Media effects models

Question 1

Media text definition

Answer 1

any media product which describes, defines or represents something, such as a movie or video clip, TV or radio programme, a newspaper of magazine article, a book, a poster, a photo, a song, an advertisement, a CD or DVD, a website etc

Question 2

Polysemic definition

Answer 2

means that a media text (such as a media message, picture or headline) can be interpreted in different ways by different people

Question 3

Methodological problems of researching media effects

Answer 3

• difficult to establish whether it is actually the media, or other social factors that cause any alleged effects - eg people who watch violent films may be more aggressive due to social circumstances rather than the films
• almost impossible to disentangle media effects from the range of other factors influencing people
• different people interpret media differently (polysemic)
• hard to establish which media causes effects due to range of media available (new media)
• practically impossible to establish what people believe without media influence
• in a media-saturated society, everyone is exposed to some form of media and all their lives so it’s almost impossible to compare those who are exposed to media and those who aren’t

Question 4

Key questions when looking at differences between media effects models

Answer 4

• how passive or active are the audiences?
• how powerful are the media in affecting audiences?

Question 5

Hypodermic syringe model

Answer 5

• passive audiences
• sometimes called the magic bullet model
• suggests that the media injects messages into the ‘veins’ of audiences who accept these messages
• Dworkin (1981, radical feminist) - viewing violent pornography contributes to violence again women
• model used to partly explain the 2011 riots in London, claiming that social media fuelled them
• used in Bandura’s bobo doll experiments, as children who saw violence against the dolls enacted it

Question 6

Criticisms of the hypodermic syringe model

Answer 6

• assumes the whole audience is passive and homogenous so would react the same way
• assumes audience is easily manipulated but people have ideas and are free to interpret media texts differently
• assumes that the media has enormous power and influence, overriding all other agencies of socialisation and people’s own experiences
• little evidence that media content has the immediate effects on audiences the model suggests

Question 7

The two-step flow model

Answer 7

• active audiences
• developed by Katz and Lazarsfield (1955)
• key factor affecting responses to media is the influence of ‘opinion leaders’ in social networks, who are respected members of the group and get information and form views from the media, leading opinion and discussion in the media
• suggests that opinion leaders select, interpret and filter media texts before the reach mass audiences, then pass on messages containing their own opinions to the social groups
• audiences are therefore influenced by mediated messages
• recognises that responses are interlinked with the influence of social groups

Question 8

Limitations of the two-step flow model

Answer 8

• probably more than two steps in the media’s influence - eg someone’s opinion may be affected by teachers, parents, friends etc
• rests on the basic assumption that the majority passively accept the views of opinion leaders (which tend to fit the media messages)
• suggests that people are vulnerable to influence and manipulation by opinion leaders, regardless of people’s own views and experiences
• suggests that the audience is divided into ‘active’ viewers (opinion leaders) and ‘passive’ viewers
• due to the new media, the role of opinion leaders may be decreased or replaced by a huge range of diverse opinion leaders online

Question 9

The cultural effects model - the ‘drip drip’ effect

Answer 9

• recognises that the media are owned and heavily influenced by the dominant and most powerful groups in society and that their interests are reflected in the media output
• whilst the majority tend to agree with the media messages, some still challenge it and react based on personal experiences
• suggests the media gradually influences the audience over a period of time in a ‘drip drip’ effect, slowly and gradually persuading people to agree with the dominant ideology and reinforcing cultural hegemony
• Himmelweit et al emphasised that the ‘drip drip effect’ affects children strongly and suggested that it can lead to violence when consuming violent media

Question 10

Preferred (or dominant) reading definition

Answer 10

is one where audiences read (or decode and interpret) media texts (messages) in the way that those producing media content intended, and which they would prefer their audiences to believe

Question 11

A negotiated reading definition

Answer 11

one in which media audiences generally accept the preferred or dominant meaning of a media text, but amend it to some extent, like finding exceptions that fit their own beliefs, values and experiences

Question 12

An oppositional reading definition

Answer 12

one in which media audiences oppose or reject the preferred or dominant interpretation of media content

Question 13

Encoding/decoding - cultural effects model

Answer 13

• Hall (1980 - neomarxist) - suggests media texts are ‘encoded’ by those who produce them and contain an intended meaning which they expect audiences to believe - this meaning is the dominant hegemonic viewpoint
• Hall suggests that most audiences will decode media texts as intended but others may interpret the same media differently based on experiences and worldview
• eg Reese and Lewis (2009) found that US media was uncritical in its reports of USA’s actions in the ‘war of terror’

Question 14

Selective filtering (model) - an interpretivist approach

Answer 14

Klapper (1960) - like Hall and Morley, suggested that people decode media differently based on their experiences etc
Klapper suggests there are 3 filters that people apply in their approaches to and interpretations of the media:
1. selective exposure - people choose what they want to watch and what media to consume
2. selective perception - people react differently to the same message and may accept or reject a message based on their own views and interests
3. selective retention - people will forget material which is not in line with their views and interests

Question 15

During the Iraq war of 2003, the Daily Mirror passionately opposed the war, yet half of its readers were opposed to it, whereas

Answer 15

the Daily Mail strongly supported the war, but 1/4 of its readers opposed it, suggesting people may form their own views beyond what the media tells them

Question 16

The Glasgow Media Group - critique of the encoding/decoding and selective filtering approaches

Answer 16

• Philo (2008) accepts that audiences are active and can be critical of media accounts, however GMG research over many years shows that the media has a great deal of power in forming how audiences view the world
• Philo study of the 1984/5 miners’ strike in Britain found that people from different backgrounds (class, politics etc) believed the media account that the miners were responsible for the trouble - the only exception was those who had seen a picket line, who all rejected the idea that miners were to blame
• concluded that the media had an effect on how audiences think about the world
• Philo (2012) - it can be difficult for audiences to criticise a dominant media account if there is little access to alternative sources of information, due to the media’s role in agenda-setting and gate-keeping
• Curran (2003) - audience is embedded into different ideologies based on the media they choose to consume

Question 17

Limitations of the cultural effects model

Answer 17

• reception analysis and selective filtering overemphasise the active role of audiences, as Philo (GMG) suggests
• assumes media personal work within the framework of the dominant ideology, failing to recognise independence of journalists
• suggests the audience can control their response to media output, but long-term socialisation by the media through repeated messages may limit the audience’s ability to filter those messages, or enable them to do so only within the framework laid down by the media, creating an illusion of choice - eg someone may mock a political debate without questioning why there’s only 3 parties represented or why only certain topics are discussed

Question 18

The uses and gratifications model

Answer 18

• McQuail (1972) and Lull (1990) suggest a variety of uses and gratification of the media; diversion (leisure and entertainment), personal relationships (keep up with family and friends, new media communities etc), personal identity (to explore, confirm and seek identity, interests, values etc), surveillance (access information eg news) and background wallpaper (while doing other things)
• Park et al (2009) - online Facebook groups were used to satisfy these needs (except background wallpaper)
• Media Reform Coalition (2023) - 1 in 3 people use Facebook to get news
• these mean that people make conscious choices to select and interpret media
• uses and gratifications vary based on personal background and factors so it is difficult to generalise about media effects due to selective exposure
• Watson (2008) - people use media to escape from their real lives eg online gaming to realise tensions and provide stimulation

Question 19

Limitations of the uses and gratifications model

Answer 19

• overestimates audience power
• focuses too much on the use of media by individuals rather than social groups
• ignores wider social factors which affect audience responses

Question 20

Postmodernist perspective on media effects

Answer 20

• Baudrillard - we live in a media saturated society
• our views and identity are consistently formed by media

Question 21

Reception analysis model

Answer 21

• Morley (1999) - 3 ways in which people may interpret media texts:
  1. the preferred or dominant reading - the one encoded by media producers (most common reading)
  2. a negotiated reading - audiences generally accept the preferred or dominant reading, but amend it to some extent to fir their own beliefs (eg accepting most benefit claimants as ‘scroungers’ but knowing some deserving cases)
  3. an oppositional reading - audiences completely reject the dominant reading
• can apply to an example of messages about COVID vaccines - dominant reading is that they are necessary and good whereas oppositional reading would be anti-vax - negotiated reading could be positive about vaccine but negative about government handling and how it is distributed