THEORIES OF COMMUNICATION Introduction

A theory is someones conceptualization of an observed set of events. In other words any attempt to explain or represent a phenomenon is a theory. The enormous interest of the social scientists to find out the effects of mass communication within society has resulted in the evolution of a number of theories which essentially trace the relationship between mass communication and society. Communication theory usually refers to the body of theories for understanding of the communication process. They are based on the studies of signs, symbols and meaning and their relation to the objects or concepts to which they belong. Earlier theories were based on the assumptions that mass media have enormous and direct influence upon society. But later researches provide evidence against any direct cause and effect relationship between mass communication and society, rather they underline the importance of individual differences and personal influences on transmission, acceptance and retention of message. Sociological theories stated mass media as an outcome of changes in society. There are other theories that express ideas on how the mass media ought to or can be expected to operate under prevailing political and economic circumstances. Some of the theories which have been discussed here will provide insights into the role of mass communication in society and the way in which an audience utilizes different mass media.

Hypodermic needle or Magic Bullet or Stimulus Response Theory

As the name implies, bullet theory suggests the messages were thought to be like magic bullets that were shot directly into the receiver. It assumes that receivers are passive and defenseless and take whatever is shot at them. The magic bullet theory also portrays that the media have direct, immediate and powerful effects on those who pay attention to their content. The theorists say (1) people receive information directly from the mass media and not through an intermediary, and (2) that reaction is individual, not based on how other people might influence them.

Individual Differences Theory

The individual differences theory proposes that each individual has unique qualities that result in his/her reaction to media messages. In other words, the reaction to media content differs according to motivation of audience members, their position to accept or reject a given message, intelligence, beliefs, opinions, values, needs, moods, prejudices, perceptibility, etc. Thus, an individual's needs, attitudes, values, prior beliefs and other cognitive and emotional states play an important part in screening and selecting media exposure and interpretation. This means that members of an audience are very selective in what they read, listen to, or view from the media. It also means that the pattern of understanding and interpretation of one person maybe very different from that of another who is attending to the same media content. Hence, variables in these differing effects are partially caused by the audience's selective exposure, selective perception and selective retention of media content. These factors act as barriers between message and effect, thereby limiting the scope of direct impact of mass communication on people. These concepts are discussed as below :

A. Selective Exposure

Selective exposure means, people will select those media which support their beliefs and which have programming and information appealing to their own interests.

B. Selective Perception
People will select only those messages which are in accordance with their existing attitudes. Thus, they may either ignore or misinterpret those messages, or parts of a message, which conflict with or are dissimilar to held attitudes and expectations. For example, if the individual is extremely loyal to a politician, he might agree with everything the politician says regardless of what he says, if his opponent said the same thing, he might completely disagree with him. We can say the individual would be guilty of selective perception. It is not a serious crime, but one that can considerably distort how the individual react to messages.

C. Selective Retention
Selective retention means that we tend to remember things that are familiar to us or that we perceive as corresponding to our preconceived ideas. For example, if a politician is making a speech we might retain only those portions of the speech with which we agree. If we perceive the entire speech as favorable, we may remember all of it. If we perceive it as unfavorable, we may wipe it entirely from our mind. If parts of the speech affect us positively, we remember those parts while forgetting the negative ones. Thus, factors influencing selective retention include the importance of the message for later utility; the extent to which the message coincided with predisposition, the intensity of the message, the means by which it was transmitted.

Social Categories Theory

The social categories perspective takes the view that there are social categories in every society based on the common characteristics of age, sex, socio-economic status, education occupation etc.(Eg. Students, Priests, teachers etc.). The fashion magazines are not often bought by males, fishing magazines are seldom read by females. Very simple variables such as age, sex and educational background provides a reasonably accurate guide to the type of communication content an individual will or will not choose. A highly educated middle aged man may never spend time reading Malayala Manorama weekly while a poorly educated middle aged labourer is more likely to read that publication. The members of a social category share common attitudes and beliefs; hence they will respond to media content in uniform ways according to the group given attitudes and beliefs. According to this view, there are broad audience groups that react similarly to specific message inputs. The members are culturally linked and have a frame of reference in common. Therefore their responses to the same message are similar. While the individual differences theory presented a view of the communication process more consistent with findings in general psychology, the social categories theory was consistent with and seemingly derived from general sociological theories of the nature of the mass society. Both these theories represent modifications of the original S-R theory, by introducing psychological and sociological processes as intervening variables in communication process. Both individual difference theory and social categories theory take into account the idea that variations in stimulus factors, in media, in content as well as in audience can have far reaching influence on the effects achieved by mass communication. In fact in 1948, Harold Lasswell was only summing up these theories when he stated that a convenient way to describe an act of communication is to answer the following questions. Who Says what In which Channel To Whom With what effect?

Social Relations Theory

This theory is an extension of the social categories theory. The theory assumes that informal social relationships can intervene or mediate in the flow of information from media to audiences. Therefore the impact of a given mass communication is altered tremendously by persons who have strong social relationships with the audience members (Eg. The one-step, two-step and multi-step flow of information and the concept of opinion leaders) Until very recently the image of society in the minds of most students of communication was of atomized individuals, connected with the mass media, but not with one another. Society or the audience was being understood as aggregates of age, sex, social class and the like. There wasnt much of thought being given to influential, informal relationships. Much less was the belief that such relationships can affect the outcomes of campaign messages. In 1940 Lazarfeld, Berelson and Gaudet developed an elaborate research design to study the impact upon voters of that years mass communicated Presidential election campaign. The site for the research was Ohio. The key candidates were Wendell Willkie and Franklin D Roosevelt. The study used a procedure of repeated interviews of a 600 member panel over a period of seven months. The effects under study included participation in the campaign, formulating a decision on whom to vote for, the degree of latent predispositions etc. It was found that some respondents were activated by the mass communicated material. Some had made up their minds in favour of a candidate in advance and the campaign communication helped in the crystallization of their decision. The study revealed that only a handful of early vote intentions were reversed and the campaign succeeded in converting the individual from one party to another. The influence of the social categories theory as a guide to this research was clear. The most interested people were the urban educated. Age, sex, residence, economic status and education proved to be key variables. However, the most important finding of the study was that whenever the respondents were asked to respond on their recent exposures to campaign communications of all kinds, political discussions were mentioned more frequently than exposure to print or radio. As a matter of fact 10 per cent more people engaged in informal political discussions than those listened to media. So it was established that informal social relationships played a significant role in modifying the manner in which a given individual acted upon a message that came through mass media. It was also discovered that the first hand exposure of many people to mass media was limited. They obtained election information mostly from opinion leaders. Thus came about the ideas of two step flow of communication and opinion leaders. It was clear that the opinion leaders passed on not only information, but their interpretations as well. Thus personal influence was recognized as an intervening variable that acted between message and response. The exact conditions under which a given person emerges as an opinion leader and the relatively permanent institutionalization of that persons leadership needs further study. De Fleur has suggested a number of conditions of social structure and social conditioning that will lead to the emergence of opinion leaders. Katz and Lazarsfeld opined that life-cycle was the key variable that determined opinion leadership. Opinion leadership does not seem to travel down the social structure, but is more likely to be horizontal, that is to say between people of same status and social standing.

The Cultural Norms Theory

The cultural norms theory postulates that the mass media through selective presentations and the emphasis of certain themes create impressions among their audiences that common cultural norms are structured in some specific way. Since individual behaviour is usually governed by cultural norms media indirectly influence the conduct of people. In other words, conduct is indirectly shaped by exposure to communications. There are 3 ways in which the media can influence the norms and definitions of the situation for individuals. 1. Mass communication content can reinforce existing patterns 2. Create new shared convictions 3. Change existing norms. But do the media actually do these things? Lazarsfeld and Merton maintain that the media operate conservatively and follow public norms in such matters as tastes and values. So for them media played the role of maintaining status quo rather than creating new norms. Analyzing this stand, we know that although there are media that transgress conservative standards by emphasizing controversial themes (eg. Movies with frank sex portrayals), by and large the media appear to be conservative. Media for example by and large do not stand for sexual promiscuity, political anarchy, unbridled scientific experiments, de-emphasis on education etc. They generally avoid posing serious challenges to fundamental values or deeply established ways of doing things in our society. At the same time the media sometimes stimulate new forms of behaviour that receive widespread social approval. Thus they create new cultural norms. For example, the media have collectively brought about many new forms of recreation and family interaction. The same is true of the way different fashions in dress, hair style etc were promoted by media from time to time. Another phenomenon that provides observations on the potential conversion power of the media is prejudice. At one time the media continually reinforced the culture of prejudice by stereotyped portrayals of racial and ethnic types ( Eg. Blacks as villains, people of a certain religion constantly being portrayed as terrorists etc). In many parts of the world, organized agitations have put an end to such trends. However it remains much in doubt, if the media alone have any effective power to convert populations from one form of conduct to another. An area in which the cultural norms theory has become central to current controversies is the impact of the high levels of violence in the contents of our movies, television and other media. Expert opinion is totally deadlocked as to whether exposure to such violent portrayals is harmful or beneficial. A number of laboratory experiments imply that a subject who has constantly seen violent scenes is more likely to engage in aggression and violence than someone who is not exposed to it. So on the one hand the norm of disapproval of violence continues, but on the other hand, enjoyment of vicarious violence too is on the increase. How long will this remain a stable situation is hard to say. Overall, then, the cultural norms theory remains as one of the least tested, most controversial and potentially most significant of contemporary theories of mass communication. A huge task lies ahead for communication specialists and other social scientists in discovering the factors, limitations and conditions under which the media have the power to shape norms, and in turn, indirectly mediate individual human conduct.

These theories explain how the media 'ought to' or can be 'expected to' operate under the prevailing set of political-economic circumstances. Since each society controls its mass media in accordance with its policies and needs, it formulates its own separate press theory. Therefore, the media system that exists in a country is directly related to the political system in that country. The political system determines the exact relationship between the media and the government. Siebert and his colleagues (1956) mentioned four theories, based on classification of the world's national media systems. Denis McQuail (1980) added two more theories to the original set of four.

1. Authoritarian Theory
This theory evolved in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, spreading throughout Europe with the invention of the printing press. The authoritarian theory views humans as subservient to the state. They held the belief that the ruling elite should guide the masses, whose intellectual ability was held in low esteem. Public dissent and criticism were considered harmful to both government and the people and were not tolerated. The press in an authoritarian society is viewed as an instrument for disseminating the state's position to the public, informing the public what is right and wrong based on the state's interpretations of issues, and providing official policy statements of the ruling elite. The state, after determining its objectives, uses the press as a means of obtaining those objectives. The press becomes a means to an end rather than an instrument of criticism of either means or ends. The main principles of the theory: Media should do nothing which could undermine established authority or disturb order. Media should always be subordinate to established authority. Censorship can be justified to enforce these principles. Media should avoid offence to majority, or dominant, moral and political values. Unacceptable attacks on authority, deviations from official policy or offences against moral codes should be criminal offences. Journalists or other media professionals have no independence within their media organizations.

Today the authoritarian system of the press is still in operation in many parts of the world. In communist countries, in nations under dictatorial control, and in some third world countries, a free press is little more than a theory without practice.

2. Libertarian Theory/ Free Press Theory

The libertarian theory developed slowly in the sixteenth century being refined in the eighteenth century as libertarian principles found their way into nation's constitutional framework. In theory, a libertarian press is the exact opposite of an authoritarian press. Libertarians assume that human beings are rational and are capable of making their own decisions and that governments exist to serve the individual. Unlike the authoritarians, libertarians hold that the common citizen has a right to hear all sides of an issue in order to distinguish truth from falsehood. Since any government restriction on the expression of ideas

infringes on the rights of the citizen, the government can best serve the people by not interfering with the media. In short, the press must be free of control. The principles of the theory: Publication should be free from any prior censorship. Attacks on any government, official or political party, should not be punishable, even after the event. There should be no compulsion to publish anything. No restriction should be placed for gathering the information for publication. The act of publication and distribution should be open to a person, a group without license or permit. There should be no restriction on international flow of information. Journalists should have professional autonomy within their organization.

3. Social Responsibility Theory

The theory was constructed in 1947 by the Commission on Freedom of the Press, a private organization financed by magazine publisher Henry Luce. According to this theory, although the press had a right to criticize government and other institutions, it also had a responsibility to preserve democracy by properly informing the public and by responding to society's interests and needs. The theory has thus to reconcile independence with obligation to society. It is assumed that the media do serve essential functions in society, especially in relation to democratic politics. Media should accept an obligation to fulfil those functions-not only in the sphere of information and the provision of a platform for diverse views, but also in matters of culture. It should give maximum emphasis on media independency, consistent with their obligations to society. The theory states that media should also follow certain standards in work. It can be seen that social responsibility theory has to try to reconcile three somewhat divergent principles : of individual freedom, of media freedom and of media obligation to society. The main principles of this theory: Media should accept and fulfill certain obligations to society by setting high or professional standards of truth, accuracy, objectivity and balance, etc. In accepting and applying these obligations, media should be self regulating within the framework of law and established institutions. Journalists and media professionals should be accountable to society as well as to employers.

4. Soviet Communist Theory

The Russian press and other media were completely reorganized after the Revolution of 1917. This theory is derived from the basic postulates of Marx and Engels. It envisages media to be under the control of the working class. The working class by definition holds power in a socialist society.

To understand the Soviet media theory of the press, one must examine the Soviet interpretation of the word "freedom". The Soviet constitution guarantees both free speech and a free press. In addition, the principle tenet of Soviet political life is one of unity. The rise of the working class, the revolution, was a movement of unity within Soviet Society. This joining together of the people into a classless society has become the philosophy of the Soviet state. Thus, freedom from the Soviet point of view is freedom from the oppression of a upper, middle and lower class. Wilbur Schramm explains that mass communication in the Soviet media theory is an instrument of the state. It (media) do not have integrity of their own. Broadcasting under the Soviet-Communist theory likewise is designed not so much to serve the public but to inform it. Programming is again the instrument of the state, and the medium is important to it because of the large number of people that broadcasting can reach. The theory can be summed as follows : Media should not be privately owned. It should serve the interests of, and be in control of the working class. Media should respond to wishes and needs of their audience. Media should serve positive functions for society by education, information, motivation and mobilization. Society has a right to punish for the anti-societal publication. Media should provide a complete and objective view of society. Journalists' aims and ideals should coincide with the best interests of the society.

5. Development Media Theory

The limited application of the four established theories of the press to Third World countries has led to the birth of a new media theory whose main task is that communication be used to carry out the development functions in a society. The absence of some of the conditions in these countries which are necessary for a developed mass communication system like, Communication infrastructure; professional skills; technology, cultural products etc. and devotion of these societies to economic, political and social development as a primary national task Development media theory favors democratic grass-roots involvement to a certain extent. It emphasized on a 'right to communicate based on Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights : Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes of freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media . The main principles of this theory can be summed as follows : Media should accept and carry out positive development tasks in line with nationally established policy. Media should give priority to the national culture and language. Freedom of media should be restricted to an extent keeping in view the economic priorities and development needs of the society. Journalists and other media workers have responsibilities as well as freedom in their information gathering and dissemination tasks.

The state has a right to intervene in or restrict, media operations and devices of censorship and direct control in the interest of the development of a country.

6. Democratic-Participant Media Theory

Denis McQuail states that it is most difficult to formulate this theory, partly because it lacks full legitimization and incorporation into media institutions and partly because some of its tenets are already to be found in some of the other theories. The main feature of the democratic-participant theory relates to the needs, interests and aspirations of the active "receiver" in a political society. It is concerned with the right to relevant information, the right to answer back, the right to use the means of communication for interaction in small-scale settings of community, interest group and sub-culture. This theory has a mixture of theoretical elements, including libertarianism, utopianism, socialism, egalitarianism, environmentalism and localism. Media institutions constructed according to the theory would be involved more closely with social life than they are at present and more directly in control of their audiences, offering opportunities for access and participation on terms set by their predecessors rather than by controllers. The main principles of this theory can be stated as below : Individual citizens and minority groups have rights to communicate. Groups, organizations and local communities should have their own media. The organization and content of media should not be subject to centralized political or state bureaucratic control. Small scale, interactive and participative media forms are better than large-scale, oneway and professionalized media.

Short Notes ICT ICT stands for information and Communication Technology. It is in fact an update of Information Technology (IT). Cyborg Cyborg is a fusion between human and machine, the organic and the technological. Cyborgs exist now in our everyday lives in such forms as artificial limbs, immunization, pacemakers, and internet chat rooms. In all of these technologies the division between the body and the machine is difficult to locate. The cyborg was first invoked in the cultural studies context by Donna Haraway in her 1984 essay A Manifesto for Cyborgs. A Cyborg for Haraway, is a concept through which a feminist dialogue can be opened up, but one capable of avoiding socialist-feminist appeals. In Cyborg theory technology is not seen as a threat. The Cyborg takes science and technology beyond its masculinist tradition and breaks down the barriors of culture. Although Haraways vision of the Cyborg is not restricted to cyberspace it implies that expression in cyberspace both through and within technology- will have ramifications for real world politics. Digital Divide The digital divide is the stratification of people according to access to interactive computer based technologies. In other words it is a division of people based on whether they are part of and participate in the network society or not. Digital divide in most concrete terms is the gap between the information rich and information poor. It was estimated that in 2001, 429 million people around the world were online. That is 6% of the worlds population. Of these 41% lived in North America. In contrast, only 4% of the same group lived in South America. 27% belonged to Europe, middle east and Africa combined, while despite its huge population only 20% of the population logged on from Asia. The communication technologies interconnect people into a network of ideas, information, e-commerce and virtual communities. Digital divide happens when not everyone manages to be part of such an information society, leading to a situation of the creation of information haves and information have nots. Studies show that the distribution of connectivity and participation in the information society depends on the allocation of resources and education. The digital divide is not necessarily between nations only. Digital divide can be experience between two villages in the same district or even two members of the same family. Knowing the magnitude of the digital divide and taking steps to bridge the gap is a very important task of present day policy makers. Cultural Citizenship T. H Marshall (1965) set out three categories of citizenship rights, which have remained the conceptual pillars around which much citizenship theory is built. For Marshall these theories have been accumulated over the course of history. a) Civil rights from the 17th and 18th centuries. They were primarily about legal rights. b) Political rights from the 19 th century. The effort was to institutionalize the rights through the parliamentary system.

c) Social rights which appeared in the 20 th century. ( Education, health, pensions etc brought about through the emergence of the welfare state. A recent addition to this understanding of citizenship rights is cultural citizenship. The social movements of the 20 th century brought increasing demands for rights based on identity and group cultures into the political arena: feminism, gay rights, indigenous rights and the black civil rights movement to name a few. Although as individuals, members of minority groups may possess the same rights as others, they may have less political power. Only by recognizing such groups is it possible to create a society with unity in diversity. Promotion of multi-culturalism as a government strategy that we witness in many countries today is an effort at accepting and acknowledging cultural citizenships of people. However cultural citizenship has not survived without criticism. Some maintain that cultural groups are in a constant state of change owing to political, economic and social forces. So it is their individual rights that must be protected, not the cultural rights. Culture jamming Culture jamming has other names such as guerrilla art, citizen art etc. This is a high-and low-tech interactive media. Culture jamming is about doing rather than theorizing the media. According to Naomi Klein culture jamming is writing theory on streets. Adbusters founder Kalle Lasn, writes that communication professors tell their students everything that is wrong with the global media monopoly, but never a word on how to fix it. Texts on culture jamming are generally how to guides that celebrate the publics right to utilize public space in order to intervene with corporate messages. They openly assert the audiences engagement with texts, refusing to accept that any media is a one way communication device, adding a whole new dimension to media theorys active audience. Changing and popularizing the Nike ad just do it to just stop it, changing the apple logo to a skull, changing the word shell to hell, promoting the buy-nothing day in order to create awareness on the levels of overconsumption etc are all examples of culture jamming.