#mmcomth

A Summary of the Game Theory by Alyssa Maac

           Our society is composed of individuals who compete, coordinate and communicate with each other. As the concept of survival of the fittest suggest, each of us need to adapt and play by the rules of the game of life in order to survive. The concept wherein it considers society as a strategic game played by individuals is called Game Theory. Game Theory is the study of human conflict and cooperation within a competitive situation. In some respects, game theory is the science of strategy, or at least the optimal decision-making of independent and competing actors in a strategic setting.

The key pioneers of game theory were mathematicians John von Neumann and John Nash, as well as economist Oskar Morgenstern. Game theory is widely regarded as having its origins with the publication of Augustin Cournot's Researches into the Mathematical Principles of the Theory of Wealth in 1838; in which he attempted explain the underlying rules governing the behavior of duopolists. However, it was in 1944 with the publication of John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern's The Theory of Games and Economic Behavior that the modern principles of game theory were formulated.  Game theory has been widely applied to the behavior of producers with a few or only one competitor (an oligopoly).

Game theory creates a language and formal structure of analysis for making logical decisions in competitive environments. The term “game” can be misleading. The concept of “game” simply means any interactive situation in which independent actors share, more-or-less, the same formal rules and consequences (although game theory also applies to recreational games).

All the games have the following: (1) Rules, which govern conduct, attitude and behavior of the players; (2) Pay-offs, such as win, lose or draw; (3) Strategies, that influences and predicts the decision making process.

The formal application of game theory requires knowledge of the following details: the identity of independent actors, their preferences, their knowledge, their possible valid strategic acts, and how their decision influences the outcome of the game. Various other requirements or assumptions may be necessary depending on the model. Finally, each independent actor is assumed to be rational.

In applying game theory to the behavior of firms, they face a number of strategic choices that govern their ability to achieve a desired pay-off, including: (1) Decisions on price and output, such as whether to: raise, lower or hold the price. (2) Decisions on products, whether to: keep the existing products or develop new ones. (3) Decisions on promoting products, whether to: spend more on advertising, spend less or keep the spending constant. From these strategy choices, firms could derive a range of possible pay-offs, including: (1) more profits for shareholders, (2) greater market share, (3) improved chances of survival, and (4) riddance of a rival or competitor.

There are three types of strategy: maximax, maximin and dominant. (1) A maximax strategy is one where the player attempts to earn the maximum possible benefit available or possible. This means they will prefer the alternative that gives the chance of achieving the best possible outcome – even if a highly unfavorable outcome is possible. This strategy, often referred to as the best of the best is often seen as ‘naive’ and overly optimistic strategy, because it assumes a highly favorable environment for decision making. (2) A maximin strategy is where a player chooses the best of the worst pay-off. This is commonly chosen when a player cannot rely on the other party to keep any agreement that has been made - for example, to deny. Take a group of prisoners as an example, the judge offers them one year of imprisonment if they confess but 3 years if none of them confessed and the worst, 10 years of imprisonment if they you denied it but they all pinpointed to you - therefore the best of the worst is to confess. (3) A dominant strategy is the best outcome irrespective of what the other player chooses, in the case of the prisoners, it is for each player to confess - both the optimistic maximax and pessimistic maximin lead to the same decision being taken. In general, game theory suggests that firms are unlikely to trust each other, even if they collude and come to an agreement such as raising price together.

Game Theory provides many insights into the behavior of an oligopolist. For example, it indicates that generating rules for behavior may take some of the risks out of competition, such as: (1) Employing a simple cost-plus pricing method which is shared by all participants. This would work well in situations where oligopolists share similar or identical costs, such as with petrol retailing. (2) Implicitly agreeing a 'price leader' with other firms as followers. A big firm may lead and raise price, with another firm passively following suit. (3) Supermarkets implicitly agreeing some lines where price cutting will take place, such as bread or baked beans, but keeping price constant for most lines. (4) Finally, generally keeping prices stable to avoid price retaliation.

Suppose executives in charge of Apple iOS and Google Android are deciding whether or not to collude and exert duopolistic power over the market for smartphone operating software. Each firm knows that if they work together and do not cheat each other, they will be able to restrict output and raise prices, thereby enjoying above-normal profits.

A great example of the game theory is the intense competition between Apple and Windows. There are a lot of computer and gadget brands out there but they are the most popular choices. People who buy their products consider a lot of things before they purchase: the price, the benefit, the function, the durability, the performance and the quality. Some people let the price suffer in exchange of durability, performance and quality. Others consider the price before the performance and quality. However, there are people who choose all of the aspects and choose the product that at least have all of these qualities.

Game theory has a wide range of applications, including psychology, biology, war, politics, economics and business. Game theory turned attention away from steady-state equilibrium and toward market process. Every decision-maker must anticipate the reaction of those affected by the decision. In business, this means economic agents must anticipate the reactions of rivals, employees, customers and investors. Despite its many advances, game theory is still a young and developing science. As the game theory suggests, life’s a game, be wise.

Resources:

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/gametheory.asp

A Summary of Social Marketing Theory by Alyssa Maac

Before communicating to the society, one must understand the system first. People need to understand people, themselves, to know what process and products to effectively apply and integrate. Thus, studies, theories and principles regarding social communication are made. The theory of mass communication that promotes socially valuable information and socially accepted behaviors is called Social Marketing Theory. It tries to integrate marketing ideas, principles, tools, techniques and socially beneficial concepts to promote communication and to benefit society.

The theory was first proposed by Philip Kotler and Gerald Zaltman. The theory emerged in the 1970s when marketing techniques were realized to sell ideas, attitudes and behaviors rather than products. It also includes the concept of “Edutainment” (Education and Entertainment). The theory is now being used by social and welfare organizations including companies, agencies and such. Social marketing is not social media marketing.

Social marketing theory is a collection of theories that focus on how socially valuable information can be promoted. It is focused on the society; they are the environment wherein the information needs to consider. This theory has been used by social and welfare organizations to help promote or discourage various behaviors. The theory is administrative in nature in such that it seeks to outline a framework that can be used to design, implement and evaluate information campaigns. The target audience is identified based on their information needs. Once this is done, information is packaged and distributed in a manner that will be easily accessible to the intended audience.

The theory is an attempt to clearly understand how societal and psychological factors work to successfully manipulate the people; in order to increase the effectiveness of mass media information campaigns. The theory focuses on helping identify the various social and psychological barriers that hinder the flow of information through the mass media and offers ideas and ways to overcome these barriers. These strategies range from being indigenous and domestic to the use of mass media or saturation advertising.

This theory is helpful in planning, designing, implementing and evaluating social campaigns with information sharing as its major objective. It uses creativity, rather than depending on public service announcements, for giving out information. Information is packaged and distributed following a plan so that maximum sharing and outcome is possible at the same time. It increases acceptability, response and practice of any social idea for the target group. Social intervention is the main objective of social marketing.

There are two types of social marketing: Operational social marketing and strategic social marketing. Operational social marketing is used to change behavior, whereas strategic social marketing is used to form new policies and development strategies.

There are 4 major components of social marketing which is also used as techniques known as 4 Ps of Social Marketing. They are: (1) Product - target population is encouraged to buy or use socially needed products. A continuum of products exists, ranging from tangible, physical products, to services practices and finally, more intangible ideas. Sustainable products which benefit the society are the goal of social marketing. In order to have a viable product, people must first perceive that they have a genuine problem, and that the product they are offering is a good solution for that problem. The role of research here is to discover the consumers' perceptions of the problem and the product, and to determine how important they feel it is to take action against the problem. (2) Price - price in social marketing can be monetary or non-monetary. It refers to what the consumer must do in order to obtain the social marketing product. Monetary price is the price to buy the product which might help the population. Non-monetary price is the psychological and social costs like changing a habit, time or effort. If the product is priced too low, or provided free of charge, the consumer may perceive it as being low in quality. On the other hand, if the price is too high, some will not be able to afford it. Social marketers must balance these considerations, and often end up charging at least a nominal fee to increase quality perceptions and to confer a sense of "dignity" to the transaction. These perceptions can be determined through research, and can be used in positioning the product. (3) Place - the place is where the target population in need can be found. It is the product distribution site, where the implemented changes will take place or the place where the product is available. The campaign is successful if the place is easily accessible. For a tangible product, this refers to the distribution system--including the warehouse, trucks, sales force, retail outlets, or places where it is given out for free. For an intangible product, place is less clear-cut, but refers to decisions about the channels through which consumers are reached with information or training. This may include doctors' offices, shopping malls, mass media vehicles or in-home demonstrations. Another element of place is deciding how to ensure accessibility and quality of the service delivery. By determining the activities, habits and experiences of the target audience, researchers can pinpoint the most ideal means of distribution for the offering. (4) Promotion - it is the way in which the information is provided for the promotion of the product or habit. The focus is on creating and sustaining demand for the product. The tools and techniques used to make it effective are many; including advertisements, charts, documentaries, etc. along with public relations, media advocacy, entertainment, etc. It takes creativity to promote in a better way. Research is crucial to determine the most effective and efficient ways to reach the target audience and increase demand. The primary research findings can also be used to gain publicity for the program at media events and in news stories.

There are other components of social marketing. Positioning is not sometimes taken as a component of social marketing but is used as a technique. It is an image of anything that is created by the campaign. It is the socio-psychological aspect of the product which is promoted with consumer needs, empirical evidences and objective setting. Public is the target audience as well as other stakeholders. Partnership between different similar agencies or the community also helps in social marketing. Similarly, change does not happen unless there are changes in the policy and administrative. Another component is the funds that are needed to conduct the whole process of social marketing.

There are major features of Social Marketing Theory: (1) Target audience analysis and segmentation; the first step to social marketing is identifying the target population. They are in most need of particular product or awareness and must be analyzed first to have a social change. The audience is analyzed in preproduction as well as production phase. A group also has various subgroups that must also be analyzed by breaking them down which is known as audience segmentation. Existing community agencies must be used. (2) Creates awareness; though the theory is not effective sometimes to change behavior patterns of people, at least they provide awareness. People get to know the alternatives that they can adopt so that they can benefit in the future. When different channels are used to create awareness, people would know new things. Awareness is the first step to change. (3) Increase interest by Edutainment - the message in social marketing is creative and interesting so it is not forgotten easily. The message is reinforced repeatedly and the message is taken as credible by the target group. Education and entertainment is provided as a package. People pay attention as well as get informed at the same time. For example, a street drama is not easily forgotten. Images are used to increase interest and get attention. (4) Desired result - the information should be so interesting and unforgettable, that people would not take the social marketing process to be a learning process but as an entertainment. When this kind of information reaches the intended target group, desired outcome is achieved as the message gets implanted in the brain of the audience.

A great example wherein the concept of Social Marketing Theory is applied, are the health campaigns like family planning. They promote tangible things like contraceptives and non-tangible concepts like family planning, at the same time. They used a society-centered perspective in promoting. For example, they use situational commercials wherein a family that didn’t use these products or didn’t had any family plans ended up getting a lot of children thus, they had a hard time in keeping up with life. It seems as an entertainment drama on television but it actually represents real life situations. It encourages some people to do family planning and use the products and it changes their behavior, choice and lifestyle.

There are also criticisms on Social Marketing Theory: Commercial marketing is sometimes done in the manner of social marketing. Since this theory focuses on creativity, it can sometimes cause problems as the audiences have to interpret the message themselves and the message might not be very assertive. Finally, social marketing theory is not taken as a proper mass communication theory sometimes. Although there are criticisms in this theory, it is possible that this process would be effective today and in the future, especially that processes are now slowly becoming you-centered, individual-centered and society-centered.

Resources:

http://www.social-marketing.com/whatis.html

https://www.businesstopia.net/mass-communication/social-marketing-theory

A Summary of Knowledge Gap Theory by Alyssa Maac

           Many people say that poverty is not a hindrance for education. However, there are salient circumstances wherein it is necessary for money to be involved. Materials, food, resources, transportation; these everyday necessities almost always require spending some money. Thus, even though there are public schools and public news sources, sometimes it is not enough to educate people. The theory that believes that the increase of information in society is not evenly acquired by every member of society: and that people with higher socioeconomic status tend to have better ability to acquire information is called the Knowledge Gap Theory (Weng, S.C. 2000). In this theory, knowledge is treated as any other commodity which is not distributed equally throughout the society and the people at the top of the ladder has more easy access to it.

           This theory was first proposed in 1970 by Philip J. Tichenor (then Associate Professor of Journalism and Mass Communication), George A. Donohue (Professor of Sociology), and Clarice N. Olien (Instructor in Sociology); all of the three researchers in the University of Minnesota. They defined the Knowledge Gap theory, “as the infusion of mass media information into a social system increases, higher socioeconomic status segments tend to acquire this information faster than lower socioeconomic status population segments so that gap in knowledge between the two tends to increase rather than decrease.”  In simple words it means, as the access to mass media increases, those particular segments of population, especially those of the higher class, inevitably gain information faster. Hence, the wide gap increases with the lower economic class of the population. The world is yet to see the complete effect of the new technologies but as the world turns more technological, the expense rises and it goes much more out of the league of the poor. As a result, the knowledge gap also widens and the people of the higher economic class gain the benefits more. If the information services are not made equal for the entire society, this gap of information will increase over the years.

           The knowledge gap can result in an increased gap, in social and literacy context, between people of lower and higher socioeconomic status. The attempt to improve people’s life with information via the mass media might not always work the way it is really planned. Mass media might have the effect of increasing the difference gap between members of social classes. This leads to a division of two groups: a group of better-educated people who know more about most things, and those with low education who know less. Lower socio-economic status (SES) people; (defined partly by educational level) have little or no knowledge about public affairs issues. They are also disconnected from news events and important new discoveries, and usually aren’t concerned about their lack of knowledge.

           Tichenor, Donohue and Olien (1970) present five reasons for justifying the knowledge gap and why these patterns of gap exist: (1) communication skills – people of higher socioeconomic status have better communication skills, education, reading, comprehending and remembering information. As a person receives more education, his communication, reading, and understanding skills increases. Hence; gathering information and understanding the issues of various spheres becomes easier and better for him. (2) Stored information – people of higher socioeconomic status can store information more easily (via classrooms, textbooks, discussions). An educated person is also exposed to much more topics than a less educated person and hence his awareness is more. (3) Relevant social contact – a person with more education has more relevant social integration. This helps him to encounter various perspectives and diverse stories that make his understanding of public issues better. (4) Selective exposure – people of higher socioeconomic status are better in selective exposure, acceptance and retention. An educated person knows well the optimum use of a medium; on the other hand, a person with no knowledge is unlikely to know it. Hence, he will be less interested and less aware of the issues around the world, and he may not also know of how it may affect him. (5) Media target markets – the nature of the mass media itself is that, it is geared toward persons of higher socioeconomic status. For every product, news or any commodity; a certain segment is targeted and it is usually the higher strata of the society, hence, the lower strata remain unaware.

           After surveying on local and national issues by the end of 1975, George A. Donohue and his other colleagues came up with three variables which would help to reduce the gap and might fail this theory up to a certain extent. (1) Impact of local issues – it was seen that local issues, that directly impacted the people, had aroused more of social concern than national issues that did not have such a great impact; hence, in these local issues, widened gap could be reduced. (2) Level of social conflict surrounding the issue – until a communication breakdown, issues with more perceived conflict tends to grab more attention; thus, weakening the knowledge gap hypothesis. (3) Homogeneity of the community – if it is a homogeneous community, the gap tends to be lesser than a wider heterogeneous community.

The knowledge gap can be used to describe presidential campaigns. The knowledge gap hypothesis holds that, when new information enters a social system via a mass media campaign, it is likely to aggravate underlying inequalities in previously held information. However, the results of the analysis show that knowledge gaps do not always grow over the course of presidential campaigns and that some events, such as debates, may actually reduce the level of information inequality in the electorate.

The knowledge gap is evident in our society. There are a lot of lower socioeconomic people in our country and most of them are oblivious in what is happening with the extra-judicial killings in our country. It is quite hard for them to know for this type of explanation can’t be found on common books and internet sources. Also, they are not aware of the process one must go through in a court before being imprisoned. Consequently, many people run away from police whenever they try to arrest them down and it eventually leads to killing.

Media presenting information should realize that people of higher socioeconomic status get their information in a different way than lower educated people. Furthermore, this hypothesis might help in understanding the increased gap between people of higher socioeconomic status and people of lower socioeconomic status. It can be used in finally approaching new ways of communication so that real equality can be achieved.

Resources:

http://communicationtheory.org/knowledge-gap-theory/

https://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20Clusters/Media,%20Culture%20and%20Society/knowledge_gap/

http://www.slideshare.net/SaimaSam/knowledge-gap-theory

A Summary of Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann’s Spiral of Silence Theory by Alyssa Maac

In today’s communication technology, social media allowed a lot of people to express themselves in certain ways. More and more people are given the chance to hear their own voice and to create their own content. The center of today’s technology revolves around you; the creator, and the storyteller. However, with the increasing opportunity to self-expression, sometimes most people would still eventually agree to one opposition, to one side. The dominance would leave other people muted to avoid conflict and isolation, especially that the freedom of expression would also mean that other people would freely express their hate. The process wherein one view dominated the public scene and others disappeared from the public awareness as it adherents became silent because of the fear of separation or isolation for those around them is called “Spiral of Silence”. In this theory, the silenced people tend to keep their attitudes to themselves when they think they are in the minority to avoid separation.

Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann, the German political scientist, contributed the famous model called “Spiral of Silence”. In 1947, Neumann and her husband found “Public Opinion Organization” in Germany and she was also the president of “World Association for Public Opinion Research” from 1978 to 1980. Through the Spiral of Silence theory, Neumann indirectly attempted to explain public opinion through the Jews’ status during World War II under Nazi’s control wherein Adolf Hitler dominated the whole society and the minority, or the Jews, became silent due to the fear of isolation or separation.

According to Mass Communication Theory website, the theory assumes that they remain silent for a few reasons: (1) Fear of isolation when the group or public realizes that the individual has a divergent opinion from the status quo. (2) Fear of reprisal or more extreme isolation, in the sense that voicing said opinion might lead to a negative consequence beyond that of mere isolation (loss of a job, status, etc.)

“The phrase "spiral of silence" actually refers to how people tend to remain silent when they feel that their views are in the minority. The model is based on three premises or assumptions: 1) people have a "quasi-statistical organ," a sixth-sense, which allows them to know the prevailing public opinion, even without access to polls, 2) people have a fear of isolation and know what behaviors will increase their likelihood of being socially isolated, and 3) people are reticent to express their minority views, primarily out of fear of being isolated.”

“The closer a person believes the opinion held is similar to the prevailing public opinion, the more they are willing to openly disclose that opinion in public. If public sentiment changes, the person will recognize that the opinion is less in favor and will be less willing to express that opinion publicly. As the perceived distance between public opinion and a person's personal opinion grows, the more unlikely the person is to express their opinion.”

“For this theory to be reasonable, it relies on the idea that in a given situation we all possess a sort of intuitive way of knowing what the prevailing opinion happens to be. The spiral is created or reinforced when someone in the perceived opinion majority speaks out confidently in support of the majority opinion, hence the minority begins to be more and more distanced from a place where they are comfortable to voice their opinion and begin to experience the aforementioned fears.”

The spiral effect is experienced to the extent that, as this activates, fears continually build in a downward spiral within the minority opinion holder; hence, the minority opinion is never voiced. The theory posits that the mass media has an effect on this process, if you’re assuming that you’re included on the majority’s position. The media plays an important role in this process, especially in dictating or perceptually showing the majority opinion or even providing a way in promoting the majority opinion.

The closer an individual feels their opinion resides to the held majority opinion the more likely they are to be willing to voice it in public discourse. There are other important factors to consider: (1) this theory relies heavily on the idea that the opinion must have a distinct moral component (i.e. abortion, legalization, etc.), (2) people isolate others: for instance, by frowning or turning away when somebody says or does something that is rejected by public opinion, (3) the process is typically ignited by emotionally and morally involved issues, (4)            in case of consensus on an issue in a given society, it is unlikely that a spiral of silence will be set into motion. The spiral is usually elicited by controversial issues and (5) public opinion is limited in time and space. Public opinion will function as a mechanism of social control. However, what specifically public opinion approves or rejects will change with time and differ from place to place.

It is related to the mass media, in such a way that mass media influences public opinion. Shifts in public opinion occur commonly and therefore this theory is used to search an explanation for behavior (speak up or stay silent). For instance, the matter of extra-judicial killings in our country has held people to gather up their opinion and choose sides. People argued to each other either choosing the sake of the legal due process or the goal of depleting drug use in our country. Some people are afraid to voice out their opinions especially that the matters are in the hands of the government.

The theory has also been criticized for ambiguity and methodological weakness, but the idea has persisted. Evidence of the spiral effect is usually small but significant. Spiral of Silence theory has both micro level and macro level explanatory process. It also helps to raise question about considering the role and responsibility of media in the society. In some cases the person may feel the majority’s ideas or opinion is much better than his own view, which means that ideas are shared; although, sometimes, it isn’t voiced out. That is why opinions are powerful; it dictates a person’s stand and support, but most of all it influences the world.

Resources:

http://noelle-neumann.de/scientific-work/spiral-of-silence/

http://communicationtheory.org/the-spiral-of-silence-theory/

https://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20Clusters/Mass%20Media/spiral_of_silence/

http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/spirals_silence.htm

A Summary of Edwin Ardener’s Muted Group Theory by Alyssa Maac

Millennia after millennia, it has been just recently that the human civilization considered listening and understanding the inferior-labeled part of the society, the women. However, there are still blockades or boundaries; they are better known as discrimination and biases against gender, sexual orientation, age, marital status, economic status and religious perspective. Everyone views the world with his or her own sense of gender and equality. But even so, some of the population tends to shut the females from themselves and become someone’s opinion instead. The idea that language is culture and gender bound; men have more power than women and men have more influence over the language that resulted in a male-biased language is called the muted group theory.

Muted group theory is a critical theory concerning the certain groups of people who remain powerless compared to the others. Edwin Ardener, a British anthropologist, introduced the concept. His studies on gender and found that the studies made by many ethnographers in the society was generalized to the male population and found that it is accepting only one side. The voices of the women and other unheard have been ignored and muted. The narrow perspective to the society ignoring almost half of the population affected the studies and the muted group theory brought a light into the powers of the marginalized in the society.

The muted group theory was further studied by Cheris Kramarae, a professor in women studies. She upheld the idea that, communication was started by men and because they take advantage of women. While speaking, women are considered less powerful than men and the reason behind this is simple psychology: women’s needs are emotionally driven unlike men. Thus, the perspective of women differs from men in all aspects.

Muted Group Theory is a critical theory because it is concerned with power and how it is used against people. While critical theories can separate the powerful and the powerless any number of ways, this theory chooses to focus and branch out the power spectrum into men and women. It begins with the statement that language is culture bound, and because men have more power than women, men have more influence over the language, resulting in a male-biased language. Men create the words and meaning for the culture, allowing expression of their ideas. Women, on the other hand, are left out of this meaningful creation and they leave without a means to express which is unique to them. Oftentimes, they just become silent and that leaves women as a muted group.

The Muted Group Theory rests on three assumptions. First, men and women perceive the world differently because they have different perception-shaping experiences. Those different experiences are caused by the different tasks of males and females in the society. Second, men enact their power politically, perpetuating their power and suppressing women's ideas and meanings from gaining public acceptance. Third, women must convert their unique ideas, experiences, and meanings into male language in order to be heard. Because everyone speaks the male language, women must be the one to adjust to society for people to understand their ideations.

The propositions and assumptions leads to a number of hypotheses about women's communication. First, women have a more difficult time expressing themselves than do men. Because, as previously stated, they need to adapt and convert their expression into the familiar one. Second, women understand what men mean more easily than men understand what women mean. Women are open-minded in a way that they were in the oppressed position so they are more aware and sensitive about things. Third, women communicate with each other using media not accepted by the dominant male communicators. Women are restrained from the society, so is their language. In our society most of the abusive languages denotes feminine and there are only very few for men. Fourth, women are less satisfied with communication than are men. Since our community is using male-biased language, of course women would be less satisfied because the language promotes expression for males but limits women’s expressions. Fifth, women are not likely to create new words, but sometimes do so to create meanings special and unique to women. Since it is a male-biased language community, there is a useless point in creating new words because it would not be practically used. Sometimes though, women create their own words to form a connection and a sense of individuality.

The most powerful and obvious example of women being labelled as inferior being is can be seen in mass media. Up until today, women are being stereotyped and it can be seen in the mass media. This perception is easily converted into a popular culture. Since it is the popular culture, most people don’t bother about it and just “go with the flow”. The women are still portrayed as a sex symbol in most of the advertisements for the male products. As everyone can also see in magazines, women are always captured with their whole body. They always show their flaunting body with revealing clothes. They were never photographed with only their face, which emphasizes power and emotion. It was always about who has the perfect body; the more perfect the more powerful in their perspective. The perspective of male towards women has been narrowed down to either sexual or emotional symbol.

Even in modern age, where communication is widely spread because of new medium, one cannot still avoid the myth etched upon women for multiple millennia. Media gave way for society to become more open-minded causing women to finally voice out their opinions. However, there are still differences between people that we cannot ignore and erase. It is an inevitable human nature. Muted Group Theory does not claim that these differences are based on biology. Instead, the theory claims that men risk losing their dominant position if they listen to women, incorporate their experiences in the language, and allow women to be equal partners in language use and creation. Language is about power, and men have it.

Resources:

https://www.megaessays.com/viewpaper/50025.html

http://mutedgrouptheory.blogspot.com/

http://www.slideshare.net/Devyani03/muted-group-theory-33732209

http://communicationtheory.org/muted-group-theory/

A Summary of Professor George Gerbner’s Cultivation Theory by Alyssa Maac

Before the internet takes its place in the limelight, there was television. More than 50 years since its invention, the television maintains a controversial presence in culture. People blame TV as the cause for a lot of occurring social problems. Some claim that TV viewing wastes time and lowers one’s IQ. Others say it’s partly to blame for the current health problems such as obesity, the rise in violence among adolescents and the deterioration of moral values. Fans of TV point to its usefulness in education and communication. Parents debate how much, if any, children should be allowed to watch. Therefore, it’s no surprise that one of the theories of mass communication—cultivation theory—examines television’s cumulative effects on human attitudes and behavior.

Cultivation theory (sometimes referred to as the cultivation hypothesis or cultivation analysis) was an approach developed by Professor George Gerbner, dean of the Annenberg School of Communications at the University of Pennsylvania. He began the 'Cultural Indicators' research project in the mid-1960s, to study whether and how watching television may influence viewers' ideas of what the everyday world is like. Cultivation theorists argue that television has long-term effects which are small, gradual, indirect but cumulative and significant. He compared television’s socializing force to that of religion, claiming that it defines social roles, standardizes behavior and homogenizes communities much like religion did in early human history.

Cultivation theory in its most basic form, suggests that television is responsible for shaping, or ‘cultivating’ viewers’ conceptions of social reality. The combined effect of massive television exposure by viewers over time subtly shapes the perception of social reality for individuals and, ultimately, for our culture as a whole. Gerbner argues that the mass media cultivate attitudes and values which are already present in a culture: the media maintain and propagate these values amongst members of a culture, thus binding it together. He has argued that television tends to cultivate middle-of-the-road political perspectives. Gerbner called this effect ‘mainstreaming’. Gerbner sorted television’s effects into two categories: first order and second order. The ‘first order’ effects are the general beliefs about the everyday world, such as the prevalence of violence; and the ‘second order’ effects are the specific attitudes, such as to law and order or to personal safety. There is also a distinction between two groups of television viewers: the heavy viewers and the light viewers. People who watch a lot of television, or the ‘heavy viewers’, are likely to be more influenced by the ways in which the world is framed by television programs than individuals who watch less, especially regarding topics of which the viewer has little first-hand experience. Light viewers may have more sources of information than heavy viewers. ‘Resonance’ describes the intensified effect on the audience when what people see on television is what they have experienced in life. This double dose of the televised message tends to amplify the cultivation effect. Also, because television portrays excessive amounts of violence, it can cause people to develop Mean World Syndrome, or the idea that the world is scarier than it really is.

Cultivation theory assumes the following assumptions: (1) Because television content is mass produced and occupies a central role in American culture, it is more influential than other forms of mass media; (2) TV does not cause or encourage violent behavior. Instead, it shapes people’s attitudes and beliefs about society and other people; (3) TV cultivates values and attitudes already present in the culture. It serves to reinforce the status quo, not challenge it; (4) viewing more than four hours of television a day can lead to Mean World Syndrome; (5) Television creates an alternate reality and it does not reflect reality.

The distinction in the degree of cultivation between various television viewers is known as the cultivation differential. A heavy viewer of reality shows, for instance, is likely to think that people are largely competitive and self-centered, while a light viewer may perceive people to be more helpful and friendly. Several factors can influence the degree of cultivation: (1) the amount of television watched –heavy viewers are more influenced than light viewers; (2) current environment – viewers who live in dangerous neighborhoods are more susceptible to Mean World Syndrome; (3) gender – women are more likely to experience Mean World Syndrome since women are overwhelmingly portrayed as victims on TV; (4) watching alone or with others – viewing television with others increases the chance of discussion, thus reducing cultivation’s effects. Watching alone increases the chance of cultivation; (5) level of familiarity with the situation portrayed – people who lack first-hand knowledge of reality depend on television to inform them, which makes cultivation likely to occur; (6) age – young children who cannot comprehend motives or consequences as shown on TV are less likely to experience cultivation. Some have argued that education, ethnicity and income level also play a part in the cultivation differential, but cultivation theorists claim that the amount of television watched overrides such factors.

Researchers have documented some common indicators of cultivation among heavy TV viewers, such as the following: (1) exaggerated fear of becoming the victim of a crime; (2) general suspicion of people and their motives; (3) inflated perception of police activity.

An example of the cultivation theory is the drug elimination that is currently happening in the Philippines. People who watch television are aware that there were a lot of people who got killed because of drugs. Some of them were killed without even saying a word; and some of them are killed not by the police’s hands. People who watch television know this information and thus created fear made them cautious. Almost everyone now is assumed as a victim. Now, many people believe that the world is a corrupt and a violent place.

Resources:

https://masscommtheory.com/theory-overviews/cultivation-theory/

https://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20Clusters/Mass%20Media/Cultivation_Theory/

http://communicationtheory.org/cultivation-theory/

http://www.uky.edu/~drlane/capstone/mass/cultivation.htm

http://www.communicationstudies.com/communication-theories/cultivation-theory

A Summary of Agenda Setting Theory by Alyssa Maac (Maxwell McCombs & Donald L. Shaw)

In our daily lives, it is important that we are aware of the events, incidents and circumstances that are happening in our environment. We all play vital roles in our dynamic society: we either get influenced or be the influence. One of the factors hugely affecting our opinions and insights is the media. We all consume media. The agenda setting theory describes a very powerful influence of the media – the ability to tell us what issues are important.

McCombs and Shaw described agenda setting theory: “In choosing and displaying news, editors, newsroom staff, and broadcasters play an important part in shaping political reality. Readers learn not only about a given issue, but also how much importance to attach to that issue from the amount of information in a news story and its position. In reflecting what candidates are saying during a campaign, the mass media may well determine the important issues—that is, the media may set the “agenda” of the campaign.”

Intense media attention increases the importance of certain topics. Sometimes simple objects or events can have meaning because of the attention given by the media. Media influence affects the order of presentation in news reports about news, events and issues in the public mind. If more importance is given to news, there is more importance attributed by audience. Media priorities say what people should think about and how people should think about. We all know about a certain topic or event because the media thought it was important for us to know about it.

There are two levels of agenda setting theory:

The first level, mostly studied by researchers, refers to media using objects or issues to influence the people what people should think about.

The second level refers to media focusing on the characters of the issues and how people should think about them. Media decides what parts of the subject are important.

As far back as 1922, the newspaper columnist Walter Lippman was concerned that the media had the power to present images to the public. McCombs and Shaw investigated presidential campaigns in 1968, 1972 and 1976. In the research done in 1968 they focused on two elements: awareness and information. Investigating the agenda-setting function of the mass media, they attempted to assess the relationship between what voters in one community said were important issues and the actual content of the media messages used during the campaign. McCombs and Shaw concluded that the mass media exerted a significant influence on what voters considered to be the major issues of the campaign.

The core of agenda-setting is the creation of public awareness and concern of salient issues by the news media. Two basis assumptions underlie most research on agenda-setting: (1) the press and the media do not reflect reality; they filter and shape it; (2) media concentration on a few issues and subjects leads the public to perceive those issues as more important than other issues. One of the most critical aspects in the concept of an agenda-setting role of mass communication is the time frame for this phenomenon. In addition, different media have different agenda-setting potential. Agenda-setting theory seems quite appropriate to help us understand the pervasive role of the media (for example on political communication systems).

The main concept associated with the agenda setting theory is gate keeping. Gate keeping controls over the selection of content discussed in the media; Public cares mostly about the product of a media gate keeping. It is especially editors media itself is a gatekeeper. News media decides ‘what’ events to admit through media ‘gates’ on ground of ‘newsworthiness’.

For example, news comes from various sources, editors choose what should appear and what should not that’s why they are called as gatekeepers.

The activity of the media in proposing the values and standards by the objects of the media’s attention can be judged. Media’s content will provide a lot of time and space to certain issues, making it more vivid. To say in simple words, media is giving utmost importance to news so that it gives people the impression that is the most important information. This is done every day: the particular news is carried as a heading or covered every day for months. Headlines, Special news features, discussions, expert opinions are used. Media primes news by repeating the news and giving it more importance.

The information given by the media is typically shaped and contextualized within same frame of reference. The audience adopts the frames of reference to see the world in a similar way. It is how people attach importance to news and perceive it context within which an issue is viewed. Framing talks about how people attach importance to certain news for e.g. in case of attack, defeat, win and loss, how the media frames the news such that people perceive it in a different way.

We can take India and Pakistan war; same happening is framed in different ways in both the countries. So depending on which media you view your perception will differ. You can also associate how media affects your opinion, perspective and decisions. It will leave you to your thoughts and self-evaluations. For example, the media always reports about the government and politician’s corruption and failure; it will give you a suggestion that most of the politicians are usually corrupt but it is your decision if you’ll think about them that way.

There are criticisms surrounding the agenda-setting theory: (1) media users not ideal, people may not pay attention to details and just focus on the issue in general, (2) the effect is weakened for people who have made up their mind, and (3) the media can’t create problems. They can only alter the awareness, priority etc.

 Resources:

http://communicationtheory.org/agenda-setting-theory/

https://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Mass%20Media/Agenda-Setting_Theory/

http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/content/36/2/176.abstract

https://masscommtheory.com/theory-overviews/agenda-setting-theory/

A Summary to Semiology Theory by Alyssa Maac

Communication is not only bounded by words and verbal language alone. We use our five senses to work accordingly to different stimulations in the environment. Sometimes, we use symbols and words to communicate more effectively and faster. The study of the interaction between people and signs and symbols is called semiotics. Semiotics, also called semiology, is the science of communication and sign systems of the ways people understand phenomena and organize them mentally, and of the ways in which they devise means for transmitting that understanding and for sharing it with others. In short, semiology is the study of the role of signs as part of social life.

The term comes from the Greek word sēmeiotikos which means “an interpreter of signs” and was first used in English by Henry Stubbes. Even though the word 'semiotics' dates back to ancient Greece, its use in modern linguistics was propelled in the 19th century with the research of Ferdinand de Saussure. Saussure was a Swiss linguist who contributed greatly to the study of semiotics, also sometimes referred to as semiology.

A sign is anything that is used for human communication. Saussure´s sign definition is “the sign is the whole that results from the association of the signifier with the signified” where the signified and signifier are both psychological form rather than substance. Saussure´s model of the sign refers only to a concept and not to a thing. For example, the word “tree” (signifier) is associated with a living object that is a tree (signified). Same signifier can stand different signified depending on context and use. The link between signified and signifier is arbitrary, meaning it depends on the person’s choice. No specific signifier is ‘naturally’ more suited to a signified than another.

An icon is where the signifier (denotation) is perceived as resembling or imitating the signified (connotation). Pictorial representations, a photograph, an architect’s model of a building, or a star chart are all icons because they imitate or copy aspects of their subject.

An index had a factual or casual connection that points towards its object. Wet streets are a sign that it has rained recently. Smoke signifies fire. A nest image is an icon of a nest but also an index of a bird.

A symbol has an arbitrary relationship between the signifier and the signified. The interpreter understands the symbol through previous knowledge and experience—it must be learned and agreed upon. Spoken or written words are symbols. There is no reason that the word “cat” should represent a cat instead of a tree.

A meta-symbol is a symbol whose meaning transcends the tangible realm of simple one-to-one relationships. History, culture, and tradition all play a role in creating meta-symbols, such as the dove with an olive branch as a symbol for peace. For certain audiences, religious and magical signs and symbols take on these properties.

A genre trope (or codes) is a common pattern, theme, or motif within the genre (e.g. a spaceship in science fiction films or ghosts in horror movies)

Semiotics is less interested in what something means than how it means anything at all to anybody. Although natural and artificial languages are central to semiotics, its field covers all non-verbal signalling and extends to domains whose communicative dimension is perceived only unconsciously. Knowledge, meaning, intention and action are thus fundamental concepts in the semiotic investigation of phenomena.

Scholars of modern linguistics, or semioticians, understand that words do not have innate meanings. That is, when we say the word 'rabbit', the word, sounds, and letters are all unrelated to the creature we call rabbit, except that humans have assigned a value to them. Because people have developed the ability to assign meaning with words, we are able to describe abstract meanings. This means we have words for things that we may not be able to actually see in front of us. Furthermore, the history of a word may not directly influence what it means to someone. As an example, we can use the word 'cool' without any thought or reference to temperature. The usage is separate from its history.

For Saussure, language itself makes meaning rather than simply conveying meaning. Therefore, our experience is influenced by the language we use to describe it. When we understand that language is a sign system and not just a naming of objects, we read and discuss literary works differently. We are able to analyze the various meanings embedded in a text and how one text influences another and texts its meaning, interpretation and significance.

We may not realize it, but in fact semiology can be applied to all sorts of human endeavors, including art, literature, anthropology, mass media, education, politics, medicine, history, and religion.

 Resources:

http://www.slideshare.net/MediaStudiesSaltash/semiotics-for-beginners-as-level

http://www.slideshare.net/gueste561ab/semiotics-1070205

http://www.vic.utoronto.ca/students/academics/semiotics.htm

https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/barthes.htm