Selasa, 29 November 2011

Different kinds of theory mass communication

If theory understood not only as a system of law-like proposition, but as any set of ideas which can help make sense of a phenomenon, guide action or predict a consequence, then one can distinguish at least four kinds of theory which are relevant to mass communication: social scientific, normative, operational and everyday theory. The most obvious kind to be expected in a text like this consist of social scientific theory – general statements about the nature, working and effects of mass communication, based on systematic and objective observation of media and other relevant sources.

The body of such theory is now large, although it is loosely organized and not very clearly formulated or even very consistent. It also covers a very wide spectrum, from board questions of society to detailed aspect of individual information sending and receiving. Some ‘scientific’ theory is concerned with understanding what is going on, some with developing a critique and some with practical applications in processes of public information or persuasion (see Windahl and Signitzer, 1992)

A second kind of theory can be described as normative, since it concerned examining or prescribing how media ought to operate if certain social values are to be observed or attained. Such theory usually stems from the broader social philosophy or ideology of a given society. This kind of theory is important because it plays a part in shaping and legitimating media institutions and has considerable influence on the expectations which are placed on the media by other social agencies and even by the media’s own audiences. A good deal of research into mass media has been the result of attempts to apply norm of social and cultural performance. A society’s normative theories concerning its own media are usually to be found in laws, regulations, media policies, codes of ethics and the substance of public debate. While normative media theory is not in itself ‘objective’, it can be studied by the ‘objective’ methods of the social sciences (McQuail, 1992)

A third kind of knowledge about the media can best be described as operational theory, since it refers to the practical ideas asslembed and applied by media practitioners in the conduct of their own media work. Similar bodies of accumulated practical wisdom are to be found in most organizational and professional setting. In the case of the media it helps to organize experience on many questions such as how to select news, please audience, design effective advertising, keep within the limits of what society permits, and relate effectively to sources and audiences. At some points it may overlap with normative theory – for instance, in matters of journalistic ethics.
Such knowledge merits the name of theory because it is usually patterned and persistent, even it never codified, and is infuential in respect of behaviour. It comes to light in the study of communicators and their organizations (for example. Elliott, 1972; Tuchman, 1978). Katz (1977) compared the role of the researcher in relation to media production to that of the theorist of music or philosopher of science who can see regularities which a musician or scientist cannot be, or does not even need to be, aware of (though usually also without theorist themselves being able to make music or do science).

Finally, there is everyday or common-sense theory of media use, referring to the knowledge we all have from our own long experience with media, which enables us to understand what is going on, hoe a medium might fit into our daily lives, how its content is intended to be ‘read’, as well as how we like to read it, what the differences are between different media, different media genres and examples of content, and much more. On the basis of such theory is grounded the ability to make consistent choices, from tastes and make judgements. This ability, in turn, shapes what the media actually offer to their audiences and sets both directions and limits to media influence (for instance, by enabling us to distinguish between reality and fiction, to ‘read between the lines’ or to see through the persuasive aims and techniques of advertising and other kinds of propaganda).

Read more »

Senin, 28 November 2011

Media Theory (Basic differences of approach)

The field of media theory is characterized by widely divergent perspectives. In addition to a fundamental difference between the left and the right of the political spectrum – between progressive and conservative, or critical and applied purposes – which plays a major part in structuring theory, there are two main differences of perspective in relation to mass media and society.
            One of these separates ‘media-centric’ from ‘society-centric’ (or social-centric) approaches. The former approach attributes much more autonomy and influence to communication and concentrates on the media’s own sphere of activity; the latter takes a view of the media as so much a reflection of political and economic forces that the theory for the media can be little more than a special application of broader social theory (Golding and Murdock,1978). Media-centric theory sees mass media as a primary mover in social change and often themselves driven forward by irresistible development of communication technology. Whether or not society is driven by the media, it is certainly true that the mass communication theory it self Is so driven, tending to respond to each major shift to media technology and structure.
            The second main dividing line is between those theorists whose interest (and conviction) lies in the realm of culture and ideas and whose emphasize material forces and factors. This divide corresponds approximately with certain other dimension: humanistic versus scientific; qualitative versus quantitative; and subjective versus objective. While these differences may reflect only the necessity for some division of labour in a wide territory, thay often involve competing and contradictory claim about how to pose questions, conduct research and provide explanation. These two alternatives are independent of each other, so that in fact several different perspectives on media and society can be identified. 
The four types of prespective can be briefly describes as follows:
  1. A media – culturalist prespective involves giving primary attention to comtent and to the reception of media message as influenced by the immediate personal environment.
  2. A media – meterialist approach involves the political-economic and the technological aspect of the media themselves receiving the moxt emphasis.
  3. A social-culturalist prespective emphasizes teh influence of social factors on media production and reception and the function of the media in social life.
  4. A social–materialist perspective sees madia mainly as a reflection of economic and material conditions of the society rather than as first cause.
Each of these prespectives can be cross-cut by a more radical or more conservative point of view. However, there has been a tendency for the critical perspectives to be more associated with either a society-centric or a culturalist perspective (or both).

Read more »

Rabu, 23 November 2011

Media and society relationships

This book is about theories of mass communication, but it is hard to draw a line between ideas concerning mass media and wider theories of society. Yet one can at least try to recognize some of the fundamentals underlying assumptions about the relation between media and society. Most basic is a view of the mass media as an established social institution, with its own distinctive set of norms and practices but with the scope of its activities subject to definition  and limitation by the wider society. The implies that the media are essentially dependent on ‘society’, especially on the institutions of political and economics power, although there is scope for influence in return, and the media institutions may be gaining in autonomy, simpli as a result of the extending volume and scope of media activities. Even so, the forces historically at work in society and the wider world are more potent than the media or the immediate influence which these might exert.

The nature of the relations between media and society depends on circumstances of time and place. This book largely deals with mass media and mass communication in modern, ‘developed’ nation states, mainly elective democracies with free-market (or mixed) economies which are integrate into a wider international set of economic and political relations of exchange, competition and also domination or conflict. The author’s view is that the theory and related research discussed in this book relate generally to social contexts characterized by structured differences in economics warefare and political power between social and economic classes.

            Despite apparent stability in these social context, deep latent conflicts and tensions exist nationally and internationally, which find expression in conflicts of ideology, competing claim of resources and, occasionally, social crisis. The media are deeply involved in these matters as producers, disseminators and stores of meaning about events and contexts of public social life. It follow that the study of mass  communication cannot avoid dealing in questions of values or easily achieve neutrality and scientific objectivity.

            This particular problem arises in another form when its comes to questions of interpreting the meaning of what media carry or the meanings which are perceived by the ‘recievers’. Again the possibility of objective knowledge is at issue and, therefore, also the possibility of formulating or testing theory. This problem is similar enough in the social sciences, though it may be posed in an unusually sharp form in respect of communications, since values and meaning are at the heart of the matter.

Read more »

Media of Mass Communication

It is the basic assumption that the mass media (newspaper, television and radio especially) are of considerable, and still growing, importance in modern societies. This view of the media is widely shared, and the reasons seem to lie in the fact that the media are :
·       a power source – a potential means of influence, control and innovsation in society; the primary means of transmission and source of information essential to the working of most social institutions.
·       the location (or arena) where many affairs of public life are played out, both nationally or internationally.
·       a major source of of definitions and images of social reality; thus also the place where the changing culture and the values of societies and groups are constructed, stored and most visibly expressed.
·       the primary key to fame and celebrity status as well as to effective performance in the public arena.
·       the source of an ordered and public meaning system which provides a benchmark for what is normal, empirically and evaluatively; deviations are signalled and comparisons made in terms of the public version of normally.
            In addition, the media are the single largest focus of leisure-time activity and means of entertainment. They also help organize and interrelate the rest of the leisure. As a result, they are a major and expanding industry, providing employment and a wide range of potential economics benefits.

            If these claims are accepted, it is not difficult to understand the great interest which the mass media have attracted since their early days, nor way they have been subject to so much public scruntiny and regulation as well as theorizing. The conduct of democratic (or undemocratic) politics, nationally and internationally, depends more and more on mass media, and there are few significant social issue which are addressed without some consideration of the role of the mass media, whether for good or ill. As will appear, the most fundamentals questions of society – those concerning the distribution and exercise of power, the management of problems and the processes of intregation and change – all turn on communication, especially the messages carried by the public means of communication, whether in the form of information.

Read more »

Selasa, 22 November 2011

Goal-Setting Theory

            While goal setting is originally viewed as a technique, it is developing into a motivational theory as researchers attempt to better understand the cognitive factors that influence its succes. Goal-setting experts argue that goal setting works by directing attention and action, mobilizing effort, increasing persistence, and encouraging the development of strategies to achieve the goals. Feedback regarding result is also an essential element. The succes of goal setting in motivating performance depends on establishing goals that have the appropriate atributes, or characteristics. In particular, goals should be specific and measureable, chalalenging, attainable, relevant to the major work of the organization, and time-limited.
            Goal commitment, one’s attachment to determination to reach a goal, is another important element in the goal setting process. Goal commitment is affected by the major components of expectancy theory: effort-performance expectancy (can i reach the goal?), performance-outcomes expectancy ( if i reach, will i be rewarded?), and valence ( do i value the potential rewards?). Individuals are more likely to be commited to attaining goals when they have high expectaion of succes in reaching the goals, see strong connections between goal accomplishment and rewards and value the rewards. Hence expectancy theory and goal setting theory are largely compatible. The usefulness of goal setting in enhancing performance has strong research support. As a result, managers are likely to find it a very helpful motivational tool.

Read more »

Equity Theory J. Stacy Adams

            Equity theory is a theory that argues that we prefer situations of balance, or equity, which exist when we perceive the ratio of our inputs and outcomes to be equal to the ratio of inputs and outcomes for a comparison other. The selection of the person with whom we compare ourselves depend on our own view of appropriate comparisons. For example, in considering the equity of pay raise, a person might compare her or his pay with that of certain coworker, peers in other units, or a friend with similar credentials who works for another company. In making equity judgement, we consider equity in relative terms (comparison with other) rather than absolute terms (comparison with a set standard). The inputs we consider in assessing the ratio of our inputs and outcomes relative to the ratio of other may cover a broad range of variables, including additional background, skills, experience, hours worked, and performance result. Outcome might include such factors as pay, bonuses, praise, parking place, office space and work assignments. The inputs and outcomes that we use assess the equity of a situation are based strictly on our own perceptions of what is relevant.
            According to the theory, two types of inequities create tension within us. In the first, underreward, we percieve our inputs-outcomes ratio to be less than the inputs-outcomes ratio of a comparison other. In the second, overreward, we percieve our inputs-outcomes ratio to be greater than the inputs-outcomes ratio of the comparison other. Interestingly, research on equity theory suggest that we are usually able to overreward condition rather quickly-apparently concluding that our inputs are worth considerably more than we originally thought. Situations of underreward are usually more difficult to rectify.          

Read more »

Rabu, 16 November 2011

Expectancy Theory Victor H. Vroom


The expectancy theory of motivation, originally proposed by Victor H. Vroom, argues that we consider three main issues before we expend the effort necessary to perform at a given level. 
            When we consider effort-performance (EàP) expectancy, we assess the probability that our effort will lead to the required performance level. Our assessment may include evaluating our own abilities, as well as considering the adequacy of contextual factors such as the availability of resource. To see effort-performance expectancy works, imagine that you are well qualified for the project and that the  available resources are adequate, you might assess the probability of your effort leading to high performance (the E-P expectancy) quite high.
            With performance-outcome (PàO) expectancy, we assess the probability that our succesful performance will lead to certain outcomes. The major outcomes we consider are potential rewards (such as a bonus or a good feeling of accomplishment), although we are likely also to take into account possible negative result (such as loss of leisure time or family diruption).  In any given situation, there may be many potential rewards associated with performance. Reward provided by others, such as bonuses, or promotion are known as extrinsic rewards. In other hand, rewards that are related to our own internal experiences with succesful performance, such as feelings of achievement, challange, and growth, are known as intrinsic rewards. Considering various possible outcomes (both positive and negative), we form an assessment of the probability of our performance’s leading to desired outcomes. If our assessment of the P-O expectancy is high, the expectancy will contribute to our motivation. If our assessment is low, the expectancy could have a detrimental effect on our willingness to perform at a high level.
            With the valence component, we assess the anticipated value of various outcomes. If the available rewards interest us, valence will be high. However, the valeu of possible negative outcomes, such as the loss of leisure time or diruption of our family, may offset the valeu of rewards in a given situation. The available rewards will have a motivating effect only when we attach a high overall valence to the situation.


Read more »

Senin, 14 November 2011

Cognitive Theories

Need theories try to identify the internal desires that influence our behavior, but they do not go very far in explaining the thought processes that are involved. In contrast, cognitive theories attempt to isolate the thinking patterns that we use in deciding whether or not to behave in a certain way. Cognitive theories are not necessarily at odds with need theories; rather, they look at motivation from a different perspective. Because they focus on the thought processes associated with motivation, cognitive theories are sometimes called process theories. Three major cognitive theories that address work motivation are expectancy, equity, and goal setting theories.

Read more »

Minggu, 13 November 2011

Clayton Alderfer ERG Theory

            Because of the criticism of maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory, motivation researcher Clayton Aderfer proposed an alternative known as ERG theory. The name stems from combining maslow’s five levels of needs into three levels: existence, relatedness, and growth. Existence needs include psychological desires, such as food and water, and work-related material desires, such as pay, fringe benefits and physical working conditions. Relatedness needs address our relationship with significant other, such as families, friendship groups, work groups, and profesional groups. They deal with our desire to be accepted by others, achieve mutual understanding on matters that are important to us, and exercise some influence over those with whom we interact on an ongoing basis. Growth needs impel creativity and innovation, along with the desire to have a productive impact on our surroundings.
            According to ERG theory, we generally tend to concentrate first on our existence requirements. As existence needs are resolved, we have more energy  available for concentrating on relatedness needs. Then, as relatedness needs are somewhat fulfilled, we have the energy and support needed to persue growth needs. Thus ERG theory incorporates a satisfaction-progression principle similar to that of maslow’s hierarchy, since satisfaction of one level of need encourages concern with the next level.

Read more »

Kamis, 10 November 2011

Komunikasi Cinta

Komunikasi itu menjadi kunci utama dalam sebuah hubungan percintaan. Kenapa menjadi kunci utama? Mari kita bahas satu persatu.

            Komunikasi sendiri memiliki arti suatu proses penyampaian pendapat, pikiran dan perasaan kepada orang lain yang kemampuannya dipengaruhi oleh lingkungan atau budaya sosialnya. Komunikasi yang efektif itu terjadi apabila kita mendapatkan timbal balik positif dari orang yang kita ajak berkomunikasi. Dengan adanya komunikasi yang efektif maka kita akan merasa nyaman dengan seseorang dan bisa meningkatkan taraf hubungan.

            Saat kita merasa nyaman dengan seseorang, kita bisa membicarakan beberapa hal yang lebih bersifat intim dan rahasia. Dan bila kita sudah mencapai tahap ini maka peluang untuk jadian pun akan semakin besar. Setelah jadian, komunikasi menjadi salah satu tiang hubungan. Komunikasi yang lancar dan positif menjadi penopang yang kuat dan sebaliknya, komunikasi yang tersendat dan negatif menciptakan hubungan yang rapuh.

            Rapuhnya hubungan yang berakhir dengan putusnya hubungan percintaan adalah yang hal yang paling ditakutkan oleh pasangan yang saling mencintai. Bahkan saat putus pun, komunikasi masih mengambil bagian. Putusnya hubungan menyebabkan putusnya alur komunikasi antar pasangan. Ini lah yang sebenernya di takutkan oleh setiap orang, putusnya komunikasi. Kita sebenarnya tidak takut kehilangan status pacar, kehilangan cinta atau apapun. Kita hanya takut kehilangan komunikasi yang biasanya kita dapatkan setiap harinya. Bayangkan bila kita putus dengan pacar tetapi kita masih dipanggil sayang, kita sms masih di respon seperti biasanya, pasti kita masih menganggap dia adalah pacar kita. Itu lah mengapa komunikasi itu sangat erat hubungannya dengan cinta.

Read more »

Selasa, 08 November 2011

Frederick Herzberg Two-Factor Theory

Building on the work of maslow, psychologist Frederick Hezberg interviewed accountants and engineers working in the pittsburgh vicinity. He asked them to relate situations in which they felt particularly good about their jobs. Analysis of the interview data revealed a distinct pattern. Factors that seemed to make individuals feel satisfied with their jobs were associated with the content of the job. These factors were then lebeled motivators. On the other hand, factors that seemed to make individuals feel dissatisfied were associated with the job context. These were lebeled hygiene factors.

            Herzberg’s two-factor theory argues that hygiene factors are necessary to keep workers from feeling dissatisfied, but only motivators can lead worker to feel satisfied and motivated. The implications for manager are clear; Provide hygiene factors to reduce sources of worker dissatisfaction, and be sure to include motivators because they are the only factor that can motivate workers and lead ultimately to job satisfaction. The two-factor theory has been criticized mainly on the ground that researcher have been unable to obtain the same pattern of hygiene factors and motivators when they use other types of study method. Nevertheless, the theory is significant because it has helped focus managerial attention on the critical need to provide motivators and in doing so, has enhanced our understanding of motivation in the workplace.

Read more »