Please read the following research article:
"Beyond the Four Theorie of the Press"
http://sernt55.essex.ac.uk/gv/gv905/W06%20Readings/ostini_beyond_four_theories.pdf
I like this article because not only does it describe the four press theories, but it also looks at how press theory is expressed in a number of countries. It is a good example of how we can investigate cultural approaches to communications.
In your response, please give your insights into how politics, culture, and media combine to produce a communications product. Do we find what we expect in these types of studies? What are your responses, insights? I know this is a bit vague, but I'm interested in your thoughts.
Good luck!
I think it is impossible for politics and culture to not influence the production of media and communications. Depending on the country's government system (capitalist, communist, socialist, etc), media will be affected. In the article, China, which is known for being a communistic country, scored very high (81.13%) for pro country commentary/beliefs when the newspapers were analyzed. This is not surprising to me because communist countries are all about being "unified" and have the government and country act as one. Another factor is how culture affects media and communication production. The U.S. scored liberal in agency aspects of media, granting a higher amount of agency to other countries. I think this fits because the U.S. cultural tendencies to assist other countries that are unable to help themselves. Media will inevitably be influenced by the culture, government, politics, etc of its native country.
ReplyDeleteI found this article to be very interesting. It makes sense that you would base the press model would be based on the type of government that controls the country. The numbers and data they concluded with surprised me in some ways, but were mostly what I expected. Id did not surprise me that China, an authoritarian system, would have more control over their media. They are very pro-country, with 81.13% of media having a pro-country attitude, which was much higher than all the countries tested. It made me think about the consequences of this on the people of their country. They have so much less freedom than where we live here in the US, and they must love and advocate for their country. The media has a hand in this. The statistic I didn't expect was that the US was 100% neutral. When reading the article, I didn't know where our country would fall, but I think it is a good thing we are neutral. The involvement of the type of government on media systems proves the amount of influence the government system has on media.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to the conclusions about attitude in the media, I thought the conservatism and liberalism study was interesting. China is extremely conservative, along with Japan. This has to stem from their culture. Which proves that culture does effect media. The US and Hong Kong and liberal. Though I do not know much about Hong Kong, I can see how the US media is mostly liberal. This stems from the attitudes and culture of the people who live here. People have more of a liberal stance, and have an opinion on everything. These theories of the press used to evaluate different nations proves the involvement in communication. Our media is directly influenced by the culture we live in and how the country is governed. It is amazing to see the effects of these influences, and it would be interesting to see just how great this influence is in society.
Culture is at the root of any nation, take for example America, the land of the free home of the brave. Here they believe that certain freedoms are simply inherit and because of this we take for granted many of the freedoms we do have, until we leave the country and realise that the rest of the world isn't the same. Its no surprise, as is shown in the results found in the article, the US media is ranked as one of the most liberal media systems.
ReplyDeleteThis same principal applies to the politics of a nation and specifically the image they are trying to convey to their people. The article stated that China's media is very pro-China because of the limitations they have on their freedoms, something they are accustomed to. Their culture and historical background lend to this because as a people they are proud of their country. I learned of another interesting example of this during my time in Russia. When, in a work environment, you asked an older Russian to think of new ideas (how to do something better, how a certain project should be done) they wouldn't say anything. I found out that the reason was because they were so used to being told exactly what to do that they didn't know how to react when asked these types of question. In fact they feared answering because then they would be to blame. Because of the limitations that had placed on them they no longer felt that need for freedom and in fact feared it. Now if you imagine a media system based on these basic emotions and ideals you'll see that they will be very one sided and limited in their content.
I think that a perfect media system would only exist in a Utopia because the media in any given nation is shaped by its politics and culture. I found it interesting how the author of the paper was able to categorize each nation differently based on factors including conservatism, liberalism, democratic, and authoritarian, along with others. I think that what it boils down to is that a nation’s media system is constructed off of the character of both the sender and receiver of the information. Perhaps the reason why people have problems with international media systems is because we are all on different levels and have different motives and want different results. In the United States, we live in a very capitalistic culture, where working hard to get a head, make a name for yourself, and be rewarded for it is very appealing. This is why journalists and influencers in business and politics push their own agendas. This also is why news outlets are constantly competing with each other for advertisers and viewers. Viewers or listeners essentially choose what media they consume, which hurts the chances of news being shared that is unbiased and non-commercialized.
ReplyDeleteThe downside to running a news outlet in a competitive industry is that profits are the bottom line, not the communication of news. The upside to our capitalism is that this news isn’t being filtered by the only other alternative, the government. It’s an imperfect system, as are every other system internationally because they are also based on flawed cultural values. I think that a perfect media system would only exist in a Utopia.
Politics, culture, and media combine to create a communications product differently in each country. The reason for this is that these areas are different in each country and the communication outputs are therefore different as well. For example, China's politics differ greatly from ours in the U.S. The article said that 81.13% of media in China have a pro-country attitude, which was much higher than all the countries tested. Therefore, China's political system combines with culture and media differently than in other countries because their political system is so bloated and controls its media and culture. While this is an extreme example, it illustrates how these elements combine so differently in each country.
ReplyDeleteI was not too surprised by many of the findings in the study. For example, it said that the US and Hong Kong have mostly liberal media. I can see how this is possible, because media stems from the attitudes and culture of the people who live in a place. The US and Hong Kong simply have a more liberal population as a whole than China and Japan, which the study found had some of the most conservative media.
This article provided yet another look into the intricate details of global media. Culture is once again an undeniable factor into how each individual country views, respects and listens to the media. It was certainly no surprise to me that communist China was largely influenced by its political state as to whether people listened to their own media or foreign media. That really was nothing earth shattering but it is more interesting to think about the more subtle difference of culture that comes into play. Japan for example is a society focused on order and respect, especially towards those in power but the difference between Japan and China is that China screw its results more due to political pressure than just a cultural taboo. To me this shows that while culture differences make a difference the biggest change comes from the government system as a whole in the country.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the results of the study I wasn't surprised to see where the individual countries resided on the spectrum of democratic/authoritarian and conservative/liberal. What I would be interested to see is how these same countries ranked on the spectrum in a different study that concerned a different topic. For example, would the U.S. still be as neutral, democratic and liberal if the story was something that concerned American citizens. The governments of these countries also allude to where they will fall in the spectrum. China, a country of authoritarian rule will be much less likely to speak poorly of their own country and promotes the government over the individual. In capitalist countries where citizens are given more control, they will be more likely to propagate libertarian and democratic ideals.
ReplyDeleteJennifer Riggs
There wasn't a lot in this article that we haven't discussed yet, but I liked the reiteration of how each country is so different because of their culture. I liked how we were discussing China in class and how different their media system is because of their political situation. That their system is more authoritarian and conservative, especially compared to the democratic, liberal media state of the US. I have found that we definitely expect what we see in these studies. However, all of the statistical data is interesting to read and study.
ReplyDeleteI think that there is no way that culture cannot influence a how the media creates a communications product. The politics, economy, faith and other cultural influences in a country change the type of news and the type of people who report the news from one country to the next. As the studies in the article showed, it really does make a difference.
ReplyDeleteSome of my thoughts after reading the article were do different international values also influence media and what about some of the other countries? As far as values go, I just wonder if in some of the Eastern Countries where young people are taught they must respect their elders if that also has an influence on what is reported in the media. Do reporters think twice before criticizing someone who is the senior in age? In the United States, reporters seem to ignore that completely. As far as my thought about the other countries, this article seemed to focus a lot on the U.S., China and Japan and I would have been interested to know about the results in European countries, Middle Eastern countries, South American countries, etc. Where would they fall in the spectrum that was presented?
Politics, culture and media are huge contributors in producing a communications product. Culture and politics both influence each other and the way we do politics and our behavior are heavily influenced by media capabilities. Look at other countries - they have different cultures and politics and they as a result have a very different media system.
ReplyDeleteI think we find what we expect in these type of studies - and incomplete finding. You see all of the theories and findings that we've come across over the years and you see how we now find them to be incomplete. Heck, even in the science field our findings are often incomplete. I think doing these sorts of studies is valuable, but I don't think we can put a ton of stock in them.
I think there is a direct correlation between culture and politics and how this influences the type of media and communications product that is created. This article supported many of the claims we have discussed in class in how the type of government structure influences what type of media is available. In a country such as China it does not surprise me that such strong support was reported in the general attitude towards their country's newspaper coverage. The leaders maintain a stronger control over what is published than other countries thus a more pro government sentiment will be presented.
ReplyDeleteCulture affects the media and communications because we see what we value in the media or at least what is considered socially acceptable to value. In the U.S. we might see more vast coverage of scandals or issues related to celebrity gossip than might be found in a more socially conservative country with a media system that would not allow for this type of news to be published. I was surprised to find that this new model identified China to not stand in such stark contrast to the U.S., Hong Kong and Japan in the types of nationalistic and journalistic values.
Is there really a way for us to have a perfect media system? I thought this article was interesting as it once again brought up the issues in having a global media system. We've talked about it over and over again, and we always come to the same conclusion. Culture does in fact effect the way we live, act, do certain things, including politics. So it is no wonder that there is a connection between different cultures and political beliefs affecting the media produced and the way we communicate. It was interesting reading about the drastic differences between countries that lean more authoritarian from those that are more liberal. Once again we learned that China is one of those places that really follows a more authoritarian rule in terms of media, which in turn affects the media and communications systems there. So yes, I would say that politics definitely has a great effect on a country and the way it views and interacts with different media systems.
ReplyDeleteAlright, I have a weird fascination with China and Hong Kong media systems and the government's control so I really enjoyed the studies done. Obviously we knew that China would be the most conservative of the bunch. And just check out those numbers in the newspaper coverage! All the pro country media and anti other countries was insane! China has always had a major hand in the lives of its people, but when you look how China is doing, why would you ever stop? The country is a powerhouse leader in the world in just about every field. Yes they have their own problems and issues, but maybe what the government is doing in the media is helping. Obviously they want their citizens to like China and not leave, so that's what their newspapers report. They limit outside contact on the internet to keep their people in a bubble. They aren't allowing their people a "The grass is always greener on the other side" dream. That dream can be deadly to any country, so maybe China has something going by killing it. Hong Kong though is a more Liberal country but still has strong ties to China, so some of those confinements are still in place. Their numbers for the papers are not nearly as impressive as China's but they're still under an Authoritarian system. They do quite well in the world as well. It's easy for us as Americans to think that these Asian communities live in such strict conditions, but we forget that its out culture that breeds this idea of complete freedom. Asian culture is all about structure and limitations. So their way of government works for them. Obviously the younger generations are wanting more and more leniency because the culture is changing, but the government will do what they can to keep the culture alive.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the article, the biggest part that stuck out to me was the section on balancing structural control and individual responsibility. I think it was wise how he split the categories into the main three. I believe that market, communitarian, and advancing are the correct categories because it just makes sense to me.
ReplyDeleteAnother part that I liked was when it talked about Altschull's typology. I agree that media systems try to find the truth and be socially responsible, but I think that the more advanced the community is, the more freedom the press has. For example, everything that is reported in the United States may not be socially responsible. Big bird, although it was clear why it became an issue, should not have been a large focus of the campaign. Although the press has the freedom to act socially responsible and find truth, they have more creativity and leeway in an advanced country.
I was never aware of the Four Theories and after reading the article I look forward to class today to go more in-depth. Something I find interesting is how they were formed and how they have become outdated. It's important to be able to adapt and form new systems when older systems are constrained by ideology and historical circumstances. The model I found the most appealing to handle change was presented by Altschull; market, communitarian, and advancing. His model was still limited and could not work in all cases.
ReplyDeleteAfter the study and research was done it came to the conclusion that individual journalistic autonomy and the structures of state policy will always play a key role in understanding of press systems and the societies in which these system exist. You can't live out the value system of the journalists and the environment in which they work in which is economic and political. Government and the personal value system of people will always play a role. There is alway something that influences the choices that are made and the changes that will come.
This article gives statistical evidence that politics, culture, and media are all intertwined. If you change one, it will affect the others. For example, in America we have more liberal social views which affects our liberal media and our politics that continue to lean left. If the media came back to the center or leaned right on the issues, our political climate would likely begin leaning right as well, and our culture will become more conservative. I think we find exactly what we expect in these studies because it's no surprise that China leads the conservative media news because they're press are tightly wrapped around the fingers of political leaders who want China to stay authoritatively controlled. This article also made the point that journalistic values vary from country to country, but also from reporter to reporter. The more liberal the country, the more creative and outspoken the reporters. This can be a benefit to citizens in countries full of corruption, but the problems is the corruption typically lies more in countries that aren't so liberal in their media.
ReplyDeletePolitics can change culture just as culture can define politics. Politics can affect media through laws and regulations. Culture influences media because media will often give people what they really want to hear. Media is the way we communicated. There is no denying that politics, culture, and media define the way that the world communicates. This article shows how the different politics and cultures of the world influence portrayal of one story.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that the US was 100% neutral on the subject was actually a bit surprise. I expected that it would be more neutral than the other countries but not this. It's an interesting reflection on the value we as a culture place on fair news reporting. I'm willing to bet that neutrality shifts a bit when matters are a bit more connected to home. It was also interesting to see how much China put out positive views of itself in the study which was also a little bit predictable.
I think that the commonly held views of a culture have a major impact on communication. After all, journalists are people too. No matter how hard they try to be unbiased they will always have opinions and beliefs shaped by the things surrounding them.
Politics and media and culture and three entities that are constantly feeding off one another. Political leaders will address cultural issues that are made popular through the media, which can alter policies drastically. A change to any one of these three things will lead to changes in the others. The article mentions that systems change from country to country, which changes the way these systems interact with one another. The article mentioned China, which is a country under a dramatically different operating system than the United States. I feel like most of the main points have already been talked about, but I was very interested by all the facts presented in this article.
ReplyDeleteIn your response, please give your insights into how politics, culture, and media combine to produce a communications product. Do we find what we expect in these types of studies?
ReplyDeleteThe State and National government have overwhelming interest on the opinions of society and the ways in which these opinions are expressed throughout various media vehicles. Balancing Structural control and individual responsibility is a subject behind much disagreement and argument.The author mentions three factors when discussing that it is necessary for the media and its subjects to have a mutually beneficial relationship. These three factors are market, communitarian, and advancing. Most media systems seek this unreachable "truth" or correctness. While journalists, advertisers, and public figures believe to be righteous, honest people, this is often times not the case. It is important to understand ethics throughout various countries in order to gain credibility and work in the most "right" way.
While we live in a democratic society, the government believes that they have the right and authority to put constraints, whether political or economical, on mass media. They believe it is their duty to protect the individuals.
I found the professional factors model to be very interesting. And i look forward to going into further depth on this topic in class, so that i can gain a better understanding of the authors points. The information displayed was predicted but that does not mean it is agreeable.
Chandler Anderson
I definitely think that politics, culture and media all influence each other. Our culture can influence what occurs in politics. I particularly think about the difference between Utah and other states. With a majority of Utah belonging to the Mormon faith, the politics and laws that occur here are often linear with Mormon beliefs. However, you look at other states such as California where gay marriage is a huge issue which has been battled for many years and finally was allowed. I do believe that both of these influence media and communication in the way of what information is relayed. Individuals who are selecting what stories air on the news and what topics should be discussed on shows are using both trends in politics and culture to decide.
ReplyDeleteSo much of the characteristics of communications and media in the United States comes from the First Amendment-“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”. It has become an untouchable part of American culture as on an outward appearance people (including the media) are allowed to express themselves or share info how they want. As this article seemed to allude to, media is a reflection of the government systems of that country. If a country has a free market and freedoms given by systems like democracy, it is likely to have a free-flow of information.
ReplyDeleteAs far as explaining the United States, we see a separation from how the state influences media operations. Or at least that how it seems or is supposed to be. In places of totalitarian governments, places like Venezuela have an excessive control of what is shared in media. I have to think that media and government could do a lot to work together to help improve each other. The text mentions, “In advancing systems media serve as partners of Government.” It seems that most people in America, at least, today do not know the issues and what is facing the country today. They know that Kim Kardashian and Kanye are having a baby, but I don’t see the average American knowing the issues of today. In the founding days of this nation I would imagine that most of the populous were not too keen on government having control on media and speech, but I would think that media in any country could further the purpose, knowledge, and deeds of a government. The text mentioned one theory stating, “That the press’s purposes are to provide an avenue for expression of public views and to fuel the political and social debates necessary for the continued development of democratic governance.” It could make government and media systems more difficult to trust, but I would think that if these two entities could work together and show more transparency towards things like biases, they could accomplish more and further the ideals of government.
Eric Vincent
While I agree that media, culture and politics are all connected, the current government in each country tends to control the amount of influence from each source. In the United States, our politics and media are almost direct reflections of our culture. Media producers freely create media that will please the consumer, and politicians are elected by the people. In China or Cuba, for example, the media and politics are probably less reflective of the culture. The more the government dictates its own policies and the countries media, the less these things are influenced by the culture of the area.
ReplyDeleteThese studies help to show that the structure and influence of the government has very real affects on the freedom and development of the culture.
Politics and culture definitely impact communications and the media. I thought it was smart to point out that in our Western way of thinking we assume press systems move from communist to authoritarian to liberalism and then social responsibility. This is a completely linear, my way or the highway, kind of thinking. Culture plays a huge role in whether journalist are liberal or conservative. Although Japan is a democratic nation and they could speak out against the government in the media, it was interesting that their writers are very conservative. Whereas in Hong Kong, ruled under an authoritarian government, the journalists are very liberal. I never would have expected this. I thought it was interesting that the general attitude of the US media was 100% neutral, not pro-country or anti-country. I disagreed with this when I read it, but then thinking about it. We definitely have a pompous America is the best country attitude, but we do rip on our government a lot in newspapers, so maybe we are neutral. I think in other countries who also may have the right to say what they want maybe the government has more propaganda and cultural differences that don't lead them to speak out against the government. Different cultures make people think and speak so differently.
ReplyDeleteI like how it talked about not only does politics or the government effect the media, but so does the professional factors. In the article it says there is a considerable discrepancy between journalists' worldview and the media stance. I think that just shows another dimension on how media is effected around the world. The way I interrupted this was in different countries the journalist and their professionalism and their morals or standards effects media. Obviously politics, culture and media all have a huge impact on products of communication. I think depending on what area of the world your in it changes which of those three have the biggest impact, but they all build off each other. This quote from the articles sums up the relationship of the three factors, "The analysis of national systems, their media structures and institutions, as well as their relationship with political and economic structures, must be part of the picture because these relationships and structures are integral to the content, distribution, and reception of information in a society."
ReplyDeleteHonestly a lot of this reading went over my head. However Politics, culture, and media influence the way we talk, communicate and also how we feel. This product is influenced by money, terms we use, as well as images we see. Our culture is become a culture of choosing. We can now choose when we watch our tv, and where now that everything is so digital. I think this influences the content people produce a lot. Including news coverage, now its important to make it fun and entertaining- as well as educational. This is a capitalistic system we have created. I'm not sure what the right kind of system would be. I'm not sure there is a right or wrong. Even in our capitalistic system I believe our government still plays a bigger role in media than we think or understand.
ReplyDeleteThat is what I thought was most interesting about this idea of democratic or authoritarianism systems. The reading talked about how they are often defined as a very strict thing. One being so free to criticize political officials, without any sort of controls. And the other as a system that enforces this strict obedience to all political authorities. Both political and economical. But I really don't think either is entirely true.
I think that government, politics, media, and culture are all intertwined. Where a government is more strict, media will be limited and the culture will be more conservative. On the other hand, when a government is less structured, media will be more free and the culture will be more rambunctious. In a country like the United States of America, this is the case. Especially with Obama in office, America is liberal. We believe in freedom and as a result, our media is free to publish whatever they want (almost) and our society and culture is becoming more and more of "I do what I want." Maybe America could benefit from a more conservative media outlet.
ReplyDeleteThis article only solidified the concepts we have been talking about in class. It makes sense that countries structure their media systems according to the politics that govern them. It should come as no real shock that 81.13% of China’s media output is pro-country. I am therefore grateful for the freedoms we enjoy in this country even if there is a considerable amount of soft-censorship.
ReplyDeleteThis article really focused on the two bookends of the spectrum comparing the U.S., China and Japan because of the supposed shock effect it would have on the reader. I would be more interested in the countries that American’s associate with more like those in Europe. I do wonder if our country would be more united and supportive of our leaders if we had a higher level of articles producing pro-country material. I fear that because of the amount of freedoms we have in media output, we see faulty entitlement logic such as: I get what I want because it’s a free country and I should. I attribute this to a free media who tend to focus on the negative because of the newsworthiness. What would happen to our patriotism if we followed a similar media system like China?
A means of communication, whether it is a newspaper article, tv spot, etc., is always the product of the unique combination of politics, culture, and journalistic values, among other things. The influence that each of these have on one another is undeniable. The article discussed this at length and described theories to go along with the idea. I was interested in the section of the article that talked about how political views have an effect on the type of journalist. It analyzed how this affects their reporting views, standards, etc. This led nicely into the analysis the article gave of the different countries' approaches to the same news story, including both the individual journalist's value and that of the state systems.
ReplyDeleteThis analysis conveys something that irritates me about the news, and that is the inconsistency that arrises as a result of political influence. I don't like the influence that politics has in the media because I don't ever feel like I can read a news story from one source and gain a full understanding of the situation. I wish more news sources would tell it like it is, without putting a conservative or liberal spin on it. The role culture plays in this is, I think, is determining what news topics people care about, and therefore gain more attention and begin to trend.
I like the idea presented early on in the article about how communitarian systems "serve the people by reflecting the desires of a political party or government, but are not themselves agents of change." From this, I'd expect people to consume media with full knowledge that it is greatly influenced by politics and government. They'd use media to help develop their own opinion on something, without letting it entirely change their view on an issue or event.
This reading was pretty fascinating to me. I definitely believe that culture and politics have a large influence over the way that communications and the media are presented to us. It influences the way that we interact, both with ourselves, and others. After reading this, I am glad I live in the US. I feel that we as a nation are expressed through our media systems. The world watches us and what happens here. UNlike other countries who are so limited and restricted in their media systems. The way Chinas media is so controlled, is a direct reflection of the way their culture impacts them and the politics that govern them.
ReplyDeletePreston Wittwer
ReplyDeleteI want to address the idea of "finding what we expect" in these types of studies. Mainly I would say yes, there aren't too many surprises in reading academic reports on topics like these. What concerns me about the reports, however, is that if they are written a certain way or address specific issues then they can become dated very quickly. I felt that the emphasis on the Cold War and Communism made this feel more like a look back at what media systems were like through the lens of history and felt less like a current analysis of the worldwide communications products. While Communism still exists in some countries, I felt like this report was dated.
But the question for this post (and the question the report was trying to answer) is still valid: how do politics, culture and media combine to produce a communications product. From the reading and from my perspective it seems like more than anything a communications product is the end result of the politics of a country, which only mix with the culture and journalistic ideals of the country. I have a hard time believing any real change can happen without a top-down effect starting with the politics of a country.
It did not surprise me that the economic and governmental structures of nations form and shape their media communications. They play an integral part in how the media is produced and what is produced. For example, a country that does not have a good economic situation will not be able to produce the interesting and flashy news reports that we have here in the US. And it is the same thing for the government. If the government is authoritarian, the media will me limited. The government will only let what they want to be on the media out for their country to see.
ReplyDeleteI found Altschull's comments very interesting regarding his three categories of market, communitarian, and advancing. He said that all types are aimed to help their people. However, a commutation system is one that will tell people exactly what they need to know and modify opinions and ideas to lead people to the correct conclusions. It was interesting to see his comparison of these categories and realize that the type of media people get is directly influenced by the amount of freedom that their government gives them.
I agree strongly with that Altschull’s typology said. Altschull said that all media systems seek truth and try to be socially responsible. I believe that is the main purpose for a lot of media systems. Now seeking truth is a relative term that can be defined in many ways, but all systems seek it and seek to be socially responsible. Now, since times have changed, I also believe Akhavan-Majid and Wolf have a point when they say one of the influencers of media systems is economics. A perfect example is what is happening with CNN. Since it recently changed presidents, there has been a severe change to the content being produced and the delivery of it. They have switched to a more Fox News/MSNBC personality model. Although they want to seek their own truth and talk about social responsibility, they are changing their platform to make more money. The culture is changing to a more "talking-heads" approach and the news organizations that are successful have already adopted this approach. Our government officials, news correspondence and our lifestyle are changing more towards this model. This has become our collective professionalism. It is provocative, outlandish and loud. It frankly is sad. Other countries did not share this same culture that we do but I am afraid the world is slowly turning to either this libertarian approach or a sealed totalitarian media system. As individualistic journalism progresses, we will see a great change in the four theories model and more of these ideas will be accepted.
ReplyDeleteI think with these three entities we get a fairly good communications product tailed to our society. Since every country is so different culturally and politically with individual media rules, each product will be different. Our discussion on Tuesday focused on how much a government can control the media systems and create the product. Also culture has a huge impact on the medium and how messages are sent and received.
ReplyDeleteAs for the studies, I think we find pieces of what we are looking for. As time goes on and the world evolves we keep adding pieces to the theories. I don't think we will ever find exactly what we are looking for because everything keeps moving forward. So as we evolve the theories will continue to evolve with us. We can only hope to keep up and keep learning so that we can understand the situations we are in now. I mean there are some rules that are timeless but things are always changing so some rules will change with the time and with technological advances.
Culture and media are so interconnected you can't talk about one without bringing up the other. It is apparent that culture and politics affect systems of communication. I think about all the shows that are popular on TV and how many references there are to culture. The Simpsons, for example, has been so popular because of the way it makes fun of American culture. I don"t think that people want to use the media if they cannot relate to it. It also makes sense that politics would have a big affect on media. It was interesting to read about the way different countries approach news, but I didn't find myself all that surprised.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this article that culture and media are connected. After all, even journalists have to get paid and its no surprise that stories which are more interesting to the general public are anticipated. However, this article made me wonder how other cultures comare to America when it comes to influencing the media. I have heard horror stories of dictator countries that are extremely strict on their subject's consumption of news and stories.
ReplyDeleteWhen all of these influences combine they create their own version of communication. This type of communication used to be one way, but through modern technology the viewers are having more say in communicating their views back to the media. I am not surprised that other cultures are realizing they have more rights in these modern days and I believe it is because of the change in our media uses. It it more readily available and almost impossible to stop.
Of course there is a connection between politics, culture, and the media. It is not a surprise that the economic structure of a country also shapes the media communicaitonsThey heavily influence what happens with the others. Our government plays a huge role in the way our media operates and what stories are told to the public, and how they are told. When a government is strict, the media becomes more limited and conservative. Our media system is becoming more constrictive on what is being put out, which really isn’t a good thing for a nation built on freedom. I liked reading about the international approach to news, its fascinating to see that what “news” is, is different for everyone.
ReplyDelete