Mass Media’s Influence on Society, Research Paper Example

Abstract

The aim of the current paper is to discuss the influence of mass media on society. The paper discusses the general effects of mass media on social cognition, from purchasing to political interests. The bias and controversies in the current media research are recognized and evaluated. The paper shows the inconsistence of the magic bullet theory and confirms that mass media do not produce omnipotent effects on society. Rather, as a part of consumer culture, it is society that influences mass media and make them change to meet the most sophisticated consumer needs.

Introduction

Previous decades were marked with the accelerating speed of mass media development in the world. Globalization, new technologies, and the growing availability of communication systems – all these have contributed to the growth of the new mass media culture. People no longer imagine their lives without TV sets. Newspapers and radio broadcasting govern human lives. The Internet has produced a real revolution in mass consciousness. As a result, the new society of mass communications has come to believe in the omnipotent influence of mass media on society and the quality of social interactions. The reality, however, is quite different and to say that mass media are omnipotent means to distort the picture of mass communications in the real world. Although mass media produce significant effects on society, the belief that mass media are omnipotent is at least erroneous; more often than not it is society that affects the media by making the latter change their representations to meet the changing needs of mass media consumers.

The Effects of Mass Media on Society: The General Overview

That mass media affect society no one can deny. Statistically, an average American spends more than 9 hours per day consuming various types of media messages; 7 hours of household television per day means that those, who spend their time at home consciously choose television as their daily companion (Berger, 2007). While 62 percent of households report having video game equipment, only 50% recognize that they have a subscription to a daily newspaper (Berger, 2007), meaning that the present day mass media do not leave people any chance or time for anything else but television, computers, the Internet, video gaming, or related forms of modern media representations. However, that people spend hours in front of a TV set does not create a full picture of media effects on society. Mass media produce societal effects across a whole range of contexts (Perse, 2001). These range from the effects which mass media may have on purchasing patterns in individuals to the mass media effects on voting, political choice, personal behaviors, and social control (Perse, 2001). All these effects are referred to as “intended”, and the media produce these effects on society to cause changes in societal behaviors and attitudes. However, there is also a whole list of unintended effects, from the effects of TV violence on human cognition and to the effects which sexual messages produce on the level of sexual arousal in individuals (Perse, 2001). A wealth of literature was written about how violence and erotic images on TV impact human behaviors and worldviews, but beyond sex and violence, mass media may be potentially responsible for a set of hidden effects. For example, how does advertising impact the smoking behaviors among adolescents? Or, can the process of watching a world cup championship on TV lead to the decrease in retail sales in the world because people prefer the process of watching to the process of shopping? All these questions do not have clear answers. Given the multiplicity of factors, which predetermine and change the quality of interactions between society and the media, it is difficult to say whether mass media are responsible for all social changes.

Very often mass media change the minds and perceptions of individuals and make them follow a completely different path. Even the simplest misrepresentation of health risks by mass media during the SARS epidemic (Bomlitz & Brezis, 2008) could become an effective driver of panic among vulnerable populations. However, the beliefs that mass media have omnipotent influence on society and produce overwhelming effects on human cognition are at least exaggerated. A closer look at the current research about media reveals contradictory findings and unexpected controversies, and turns mass media into a weaker argument compared to other, more significant social influences. It appears that society lives surrounded by a whole array of myths about mass media and underestimates its own role in governing the development and creation of mass media thinking in the world.

Mass Media’s Influence on Society: Popular Myths and Barriers for Media Impact

In its current state, media research lacks a single universal proof for the fact that the influence of mass media on society is overwhelming. There is little or no evidence that could confirm the link between mass media and academic achievement; also, researchers gradually come to realize the pornography has little effect on human behaviors (Perse, 2001). The study which sought to link availability of television to aggression in children did not find significant differences between children who live in towns and have a personal TV set and children who have no television and live in rural territories (Perse, 2001). There is still no direct connection between pornography and sex crimes, and even if mass media send stereotyped messages about race and racism, these messages rarely have any influence on attitudes toward African Americans in society (Perse, 2001).

Very often, the influence of mass media on society is mediated by the cultural barriers. For example, “there is a good deal of open and available sexual content in Japanese media, but a much lower incidence of sexual crime. Similarly, Japanese television in 1977 was about as violent as U.S. television, but Japan is a less violent society” (Perse, 2001). Mass media are fairly regarded as a potent tool used to inform and educate those who would otherwise be unaware of the issues that may directly affect them (Lal, Sharma & Ahmed, 2007), but the media are not always able to overcome the cultural barriers on their way to the masses. In case of India, mass media took a strong position and played a significant role in promoting the message of the agricultural revolution in society, while advertising in the country did not have any observable impacts on social behaviors (Lal, Sharma & Ahmed, 2007). The reasons and explanations for the lack of media effects on society are numerous. The lack of credibility is often considered as the primary barrier on the media’s way to human minds; the growing availability of information makes it possible for the society and consumers to look behind the content and to evaluate its reliability. As a result, very often, mass media consumers do realize the presence of the content bias and are not willing to accept such media messages for granted. Feudal mindset and self-centered lives are also included into the list of barriers against mass media influence (Lal, Sharma & Ahmed, 2007). In India alone, “the erosion of authority of law and establishment and the general lack of a culture of punishment have added to this environment of general disregard for ethics. Mass media, again, have a limited role to play in making people change their attitudes” (Lal, Sharma & Ahmed 2007). As a result, it is difficult to say that mass media produce overwhelming effects on societal cognition and the quality of social interactions.

The magic bullet theory remains one of the most popular myths about the impact of mass media on society. With the rapid spreading of information and media technologies, scholars in media studies assumed that mass media could lead to the development of new mass consciousness. The rise of Hitler and the spreading of Nazism showed media as a tool of mass thinking and the basis for the development of a totalitarian social order (Martinson, 2006). However, if the magic bullet theory had been realistic, Nazism would have continued its existence and societies would have failed to withstand its pressures. In reality, all these mass influences are readily mediated by individual differences and factors. Individual differences, social categories, and personal relationships altogether contribute to the development of the new vision of mass media (Martinson, 2006). Under the pressure of these factors, mass media cease to be the tool of mass control but turn into the product of mass creation: the rise of the new consumer culture and the growing role of profitability and finance in mass media turns society into the major driver of mass media changes, where the latter, as a matter of their survival, seek to meet even the most sophisticated needs of their consumers.

The Rise of Consumerism: Mass Media as the Product of Mass Consumption

The relationships between mass media and society are as complex as they are also comprehensible. In their current state, they often resemble a two-way street, in which mass media impact consumers and in which consumers also produce significant influence on mass media. It would be fair to say that “we are all, in a certain sense, ‘double’. On the one hand, we are in society, and on the other hand, society is in us. We have physical bodies and personalities that are our own – that is, we are individuals – but we also are social animals, and much of what we think is based on this fact” (Berger, 2007). However, the development of the individualistic culture and the rise of consumerism in postmodern society signify the dramatic shift in mass media consciousness: its impact on society is no longer overwhelming; on the contrary, consumers change mass media perceptions about reality and make them pursue their customer needs for the sake of stability and profitability in the media business.

The rise and the development of the mass media culture was closely associated with the new vision of mass thinking – under the impact of media messages and advertising, the media sought to create a new society of rational consumers. Commodification of the social reality and the development of the new market ties reflected one of the major effects of mass media on society in the twentieth century: “to help construct a consumer society by encouraging people to locate their identity in their leisure tastes and consumer practices rather than in other roles, such as jobs and church membership” (Grossberg, 2006). However, in no way could mass media expect that their striving to consumerism and commodification would reverse the impact of media on society and would turn consumers into the central drivers of social influence. In no way could mass media expect that the development of the new consumer thinking would make consumers more active and selective in their choice of products and services. While the media were striving to reflect and reproduce the activity of wanting new products and buying them, the mass media audience, as the market, worked effectively to make the best choice of products and to analyze the information presented by mass media. The new consumerist culture taught the society to be selective in its choice of media messages. The development of the new analytical thinking was the direct result of the overwhelming power of mass media in the middle of the 20^th century. Trying to conquer the human minds, mass media obviously forgot that “the limits of the claim that a part of people’s identity is defined by their investment in consumption. People are aware of themselves as consumers, but there is far more to their self-conscious sense of their own identity” (Grossberg, 2006). The common mistake mass media made in the past was in treating society as a mass of people who lacked thinking skills and could not recognize their own vices.

Unfortunately, under the pressure of this culture of consumers, mass media had to learn how to become competitive, how to stay afloat, and how to meet the most sophisticated consumer needs. To achieve those goals, the mass media had to learn the tastes and cultural preferences of mass media consumers. The mass media had to incorporate changes necessary to meet those needs. With time, and pressured by internal and external factors, the mass media turned into a new consumer trend which, under the influence of the changing consumer needs, had to change themselves. As a result, even if mass media influence society, this influence is far from being overwhelming; rather, under the influence of the new consumerist culture, it is society that influences mass media and makes the latter change in order to meet the changeable needs of consumers.

Conclusion

That mass media influence society no one can deny. However, contrary to previous beliefs, the influence of mass media on society is not overwhelming; nor does it produce any significant shift in mass consciousness. In many aspects, the process of interaction between society and mass media is a two-way street, in which society chooses the most useful media messages and the media use society to generate additional profits. More often than not, and under the pressure of the new consumerist culture, it is society that produces significant influence on mass media which, for the sake of profitability and competitiveness, must change to meet the most sophisticated needs of their consumers.

References

Berger, A.A. (2007). Media and society: A critical perspective. NY: Rowman & Littlefield.

Bomlitz, L.J. & Brezis, M. (2008). Misrepresentation of health risks by mass media. Journal of Public Health, 30 (2), 202-204.

Grossberg, L. (2006). Mediamaking: Mass media in a popular culture. London: SAGE.

Lal, R.M., Sharma, S.K. and Ahmed, N. (2007). Inherent barriers for mass media impact on Indian society. International Journal of Business Research. Retrieved from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_6773/is_6_7/ai_n28522957/pg_4/?tag=content;col1

Martinson, D.L. (2006). Teachers must not pass along popular ‘Myths’ regarding the supposed omnipotence of the mass media. The High School Journal, 90 (1), 16-21.

Perse, E.M. (2001). Media effects and society. NY: Routledge.