Abstract
The more prominently the media have featured in the life of a people the sharper has been the debate on what purposes the media ought to serve in society. In the 19th century the press were sufficiently influential to earn the title Fourth Estate, a part of the power structure alongside government, the church and the law. This chapter attempts a survey of a number of definitions of the purpose and role of the media, starting with three broad models of media function — propagandist, commercial laissez-faire and public service. The shift from public to private, aided and abetted by imperatives brought about by new technology, is sketched in to remind us of the rapidity of change and the volatility of definitions. Then six normative theories arising out of specific cultural/political contexts are discussed. A core feature common to all media, their relationship with centres of political and economic power, leads us to examine the part media play in reality-definition and as agents of social control. Ultimately how the media are constituted — as private or public enterprises — governs how they perform and what principles inspire practice.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
For an analysis of Silvio Berlusconi’s impact on broadcasting in Italy, see Paul Statham’s article ‘Television news and the public sphere in Italy: conflicts at the media/politics interface’ in European Journal of Communication, December 1996.
Henry Porter, ‘The keeper of the global gate’, Guardian 29 October 1996.
Denis McQuail, Mass Communication Theory: An Introduction (UK: Sage, 1983).
John Hartley, The Politics of Pictures: The Creation of the Public in the Age of Popular Media (UK: Routledge, 1992).
Richard V Ericson, Patricia M. Barnak and Janet B.L. Chan, Representing Order: Crime, Law and Justice in the News Media (UK: Open University Press, 1991).
Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (US: Pantheon, 1988).
Herbert J. Gans, ‘Reopening the black box: toward a limited effects theory’ in Journal of Communication, Autumn 1993.
D.R. LeDuc, ‘Deregulation and the dream of diversity’ in Journal of Communication, 32(4) (1982).
Harold Innes. See The Bias of Communication (Canada: Toronto Press, 1951) and Concepts of Time (Canada: Toronto Press, 1952).
John Fiske, Reading the Popular (US: Unwin Hyman, 1989).
J.H. Boyer, ‘How editors view objectivity’ in Journalism Quarterly, 58 (1981).
Denis McQuail, Media Performance: Mass Communication and the Public Interest (UK: Sage, 1992).
McQuail, ‘Mass media in the public interest’ in James Curran and Michael Gurevitch (eds), Mass Media and Society (UK: Edward Arnold, 1991).
John Keane, ‘The crisis of the sovereign state’ in Marc Raboy and Bernard Dagenais (eds) Media, Crisis and Democracy: Mass Communication and the Disruption of Social Order (UK: Sage, 1992).
Nick Stevenson, Understanding Media Cultures: Social Theory and Mass Communication (UK: Sage, 1995).
Copyright information
© 1998 James Watson
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Watson, J. (1998). Media in Society: Purpose and Performance. In: Media Communication. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26546-6_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26546-6_5
Publisher Name: Palgrave, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-68400-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-26546-6
eBook Packages: Palgrave Literature & Performing Arts CollectionLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)