Loading…

Effects Theory

lavinia mottershead

Updated Nov. 22, 2018

Transcript

Effects Theory

Lavinia Mottershead

Frankfurt School

Effects Theory

This is a term given to a group of social scientists originally based at the instate for social researcher in Frankfurt during the years between the first and second world war. They were interested and concerned with the power in which modern mass media had to propagandise on behalf of fascism. The founders of this institution articulated criticisms of a capitalist system which controlled media output creating a large culture that eliminated opposition. The researchers argue that the rise of the ‘culture industry’ results in an increase of standardisation within society. Under capitalism, society controls almost everything and even culture is processed through the mass media as something which is bought and sold. The mass audience is manipulated by society and are progressively less able to criticise it. The mass media prevent culture from being effectively communicated in an authentic form as first its commodified and transformed to fit the capitalist system. The original model proposed to explain how this worked was the hypodermic needle model. This model owes much to the supposed power of the mass media as it injects the passive audience with ideologies.

Violence in the media

In our society effects theory is often cited as evidence of the dangers of violence within the media. The ‘moral majority’ argue that TV output which is explicitly sexual, too violent or offensive in other ways must be censored as it may influence audiences the act in similar ways. This assumes that the audience is passive and will receive without question whatever ideologies are presented.

Cultivation theory

It’s difficult to prove the effects of individual media texts on an audience so a more refined version of the theory has been made- the cultivation model this states that while a single text don't have much effects on the viewers repeated exposure will make them less sensitive.

Two-step flow

The final development from this theory is the concept of two-step flow this assumes that the audience is more active and will discuss media texts with one another. If the texts are discussed with others who we respect, then we may be passive enough to accept their views.

Reception Theory

This focuses on what people see in the media on the meanings the produce when they interpret media texts.

Reception Theory

David Morley has explored the politics of the living room this is the idea that the media is just a part of all the different things that may be going on in your home. In a typical family it can be a subject of argument or a symbol of power. IN 1980 David conducted a very detailed audience study and he observed the different social groups and how they all interpret media texts in different ways. he discovered that there are 3 mains types of reading for media texts:

Dominant reading- the reader shares the programmes codes (its meaning system of values, attitudes, beliefs and assumptions) and accepts the preferred reading.
Negotiated reading- the reader partly shares the programmes codes but modifies it in a way which reflects their position and interests .
Oppositional reading- the reader doesn't share the programmes codes and rejects the preferred reading bringing to bear an alternative frame of interpretation.

Reception analysis concentrates on the audience itself and how they respond to the text. Reception analysis is based on the idea that no text has one single meaning but instead suggest that the individual members of the audience themselves help to create the meaning. We decode the texts that we encounter in individual ways which may be a result of our upbringing, the mood were in, the place were in at the time as well as other factors. Reception analysis tries to understand these differences. Factors such as gender, social status and our social context can be massively important when we construct the meaning of a media text.

Uses and Gratifications

Learning

Uses and Gratification Theory

During the 1960's it became apparent that audiences made choices about how and when they consume media texts. Audiences were made up of individuals who actively consumed texts for different reasons and in different ways. This theory was expanded suggesting a series of possible reasons as to why audience members might consume media texts:

diversion- escape from everyday problems and routines
personal relationships- using the media for emotional and other interaction
personal identity- constructing their own identity from characters in media texts as well as leaning behavior and values
surveillance- for gathering information.

Information

Some people use media to inform and educate themselves e.g. documentaries. The reasons for this is that they may want to find out about relevant events and conditions, they may want to seek advice or they may just want to satisfy curiosity and general knowledge.

Learning

Others watch tv to self-educate and to build confidence through gaining knowledge.

Personal Identity

This is the idea that people watch tv as they find reinforcement for personal values, find models of behavior, identify with celebrities or gain insight on themselves.

Integration and social interaction

Another use and gratification is integration and social interaction this is the idea that people watch tv to gain insight into circumstances of others, to identify with others giving the viewers a sense of belonging, to find a basis for conversation and social interaction, to have a substitute for real-life companionship, to help carry out social roles and finally to enable the viewer to connect with family, friends and society.

Entertainment

Others may watch to purely for the enjoyment side of it. They may want to escape or be diverted from their problems and everyday lives, they may just want to relax, they may want to get intrinsic cultural or aesthetic enjoyment, or perhaps they may need emotional release.

Crime and Violence

Crime and Police series are always popular, and Crime is now classed as a key genre it even has it's own codes and convention:

most crime series have binary oppositions between good and bad
there's usually a chase sequence
mise-en-scene is usually dirty and cramped
there's lots of emphasis of guns and weapons
the lead character is often troubled with a complex past
the hero usually has a sidekick

Crime and Violence

Violence in the Media

violence in the media

The cultivation theory suggests that were increasingly destined to violence in the media. There are various arguments about the influence this has on our lives. It may influence our behavior some psychologists actually think that children in particular are influenced by watching violence on tv making them significantly more aggressive. Others think that by watching significant quantities of violence on television we can start to believe that it is extensive and lose perspective on reality. Where as some theorists argue that experiencing violence second-hand through the media can enable us to realize violent feelings and actually become more peaceful.

Moral Panics

moral panics

Moral panics start when the media are placed in a position of becoming an agent of social control. The panic which is generated by a story of this kind relates to the theory of deviancy. Most news depends on binary oppositions to establish a story, so any story representing a group as dangerous are referred to as bad and therefore deviant. The problem is that moral panic can cause more deviancy and doesn't resolve situations. There are 3 stages to the creation of a moral panic: 1) an event occurs generating media attention 2) media organizations relate this one event to wider social issues 3) media coverage increases, social pressure force government action of some kind and the public feel vindicated.

Children and the Violence on TV

children and violence on tv

Assumptions about the dangers of exposing children to violence in the media are commonplace. An example of this is Jamie Bulger and how the violence in the media led directly to real-life violence. However violence on cartoons and kids shows plays a different effect on children than violence in real life. David Guantlett argues that the effects model make incorrect assumptions such as assuming children can't cope with violence in media form, not differentiating between types of media and assuming a passive audience and a single meaning to be received from media texts.