Audience Reception Models

Audiences activley accept the messages thay tare injected within them due to passivity.

McCabe and Martin - Take the example of on screen violence having a direct correlation with actual violence as imitation can be seen as the likely outcome when violent acts are portrayed as heroic. 

The NRA have tried to use this as an explanantion for scool shootings in the US to defelct problems from gun violence and the possibility of gun control. 

Because of this overwhelming exposure to violence, we have now become desensitized to real violence where minimal reactions or empathy towards the victims are shown. 

Marcuse - the media transmits a 'mass culture' which id directly injected into the hearts and minds of the population, makes people more vulnerable to RC propaganda. 

ELIZABETH NEWSON -

Newson suggested that exposure to violent killings create a 'drip drip' effect amongst young viewers resulting in violence becoming desensitised and normalised as such deviant behaviour is becoming normal where individuals are socialised into accepting this. 

She contiues to argue how violent images in films are too easily accessible.

Exposure to on screen violence encourages young viwers to identify with the violent perpatrators opposed to the victims, linking to the overall drip drip effect.

This theory further links to the conccept of audience weak and passive models where we fully accept messages perpetuated through the media. 

McCABE AND MARTIN - The Disinhibition Effect

Such acts are then carried by young people as they believe it is acceptable in some social situations for violence to replace discussion and negociation. 

Gauntlett - 

Gauntlett critiqued the study of Bandura ( carried out lab experiments highlighting the influence of the media on behaviour ) by suggesting that they lack in validity for being carried out in an artificial environment as people wont behave as naturally. 

Cumberbatch - 

Cumberbatch looked at over 3500 research studies into the effects of on screen violence and concluded that there is no conclusive evidence to suggest either way that violence shown in the media influences or changes behaviour. 

Further points - 

The biggest violent video game playing nations ( Holland and South Korea ) tend to function the least severe when it comes to violence.

The standard of modern day media studies is so poor that the HSM has been rejected by every court that has taken it to account, results too insignificant. 

Katz and Lazarfeld - 

The two step flow theory follows the audience strong model ( we are active and affected by social interaction ) and takes on the idea of opinion leaders who influence thoughts and behaviours.

The opinion leaders dominate and control personal relationships and have the ability to influence because they are listened to due to cultural status. 

The theory suggests the media has to pass through two stages before it has an effect: the opinion leader is exposed to the content, the opinion leader disseminates their interpretation of that content. 

Critique - those who are usually most at risk of being influenced by content or opinion ar eusually inherently isolated or not belonging to any social network. Futhermore, the opinion leader themselves may have been directly influenced by the media and they are simply passing this perspective on. 

Klapper - 

For media to influence audiences it must pass through 3 filters...

Selective Exposure: Individuals are already active with the coices they are making with regard to what they read/hear/watch. we may also link this to the concept of the 'echo chamber' where you are presented and suggested ideas that you already agree with, links to hypertextuality (youtube home page).

Selective Perception: The audience needs to engage with media content and it can be easily rejected if they dont like it. Festinger argues most people choose to engage with media that confirms their existing attitudes. 

Selective Retention: The audience needs to retain information. Postman illustrates how wr work on a 3 minute culture with low attention spans. 

This essentially highlights how the media still has the ability to influence audienced but overall they have dominant control in deciding what content to expose themsleves to and what they want to take away from it. 

Bulmer & McQuali and Lull - 

People access the media to fit their needs. 

Diversion: (Watson) we may use the media to escape from routine, there is some evidence to suggest disabled people use virtual media to be 'able' bodied.

Personal Relationships: compensate for a ack of community and to gain a sense of belinging, elderly people may satisfy this through watching soap operas. 

Personal Identity: To access media to strenghten our own identity e,g, a gay teenage watching Love, Simon (advice, ensure you're not alone)

Surveillance: Audiences use the meida to keep track of global events, helping them to make their minds up on particular issues. 

Criticisms - Research is too dependent on the interpretation of the researcher, doesnt appreciate individual characteristics, media can be subjective, marxists say it exaggerates the audience's freedom of interpretation, postmodernists argue there is not one universal metanarrative. 

Lull - 

Families use the TV to communicate with one another, TV reinforces family affiliation. People may use the media as a means of avoiding others, to solve problems, or to gain intellectual validation ( watching Joey Essex or playing along to University Challenge ). 

Ellison - 

Found social networking sties ( SNS ) acted to satisfy needs of meeting new people and saw facebook as a means of mainitaining relationships. 

Reake - 

Found this led to a sense of beloning and wellbeing ( the use of SNS ). 

Parke et al - 

SNS are used for socialising, entertainment and the seeking of self esteerm/ information. 

The meida has an ideological influence in transmitting capitalist values due to meida ownership and capitalist market conditions.

Recognises there are fragmented media audiences so content can be subjective but argues media content obtains strong ideological messages so we can expect audiences to interpret these in a certain way. It gives the illusion of choice.

Argues media perspectives reflect a concensus perspective, not challenging RC ideologies ( use the drip drip model to explain this ). E.g. TV content has been dumbed down so people no longer think critically, values of the rich are unconsciously shared by most people (money, happiness, rejection to immigrants etc).

Critique - Cultural effects are difficult to operationalise and measure, pluralists argue the proffessionalism of modern journalists ensure media content is construced for the benefit of the audience, pluralists also argue diversity of media content means marxist concern that thw media is creating a homogeneous worldview underpinned by capitalist ideology is simply untrue.