Sorry for the inconvenience of late post. To make a long story short, due to some 'technical difficulties' I had to re-write the post after a late class.
Agenda setting theory is in some ways related to cultivation theory in that it is based around how media, for lack of a better term ‘Warps’ the viewers mind, except in Agenda theory, it is intentional. To start one has to understand that the theory is for the most part broken down into two aspects, where the media, through use of subconscious techniques, tells you what you should be thinking (Agenda Setting) and how you should be thinking about it (Framing).
First lets talk Agenda Setting. The best example for this is news stations, and what they choose to broadcast. A common trait is pushing lots of negative stories to spread fear in the minds of the people watching. By showing these stories people want to hear and know more about similar events, so that is what the media gives them. Agenda setting has a lot to do with not only what the broadcast wants to show but also the relationship of that and what the people want to see.
The second aspect is framing which is where the media, and above all the news tell people how to think about things. Fox news and MSNBC could receive the same exact information on a story but convey the information in entirely different ways, almost convincing the viewers of their politically influenced view on the topic.
In the following clip from The Daily Show, host Jon Stewart points out some rather in your face examples of news networks using framing.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Agenda Setting Theory
In my first blog which was my introduction, I quoted that the information we are exposed to both informs and forms us. As we grow older, we form our lives and become stubborn to take information that we want to believe in. Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw introduced the Agenda-Setting Theory in 1972. These men defined the theory with the function:
"The media may not only tell us what to think about, they also may tell us how and what to think about it, and perhaps even what to do about it." (Griffin p 403)
The Agenda-Setting Theory tells us how the media influences not only what the audience wants to hear and read about, but also how to deal with it as well. For example, the use of media to get people out to vote in the 2008 presidential election. Media was used in every way possible to get Americans out to vote, to show the significance of voting, how important it is. And it worked!
The Agenda-Setting Theory has 2 components of media agenda which is the "cause" and public agenda which is the "delayed effect." The media agenda is what the media communicates to the public. In the voting example, it would be the commercials, ads, all of media! And the public agenda is what the public is influenced to do, think, or act upon the media agenda. In the given example, it would be the influence upon viewers that voted.
Also we learn about Framing: The Salience of Attributes. James Tankard defines framing as "the central organizing idea for news content that supplies a context and suggests what the issue is through the use of selection, emphasis, exlusion, and elaboration." (Griffin p 401) Then that makes it possible that the media pick and choose what to communicate to the audience. In order to do so, they need to know what the audience wants to read and watch about. Whatever sells is aired on TV; sex, power, violence sells! And if this is so, how is it that framing is possible when the media agenda causes public agenda?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)