4 ms·
Media effects studies were done with television, radio, print and web content. Opinion changes in response to media content would generally be considered stron
by ugh 15y ago
Media effects studies were done with television, radio, print and web content.
Opinion changes in response to media content would generally be considered strong media effects. Agenda setting, framing and priming are of course also media effects but they are seen as much weaker.
There also still is plenty of pluralism in media content, both internal and external. Worrying developments do exist, sure, but in the grand scheme of things they are not such a big deal. Especially the web can actually increase pluralism.
- bluedanieru 15y agoThis doesn't suggest that, as you say, 'opinions cannot be easily changed by media'. Sure, it would not do much good for a personality to appear on the air and basically tell his audience 'you need to think this', but these weaker, less direct methods of influencing opinion are effective and mass media uses them with generally great success. Perhaps the key word is 'easily', but the damage is done regardless.
- ugh 15y agoAgenda setting, framing or priming are not opinion change. It's not really known how and how effectivly those effects can change opinions. I would also be wary of characterizing mass media as a single entity. That's just doesn't reflect reality.
- bluedanieru 15y agoRupert Murdoch is the king of News Corp. Anyway, I see what you're getting at, but I think you're implying a discontinuity between 'change opinion' and 'influence opinion' where one need not exist.
- ugh 15y agoBut even Murdoch isn't some kind of tyrant – he can't be, even if he wanted to. There is still a lot of pluralism inside of News Corp. You are, of course, correct: Concentration of media ownership is prevalent and a worrying development.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]