Development of strong effects theory

Theorists of communication

• Walter Lippmann• Chicago School– John Dewey– Charles Cooley– Robert Park– George Herbert Mead

Importance of the Chicago School

• Rogers (1994) in his A History of Communication Study: A Biographical Approach identified four major contributions to communication study that came from the Chicago School:

• 1. It represented the first important flowering of social science in America, serving as the intellectual beachhead for important European theories, particularly those of the German sociologist Georg Simmel.

• 2. It gave a strong empirical dimension to the social science study of social problems in the United States. The Chicago School was amelioristic, progressive, and pragmatic, seeking to improve the world by studying its social problems. At issue for the Chicago School was whether American democracy, born in a society of rural communities, could survive in the crowded immigrant slums of rapidly growing cities.

• 3. Chicago scholars formed a theoretical conception of personality socialization centering on human communication. To the Chicago sociologists, to be social and to be human was to communicate. They attacked instinct explanations of human behavior and instead stressed a viewpoint later known as symbolic interactionism.

• 4. The Chicago School cast the mold for future mass communication research on media effects.

Three Elements of the Looking Glass Self

• The imagination of our appearance to the other person• The imagination of his judgment of

that appearance• Some sort of self-feeling–Pride–Mortification

Cooley’s example:• The real Alice, known only to her maker• Her idea of herself

– “I [Alice] look well in this hat”• Her idea of Angela’s idea of her

– “Angela thinks I look well in this hat” • Her idea of what Angela thinks she thinks of herself

– “Angela thinks I am proud of my looks in this hat”• Angela’s idea of what Alice thinks of herself

– “Alice thinks she is stunning in that hat”•

© 1998-2002 by Ronald Keith Bolender

• Society is an interweaving and interworking of mental selves. I imagine your mind, and especially what your mind thinks about my mind. I dress my mind before yours and expect that you will dress yours before mine. Whoever cannot or will not perform these feats is not properly in the game.

• (Cooley 1927:200-201)• Cooley, Charles Horton. 1927. Life and the

Student. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Public Opinion (as a social process)

• In Cooley’s view society consists of a network of communication between component actors and subgroups; therefore, the process of communication, more particularly its embodiment in public opinions, cements social bonds and insures consensus.

• Cooley saw public opinion as “an organic process,” and not merely as a state of agreement about some question of the day.

The Significance of Communication

• “By Communication is here meant the mechanism through which human relations exist and develop—all the symbols of the mind, together with the means of conveying them through space and preserving them in time.”– Make up “an organic whole corresponding to the

organic whole of human thought; and everything in the way of mental growth has an external existence therein.”

John Dewey• Most expansive theorist of the School– Actually, only taught at Chicago for 10 years, but influenced members throughout his long and prestigious career– Concerned with the dissolution of community as a result of the industrial age, the implications of communication for

democracy, education– One of the true Renaissance scholars—his work influenced

philosophy (pragmatism), social sciences method and theory, psychology, education, librarianship and other disciplines

Pragmatism• Dewey did not first develop this philosophical position, but

was probably its most eloquent and effective proponent– William James

• Dewey’s view was that knowledge in the abstract was not only of little value, but not really possible. Knowledge was a result of the interaction of intellect and experience. The only real knowledge was developed through interaction with the living world—strong proponent of empirical study of society. Pragmatism argues that knowledge is to be judged by its usefulness in real life. The only uniquely American philosophical school.

Dewey and communication study

• Though Dewey places communication at the very heart of his philosophical and social concerns, his actual theoretical work on communication is fragmented and, at times, frustratingly difficult if not obscure– “Of all things, communication is most wonderful”– Society can be said not only to live by transmission, by

communication, but in transmission, in communication.• As was concurrently and subsequently true of Marx,

Gramsci, and others it was up to later scholars to try to make sense of what he was saying (Carey)

Dewey’s idea of the role of communication in society

• Societies are based on shared sentiments, meanings, beliefs, norms, etc.

• For a society to exist, the members must have a feeling of communion with other members– Shared self-interest, knowledge of the law, even

agreement to rules of democracy are not enough– Difference between the “Great Society” and the

“Great Community”

The Great Community• In any true community, individuals have a feeling of

fellowship with all the other members– Concern over the fate of all members, but especially those in greatest

need, is a natural part of the community– All members share equally in the feeling of fellowship even if material

wealth, etc. is unequally distributed– The machinery of democracy is created to help carry out the natural

policy of a true community• Cannot create a community• Cannot substitute for a community• In the absence of a true community, the machinery of elections, universal

suffrage, and on and on is simply an empty husk which will only forward the interests of the most powerful or adept at its manipulation

• Community can only be created through communication– Of all things communication is the most wonderful

Communities small and large• The ideal of community is the small town

– Like Dewey’s native XXXX Vermont• People know each other, develop bonds of affection and understanding,

through their face-to-face communication, shared religious experience (communication), gossip, shared culture and all the other myriad ways they communicate and thus come to share a deep understanding supported by emotional bonds– People take on as a personal goal the good of the community

• American democracy was born of, and grew within a system where this was the actual experience for the great majority of citizens

• However, the industrial age had completely shattered this ideal, producing instead vast cities of polyglot culture, chasms between rich and poor, racial and ethnic conflict, self-centered individualism and political opportunism

• While community was small and place-based, society was huge and mobile

How to recapture community?• Political chicanery, social disintegration, immorality and

economic abuse were largely due to a loss of the communitarian spirit that was part of true democracy—the community– Must construct a mass community—the “Great community” that

would replace the “Great Society”• Because of the society’s grand scale, communication would need to be on

an equally grand scale—harness the mass media to provide communication widely and relatively uniformly to the differing groups that make up the nation (or the city)

• “Thought News” project• Continued to believe that harnessing the press by using it to disseminate

the ‘latest intelligence’ from the standpoint of social experts but in an arresting and engaging manner would revitalize the public, imbue it with a civic spirit and produce an effective and wise public opinion that could lead the Great Community

Search for the Great Community

• “the idea of democracy is a wider and fuller idea than can be exemplified in the state even at its best. To be realized in must affect all modes of human association, the family, the school, industry, religion. And even as far as political arrangements are concerned, governmental institutions are but a mechanism for securing to an idea channels of effective operation.”

Louis WirthConsensus and mass communication

• Wirth, Louis (1948). Consensus and mass communication. American Sociological Review. 13(1) 1-15.• Classic (canonical) rendering of the theory of liberal pluralism (interest group democracy).• Wirth was giving his presidential address read before the annual meeting of the American Sociological

Society, NYC, December 28-30, 1947.• He began with his belief that “man” had developed technical capabilities that outstripped his ability to

control them through reason and ‘consensus’ and that this was a terribly dangerous state to be in. This made study of sociology critically important so that man’s ability to rule with reason could control the danger of nuclear holocaust that had developed.

• Social scientists cannot treat their topic in the abstract or use many of the methods of physical sciences.

• Chose to discuss consensus “because I believe it provides both an approach to the central problem of sociology and to the problems of the contemporary world.” (2)

• “Because the mark of any society is the capacity of its members to understand one another and to act in concert toward common objectives and under common norms, the analysis of consensus rightly constitutes the focus of sociological investigation.” (2)

• Compares modern mass societies to Roman Empire. Modern mass societies are more integrated, with people participating in common life and in democratic societies participate in control of public policy.

• Mass societies are a creation of the modern age and are a product of:• Division of labor• Mass communication• More or less democratically achieved consensus• Characteristics of the mass:• Great numbers• Aggregates of men widely dispersed over the face of the earth• Heterogeneous members• Anonymous individuals• Does not constitute an organized group• No common customs or traditions

– Open to suggestions– Behavior is “capricious and unpredictable”

• Consists of unattached individuals– Do not play roles in a group

• Everyone is in some respects characterized by mass behavior• Members of multiple organizations with disparate interests• Fragmentation of human interests• Maintaining two-way communication between leaders of structures and

members, and contact among members is necessary for the future of democracy• Dynamic equilibrium

– “One of the principal conditions of effective collective action is the accuracy and speed with which the shifting interests and attitudes of great masses of men, whether organized or unorganized, can be ascertained and brought to bear upon the determination of policy.” (4)

• Instability of interests and motives of members and correspondingly frequent changes in leadership lead to uncertainty in the locus of decisive power at any one juncture of events

• Mass societies--Vast concentrations of power and authority and complicated machinery of administration– “Perhaps the most urgent need that goes unmet in such a society is the capacity for

prompt decisions in the face of recurrent crises.” (4)

• Consensus• Equivalent for society to mind for individual• “Consensus is the sign that such partial or complete understanding has been reached on a

number of issues confronting the members of a group sufficient to entitle it to be called a society.” • Not imposed by coercion• Not fixed by custom• Therefore, “always partial and developing and has constantly to be won” (4)• “If men of diverse experiences and interests are to have ideas and ideals in common they must have the

ability to communicate. It is precisely here, however, that we encounter a paradox. In order to communicate effectively with one another, we must have a common knowledge, but in a mass society it is through communication that we must obtain this common body of knowledge.” (4-5)

• Must initially be content to “grope haltingly” for “elementary understandings” supplied by superficial common experiences

• Assumption that human beings the world over are sufficiently alike in their basic nature and in their life careers that they have some “elementary capacity to put themselves in the place of the other” (5)

• Two major aspects of modern society• Organized groups• Detached masses• “held together, if at all by the mass media of communication

Society has developed many ways of inducing consent

• Force and authority– Dictatorship– However, even the dictator “does not enjoy unlimited opportunity to coerce his

subjects” (5)– If conditions too onerous, subjects may revolt– Contact with communication about other types of conditions may be necessary for

subjects to be aware of their own negative conditions• Law• Religious sanction

• Leadership• Common identification with great heroes or leaders

– Reinforced by:– Propaganda and education– “Ideas and ideals and the symbols with which they become identified” (6)

• mass communication lends itself particularly well to the dissemination of symbols and ideals “on a scale hitherto thought impossible” (6)

• A common history, culture and set of traditions– “It is this basis of common social life as patterned by these traditions that makes it

possible in the last analysis for any group to think of itself and to act as a society, to regard itself as a “we” group and to counterpose this “we” experience to all that is alien.

• Public opinion– “formed in the course of living, acting and making decisions on issues”

(8)– Individuals’ role is not determined by demographics. “What counts,

rather, is their power, prestige, strategic position, their resources, their articulateness, the effectiveness of the organization and leadership.” (8)

– “Decisive part of public opinion . . . is the organization of views on issues that exercise an impact upon those who are in a position to make decisions.”• Individuals affiliated with a variety of organized groups• Another large mass of individuals unattached to any stable group

– unorganized masses, leave the decision-making to those who are organized

•

• “The fact that the instrumentalities of mass communication operate in situations already prepared for them may lead to the mistaken impression that they or the content and symbols which they disseminate do the trick. It is rather the consensual basis that already exists in society which lends to mass communication its effectiveness.” (6-7)

• Conditions that led to mass society have combined to “disintegrate local cohesion and to bring hitherto disparate and parochial cultures into contact with each other. Out of this ferment has come the disenchantment of absolute faiths.” (7)

• --“skepticism toward all dogmas and ideologies”• --substitution of rational grounds for believing• where reason fails, to seek “legitimation for a belief in

personal tastes, • preferences and the right to choose”• Increasing sophistication among the populace led to “perfection of the means of

persuasion”• “disintegration of unitary faiths and dogmas” concurrent with a blending

of the elements “in such a way as to attract the greatest number of followers”• Political parties blending ideas into incongruous conglomeration of ideas• Means for reaching consensus:• “Force and fraud on the one hand, and persuasion and rational

agreement on the other hand.” (8)

• Democracies must resort to the art of compromise.• “democracies rest upon the ultimate agreement to disagree, which is

the tolerance of a divergent view” (8)• “Coercion can achieve spurious agreement on all issues, but consent can

be obtained only provisionally and perhaps only on those issues which do not threaten too deeply the interests, the ideas and the ideals of the heterodox.” (9)– Consensus . . . is the established habit of intercommunication, or discussion, debate,

negotiation and compromise, and the toleration of heresies, or even of indifference, up to the point of “clear and present danger” which threatens the life of the society itself. Rather than resting on unanimity, it rests upon a sense of group identification and participation in the life of society, upon the willingness to allow our representatives to speak for us even though they do not always faithfully represent our views, if indeed we have any views at all on many of the issues under discussion, and upon our disposition to fit ourselves into a program that our group has adopted and to acquiesce in group decisions unless the matter is fundamentally incompatible with our interests and integrity.” (9-10)

• Mass media “direct their appeal to the mass” and constantly tempted to “reduce their content” to the “lowest common denominator”

• “Mass communication is rapidly becoming, if it is not already, the main framework of the web of social life.”

• “we live in an era when the control over these media constitutes perhaps the most important source of power in the social universe” (10)

• Hitler’s use of media

• Vast areas of ignorance• Even on most important issues• “Astonishing degree of apathy and indifference”•• Therefore: “the price we must pay for the survival of a way of life that we cherish calls for

the expenditure of an immensely greater share of our resources than thus far we have been willing to devote to information and education.” (11)

• Success of entertainment content means that information and education services must be interesting to be successful

• “The media of communication tend toward monopolistic control”• “may threaten the free and universal access to the factual knowledge and

balanced interpretation which underlie intelligent decision.” (11)• control over media becoming “one of the principal sources of political, economic

and social power” • Access to alternative views through the media “does of course open the door to the

disintegration of all existing social solidarities, while it creates new ones.” (12)• Considers three cases—race relations, class relations, international relations • Wants to see how to build consensus in each

Chicago School concerns

• Fear over loss of “community”– consensual forms of social control no longer

working– rise of vice, demagoguery, mass movements– crowd-like, mindless behavior

• Concern over viability of democracy in industrialized, mass society

• How to reinvent the social conditions of the small town within an industrialized society?– no going back to an earlier age

Mass culture

• Mass culture is culture produced as a commodity

• Undermines high culture and absorbs folk culture

• Leads to “lowest common denominator” culture and demeaning of public consciousness

Mass culture

• Individuals unprotected from propaganda• Propaganda able to move masses, leads to

radical action• Media powerful and broad-based, leading to a

number of negative social outcomes

DeTocqueville (Democracy in America 1835):

• “It would be to waste the time of my readers and my own, if I strove to demonstrate how the general mediocrity of fortunes, the absence of superfluous wealth, the universal desire for comfort, and the constant efforts by which everyone attempts to procure it, make the taste for the useful predominate over the love of the beautiful in the heart of man.”

• Democratic nations, among whom all these things exist, will therefore cultivate the artes which serve to render life easy, in preference to those whose object is to adorn it. They will habitually prefer the useful to the beautiful, and they will require that the beautiful should be useful.”

Jose Ortega Y Gasset (The Revolt of the Masses, 1932)

• “There is one fact which, whether good or ill, is of utmost importance in public life at the present moment. This fact is the accession of the masses to complete social power. As the masses, by definition, neither should nor can direct their own personal existence, and still less rule society in general, this fact means that actually Europe is suffering from the greatest crisis that can afflict peoples, nations, and civilization.”

• "Some of those [persons who participated in World War I] who trusted so much and hated so passionately have put their hands to the killing of man, they have mutilated others and perhaps been mutilated in return, they have encouraged others to draw the sword, and they have derided and besmirched those who refused to rage as they did. Fooled by propaganda? If so, they writhe in the knowledge that they were the blind pawns in plans which they did not incubate, and which they neither devised nor comprehended nor approved."{2}

• 2. Harold D. Lasswell. Propaganda Technique in the World War. First edition, 1927. Reprint. New York & London: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1972. Page 8.

LasswellThe Theory of Political Propaganda• "Propaganda is the management of collective attitudes by the

manipulation of significant symbols." • "Deliberation implies the search for the solution of a besetting problem

with no desire to prejudice a particular solution in advance. The propagandist is very much concerned about how a specific solution is to be evoked and "put over.""

• definite and restricted objectives vs. general and diffused purpose• "Every cultural group has its vested values. . . . An object toward which it

is hoped to arouse hostility must be presented as a menace to as many of these values as possible. . . . If the plan is to draw out positive attitudes toward an object, it must be presented, not as a menace and an obstruction, nor as despicable or absurd, but as a protector of our values, a champion of our dreams, and a model of virtue and propriety."

• Harold D. Lasswell, Propaganda Technique in the World War (New York: Knopf, 1927),

• "The strategy of propaganda, which has been phrased in cultural terms, can readily be described in the language of stimulus-response. Translated into this vocabulary, which is especially intelligible to some, the propagandist may be said to be concerned with the multiplication of those stimuli which are best calculated to evoke the desired responses, and with the nullification of those stimuli which are likely to instigate the undesired responses.”

• "Propaganda rose to transitory importance in the past whenever a social system based upon the sanctions of antiquity was broken up by a tyrant. The ever-present function of propaganda in modern life is in large measure attributable to the social disorganization which has been precipitated by the rapid advent of technological changes. Impersonality has supplanted personal loyalty to leaders.

• Literacy and the physical channels of communication have quickened the connection between those who rule and the ruled. Conventions have arisen which favor the ventilation of opinions and the taking of votes. Most of that which formerly could be done by violence and intimidation must now be done by argument and persuasion. Democracy has proclaimed the dictatorship of the palaver, and the technique of dictating to the dictator is named propaganda.“

Studies of mass communication

• Radio Panics America– Cantril, Gaudet, Herzog

The invasion from Mars: Radio panics America

– -Hadley Cantril (1940)– -personal interviews, scientific surveys, analysis

of newspaper accounts and mail– -attempts were made to answer: – 1. what was the extent of the panic? – 2. what about this specific broadcast was so

frightening? – 3. why did it frighten some people and not

others? – -contributions: – -theory-contributed to notions of selectivity-all

three types – -affirmed public opinion about media power

Two questions (p. 67)

• Note: “Even this broadcast did not affect more than a small minority of listeners.”

• Why did this broadcast frighten some people when other fantastic broadcasts do not?

• Why did this broadcast frighten some people but not others?

Why were people frightened?

• Realism of the program– “sheer dramatic excellence” of the program– early parts of the broadcast “fell within the

existing standards of judgment of the listeners”– “If a stimulus fits into the area of interpretation

covered by a standard of judgment and does not contradict it, then it is likely to be believed.”

Standards

• “Radio as accepted vehicle for important announcements.”

• “Prestige of speakers.”– astronomers– military men– Secretary of the Interior

• “Specific incidents understood.”– colloquial English/bureaucratese– real places, buildings, highways

Standards

• “Everybody baffled.”– on-air personalities claim bewilderment

• “The total experience.”– projected environment– “experienced as a unit”• individual features of broadcast not adequate to

explain reaction

Tuning in late

• CBS survey found that 42% of audience tuned in late– after intro– strong relationship to belief that broadcast was

news report rather than play

• “Contagion the excitement created”– Someone suggested respondent tune in after

show had begun [21% in AIPO survey; 19% in CBS survey]

Effect of late tune-in

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

From the beginning(n=269)

After beginning (n=191)

NewsPlay

Not paying attention to first announcements

• “widespread habit”– station IDs and advertising

• accounted for about 10% of those who misinterpreted the broadcast – actual n quite small (10% of 54 people who

thought it was news reports)

Not paying attention to first announcements

• most were casually scanning for something to listen to--not looking for Mercury Theater

• Competing with Charlie McCarthy– vastly more popular than Mercury Theater• (34.7 to 3.6)

– 18% of McCarthy listeners said they heard WOW, of which 62% said they changed after the first act (“Eddie Cantor effect”)

Classifying listeners• Researchers chose following scheme from

among a wide array of possible classifications:• 1. Those who analyzed the internal evidence of

the program and knew it could not be true.• 2. Those who checked up successfully to learn

that it was a play.• 3. Those who checked up unsuccessfully and

continued to believe it was a news broadcast.• 4. Those who made no attempt to check the

authenticity of the broadcast.

Checked internal evidence

• Did not remain frightened• 1. “Specific information they possessed and

were able to project into the situation”– knew it was Mercury Theater– recognized Orson Welles– knew that time changes were too fast– knew that there weren’t three regiments of

infantry in area– just recognized the events as too fantastic

Successfully checked the broadcast against other information

• Checked other stations (most common)– “I turned to WOR to see if they had the same thing on and

they didn’t so I knew it must be a fake.”

• Looked up program in newspaper– “I tuned in and heard that the meteor had fallen. Then

when they talked about monsters, I thought something was the matter. So I looked in the newspaper to see what program was supposed to be on and discovered it was only a play.

• Asked friend, looked out window – (1 respondent each)

Unsuccessfully checked broadcast against other information

• “Difficult to determine from interviews why these people wanted to check anyway”– seemed to be checking whether they were in

personal danger yet rather than whether reports were authentic

• Type of checking behavior was “singularly ineffective and unreliable”

Unsuccessful checks

• Methods– Look out window or go outdoors (employed by

2/3 of this group)– Called friends or ran to consult neighbors– Telephoned police or newspapers– “Only one turned his radio dial. Only one

consulted a newspaper.”

Reasons checks were unsuccessful

• New information only verified their interpretation– “I looked out of the window and everything

looked the same as usual so I thought it hadn’t reached our section yet.”

– “I went outside to look at the stars. I saw a clear sky but somehow was not reassured.”

Reasons checks were unsuccessful

• Observed data were interpreted as additional evidence that the broadcast was true– “We looked out of the window and Wyoming

Avenue was black with cars. People were rushing away, I figured.”

– “We tuned in to another station and heard some church music. I was sure a lot of people were worshiping God while waiting for their death.”

• “I looked out of my window and saw a greenish-eerie light which I was sure came from a monster. Later on it proved to be the lights in the maid’s car.”

• Others felt unable to trust their own observation, believing others knew more about the situation than they did.– Trusted the announcer on the radio as a source– “My son came home during the excitement and I

sent him out to find one of the elders in the church to see what it was all about.”

Made no attempt to check the broadcast

• “Over half of the people in this group were so frightened that they either stopped listening, ran around in a frenzy or exhibited behavior that can only be described as paralyzed.”

Reasons for not checking

• So frightened they never thought of checking– “We didn’t try to do anything to see if it were

really true. I guess we were too frightened.”

• Adopted an attitude of complete resignation– “I didn’t do anything. I just kept listening. I

thought if this is the real thing you only die once--why get excited?”

Reasons for not checking• Some felt they needed to take action. They

prepared immediately for escape or death.– “My husband said we were here for God’s glory

and honor and it was for Him to decide when we should die. We should prepare ourselves.”

– “I couldn’t stand it so I turned it off. I don’t remember when, but everything was coming closer. My husband wanted to put it back on but I told him we’d better do something instead of just listen, so we started to pack.

Some remained constantly tuned in to see how to escape