Normative Theories UGC NET Previous Year Question Paper Question: Mass media legitimize the audience’s: A. Family relations B. Power structure C. Political connections D. Prestige and status The question primarily focuses on three key theories in mass communication: Agenda-setting, Priming, and Framing. These theories fall under Unit 1, Section 10 of the syllabus: "Models and Theories of Mass Communication," specifically relating to Normative Theories and Administrative and Critical Traditions in Communication, Media, and Journalism Studies. This is because the question addresses how mass media influences societal structures and perceptions, a key focus of these theories. Answer: B. Power structure Mass media plays a crucial role in shaping and legitimizing societal power structures. According to various mass communication theories, including agenda-setting and framing theories, the media can affect what issues the public views as important and how they perceive them. This, in turn, affects the power dynamics within a society. The agenda-setting theory suggests that the media significantly impacts people's thinking, although it does not directly dictate their thoughts. By highlighting specific issues, the media can influence the public agenda and the power dynamics in society. The framing theory suggests that media highlights certain issues and presents them in a particular way, influencing the audience's perception and understanding. This framing has the potential to validate current power structures by presenting them in a positive way or by downplaying alternative viewpoints. The other options are not correct: A. Family relations: While media can influence family dynamics, it does not primarily function to legitimize family relations in the same way it does power structures. C. Political connections: The media can highlight political connections, but its role in legitimizing these connections is more indirect than in legitimizing power structures. D. Prestige and status: Media can affect perceptions of prestige and status, but these are often outcomes of the power structures that media helps to legitimize rather than primary focuses.
Normative Theories of the Press
Agenda-Setting Theory
The agenda-setting theory, initially introduced by McCombs and Shaw in 1972, argues that the media plays a crucial role in shaping the public’s perception of important issues. This theory aligns with the observation that people think about what they are told but not necessarily what they are told to think.
In This Article
Key Points
- The theory suggests a correlation between the importance given to issues by the media and the significance attached to these issues by politicians and the public.
- The contemporary media landscape’s agenda-setting process has become more diverse and dynamic due to the proliferation of online platforms and social media.
- Dearing and Rogers define agenda-setting as an ongoing competition among issue proponents to gain attention from media professionals, the public, and policy elites.
Critical Analysis
- While agenda-setting theory offers an alternative to direct media effects on individual attitudes, it faces several challenges:
- Methodological difficulties in proving causal connections between media coverage and public opinion.
- The need for comprehensive data includes party programs, opinion changes over time, content analysis, and media usage patterns.
- The theory often neglects the complex interactions between media, public, and policy agendas.
- It doesn’t account for variations in media credibility, personal experiences, and unexpected real-world events.
In India, agenda-setting theory can be observed in various scenarios:
- The media shapes public discourse on corruption, environmental concerns, and social reforms.
- The influence of media coverage on political campaigns and election issues.
- The emergence of social media as a powerful tool for setting public agendas, as seen in movements like India Against Corruption or the #MeToo campaign in India.
Priming Theory
Priming, an extension of agenda-setting, suggests that the issues receiving the most media attention also become more prominent in public assessments of political actors.
Key Points
- Priming affects how people evaluate political performance based on the most salient issues in the media.
- It plays a role in news management and political strategies.
- Priming is based on psychological theories of salience and attitude accessibility.
Critical Analysis
- Like agenda-setting, priming is difficult to prove empirically.
- It focuses on how people access certain types of news and information rather than how they interpret it.
- The theory may oversimplify the complex process of political evaluation and decision-making.
In India, priming effects can be observed in:
- Political campaigns focus on specific issues to influence voter perceptions.
- Media coverage of national security issues affecting public opinion on government performance.
- Religious or cultural issues are used to prime voters’ evaluations of political parties.
Framing Theory
Framing theory examines how media presentation of issues influences audience interpretation and perception.
Key Points
- Framing involves journalists selecting and emphasizing certain aspects of issues.
- It can guide audience learning and interpretation of news events.
- Framing effects are considered distinct from agenda-setting and priming.
Critical Analysis
- Framing effects are complex and depend on the interaction between media frames and individual (receiver) frames.
- Recent research has shifted focus to affective factors in mediating framing effects.
- Critics argue that framing research often neglects power dynamics in media production.
Framing in Indian media can be observed in:
- Coverage of communal issues and how they shape public perception.
- Framing of economic policies and their impact on public support or opposition.
- The portrayal of India’s international relations and its effect on public opinion.
Conclusion
These theories—agenda-setting, priming, and framing—offer valuable insights into the complex relationship between media, public opinion, and political processes. They highlight the subtle yet powerful ways media can influence public discourse and perception. However, they also face challenges in empirical validation and accounting for the increasingly complex and interactive media environment of the 21st century.
In the Indian context, these theories provide a framework for understanding the media’s role in shaping public opinion on crucial issues like governance, social reform, and national identity. As India’s media landscape continues to evolve, with the rise of digital platforms and regional language media, the application and relevance of these theories will likely require ongoing reassessment and adaptation.
Studying these theories is crucial for aspiring journalists and mass communication professionals in India, as it gives them a critical understanding of media effects and the ethical responsibilities that come with the power to influence public opinion.
