Daniel Chandler concluded his analysis of the Shannon-Weaver model of communication by noting that it "was of little direct value to social science research into human communication, and its endurance in popular discussion is a real liability". With all due respect to my fellow bloggers and soon-to-be-engineers, I couldn't possibly agree more.
Although the definition from the Merriam-Webster dictionary:"an act or instance of transmitting", somewhat validates this model, it is by no means an accurate reflection of communication as we know it. The linear nature of this model simplifies the complexity of human beings, their interactions and the art of communicating effectively. According to this model, the sender is the sole custodian of the meaning of the message and there is no accommodation for feedback or the receiver's interpretation of the message(Chandler, 2004).
It is quite a task trying to fathom communication as we know it today without feedback for example. This is the very aspect of communication on which consumers rely for just about any information they need to validate the manufacturer's claims to quality. Unilateral communication as assumed by that model couldn't possibly apply to facebook, twitter, TV remote based surveys; all of which are examples of active avenues of communication and mass communication too. The concept of feedback and the multilateral nature of communication is not limited to human interaction. It takes on a whole new meaning when it comes to the Internet. Every communication, transaction or website visited seems to be a subconscious conversation with a whole host of marketers waiting to pounce with new "deals" on just about anything. Perhaps if my name was Mary or Rose, or any clearly female English name, "they" would know that I don't need "grow your hair back" products. I have been attacked by such "deals" since I bought my dad a gift online four months ago.
Contrary to the assumptions as laid out by the Shannon-Weaver model, in his essay on Mass Communication and Democracy, Hardt refers to 'communication' as the process of "making common"(Hardt, 2004). Further more, he noted that 'mass communication', a discourse of society, which defines, organises and shapes every sphere of society, be it culture or politics, was born from communication(Hardt, 2004). Mass communication is definitely a daily discourse that seems to be rapidly redefining the norm and thrusting us forward into the future on this vehicle of modernity. Ever since the advent of the printing press and lately, the Internet, the boundaries of what is possible in the world of mass communication have been receding at an exponential rate.
Chandler, D. (1994). The Transmission Model of Communication.
Http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/short/trans.html 05 January 2011
Hardt, H. (2004). Myths for the Masses: An Essay on Mass Communication. Malden, MA, USA : Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment