harris and Trump , who vowed to push America decisively back to fossil fuels, promising to unwind Biden’s climate and clean energy legacy and pull America out of its global climate commitments.

If elected, one of the biggest climate goals Harris would have to craft early in her administration is how much the US would reduce its climate pollution by 2035 – a requirement of the Paris climate agreement .

Immigration

Harris has quickly started trying to counter Trump’s attacks on her immigration record.

Her campaign released a video in late July citing Harris’ support for increasing the number of Border Patrol agents and Trump’s successful push to scuttle a bipartisan immigration deal that included some of the toughest border security measures in recent memory.

The vice president has changed her position on border control since her 2020 campaign, when she suggested that Democrats needed to “critically examine” the role of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, after being asked whether she sided with those in the party arguing to abolish the department.

In June of this year, the White House announced a crackdown on asylum claims meant to continue reducing crossings at the US-Mexico border – a policy that Harris’ campaign manager, Julie Chavez Rodriguez, indicated in late July to CBS News would continue under a Harris administration.

Trump’s attacks stem from Biden having tasked Harris with overseeing diplomatic efforts in Central America in March 2021. While Harris focused on long-term fixes, the Department of Homeland Security remained responsible for overseeing border security.

She has only occasionally talked about her efforts as the situation along the US-Mexico border became a political vulnerability for Biden. But she put her own stamp on the administration’s efforts, engaging the private sector.

Harris pulled together the Partnership for Central America, which has acted as a liaison between companies and the US government. Her team and the partnership are closely coordinating on initiatives that have led to job creation in the region. Harris has also engaged directly with foreign leaders in the region.

Experts credit Harris’ ability to secure private-sector investments as her most visible action in the region to date but have cautioned about the long-term durability of those investments.

Israel-Hamas

The Israel-Hamas war is the most fraught foreign policy issue facing the country and has spurred a multitude of protests around the US since it began in October.

After meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in late July, Harris gave a forceful and notable speech about the situation in Gaza.

We cannot look away in the face of these tragedies. We cannot allow ourselves to become numb to the suffering. And I will not be silent.”

Harris echoed Biden’s repeated comments about the “ironclad support” and “unwavering commitment” to Israel. The country has a right to defend itself, she said, while noting, “how it does so, matters.”

However, the empathy she expressed regarding the Palestinian plight and suffering was far more forceful than what Biden has said on the matter in recent months. Harris mentioned twice the “serious concern” she expressed to Netanyahu about the civilian deaths in Gaza, the humanitarian situation and destruction she called “catastrophic” and “devastating.”

She went on to describe “the images of dead children and desperate hungry people fleeing for safety, sometimes displaced for the second, third or fourth time.”

Harris emphasized the need to get the Israeli hostages back from Hamas captivity, naming the eight Israeli-American hostages – three of whom have been killed.

But when describing the ceasefire deal in the works, she didn’t highlight the hostage for prisoner exchange or aid to be let into Gaza. Instead, she singled out the fact that the deal stipulates the withdrawal by the Israeli military from populated areas in the first phase before withdrawing “entirely” from Gaza before “a permanent end to the hostilities.”

Harris didn’t preside over Netanyahu’s speech to Congress in late July, instead choosing to stick with a prescheduled trip to a sorority event in Indiana.

Harris is committed to supporting Ukraine in its fight against Russian aggression, having met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at least six times and announcing last month $1.5 billion for energy assistance, humanitarian needs and other aid for the war-torn country.

At the Munich Security Conference earlier this year, Harris said: “I will make clear President Joe Biden and I stand with Ukraine. In partnership with supportive, bipartisan majorities in both houses of the United States Congress, we will work to secure critical weapons and resources that Ukraine so badly needs. And let me be clear: The failure to do so would be a gift to Vladimir Putin.”

More broadly, NATO is central to our approach to global security. For President Biden and me, our sacred commitment to NATO remains ironclad. And I do believe, as I have said before, NATO is the greatest military alliance the world has ever known.”

Police funding

The Harris campaign has also walked back the “defund the police” sentiment that Harris voiced in 2020. What she meant is she supports being “tough and smart on crime,” Mitch Landrieu, national co-chair for the Harris campaign and former mayor of New Orleans, told CNN’s Pamela Brown in late July.

In the midst of nationwide 2020 protests sparked by George Floyd’s murder by a Minneapolis police officer, Harris voiced support for the “defund the police” movement, which argues for redirecting funds from law enforcement to social services. Throughout that summer, Harris supported the movement and called for demilitarizing police departments.

Democrats largely backed away from calls to defund the police after Republicans attempted to tie the movement to increases in crime during the 2022 midterm elections.

Additional credits

IMAGES

Mass Communication: A Critical Approach
Critical Thinking Definition, Skills, and Examples
PPT
Mass Communications: Critical Approach
Mass Media: Critical Thinking Skills, Images and Stereotypes
Types of Mass Communication, Examples, Courses, PDF

VIDEO

Foundations of Critical Thinking
Negative Thoughts
Immersive Critical Thinking Activities: Think Like A Scientist
Critical Mass
To all the politicians who underestimate the power of young minds, let us set the record straight
Thought Control in Democratic Societies

COMMENTS

15.2 Functions and Theories of Mass Communication
How does mass communication function differently than interpersonal communication? Do we have relationships with media like we have relationships with people? To answer these questions, we can look at some of the characteristics and functions of mass communication. One key characteristic of mass communication is its ability to overcome the physical limitations present in face-to-face ...
13.2: Functions and Theories of Mass Communication
This function has been analyzed and discussed by mass communication scholars for decades. Overall, the mass media serves four gatekeeping functions: relaying, limiting, expanding, and reinterpreting (Bittner, 1996). In terms of relaying, mass media requires some third party to get a message from one human to the next.
Mass Communication, Media, and Culture
According to the author, the world did not need another introductory text in mass communication. But the world did need another kind of introductory text in mass communication, and that is how Understanding Media and Culture: An Introduction to Mass Communication was birthed.
The Handbook of Media and Mass Communication Theory
The Handbook of Children, Media, and Development, edited by Sandra L. Calvert and Barbara J. Wilson The Handbook of Crisis Communication, edited by W. Timothy Coombs and Sherry J. Holladay The Handbook of Internet Studies, edited by Mia Consalvo and Charles Ess The Handbook of Rhetoric and Public Address, edited by Shawn J. Parry-Giles and J. Michael Hogan The Handbook of Critical ...
Introduction to Mass Communication , 12th Edition
The new edition maintains its commitment to enhancing students' critical thinking and media literacy skills. New and updated material in this edition reflects the latest developments in new digital technologies and highlights the most current research in the field. With Introduction to Mass Communication, students will have access to a suite of assessments and presentation tools to help them ...
8.6: Grounding Theories of Mass Communication
Let's look at five fundamental theories of mass communication: 1) the magic bullet theory, 2) two-step flow theory, 3) multi-step flow theory, 4) uses and gratification theory, and 5) cultivation theory. Magic Bullet Theory. The magic bullet theory (also called the hypodermic needle theory) suggests that mass communication is like a gun ...
PDF Media Literacy Through Critical Thinking
The skills of thinking critically about mass communication are essential survival skills in a technological, consumer society such as ours. The purpose of these materials is to assess students' abilities to think critically when analyzing mass communication.
25 Mass Communication Theories: A Comprehensive Take on what shapes
The Gatekeeping Theory, first introduced by social psychologist Kurt Lewin in 1943, is a critical concept in mass communication and journalism. It underscores the power that journalists, editors, news directors, and other media professionals have in controlling the flow of news.
Introduction to Mass Communication
Through this cultural perspective, students learn that audience members are as much a part of the mass communication process as are the media technologies and industries. The tenth edition maintains its commitment to enhancing students' critical thinking and media literacy skills.
1: Mass Communication: A Critical Approach
Examining the findings of both cultural and social scientific research on media can help us follow a critical process that consists of describing, analyzing, interpreting, evaluating, and engaging with mass media. But the two models have strengths and weaknesses that are important to keep in mind. The cultural model is best at recognizing the complexity of media culture and providing analyses ...
15.3 Mass Communication and Ethics
Instead, media literacy ties in with critical thinking and listening, which we have learned about throughout this book already. Media-literacy skills are important because media outlets are "culture makers," meaning they reflect much of current society but also reshape and influence sociocultural reality and real-life practices.
Introductory Guide to the Study of Mass Communication
This guide explains the history and social significance of mass communication as a field of study, outlines the theories underpinning this discipline, and describes the impact of mass communication on individuals, governments, and industries.
Post-Truth and Critical Communication Studies
Critical scholars have identified a more complex historical set of factors, to which popular proposed solutions have been mostly blind. Modern origins of PT lie in the anxious elite negotiation of mass representative liberal democracy with proposals for organizing and deploying mass communication technologies.
Critical thinking: Critical thinking for mass communications students
Published in Critical Studies in Mass Communication (Vol. 10, No. 1, 1993)
Critical Thinking Lacks Definition and Uniform Evaluation Criteria
Challenges and opportunities in journalism and mass communication education. A report of the Task Force on the Future of Journalism and Mass Communication Education, a special section in Journalism Educator, 44, 1, Spring.
Critical Studies in Media Communication
Critical Studies in Media Communication publishes original scholarship on mediated and mass communication from a cultural studies and/or critical perspective.
221+ Best Project Topics for Mass Communication Students
Mass Communication is vital for students as it cultivates effective communication skills and a deep understanding of the media's role in society. It enhances critical thinking and fosters creativity, preparing students for diverse career paths. When it comes to Project Topics for Mass Communication, students must select subjects aligning with their interests and industry trends.
10.6: Grounding Theories of Mass Communication
Let's look at five fundamental theories of mass communication: 1) the magic bullet theory, 2) two-step flow theory, 3) multi-step flow theory, 4) uses and gratification theory, and 5) cultivation theory. Magic Bullet Theory. The magic bullet theory (also called the hypodermic needle theory) suggests that mass communication is like a gun ...
Here's where Harris stands on key issues
A week after announcing her run for president, Kamala Harris has yet to tell voters how she will address the key issues facing the nation. Her platform will likely be in the same vein as that of ...
Power-Skills: AI-Proof Job Skills to Learn in High School
Discover how key power skills like emotional intelligence and critical thinking can secure your future career in the AI era.
2024-2025 California State University General Education Requirements
A. English Language Communication and Critical Thinking Choose one course (three units minimum) from each area for a minimum of nine units. Learn how to find classes in this area with free textbooks. Area ... RTVF 300 Mass Media and Society; SJS 300 Introduction to Social Justice Studies; ...
2024-2025 California State University General Education Requirements
A. English Language Communication and Critical Thinking Choose one course (three units minimum) from each area for a minimum of nine units. Area Courses; A1 Oral Communication: COMM 301, 303, 311**, 331, 361, 481: A2 Written Communication: ENGWR 300, 488; ESLW 340: A3 Critical Thinking