I definitely think that much of international communication theory sells short the human mind’s ability to make personal and active decisions. In his book, International Communication, Continuity and Change, Thussu devotes his second chapter, “Approaches to Theorizing International Communication,” to providing the historical framework for looking at communication theory (2006).
A common theme throughout Thussu’s chapter was the idea of humans as being “passive receivers” or “cultural dupes.” Even the earliest ideas in international communication theory assumed that people are easily persuaded. In the 20th century Walter Lippmann expressed his ideas on public opinion manipulation by governments (p.41). He saw communication, as Professor Hayden says, as a “magic bullet” for unquestioningly influencing opinion. Karl Marx also questioned the role of power and its ability to control the public.
Thussu continues to show how, around WWII, fears of Hitler’s ability to use propaganda and create the Holocaust fostered the negative view of communication and its power. The Cold War further reinforced to pessimists that communication could be used to create the enemy Soviet power. It was also used by the Soviets to influence new populations and nation states to change course and follow, as they thought blindly, behind their ideals.
Theories throughout these decades mirrored cynical thoughts. When culture and development studies began in the late 20th century, communication was still seen from a top-down and linear approach and influenced Modernization Theorists. This itself was not a negative view of communication and was merely a reaction to the pressures of the Cold War and desire by the West to aid developing countries. Western countries simply saw their ways as superior. The Dependency and Structural Imperialism theories, however, stated otherwise. They argued that because of this Westernization, peripheral developing countries were dependent on the core, more economically successful, countries in the West (p. 42-50). A theory for why this is sustained, Hegemony, further expressed that people tacitly give the power to control their lives to others (p.52-53). The Frankfurt School’s Critical Theorists also theoretically undermined peoples’ ability to make choices and gave that power instead to mass media (53-54).
I personally believe that theorists need to gain faith in the population’s ability to make decisions for themselves. There are numerous examples of how people are not simply "duped" by mass media without question. Two examples from our class and from the Thussu reading are that of Cultivation Research which shows how people will change their attitudes over time and not from one viewing of a program, and of the Two Step Flow Hypothesis which shows that people are influenced not directly from media but by their opinion leaders.
I think that people are most influenced by their choices that they make on their societal affiliations. People choose which paths and groups they want to relate to most, and it is this desire to fit into their paths’/groups’ common behaviors, opinions, and social norms that allows them to be affected by messages. It is an individual’s choice to decide values they hold closest and which opinion leaders they will take their lead from.
This is not to say that humans should be given too much credit such as in the cultural studies perspective of international communication discussed by Thussu which assumes that people are extremely active and frequent players in their interpretation of messages. It is unrealistic to assume that people will seek out and hold with them all knowledge on particular subjects. In an election, for example, people turn to their party leaders to guide them in what to think and to fill them in on their party’s interpretation of a subject. That person though, as previously stated, has chosen to follow that person. There is an active decision making process that previously took place, and they are therefore making their own decisions and are not “cultural dupes” as much of theoretical history concludes.
No comments:
Post a Comment