The muted group theory has its origin from another professional area which is the anthropology field by a social anthropologists Edwin and Shirley Ardener. They explained that in the area of enthnography, most social anthropologist would rely on findings from the men and not the women in a particular culture. Hence, the creation of the theory.
Ardener (2005) stated that the muted group theory does not
really revolve primarily on women, despite them being the most obvious victims.
Therefore this theory can be applied to other groups in society as well who are
basically not heard. Orbe (1998) also stated that this muted group theory can also be applied to other non-dominant groups such as the homosexual individuals or any subordinate group that co-exist with a dominant group in society.
Griffin (2012, pg 461) defines muted group as the " people belonging to low power groups who must change their language when communicating publicly, thus, their ideas are often overlooked".
It was Cheris Kramarae who is basically the main theorist when it comes to the area of communication study. She provided an extension to this theory where she stated that women are at a disadvantage when it comes to language. Kramarae explains that language is benefiting its creator which is man. She continues stating that 'language is literally a man-made construction.' (Griffin 2012, pg. 460) Therefore for women to be heard, they need to adapt to the ways of men. Such as speaking like men to be heard.
For this theory, I will use cartoons characters such as Ariel from Little Mermaid, Princess Jasmine from Alladdin and Snow White.
Referring to the examples, what do they all have in common?
Griffin (2012) stated that Kramarae discovered women in cartoons to be "emotional, apologetic or just plain wishy-washy" (pg. 460). This is true with references to the examples above. How all those Disney female characters Ariel, Jasmine and Snow White are all what Kramarae discovered to be.
I personally would agree that it is somewhat true that language can benefit men at most times compared to women. However there are women who are not even considered muted. Those women as such as Condolezza Rice and Hillary Clinton. Both have influence in society and that they are even more powerful than most men. It seems to be that there are other factors other than language that may affect a women's position in society. They do not even have to talk like a man or even dressed like one to be heard.
West and Turner (2010) explains that this Muted Group Theory is 'provocative and causes us to think about biases in language.' (pg. 499) This is true as it is evident as stated by Kramarae. Therefore it helps us realise on which aspects do women experience problems in expressing their needs.
References:
Ardener, S., (2005) Muted Group Theory Excerpts. Women and Language, Vol. 28, No. 2, Pg. 50-54.
Griffin, E., (2012)A First Look At Communication Theory (8th Edition).New York. McGraw Hill.
Orbe, M. P. (1998). Constructing co-cultural theory:An explication of culture, power, and communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
West, R., Turner, L., H., (2010) Introducing Communication Theory: Analysis and Application (4th Edition). New York. McGraw Hill.
This theory is based on Deborah's Tannen idea that communication between men and women are cross-cultural. (Griffin 2012)
Ruiz (2003) have stated that the genderlect theory explains that the between the gender of men and women, none of them are superior to one another. To explain it simply, the communication of men and women are taken as two separate forms of communication.
I would personally agree to an extent that there is a difference when men and women tries to communicate with one another. I would assume that this is something that all of us personally experience everyday such as the how our parents talk to each other or when we try talking to our opposite gender.
Most movies that involves opposite genders as their main casts, we can see how those opposite genders have distinctive way of communicating. I have a chose a typical movie as an example where I can how both genders tries to communicate with one another. The movie is "A Walk To Remember"
A little bit of storyline of the movie;
This movie revolves around the story between two different individuals by the name Landon Carter and Jamie Sullivan. Landon was held responsible for prank that goes wrong therefore he was being forced to participate in after-school community services as punishment. Jamie Sullivan is also participating in the after-school community service. Both of them have nothing in common at first, however when Landon starts asking help from Jamie, they started spending a lot of time together. Landon starts developing feelings for her. Going through all the pressure with dealing with Landon's popular friends and even Jamie's strict reverend father, they both realise the true meaning of true love. (IMDb 2012)
From the storyline, we cannot see much relation to the genderlect theory other than the fact that it involves the opposite genders. What I am trying to highlight here is how both genders react when they try to first communicate.
If you watch the trailer, there are scenes where both genders talk to each other in the bus. One of the main concept of genderlect theory is that women seek human connection. Tannen (1990) stated that the women uses rapport talk to establish connection with other individuals. This is very evident in the movie trailer where Jamie tries to talk to Landon in the bus.
Tannen (1990) also stated that men uses report talk to gain status. This is very evident at the first 15 seconds of the movie trailer. Landon and his friends were trying to do some sort of 'prank' on one of their friends but ended up wrongly as that friend of theirs got hurt instead and they were apprehended by the law. The question is why did Landon did it? Here I agree with Tannen; to gain status.
To clarify on women doing rapport talk and men doing report talk; women engage in communication for the sake of developing and maintaning relationships with other individuals. Whereas for men, they only engage in communication when they see it as beneficial for them. (Tannen 1990)
Another assumption of genderlect theory is on how men and women tells stories. Men tell more jokes than women. Tannen (1990) stated that it is one of the ways that men achieve or negotiate status. In the movie trailer, Landon's prank on one of his friend is considered the pre-event, where to tell the joke, he needs to do the prank first. The prank itself is a way to show or negotiate status really.
Again, I would personally agree to an extent that indeed men and women communicates differently. However, it does raise a question where due to the differences in the way men and women communicate, could it be possible that they might be misinterpreted? We need to be aware and respect on how both genders communicate. Indeed it is evident to most of us that communication between genders can be very frustrating as mutual agreements or understandings can be hard to achieved.
Caroll (2010) have explained that one of the biggest criticism of Tannen's theory is on her undimensional approach for the gender differences in communication. Tannen sees gender based on biological sex thus making her assume that men and women communicate in different ways. Numerous studies has been conducted on gender and communication and Caroll (2010) has stated that there is very little difference in how men and women communicate. There are factors that affects our ability to communicate such as gender roles, dominance and power. It was also argues that Tannen's studied only focused on young, well- educated, middle-class Americans as stated by Mortensen (2002) as cited by Caroll (2010). Therefore it is not possible to generalize Tannen's findings. There are other factors that need to be considered such as culture that may have a huge impact in how opposite genders communicate.
Perhaps the muted group theory may give a different approach where language can be seen to benefiting its creator which is man and not benefiting women where they seem to be at a disadvantage. (Ardener 2005)
References:
Ardener, S., (2005) Muted Group Theory Excerpts. Women and Language, Vol. 28, No. 2, Pg. 50-54.
Being an interpersonal theory,
this theory would involve relationship between individuals. When strangers meet
for the first time, their first primary concern would be to reduce their uncertainties
about one another due to the fact they feel uncomfortable knowing little about
each other. (West & Turner 2010)
This is something that we all
face every day upon meeting someone new. When we meet someone new, there will always be that uncertainty, that curiosity of needing to know. Who is that person? Where is he/she from?
Stacks & Salwen (2008) have cited Berger et al (1991) where individuals must reduce their uncertainties to some degree in order to be able to fashion verbal discourse and actions that will allow them to achieve their interaction goals.
West & Turner (2010 pg 150)
have listed the assumptions of this theory;
People experience uncertainty in interpersonal settings.
Uncertainty is an aversive state, generating cognitive stress.
When strangers meet, their primary concern is to reduce their uncertainty or to increase predictability.
Interpersonal communication is a developmental process that occurs through stages.
Interpersonal communication is the primary means of uncertainty reduction.
The quantity and nature of information that people share change through time.
It is possible to predict people’s behavior in a lawlike fashion.
Individuals can be uncertain in
two ways; behavioral or cognitive.
Behavioral; Some individuals may
be unsure on how to behave in a particular environment or setting or how others
will behave as well.
Cognitive; some individual may be
unsure on how the other person is or how that other person think about the individual
.
All this uncertainties can be
reduced through following certain protocols or guidelines or basically acquiring
information concerning the uncertainties.
For this theory, I will be using
the movie ‘The Lake House’ as my example.
A little synopsis;
Kate Forster is moving out from her lake house, built all of it with glass. She is a doctor and has just begun to work in a hospital in Chicago, moving to a new flat in the center of the city. Alex Wyler is the new owner of the lake house, a young architect who's working in the construction of a new complex of houses at the city skirts. Alex and Kate are maintaining a correspondence, talking about the house matters, sending each other letters, which are put in the lake house's letter box. But a strange thing is happening, because both of them find out that the letter box is working as a kind of time communication channel, between the year 2004, where Alex's living, and 2006, the year that Kate's actually living. After sending each other many letters talking about their lives, and Kate talking to Alex about how life will be in two years, it seems like they're falling in love each other. (IMDb 2012)
In this movie, it involves two strangers who communicate through letters. How at first Kate just wanted to inform Alex that she used to be the tenant to the lake house. The letter that Kate left for the future tenant went 2 years back to the previous tenant which is Alex. Alex being confused with the letter sent a reply saying that he is the first tenant of the lake house. From the confusions or uncertainties, they communicate through letters where they talk about each others lives, reducing their uncertainties with one another.
The creator of this theory Charles Berger, as cited by Griffin (2012 pg 127-129) have proposed a series of axioms to explain on his theory.
Axiom 1: Given the high level of uncertainty present at the onset of the entry phase, as the amount of verbal communication between strangers increases, the level of uncertainty for each interactant in the relationship will decrease. As uncertainty is further reduced, the amount of verbal communication will increase.
Axiom 2: As non-verbal affiliative expressiveness increases, uncertainty levels will decrease in an initial interaction situation. In addition, decreases in uncertainty level will cause increases in nonverbal affiliative expressiveness.
Axiom 3: High levels of uncertainty cause increases in information-seeking behavior. As uncertainty decline, information-seeking behavior decreases.
Axiom 4: High levels of uncertainty in a relationship cause decreases in the intimacy level of communication content. Low levels of uncertainty produce high levels of intimacy.
Axiom 5: High levels of uncertainty produce high rates of reciprocity. Low levels of uncertainty produce low levels of reciprocity.
Axiom 6: Similarities between persons reduce uncertainty, while dissimilarities produce increases in uncertainty.
Axiom 7: Increases in uncertainty level produce decreases in liking; decreases in uncertainty produce increases in liking.
Axiom 8: Shared communication networks reduce uncertainty, while lack of shared networks increases uncertainty.
Referring to the example, the axioms by Berger seems to fit in well. Axiom 1 is very obvious where both Alex and Kate were total strangers at first. With the continuous communication through letters, their uncertainties between one another decreases. In other words, their verbal communication also increase.
Axiom 2 is somewhat agreeable to the example. They show non-verbal warmth through their letters, through their exchange of stories and their memories of meeting each other before before they ended up exchanging letters at the lake house mailbox.
Axiom 3 does indeed fit with the example. Both Alex and Kate have high uncertainties about each other thus the increase in information seeking behaviour. With the questions they asked about each other through the letters such as are you married? your occupation? and others.
Axiom 4 & 5 also fits with the example. With the high level of intimacy between Alex and Kate, there is low level of uncertainties. There is also reciprocity between them.
One of the axioms; axiom 6 may not fit in most relationship cases. In the example, Alex and Kate are both different individuals, different family backgrounds, different professions and even different time periods.However, both of the still fell in love with each other. In other words, uncertainty decreases with dissimilarities in some cases.
Axiom 7 is another obvious fit. Both Alex and Kate fell in love with one another as their uncertainties of one another decreases.
Axiom 8 does not seem to fit fully with the example as both were from time zone. However, viewing it from a logical perspective. It is not possible to be communicate between two time zones. But in the movie, from their past memories before the lake house, they indeed have met through their friends, which is considered a shared communication network. Thus axiom actually does fit.
This theory by Berger has been subjected to criticism. West and Turner (2010) has cited Sunnafrank (1986) where he stated that it is not always primary concern of individuals to reduce uncertainty upon meeting someone new. He continues adding that their primary concern is actually to maximise 'relational income'. To benefit from a particular relationship.
Kellerman & Reynolds (1990) actually pointed out that Axiom 3 can be problematic. In their study, it is not that lacking knowledge that increases seeking information behaviour but wanting knowledge is the one that increases seeking information behaviour.
References:
IMDb (2012) Synopsis for The Lake House. Retrieved on March 14 2012, from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0410297/synopsis
Kellermann, K., & Reynolds, R. (1990). When ignorance is bliss: The role of motivation to reduce uncertainty in uncertainty reduction theory. Human Communication Research, 17, 5–35.
Stacks,W., D., Salwen, B., M., (2008) An Integrated Approach To Communication Theory and Research. London. Routledge.
West, R., Turner, L., H., (2010) Introducing Communication Theory: Analysis and Application (4th Edition). New York. McGraw Hill.
From my personal understanding,
Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT) revolves around us trying to ‘accommodate’
other people’s communication style.
Griffin (2012) defines the term
'accomodation' as "the constant movement toward or away from others by
changing your communicative behaviour." (p.395)
According to Turner & West (2010), this theory tries to explain what are the causes and the outcomes for what happens when two individuals shift or change their communication styles for the sake of accommodating one another. This is usually the case when two individuals from different cultures meet.
I personally see this 'accomodation' process as something that we do almost everyday when we interact with different people specifically those of different cultures with us. However this 'accommodation' is also done in our daily personal meetings or routine. For example on how we speak with our parents and how we speak with our friends. For surely we will speak to them differently such as in terms of the words we use, the tone we use, even our facial expressions.
It needs to be noted that
communication does not always mean verbal form of communication such as talking
but it also involves non verbal communication such as behavior, gestures or
even the way we dress. (West & Turner 2010)
So for my example in this
analysis, I would just use the Malay Muslim culture in Brunei. When the
celebration of Eid came, normally the Malay Muslim will be celebrating their
moment of victory after fasting for a month. It is also to ask for forgiveness
among family and friends. During this time of the year, we can surely see a lot
of people trying to ‘accommodate’ other people when they meet.
Let us just take one aspect of
the event which is CLOTHING.
As we can see, most people will
be dressed up in their formal Malay clothing which is ‘baju cara melayu' for the men and ‘baju kurong’ for the women.
This can be seen as a obvious dress code during eid. This itself is ‘accommodation’.
Accommodating the eid event here in Brunei, accommodating the host who is also
using ‘cara melayu or baju kurong’.
I can see the concept of
convergence occurring here. West and Turner (2010, pg 472) defines convergence
it as ‘strategy used to adapt to another’s behaviour’. This is usually done for
the sake of social approval, for converging with a particular individual.
Referring to the example stated, it only seems proper for us to visit others
during Eid by following the dress code which is cara melayu or baju kurung.
Those clothing itself potray a hidden message of trying to ‘fit in’ with a
particular group or event. In this case, as the culture of Brunei Muslims
during Eid is that they wear cara melayu or baju kurong.
Assuming someone from a different
culture of different religion would try to join the Eid event, if they would
want to ‘converge’, they would most likely try and fit in through suing the
appropriate dress code.
There is another aspect in CAT
which is ‘divergence’. Griffin (2012, pg 396) defines it as the ‘communication
strategy of accentuating the differences between you and another person.’
Individuals would usually diverge if they wanted to make a distinction of
themselves. West and Turner (2010) added that usually groups with strong sense
of cultural pride would want to diverge to somehow make a statement or
highlight their group identity.
Taking the example of baju cara
melayu or baju kurong, divergence can occur when the those clothing are used on
a different setting or event. For example on events which involve different
cultural groups promoting their culture. Assuming that the Malay culture group
is involved in that event, therefore they would also promote their culture
where they would wear their traditional clothing of baju melayu or baju kurong.
That itself is divergence. Other cultural groups would also 'diverge' in those type of events.
There is a question of why we do
all those converging and diverging. Griffin (2012) explains that we are
motivated to do them. For ‘convergence’, the motivation for social approval of
others. For ‘divergence’, the motivation to be distinctive, different from
others. Coupland (2007 pg.62) added that for convergence, individuals seek for 'social attractiveness' and 'communication efficiency'. Whereas for divergence, it may be for 'reducing intimacy' though that is just one of the implications of divergence.
West and Turner (2010) has commented on this theory on how it is extended from accommodating verbal communication to non verbal communication. With the changing culture in most societies, this theory may need to be extensive to further our understanding with the changing population of culture in the world.
References:
Coupland, N., (2007) Style: Language Variation & Identity. Cambridge.
Griffin, E., (2012)A First Look At Communication Theory (8th Edition).New York. McGraw Hill.
West, R., Turner, L., H., (2010) Introducing Communication Theory: Analysis and Application (4th Edition). New York. McGraw Hill.
I personally understand Symbolic Interactionism through the word 'meaning' and 'interpretation'. It is all about how we interpret a particular meaning. Applying to everyday communication, language itself is a symbol.
According to Turner & West (2010), this theory is based on the idea on how we are motivated to act based on the "meanings that we assign to people or things or even events. " (p.79) How these meanings are in a way created through negotiation with other individuals or negotiated within our self. Language, being a symbol enables us to interact negotiates meaning with other individuals in society.
Griffin (2012) defines it as 'the ongoing use of language and gestures in anticipation of how the other will react; a conversation.' (pg.54)
I will use the road sign 'BERHENTI" as my example. For a Malay society, they will surely know what this sign means. 'BERHENTI' means 'STOP'. A road sign which means that for a vehicle user, we stop at a road junction to see to see whether there is an opening for us to move before making our exit to another road.
Using the symbolic interactionism theory where language itself is a symbol, for those who are able to speak and understand Malay Language, this road sign is not really a major problem for them as they are able to understand. That BERHENTI sign has 'meaning' for them which is to 'stop'. However, for those who do not understand Malay language or words, this sign will not mean anything to them. Therefore they do not see any meaning. This is a simple way of an understanding of symbolic interactionism.
Applying this theory to society. In most societies there is a 'shared meaning'. People in society would definitely would have the same definition of a particular matter. For example in the Brunei society, they see homosexual couples getting married as something not accepted in terms of culture and religion. This is an example of a 'shared meaning'.
However for some societies such as the United States, they see homosexual couples getting married as something normal. That is their 'shared meaning' concerning that matter. This shows that for the people in the Brunei society, this matter is prohibited therefore they follow that 'meaning' where they do not accept homosexual marriage. For the American society, this homosexual matter may use to be something prohibited but the society may have gone through a process of changing interpretation of that particular 'meaning' making homosexual marriage as something acceptable within that society. (Cantor et al 2006)
We need to keep in mind that this theory is based on interpretation of meaning. Therefore a particular matter may not just have one meaning for a particular individual but various meanings. This make the theory quite broad and making it very hard to apply. However this theory can be used as a framework to support other communication theories. (West & Turner 2010)
References:
Cantor, D., (2006) Same-Sex Marriage: The Legal & Psychological Evolution In America. Middlestown. Wesleyan University Press.
Griffin, E., (2012)A First Look At Communication Theory (8th Edition).New York. McGraw Hill.
West, R., Turner, L., H.,
(2010) Introducing Communication Theory: Analysis and Application 4th
Edition). New York. McGraw Hill.
For the social penetration theory, I personally think that there are many examples around and that it is constantly happening in our daily lives. I will use a a clip from a movie for this analysis. Most love genre movies usually involves two individuals trying to get to know each other. This is one of them where I will be using the movie 'My Sassy Girl' as my example.
A little synopsis of this movie. It is about a typical nice guy called Charlie who falls in love with a hellion called Jordan. Both individuals come from very different background and both of them first met at the New York subway station. Cutting the story short, both of them started going for a few exciting dates and along that exchanging stories through conversation. and it all goes to a point that Charlie start falling deeply for Jordan. After three months, Jordan asked Charlie to meet her at Central park to exchange love letters. This is where Jordan told Charlie that she needs time to heal from the loss of her fiancee. They made an agreement that they will meet there at the same time the following year. A year has passed and Charlie came to the place but Jordan was not there. He read her letter and found out that her fiancee actually died and that he reminded her of her fiancee and all the dates that they went are reenactments of her previous dates with her late fiancee. (IMDb 2012)
A typical story line revolving around knowing two individuals trying to get to know each other. Applying the social penetration theory to explain
this, it is evident that the process of disclosure plays an important role in relationship
development.
Social penetration theory can be
defined as the "the process of increasing disclosure and intimacy in a
relationship." (Allensworth 1996, p.1)
According to West and Turner (2010) the social penetration theory assumes that;
Relationships progress from nonintimate to intimate
relational development is generally systematic and predictable
relational development includes depenetration and dissolution
self-disclosure is at the core of relationship development. (p.169)
Simply said, this theory seeks to explain the
processes that occur during a relationship. This processes can be observed in
our daily lives relationship with different people and it is through the
process of disclosure that individuals become close to one another.
The disclosure process is explained by Griffins (2012)
to be a process where two individuals reveals their personal matters
voluntarily with one another. In other words, both individuals are exchanging
information that may make them vulnerable to each other. This can be seen throughout the 'My Sassy Girl' movie where the process of disclosure continues occurring throughout most of the scenes.
The onion metaphor is used to explain the process of
social penetration. The creators of this theory Altman & Taylor have used
this metaphor to explain the personality structure which is defined by Griffin
(2012, p. 114) to be "onion-like layers of beliefs and feelings about
self, others, and the world; deeper layers are more vulnerable, protected, and
central to self-image."
The human personality is like an onion, consisting of
several layers, where the public self is on the outer layer and the most
private self at the core. The human personality will have different aspects
which may include all the values, interests and emotions. It is possible that
we have a casual friend that knows a lot of things about ourselves. But then again, to what extent to they know? Here the concept of depth & breadth plays a vital role.
Referring to the 'My Sassy Girl' movie, through the process of disclosure, Charlie and Jordan are getting closer after each day spent together, more breadth is covered and depth as well. For example the part where Jordan disclose the information concerning her being 'left' by her fiancee to Charlie.
Depth is the degree of intimacy. Therefore, with more
depth and breadth, you get more intimate with a particular person.
It needs to be noted that the process
of disclosure is reciprocal.The law of reciprocity stated that the process of
openness in one person will lead to openness in another person. Referring to
the example, when Charlie and Jordan are engaging in a conversation with each other on any particular aspect, it is most likely that
there is an exchange process of information. In simpler words, if you open up to someone, that someone might open up to you as well.
But we
cannot always assume that if we open up to someone, that someone will open up
us back. There are factors that may affect this. Such as gender, there is an
assumption that women opens up more than men.
It is stated
that the speed of penetration is rapid at first but slows down reaching towards
the core where the most private informations are. This is due to the social
norms where you risk being too vulnerable to a person when you disclose too
much information especially the most private ones. This is very evident in the example 'My Sassy Girl' movie where it took Jordan a year just to disclose the information about her fiancee being 'dead' to Charlie and that she is not fully healed from that.
There is a social norm
against telling too much things too fast where most individuals may be
overwhelmed or even be disgusted with so much information all at once. Due to
this, depenetration may occur. It is defined by West & Turner (2010) to be
the "slow deterioration of relationship" (p.170). This process
explains that a relationship will not end up just like that but goes through a
gradual withdrawal from the deeper layer towards the outer layer. This happens in
most relationship cases in our everyday lives. However we should not be quick to assume that everyone follow this social norm. Some individuals might be accepting with all information overflowing to them and in return may also open up the same amount of information back.
I would
critic this part of the theory to be not fully explaining on what may occur
next. Depenetration assumes that a particular relationship will deteriorate.
There are some cases that some relationships actually become more intimate
after a slight depenetration. It may take a moment for some individuals to
accept a particular fact or truth about someone, and then when they did,
penetration can continue to occur for some cases whereas for some cases,
depenetration may still occur.
Applying the
stages of the penetration (Orientation stage, Exploratory stage,Affective
stage, Stable stage & Depenetration stage)to the 'My Sassy Girl' example.It is evident that Charlie and Jordan's relationship did go through all those stages except for the depenetration stage. From the movie example, despite Charlie knowing that Jordan could not date him due to the fact that he reminded her of her late fiancee, does not cause depenetration to occur but more like an additional stage between affective and stable stage. This just shows that not all relationships follow a particular structure such as those stages in social penetration.
My personal critic would be that not all relationships may go through all the penetration
stage. Some may just go through the first two stages and skip a few stages and
end up directly to the depenetration stage. Some cases may be that after the
depenetration stage, it goes back to the stable stage instead.We cannot always assume that a relationship progress through a specific pattern.
Another concept in the social penetration theory is the cost benefit analysis. This concept explains that we all expect something in return from a particular relationship. There is a system of rewards and cost. If the rewards exceeds the cost, the relationship will develop further. Otherwise, it will either reach a stop or even go through depenetration. The social exchange theory best explains what is going on between two parties that evaluate each other's cost and benefit in a particular relationship. The theory states that individuals will seeks to maximise their benefits and minimise their costs.
For the example presented, the benefit for both individuals is 'love' it seems. It is safe to assume that their love exceeds all cost.
It is a question of who is worthy of your time and attention and then what are the benefits after your 'investment' towards them.
Applying this to our daily lives, indeed we do expect something from our friends and colleagues in a certain relationship and that can be either be in a form of attention, mutual agreement or any other benefits. The cost might be in the form of deviance or resentment and other negatives.
References:
Allensworth, N. (1996). Social penetration: A description, research and
evaluation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southern States
Communication Association, Memphis, Tennessee, March 27-31, 1996. Available at:
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/14/e0/03.pdf
Griffin, E., (2012)A First Look At Communication Theory (8th Edition).New York. McGraw Hill.
There are various definitions of culture and that each definition is specific to particular aspect of study. The most commonly used definition of culture comes under the area of sociology and anthropology. Under that area of study, Ferraro (1998) cited Tylor (1871) who defines culture as “that complex whole which includes knowledge, beliefs, art, morals law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as member of society.” (p.18) To explain it simply, culture means the way of life for a particular group of people.
However the definition of culture is different when applied to the communication theory of cultural studies. It concerns more on the individuals make ‘meaning’ from what they encounter in their daily lives such as a form of identity or sense of belonging. (Rojek 2007)
West & Turner (2010) have stated that cultural studies concerns "the media represents ideologies of the dominant class in society". (p.363)
They continue explaining that the media is controlled by the most elite or top people in society where their main aim is to influence the public people and benefit or profit from them. The power of media and the role of power need to be taken into account when it comes to understanding a particular culture.
In simpler words, the media has the power to influence the people with ideologies of a dominant discourse in a particular society. It is evident that even now that we are all following a dominant discourse. Such as the discourse of being a 'student' or the discourse of being a 'lecturer' where we are expected to follow certain ideologies. However it needs to be noted that that not all the ideologies are true and that there are no specific ideology to a certain discourse. Ideologies usually creates a binary formation of a good ideology or a bad ideology. Such as the ideology of a good student would be hardworking, studious and attentive in lectures. Whereas the ideology of a bad student is lazy, absent in lecture for no reasons and does not listen to their lecturers.
For this theory I will focus on visual culture and how it may represent a form of identity for individuals. The media promotes various visual cultures and it has already influenced many individuals to date. I will use one very well known culture as example. FACEBOOK is a visual culture.
It is one of the very well known social networking site and that almost everyone in the world is logged in on Facebook. The idea of communication and keeping in touch with old friends and making new friends surely has affected the world on a whole. Communication itself is a vital process and now with the innovation of technology, promoting visual culture is more effective and that its level of influence is very high on us consumers.
Relating to the cultural studies theory, let us ask the question who benefits from Facebook? Surely there is someone behind the scenes making money from all the people who are logging in Facebook.
Facebook as a discourse. What are the ideologies? Individuals with many friends. Online Gaming. Relationships. Gossips. Photography. Stalking people.
Applying politics to Facebook; the politics of relationship, politics of influence, politics of followers
Counter discourses and counter ideology are those that oppose the norm. Basically something that is not mainstream. For example for most individuals, using Facebook is a mainstream thing as majority of consumers in the world are using them. So what is a counter discourse against Facebook? Perhaps those individuals who are not using Facebook. However due to the fact that the main discourse is individuals using Facebook, those not using Facebook are basically left ignored.
I would personally critic this theory concerning the counter discourse. It is usually assumed that that the counter-discourse is the other side of the coin. Something the people view as mostly wrong and deviant. But then again, it depends on the subject and acceptance of a particular culture, law & religion in society. If I would use the counter-discourse of Facebook which is those individuals not on Facebook. Are they at the wrong side or are they even deviant?
For a discourse such as heterosexual marriage, the counter-discourse would be homosexual marriage. Yes I agree that it may be wrong but only to certain culture and religion. In some societies or areas of the world, homosexual marriage is already legal and accepted by the public.
Nevertheless the cultural studies theory has contributed much on understanding those counter-discourses giving to new areas of study such as ethnic studies, homosexual relationships and even transgender relationships. This theory made us realize how we are exploited by those elite groups through the mass media and those who do not follow the main discourses are oppressed.
References:
Griffin, E., (2012) A First Look At Communication Theory (8th Edition). New York. McGraw Hill.
Ferraro, G., (1998) Cultural Anthropology: An Applied Perspective (3rd Edition). Belmont.Wadsworth.
Rojek. C., (2007) Cultural Studies. Cambridge. Polity Press.
West, R., Turner, L., H., (2010) Introducing Communication Theory: Analysis and Application 4th Edition). New York. McGraw Hill.
The agenda setting theory can simply be understood through the phrase
above. Agenda setting is basically how
the media specifically the press has the power to influence people on which
news information that is considered to be important. McCombs and Shaw as cited
by Griffin (2012) believe that the news media has “the ability to transfer the
salience of items on their news agenda to the public agenda”. (p.378)
This theory explains
the major influence of media in our lives. How the media makes us think what
they want us to think. Though we have to keep in mind that we as individuals
have the power to choose whether to conform to what the media wants us to do or
otherwise.
Here I will use an article from Brunei Times as my example. An article
by Sofri (2009) titled "‘Sounds of Hope’ getting louder. "
The first level agenda setting is that an
association called ‘Sounds of Hope’ is ‘getting louder’ as in getting heard by
people. The second level agenda setting will focus on why ‘Sounds of Hope’ is
getting louder. This is where the media narrows down our choices on what to
think, basically what they want us to think about.
This article basically follows one of the main functions of agenda
setting theory which is the public agenda; promoting issues that are considered
important by the public. Referring to the article example, the issue of poverty
is something to be taken seriously and the public community needs to make their
moves in eradicating it as it was framed by the journalist of that article.
Corporate agenda can also be observed here where it is an issue that business
corporation sees as important. Referring to the example, who will benefit from
this news?
We can observe how the journalist use framing in this article; “Sounds
of Hope getting louder”. How the journalist try to make us think what he wants
us to think. If I were the journalist, I can frame it differently such as ‘Sounds
of Hope’ dare to hope? Which can make the viewers see it from a pessismitic
perspective if they just read it from the title. At least to my assumption that
it is.
The framing process gives the journalist the
ability to make us view certain content with a specific perspective like what I
and the journalist have done. Weaver (2007) cited Entman (1993) on framing
where he stated that “to frame is to select some aspects of a perceived reality
and make them more salient in a communicating text, in such a way as to promote
particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or
treatment recommendation for the item described.” (p.143)
References:
Griffin, E., (2012) A First Look At Communication Theory (8th Edition). New York. McGraw Hill.
Sofri, D., W., (2009) ‘Sounds Of Hope’ Getting Louder. The Brunei Times. Retrieved on 2012 February 11 From http://www.bt.com.bn/lifestyle/2009/10/02/sounds-hope-getting-louder
Weaver, D. (2007) Thoughts on Agenda Setting, Framing, and Priming. Journal of Communication 57 (2007) 142–147.
