INTRO: The influence of the media on the
perception of the people on public issues is empirically verifiable, and
well-documented. As far back as 1922, Walter Lippman, a newspaper columnist was
concerned that the media had the power to present images to the public. Little
wonder why Bernard
Cohen in 1963 observed that the press "may not be successful much of the
time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in
telling its readers what to think about.” The empirical confirmation of
the truism of the Lippman’s 1922 position came only in 1968 when during the
Chapel Hill Study, published in Public Opinion Quarterly, Maxwell McCombs and Donald
Shaw studied the 1968 American presidential election and demonstrated a strong
correlation coefficient (r > .9) between what 100 residents of Chapel Hill,
North Carolina thought was the most important election issue and what the local
and national news media reported was the most important issue. That study
promoted the agenda setting theory of mass communication.
Although, affirming
the effectiveness of the agenda setting function of the mass media, the agenda
setting theory of Mass Communication argues that media agenda does not reflect
the reality. This however does not mean that media agenda setting in the
society is dysfunctional. The mass media agenda setting function is important
due to the following reasons:
1/ Agenda-Setting Molds Public Opinion for Policy
Process: The strong correlation between mass media priority issue and
public opinion has been verified in the Chapel Hill study of 1968 by the duo of
McCombs and Shaw. This is why it is not uncommon to hear people say something
like, “it is true, I heard/read it in the news.” By nature, people are
followers, and this is manifested as bandwagon. Armed with the rare capability
of reaching large number of audience simultaneously, the mass media have been
able to exploit the bandwagon tendency of people in molding public opinion.
Given the strategic importance of public opinion in policy formulation and
implementation, agenda setting function of the mass media therefore helps to
chart the waters for policy formulators to the overall betterment of the
society.
2/ Agenda-Setting Helps in Maintenance of Law and Order: Media content disseminated to
the society are sieved and filtered through the process of media gatekeeping,
bearing in mind among other things the maintenance of law and order in the
society. In this manner, the media trivialize volatile issues or fundamentally
doctor the content for law and order.
3/ Agenda-Setting Helps in Promotion of Democracy: The media in its agenda
setting function have promoted democracy with several fronts of propaganda.
Thus, scholars seem to have
reached a common consensus that recognizes mass media’s critical role in
democratization (Hall & O’Neil, 1998; Hyden & Okigbo, 2002; Jakubowicz,
2002; Pasek, 2006).
Agenda setting function of the media tells the populace
about current events, educates the electorates for meaningful contribution on
public issues, and inspires participation which is the hallmark of democracy.
4/ Agenda-Setting
Helps in Policing against Abuses: Be it in the political power box or in the streets,
the media eye-of-god surveillance polices abuses. The simple knowledge that the
media are out there and very ready to make a mountain out of a mere hill of an
abuse has served as a deterrence to political, social, economic and or
religious abuses. Agenda setting function of the media may not truly reflect
the reality but it has achieved a noble feat in getting popular attention
against heinous crimes and abuses in the society.
References
Hall, R. A., &
O’Neil, P. H. (1998). Institutions, transitions, and the media: A comparison of
Hungary and Romania. In P. O’Neil (Ed.), Communicating democracy: The media and
political transitions (pp. 125–146). London, UK: Lynne Rienner.
Hyden, G., & Okigbo,
C. (2002). The media and the two waves of democracy. In G. Hyden, M. Leslie,
& F. F. Ogundimu (Eds.), Media and democracy in Africa (pp. 29–53). New
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction
Jakubowicz, K. (2002).
Media in transition: The case of Poland. In M. E. Price, B. Rozumilowicz, &
S. G. Verhulst (Eds.), Media reform: Democratizing the media, democratizing the
state (pp. 203–231). New York, NY: Routledge.
Pasek, J. (2006,
August). Fueling or following democracy? Analyzing the role of media
liberalization in democratic transition.
Paper presented at the American
Political Science Association Conference, Philadelphia, August 30–September 3.
Comments
Post a Comment