Papers

Origins of mass communication research: the american and european roles

Pedro Silva¹
psilva@sfsu.edu

September 6 2006

Abstract

This paper extrapolates on the origins of mass communication research in the United States and Europe, by tracing the evolution of the various schools of thought in the U.S. and their convergence with European critical theory. The ambivalence of the term 'mass' communication is debated in light of a semantic and linguistic perspective, and thereby found to be inadequate.

1 Introduction

According to [3], the term 'mass communication' was first introduced by Harold D. Lasswell in the early 1940s, meaning "the modern conditions under which society is organized" [2,p. 9]. In later years, though, 'mass' has been interpreted as ambivalent, in the sense that it effectively qualifies its components - the audience - in a derogatory way. Indeed, it reminds of "lack of distinctiveness or individuality, and of mindless, even irresponsible response" [2,p. 3]. Is this view justified? Current research seems to indicate so, particularly in the fields of linguistics and semantics. I analyze an opinion piece by Adam Lockyer of the Australian National University, where he summarizes some of the mechanisms through which the media unwittingly generate new conceptual frameworks that the public, in general, assimilates into everyday life.

2 European and American convergence

It is interesting to note in what ways the American and European traditions of 'mass communication' research vary. In America, Boyd-Barrett argues, 'mass' communication shifted decisively from a sociological research "reminiscent of pragmatism and the work of the Chicago School" [2,p. 10] to a ßcientific/empirical definition of the field" when ä series of scientific models of communication and mass communication" emerged in the 1940s and 1950s. What enabled this paradigm shift? Hardt attributes the initial change overcoming inertia to Wilbur Shramm, who had a journalistic background and was, therefore, paradigmatic of the American broadcasting, institutionalized and thus administrative type of communication research. Shramm himself identified Lazarsfeld, amongst others, as 'the founding father[] of communication' [2,p. 10]. Lazarsfeld, despite his shortcomings [2,pp. 13-16] was perhaps the first American researcher to have contact with the Frankfurt School, and particularly Theodore Adorno and his theory of society. American communication research was thus 'infected' by European critical theory. Not merely administrative now, 'mass' communication research in the US gathered the finest critical thinkers Europe had to exile off, and generated a much more useful type of research, which blended pragmatic and practical effects and audience-based investigations with critical theory. At the same time, in Europe, research into communication was mainly in the hands of state-controlled institutions. These, [1], were mainly composed of public service corporations, theoretically impartial in nature. However, this wasn't so in practice, as ëven in a country like Britain, where many safeguards of media autonomy have been carefully devised", the ßystem inevitably propels broadcasting right into the political arena" [2,p. 45]. In contrast, and although American research is traditionally more administrative and, supposedly susceptible to outside pressure, the fact that Europe is traditionally not as concerned with 'ethics' (ibid) means there is not, currently, a major difference between American and European institutions.

3 Semantic issues in the 'mass' media

How, then, does this relate to how justified is the term 'mass' communication in today's media landscape? The American research tradition in communication has followed a path of being a mere branch of sociological research,without administrative reason of being at the university departmental level, to a corporative practice, more or less pragmatical and firmly based on the production-audience-effects flow; this, in turn, had turned into a broad multi-disciplinary field encompassing critical theory as the previously missing guiding framework. On the other hand, European communication research developed from a merely theoretical effort by German philosophers and sociologists to something applicable in real life and, particularly in media as it relates to the production work flow. There has been a convergence of methods, then, in American and European researchers. Despite all this, consider the following linguist/semantic approach to today's treatment of the terrorism issue by the 'media', in general: [4] proposes a number of processes through which 'linguistic acculturation' is created:unconscious language adoption of sources; conscious language adoption; journalists as rhetorical amplifiers. These processes, the author proposes, mean that media terminology is becoming the primary definition of reality. Other semantic issues also contribute to a 'mass' communication perspective of the problematic: the threat of "journalese" and öfficialese" to the cognitive process; linguistic determinism and the pre-packaging of concepts and ideas by the media. The conceptual frameworks concept, particularly, has been extensively researched by politically-affiliated think-tanks in the last decades, and has its main proponent in George Lackoff of UC Berkeley. It should stand to reason that, given these premises, the 'mass' in 'mass' communication is very much called for. Our cultural and social individuality cannot stand against an unknown variable such as the one proposed by Lockyer.

References

[1]: Jay G. Blumler. Mass communication review yearbook. volume 2, pages 37-47, Berverly Hills and London, 1981. Sage.
[2]: O. Boyd-Barret and C. Newbold, editors. Approaches to media: A reader. Oxford University Press, New York, 1995.
[3]: H. Hardt. Critical communication studies: Communication, history and theory in America. Routledge, London, 1992.
[4]: A. Lockyer. The relationship between the media and terrorism. 2003.

Footnotes:

¹Broadcast and Electronic Arts Department, San Francisco State University

File translated from T_EX by T_TH, version 3.77.
On 24 Apr 2007, 23:50.