Friday, October 17, 2014

Look! Agenda Setting theory at its Finest.

EBOLA! EBOLA! Cue, widespread panic...

All of this Ebola uproar takes me back to a little research piece I wrote my senior year of my undergrad at UM-F.  Thanks to the media, we're in prime agenda setting theory overload.  I'll share with you snippet of the paper below, you can quickly paint a visual of what's happening right now in society with the Ebola scare and what may be getting swept under the rug because of it. The CDC and other experts predict that more people in the U.S. will die in the next year of influenza or perhaps more alerting and something that's not being exploited as much as Ebola, the Enterovirus which has already taken 600+ lives whereas Ebola has taken the life of one individual and infected less than a handful of people since here in the U.S. So why is it we're focusing all of our time an energy on Ebola instead of some of the more alarming statistics of other health risks out there? Welcome to agenda setting theory, enjoy.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/dont-forget-flu

          The mass media has a profound effect on today’s society.  Citizens are being pushed, pulled and pointed in every which direction as to what’s deemed “newsworthy” or relevant from every such existing medium.  The media has a strikingly effective way of presenting ideas, offering opinions and ultimately setting the agenda as to what’s relevant.  “Water cooler” talk has drastically changed over the years to expand beyond the once important, life-altering news stories, to reflect a staggering number of political propaganda, continuous fiscal woes and the increasing phenomenon of seemingly irrelevant entertainment headlines.  In an effort to highlight the inequalities and influence passed on from the media’s agenda to public agenda, we’ll examine the agenda-setting theory and its involvement in media studies and its effect on society’s health and well-being issues.
Agenda-setting theory was popularized by researcher’s Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw in 1972. McCombs and Shaw were interested in the overwhelming influence of mass medias “…ability to transfer the salience of issues on their news agenda to public agenda”           ( Griffin ). Adding, society looks to media as to where their focus should be placed and why; “media assistance.” They note “We judge as important what the media judge as important,” - a statement that certainly drives home the agenda-setting hypothesis.
In an effort to best understand the agenda-setting theory, it’s important to look at some of the components of the theory. First and foremost, the theory can be identified as an objective approach. Essentially, the theory looks to uncover one truth, answering what is real.  With conducting experiments, focusing on unbiased observations and practical utility, we uncover what we already know and eventually can decipher what is good.
Furthermore, the theory is also noted as a socio-psychological tradition of communication studies. The tradition is based on interpersonal interaction, expression and influence. The problem within the communication lies within a situation that requires manipulation or perception, whether cognitively speaking or not. The socio-psychological tradition focuses on cause and effect and therefore the appropriate tradition to describe agenda-setting theory.
Expanding beyond the characteristics of objective approach and socio-psychological tradition of agenda-setting theory, it’s important to closely examine how exactly the theory functions and what it’s attempting to expose. Both McCombs and Shaw reference Bernard Cohen, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin as stating “The press may not be successful much of the time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in telling its readers what to think about” ( Griffin ). One can see how prominent and influential this may be in politics and election processes, as countlessly noted within the theories examination. However, politics aside, theorists are able to draw on several applications of influence in the agenda-setting theory.  The first step is to make sense of the media’s agenda.
Media agenda refers to “The pattern of news coverage across major print and broadcast media as measured by the prominence and length of stories” ( Griffin ). Dependent on which form of media: print, broadcast, film, etc… certain positions, prominences and length of stories, quantifies the effectiveness and perceptions of the audience. In an article from the Malaysian Journal of Media Studies, author Amira Sariyati Firdaus notes the media’s role as “a very important agenda setter,” stating that “ideology” is the main influence on content, typically derived from the government.  Other, more minor influences on media agenda’s include influences from decision-makers or interest groups, who have policy making clout and also the journalists themselves with their values, biases and personalities that shape the stories or headlines ( Sariyati ). 
Additionally, the public agenda’s reflects “A composite index of media prominence revealed the following order of importance: foreign policy, law and order, fiscal policy, public welfare, and civil rights” ( Griffin ). The public agenda attempts to measure the issues and their importance by conducting public opinion surveys, surveys which McCombs and Shaw frequented in their research. “In the metaphorical language of the theory, the media’s agenda sets the public’s agenda” ( Tankard ).  
If the media’s agenda is the prominent agenda, it should come to no surprise that the audience is susceptible to the media’s ideologies, some individuals more than others. The media has the upper hand and definitely serves as gatekeepers, meaning they choose what the public sees or hears. Although, it’s to what extent each individual’s need for orientation occurs.  Deciphering between an individual’s high interest on an issue combined with high uncertainty on that issue, is reflective of their need for orientation ( Sariyati ).   In other words, the motivation factor of letting the media shape their thoughts, is also known as index of curiosity ( Griffin ).  For example, if one were getting ready board a cruise ship set to sail the Pacific and a warning came across the television of a new storm system developing in the Pacific Ocean, this would most likely cause a level of concern for that individual, for it’s of high relevance and high uncertainty.
Likewise, an increasingly noted factor arising amidst the agenda-setting theory is framing. Framing is “The selection of restricted number of thematically related attributes for inclusion on the media agenda when a particular object or issue is discussed” ( Griffin ). Noted mass communication scholar James Tankard adds that media frame suggests “the central organizing idea for news content that supplies a context and suggest what the issue is through the use of selection, emphasis, exclusion, and elaboration” ( Griffin ).  Essentially, media time and time again sets both the agenda and also transfers the salience of specific attributes belonging to the particular headlines of interest ( Griffin ). 
Further, “Frames are abstract notions that serve to organize or structure social meanings. Frames influence the perception of the news of the audience, this form of agenda-setting not only tells what to think about, but also how to think about it” ( “Framing” ).  Media has the power to frame particular topics in a way that’s favorable to one side or the other, particularly without showing biases, though they usually exist.  Further noted is the idea that the media often “…reflexively choose a conflict frame – who are the antagonists or opposing forces” 
( Tankard ).  Negative or positive slants of media coverage are consequences of framing
( Sariyati ). Framing is the subconscious, subtle molding of particular stories and headlines that media exposes to its seemingly vulnerable audience; planting seeds of relevance.

As illustrated, it’s evident that media holds immense power over society. Agenda-setting theory provides insight as to how commanding and transparent the media is when it comes to delivering information and highlighting what it deems as important, “newsworthy,” within the culture. With that said, it’s crucial media spend more time and attention aiming to highlight some of the ever pressing issues of health and well-being in today’s society.  What if we took the concept and characteristics of agenda-setting theory to focus on more positive and necessary applications of mass media? In a day and age where healthcare wavers on the brink of non-existence for many, it seems more important than ever to push personal wellbeing issues to the forefront and bring about the attention, prevention and information society desperately needs to live healthier, longer lives.

1 comment: