Theories of Journalism (T.V )
 

[CENTER][B]CULTURAL IMPERIALISM[/B][/CENTER]

Explanation of Theory:

Cultural Imperialism Theory states that Western nations dominate the media around the world which in return has a powerful effect on Third World Cultures by imposing on them Western views and therefore destroying their native cultures.

This theory was presented by Herb Schiller in 1973. The primary article of the theory ‘Communication and Cultural Domination ‘was published by White Plains, NY: International Arts and Sciences Press.

Individual Interpretations of the theory hold that Western Civilization produces the majority of the media (film, news, comics, etc.) because they have the money to do so. The rest of the world purchases those productions because it is cheaper for them to do so rather than produce their own. Therefore, Third World countries are watching media filled with the Western world's way of living, believing, and thinking. The third world cultures then start to want and do the same things in their countries and destroy their own culture.

The theory holds some Meta-theoretical Assumptions, which may be classified as Ontological Assumptions, Epistemological Assumptions and Axiological Assumptions.


Ontological Assumptions:

This theory says that humans do not have the free will to chose how they feel, act, think, and live. They react to what they see on television because there is nothing else to compare it to besides their own lives, usually portrayed as less than what it should be.

Epistemological Assumptions:

This theory explains that there is one truth and no matter what that truth never going to change. As long as Third World countries continue to air Western Civilization's programs then the third world countries will always believe they should act, feel, think, and live as Western Civilizations act, feel, think, and live.


Axiological Assumptions:

This theory is value-neutral and objective. It does not matter what beliefs the people of Third World may already hold the television programs from the Western World will communicate the same message and effect them in the same way.

The Theory of Cultural Imperialism sounds to be a scientific theory as it has explanatory, and predictive powers.


Explanatory Power: It explains what happens when one group of people with their own ideas sends messages through the media to a different group of people.


Predictive Power: It predicts that Third World countries' culture will be destroyed and the people will identify with Western views.

It also has a parsimonious effect by which we can see a direct linear path from sender to receiver through the media channels and then watch the effects. Another aspect of the theory is its internal Consistency, which explains that there is a logical flow of events and consequences within the theory.

Heuristic Provocative ness is also an important feature of the theory which helps to lead to new hypotheses such as which cultures are effected more than others (if any) or whether low context differ in the reception of messages compared top high context cultures?

In the last the most important feature of the theory, that it has organizing power: This fits with what we already know about differences between Western civilization and Third World countries. For instance several people have seen the episode of ‘South park’ where one of the students is swapped for a "starving Ethiopian." Should someone in Ethiopia watch this cartoon, the Western stereotype of Ethiopians all starving to death will tell that person that all they are, are tiny black people who cannot help themselves. If the person is not effected this way the theory is proved false but the relations between American and Ethiopian individuals will still be hurt because of those stereotypes.

Congruity Theory
 

[CENTER][FONT=Times New Roman][B][U][COLOR=windowtext]Congruity Theory[/COLOR][/U][/B][/FONT][/CENTER]

The Congruity theory predicts that if there are two contradicting people, sets of information, or concepts on which a judgment must be made by a single observer, the observer will experience pressure to change his or her judgment on one of the sides. However, if the two sets of information are similar or congruent, then there will be no problem, and the observer will not experience pressure of any form.

The theory was first presented by Osgood, C., & Tannenbaum, P. in 1955. Initially an article from the theory, ‘The principle of congruity in the prediction of attitude change’ was published in “[U]Psychology Review”.

By interpreting the Congruity theory, it is revealed that only the observer will determine whether or not they will feel pressure. The observer alone must decide the level of congruence between the two sides, before doing one of two things: (1) taking a stance in the middle and viewing the exchange as one without problem, or (2) changing their viewpoint of one of the sides.

Meta-theoretical Assumptions of the Congruity theory as similar to that of the meta-theoretical assumptions of Cultural Imperialism, consisting of Ontological, Epistemological and Axiological Assumptions. And a descriptive analysis of the ontological, epistemological, and axiological assumptions derives that the congruity theory is naturalistic.

[B]Ontological Assumptions:[/B]

Congruity theory appears to have multiple realities, and there are numerous ways to view things when using the theory to conduct a study or perform an analysis.

[B]Epistemological Assumptions:[/B]

Congruity theory takes a dependent view of things, as things could change to each observer, depending on the way they view what is going on between the two main parties involved.

[B]Axiological Assumptions:[/B]

Congruity theory appears to value-laden in nature, and it takes into account that separate observers may be biased.

Congruity theory is a scientific model because it is predictive of how third-party observers will react to an argument between two main parties. It does little to explain why people do what they do necessarily in such a situation, but simply states how their actions and views might change.

Ideas and Implications of the theory vary according to the situation.The basic premise of the theory is to help determine the levels of congruence between two sides. If a third-party observer feels pressure to take a side or change a viewpoint, there must be low levels of congruence between the two sides. If the third-party observer feels no pressure, than there must be a high level of congruence between the two immediate parties.

Dan and Patty are having a discussion regarding what movie they feel is the best of all time. If Dan argues that Star Wars is much better than Return of the Jedi, and that the two are not similar in any fashion, it is less likely that an independent observer will gauge the two movies to be similar. The two movies will remain on opposite spectrums to the observer. Consequently, if Patty argues that the two movies are very similar, but that Return of the Jedi was much better, an on-looker to the discussion will begin to view the movies on more of an equilibrium.

Diffusion Innovation Theory
 

[CENTER][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman][B][U][COLOR=windowtext]DIFFUSION INNOVATION THEORY[/COLOR][/U][/B][/FONT][/SIZE][/CENTER]


[COLOR=windowtext][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]In the Diffusion Innovation theory, communicators in society with a message influence/encourage people that have strong opinions through the media to influence the masses. The theory was presented by P. Lazarsfeld, B. Berelson, and H. Gaudet in 1944.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman][COLOR=windowtext]Primarily the theory started from an article ‘[/COLOR][COLOR=windowtext]The People's Choice.’ Published in ‘[/COLOR][COLOR=windowtext]New York[/COLOR][COLOR=windowtext]: Duell, Sloan and Pearce.’[/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]
[COLOR=windowtext][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]The Meta-theoretical Assumptions of the theory are further classified as follows: [/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]
[B][COLOR=windowtext][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Ontological Assumption:[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR][/B][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman][COLOR=windowtext]
[/COLOR][COLOR=windowtext]There does not seem to be free will in this case, it is fated as to what information is received to the masses, they have no choice to what they are exposed to. [/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]
[B][COLOR=windowtext][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Epistemological Assumption:[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR][/B][COLOR=windowtext][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]
In this sense, the theory is scientific. There is one truth, dependent on the messages sent and received by the media and the opinion leaders. [/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman][B][COLOR=windowtext]Axiological Assumption:[/COLOR][/B][/FONT][/SIZE][COLOR=windowtext]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]Diffusion of Innovations is scientific in the values sense as well. Research being done is value neutral and not biased because what is stated is pretty much how the news is run. The masses are fed what information is important. [/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]
[COLOR=windowtext][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]The Diffusion of Innovations does a good job of explaining how ideas are spread and is accurate in its conclusions. Diffusion of Innovations is useful to apply in situations when trying to explain how ideas are spread through our society from the media. For instance[B]:[/B] [/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]
[COLOR=windowtext][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]An applicable example to help illustrate Diffusion of Innovations involves Christmas time specials on TV programming. These programs on harmful/popular toys influence either the opinion of and/or the decision of whether to purchase a specific toy to many shoppers. [/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

Cultivation Theory
 

[CENTER][FONT=Times New Roman][B][U][COLOR=windowtext]Cultivation Theory[/COLOR][/U][/B][/FONT][/CENTER]

[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman][COLOR=windowtext]Gerbner’s cultivation theory says that television has become the main source of storytelling in today's society. Those who watch four or more hours a day are labeled heavy television viewers and those who view less then four hours per day, according to Gerbner are light viewers. Heavy viewers are exposed to more violence and therefore are effected by the Mean World Syndrome, an idea that the world is worse then it actually is. According to Gerbner, the overuse of television is creating a homogeneous and fearful populace. [/COLOR][COLOR=windowtext]The theory was presented in1976. [/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman][COLOR=windowtext][B]Primary Article of the theory [/B][/COLOR][COLOR=windowtext]‘Living with television: The violence-profile’ [/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman][COLOR=windowtext][B]was published in ‘[/B][/COLOR][U][COLOR=windowtext]Journal of Communication’ [/COLOR][/U][/FONT][/SIZE]
[COLOR=windowtext][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]The Meta-theoretical assumptions of the theory are as follows:[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman][B][COLOR=windowtext]Ontological Assumptions: [/COLOR][/B][COLOR=windowtext]
[/COLOR][COLOR=windowtext]deterministic---X----------------free will [/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman][B][COLOR=windowtext]Epistemological Assumptions: [/COLOR][/B][COLOR=windowtext]
[/COLOR][COLOR=windowtext]Truth---X-------------------------------truths [/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]
[B][COLOR=windowtext][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Axiological Assumptions: [/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR][/B][COLOR=windowtext][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]
[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=windowtext][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]value neutral---------X------------value laden

[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]
[COLOR=windowtext][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]The cultivation theory is a scientific theory. Epistemologically speaking, Gerbner believes in one truth. The theory does not believe television viewers have a choice in whether they are effected by media violence or not. Lastly, Gerbner allows some of his own values to enter into the theory by deciding what to consider violence and by assigning a numerical value to heavy television viewing. Gerber’s idea of the effects heavy television viewing is intriguing. There is definitely support to show that those who watch great amounts of television do experience the mean world syndrome, the definition of ‘heavy’ needs to be reexamined. Gerbner defines heavy television viewing as watching four or more hours a day. The idea of setting a numerical value to try to equate heavy influence to a mass populace is suspect. While the theory does contain some holes it adequately opens the discussion dealing with effects of the media upon viewers. [/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3][B]Ideas and Implications: [/B][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]The effects of Gerbner’s mean world syndrome can easily be seen in nursing homes. Many occupants of nursing homes watch many hours of television per day without leaving their rooms to actually see what the real world is like. Having only the media to guide their interpretation of the ‘real world’, nursing home residents believe that the world is a corrupt and violent place. [/SIZE]

[/FONT]