发布时间：2020-11-07 热度：
高端论文代写平台——实力强劲，硕博写手，200+专业写手，已服务10000多留学生，主营业务：论文代写，网课代修，考试代考。
有许多多样且相互冲突的观点在作用于社会大众传媒。本文将讨论这两个主要的观点——大众传媒的多元化和马克思主义理论。在每种情况下三个社会学研究将用于检验的有效性的定义。最具前瞻性的研究将被用于大众媒体和通信一般性评估和结论。我们来看看这份Sociology Coursework！
Example Sociology Coursework ——【Mass media and communication】
1.0 Introduction
There are many diverse and conflicting views of the role of the mass media in society. This paper will discuss the two dominant schools of thought – the pluralist and Marxist theories of mass media. In each case three sociological studies will be used to examine the validity of the definition. The most prescient case studies will be evaluated and conclusions drawn with relation to mass media and communication in general.
2.0 Mass Media and Communication
The term ‘mass’ is a reference to the large numbers of people to which traditional broadcasts are aimed. The spread of interpersonal media systems means that, “modern communication has become less mass in character”(Haralambos et al., 2000). However, the term is still relevant for many influential media systems . Therefore, mass media can be defined as:
“The methods and organisations used by specialist social groups to convey messages to large, socially mixed and widely dispersed audiences”
(Haralambos et al., 2000, p935)
This definition assumes that communication passes from a single point to many other points. However, from the 1980s onwards, this was increasingly irrelevant in relation to the media. Technology has enabled interpersonal media communication to become steadily more prevalent.
The definition also makes no reference to the audience’s role in the communication. Many sociologists now believe that audience responses are both highly individual, and heavily influenced by social context.
3.0 Pluralism
The pluralist view of the mass media is that society is made up of a complex of competing groups and interests , all of which interact with one another. The groups are important to an idealistic democratic society, where a benign and neutral state allows them equal access to resources and influence.
3.1 The audience and its influence on the media
The mass media are free of government control, and the audience is in turn free to choose the version of reality that they absorb. Audiences provide feedback (and hence affect media content) by conforming, accommodating or rejecting a particular medium’s view of reality.
In this way, different parts of the media cater for different parts of society. Because the media is seen as reflecting society, it does not have a significant role in changing it.
3.2 On the existence of media bias
Jones (1986) argues that radio news is “neutral, balanced and fair”. Therefore, radio news is unbiased and reports facts rather than conjecture. Jones analyses media coverage of industrial disputes. Where an “apparent bias” is reported, he claims that this is due to one side representing their argument to the media less successfully. However, it must be noted that Jones is a correspondent on BBC radio, and is thus a biased source himself.
3.3 The media as the fourth estate
The media are seen as the ‘fourth estate’, fulfilling a public service role, ensuring that facts inform ‘public opinion’ and check government. The media constitute a public sphere in which an open political debate can take place.
Keane (1991) has identified man’s right to morality, liberty and justice as justification for a plural mass media . Societies such as the United States, with a constitutional commitment to the First Amendment (the right to free speech) have always placed importance on the autonomy of the mass media. In this way, the media facilitate a ‘marketplace’ of ideas.
3.4 ‘Post-Communist Media Autonomy, Pluralism and Diversity’, Gross (2002)
In this paper, Gross suggests that the widespread negative critique of eastern-European journalism is unjust and based upon unrealistic and utopian assumptions . He argues that by 2002, most post-communist states had developed a pluralistic mass media.
The cultures of Eastern Europe remain undemocratic – “a strange synthesis of pre-Communist and Communist era cultures mixed with a libertarianism that is unfettered by any responsibility”. The culture is effectively a democratic civic masquerade where “democracy” designates a form of government rather than a condition of society.
For Gross, the change in the media’s status from Communist to non-Communist contributes to the pluralism and diversity of the press in spite of the many problems it faces . However, the pluralism is based on highly political ideologies. Since the fall of communism, the media has served intellectual pluralism, but will not serve democratic pluralism until informative capacity replaces ideological convictions.
3.5 ‘Coverage of the Roma in the Mass Media in Romania’, Project on Ethnic Relations Plaks (1997)
The aim of this work was to investigate the foundation of anti-Roma (gypsy) bias in the Romanian media. The report suggests that in 1997, eight years after the fall of the communist Ceausescu government, the media is freer, but by no means pluralistic.
The media considers it normal to negatively stereotype the Roma as criminals with “inherent” deviant behavioural patterns . Romanian journalists, see their role as reflecting the views of society, and thus portray the Roma very negatively.
The one Romani newspaper that does exist is funded and regulated by the government. This regulation restricts the content, so that the audience feedback loop necessary for pluralism is depleted. The newspaper is not concerned with national issues, for which the community must rely upon the support of the Romanian press.
There is no Romani newspaper for national news, therefore, the Roma must rely on the biased press. It is clearly not in the interest of the Roma to be the subject of racism-based reporting that reinforces stereotypes. Therefore the media is not pluralistic. However, if a Roma newspaper existed for national news, then the racist press could be said to be pluralistic .
The article was written by PER, an organisation that promotes the interests of minority groups. However, honest contributions from the police, newspapers and Romani elite, improved the validity of the racist connotations prevalent throughout the piece. It was a longevity study where articles were analysed over a 6 year period. The article was written to promote relations between all parties, therefore it was keen to stress positive efforts being made by the media. Therefore, in general it was unbiased with respect to sociological analysis of media theory.
3.6 ‘Study of the 1940 US Presidential Election Campaign’, Lazarsfeld et al. (1945)
The Lazarsfeld et al. (1945) study investigates the effect of political mass communication on the 1940 US Presidential election. The work suggests that the mass media has a limited effect and that other social influences an overriding effect on opinion formation.
Lazarsfeld et al. (1945) initially assumed that messages were transmitted from the mass media to a ‘mass audience’, who absorb the message . However, their work suggests that only 5% of people change their voting behaviour as a result of media messages. The weak influence of the mass media was explained by overriding social influences in their ‘limited effects paradigm’ .
In a follow up work, Katz & Lazarsfeld (1955) confirm the assertion of Lazarsfeld et al. (1945) that the “media have a rather limited influence” on society. This is because the mass communication process is altered by a number of variables . The key factor is seen as being the role of opinion leaders who mediate media messages and exert strong influence over individuals with a low level of independent thought.
Katz and Lazarsfeld may be misleading when they project the characteristics of opinion leaders. Many opinion leaders will have the characteristics they mention, but it is also known that some opinion leaders in some subject areas will not have those general characteristics .
Influence tended to be horizontal across a particular socio-economic class, except that in the ‘higher’ social classes there was a tendency for people to find opinion leaders in the next class up. No opinion leader was an opinion leader in all aspects of life. Allowing for those differences from one class to another and from one subject area to another, www.ccms-infobase.com argues that society “probably” can recognise in opinion leaders the characteristics that Katz and Lazarsfeld suggested, in particular that opinion leaders will be more active users of the mass media than others.
There is an era-dependent basis for the study. The work depends upon the accessibility of opinions. In the 1940s the general public would have had access to far fewer sources of information than today. Under such circumstances it is likely that opinion leaders in the community became especially influential. This was the case during the rise to power of the National Socialist (Nazi) party in Germany during the 1930s.
In spite of the increased accessibility of the media, Katz and Lazarsfeld’s research is still highly influential. Advertisers and spin-doctors recognise that ‘the best form of advertising is word-of-mouth advertising’. In British politics there are notable examples in the 1992 and 1997 elections. Both parties developed strategies that saw local opinion leaders armed with ‘ammunition’ to support arguments at micro levels such as the pub and workplace
4.0 Marxism
In ‘The German Ideology (1846), Marx asserts that “the ruling ideas are the ideas of the ruling class”. Applying this to Marxism, the media are the means by which the ideas of the ruling class maintain their dominance as the ruling ideas (Haralambos & Holborn, 2000, p937).
The Marxist view was dominant in Britain and Europe from the mid 1960s to the mid 1980s, and is still used in modern research. Although less dominant now, Marxism still affects much media research.
4.1 Classical Marxism
Generally, the Marxian view of media influence depends on an understanding and elaboration of the operation of the notion of ideology.
In Marxist texts, ideology is used in an entirely negative sense to refer to a supposedly dominant ideology, which supports the interests of the dominant class. The idea of domination is central to Marxism and is seen as a tool of the dominant classes, misleading and illusory.
4.2 Critical Marxism – Political economy of the media
In the Marxist fundamentalist tradition, ‘political economists’ see ideology as subordinate to the economic base (Curran et al. 1982: 26). Work by Graham Murdock (Murdock & Golding, 1977; Murdock, 1982) represents the ‘critical’ political economy approach, locating the power of media in the economic processes and structures of media production. Ownership and economic control of the media is seen as the key factor in determining control of media messages.
