Agenda Setting: Media and Power - Case Study Example

Name: Tutor: Title: Research Portfolio (Media, Society and Politics) Course: Date: Agenda setting: media and power Agenda setting and framing are two important frameworks on which the role of media professionals and the perception of audiences on media exposure are critically analyzed. Research in agenda setting has basically focused on the salient topics or issues discussed in the media, including the significant impacts that people associate such topics with. Agenda setting refers to the process through which media producers determine the issues or agenda that will be discussed in the media and which the audiences will consider as important. However, decisions concerning what issues and how they can be communicated do not necessarily reside in the authority of the media (McCombs & Shaw 1972). This means that agenda setting and the related theoretical frameworks help to understand the influence of news media on people’s ability to develop attitudes and value issues. Generally, agenda setting is divided into three themes that show the relationships between public agenda setting where issues are presented in the media to determine the public’s views. The second category is policy agenda setting that includes the media coverage and its power on the legislative agenda developed by policy-making bodies. The last category is media agenda setting that includes aspects such as institutional roles that determine the kind of issues and contents presented in the media (Kosicki 1993). Since social media is defined as a set of Internet-based applications that are developed from the ideological and technological basics of Web 2.0, offering Web developers or online sellers with appropriate features and tools that enable the documentation and exchange of online user-generated contents (Kaplan & Haenlein 2010, p.61). It is worth noting that agenda setting is key process that can be used to assess the power of social media in the digital world. Based on the sociological perspective or understanding of framing, Goffman (1974) argues that for efficient processing of new information, people apply the interpretive schemas so as to appropriately classify the information as well as interpret it in a more meaningful manner. Therefore, clear understanding of the notion of agenda setting is crucial to assessing the power of social media platforms in communicating the media news and the audiences’ views on what is considered as important issues. The theory of Agenda-setting creates the view that media in particular, the news media are not always right in informing the audience what to think, but rather they are good at telling people what to think about. This means that the Agenda setting theory is relevant in explaining the rationale behind people with same media exposure value same issues. Therefore, it is important to note that although people from diverse corners of the world may have different perceptions about a particular issue, a number of people will consider same issues to be of significant value (McCombs & Shaw 1972). Chaffee and Berger (1997) critically examine the Agenda-setting theory from the scientific perspective. Based on the criteria for evaluating scientific theories, the authors argue in support that Agenda-setting is a significant theory because of its explanatory power of stating why a number of people perceive same issues as important. In addition, Chaffee and Berger consider the Agenda-setting theory as a platform for further research particularly if proven false. For instance, when people are not truly exposed to the same media, it is obvious that they will not consider the same issues as of great value. However, the authors emphasize that the meta-theoretical assumptions of the Agenda-setting theory are more balanced on a scientific point of view (Chaffee and Berger 1997). Therefore, it is necessary to point out that the Agenda-setting theory has organizing power to put on surface the existing knowledge about media effects. The ability to understand the liberalism and the freedom of the press can also play an integral role in determining what is to be considered important issues. This may involve analyzing the complex relations that exist between the media and audiences in society and political world. Errington and Miragliotta (2008) examine that in Western liberal democratic societies, the media are considered as the master of people as well as the guardians or controller of the independence of political systems. This means that the media sectors can make this function globally recognized by being open and pluralistic in media ownership. Thus, it would be relevant to suggest that media outlets can be privately owned and allowed to operate freely without the unnecessary governmental regulations. In Australia, the liberal doctrine has been considered powerful in shaping the citizen’s expectations of the role of media in society as well as influencing the structural performance of the industry (Errington & Miragliotta 2008). Agenda setting concerns the powerful influence of media in terms of its capability to inform people about significant issues. For example, McCombs and Shaw (McCombs & Shaw 1972) carried out investigations on the presidential campaigns in the periods1968, 1972 and 1976. In 1968, they focused their research on two major aspects, the awareness and information. In this case, MacCombs and Shaw aimed at understanding the really agenda-setting function played by the mass-media. Therefore, the researchers analyzed the relationship between what voters in a particular community considered to be important issues and the really contents of media messages related to the campaign. Based on the research findings, MacCombs and Shaw reached a conclusion that the mass media had a significant influence on what most voters perceived as important issues in the campaign (McCombs & Shaw 1972). From the above research about voters’ views and the actual contents of media messages, it can be argued that the focus of agenda-setting can be extended to include other issues such as history, politics or even medical news. However, the most fundamental idea is that agenda-setting is more about public sensitization of salient issues via the news media. Politics means power, its effects and distribution, indicating that media outlets possess power. For example, the power to create images of politicians, develop political agendas as well as debate on important issues (Errington & Miragliotta 2011). One of the major assumptions that can be made from most of the research involved in agenda-setting is that both the press and media are not realistic about what to be considered as important issues. It seems the press and media filter and shape what is considered to be important issues. Perhaps the media concentration on just a few issues of global concern makes the public judge those issues as more significant than others not focused. Therefore, the agenda-setting theory appropriate in enabling people to understand the all-encompassing role played by the media, for instance, on the existing political communication systems. Media convergence: new media technologies Jenkins (2006, p.2) defines media convergence as the flow of contents via different media platforms, the collaboration between different media industries and the changing behaviors of media audiences. This implies that media convergence is not only about technological shift, but also means the changes occurring in cultural, industrial and social models. In this case, media convergence can be perceived as a continuous process or the changing relationships between multiple media systems. Cultural convergence shows how media audiences are currently engaging with and perceive the new types of media contents. Deuze (2007) argues that convergence is not only about technological changes but also seen as a process with cultural logic that shapes and controls the activities between production and consumption, for instance, making the media contents and using media or analyzing the mediated culture. The topic of media convergence is important in understanding the role of social media platforms in media complex today. For example, the occurrence of Convergent Media has enabled Australia to achieve an advanced digital economy because majority of Australians are increasingly making connections and sharing information as well as locating and creating contents in the digital world. Although the convergent media landscape is faster and associated with much potential, it creates fundamental questions that must be addressed about the diversity of voices, standards for handling user literacy and community, regulations and innovations. The Australian government is aware of these issues, and thus is currently conducting its Conference Review to analyze how the media technologies are changing a midst the many communications regulations being established. Research shows that social networking has enabled more Australians to engage in online transactions. It should be noted that the proliferation of social media platforms, tools and its high-speed access has enabled many Australians to upload contents to various online spaces, for instance, photos on services like Flickr and Picasa, music on MySpace and SoudCloud, find documents on online spaces like Google Docs and videos on YouTube and Vimeo (Crawford & Lumby 2011). This implies that as Australians gain more experiences online, they are actively participating in the online world. In understanding our contemporary media landscape, convergent is clearly presented as one of the traits of new media landscape. Jenkins (2006), states that convergence is increasingly being shaped from top to bottom through the different decisions made by large media conglomerates. This massive media group show controlling interest across the entire media systems and have all the power to circulate their contents globally. For economic gains, the massive media conglomerates have the power to eliminate successful media contents from a particular delivery system to another so as to increase profits and expand the market potentials (Jenkins 2006). It is notable that Jenkins has received criticisms for his exaggerated celebratory perspective about the strong and influential power of people over active engagement in media environment. However, the fundamental idea is that convergence has taken three major dimensions the technological convergence, industrial convergence and cultural convergence. From the technological convergence point of view, it is apparent that the underlying argument on the notion of convergence is that it should be addressed on multiple devices. For example, the wireless access and its continuous connectivity to specifically preferred networks comprising of personal and work associations as well as leisure and entertainments rather than centralizing media in a single device (Nightingale 2007). Industrial convergence shows how companies across different business sectors ranging from media through telecommunication to technology have come together to form strategic alliances that help to establish new business models. However, the models should be relevant in addressing the changing needs or increasing expectations for media contents as well as engage in the expanded digital media space. On the other hand, cultural convergence concerns the sudden occurrence of different and new aspects of creativity and agency that is referred to as trans-media model (Nightingale 2007). From the perspective of cultural convergence, it can be argued that the increased numbers of people who own the necessary tools to keep, update and re-circulate the media content have generated and dispersed different media contents across different media platforms. It is relevant for the scholars of media convergence to make a comprehensive understanding of the old and new forms of media as well as how the producers relate with consumers to create new ways of interaction. In so doing, the scholars will develop a clear view of the process of media convergence. From the definition of agenda setting as the process through which media producers determine the issues or agenda that will be discussed in the media and which the audiences will consider as important. However, decisions concerning what issues and how they can be communicated do not necessarily reside in the authority of the media (Chaffee & Berger 1997). It means that even in the process of media convergence, the new forms of interaction are offering people with new capabilities to develop, appropriate as well as reuse the content. Apparently, the increased use of the Internet has facilitated the production and distribution of digital contents. The ideas of liberalism and freedom of the press presents media as an institution to shield the individuals or citizens from the unnecessary regulations or excesses of the state as well as to ensure that the rights and liberty of each citizen are protected. Therefore, the media are considered as medium through which the political systems of independence are promoted among the people (Errington & Miragliotta 2008). One of the dangers of media convergence is overreliance on the Internet. The open design feature of the Internet has resulted in an era where other massive information networks have centralized or converged on it as the single superhighway. It is notable that although distinct channels such as telephony and televisions, radio and films. Today, large amounts of information have been destined to a master network-the Internet that supports virtually all sorts of data traffic (Wu 2010). It seems that this media convergence was initially accepted across the world, but its increased dangers are becoming difficult and expensive to control. Since sorts of cultural, economic, social and political transactions were digitized, it is quite clear that the overreliance on a single network has made the objective of preserving the openness of the Internet from regal designs less important. Social media: its role in the media complex today Kaplan and Haenlein (2010, p.61) define social media as a set of Internet-based applications that are developed from the ideological and technological basics of Web 2.0, and thus offering Web developers or online sellers with appropriate features and tools that enable the documentation and exchange of online user-generated contents. This suggests that the notion of liberalism and freedom of the press is relevant in encouraging the development and use of Internet-based applications or social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. Basically, the idea of liberalism originates from the perception of society as significantly comprised of different people rather than as classes of freely built contractual relationship with a state. According to Ellison et al. (2007) Social Networking Sites provides a more flexible way to manage relationships. They discovered that both technical and social advantages of using Facebook have enabled users of this social media platform to manage diverse types of networks and social relations or interactions. This strengthens the massive sets of weaker ties, makes the ephemeral connections persistent and results in more convenient ways of building social relations between the strong and weak ties (Papacharissi 2011). This implies that social life for most of the individuals is significantly associated with online component because the virtual world harmonizes and covers the offline social world. It is relevant to point out that the various practices about sharing information and gaining access to intended information, for instance, about peers controls the interactions on social media sites. Thus, participants find themselves engaging in complicated online rituals (Palfrey & Gasser 2008). From the contemporary media landscape point of view, it can be noted that the media landscape is undergoing rapid changes. Therefore, it is crucial as Coonan (2006) suggests that flexible systems must be developed to allow the media companies to make utilize them and grow in this new digital environment. The question of whether social media provide or demand new modes of displaying social and cultural differences is fundamental in understanding the new ways of social distinction. Palfrey and Gasser (2008) examine that the Internet age, dominated with Digital Natives is prompting a significant change in what is believed as building and managing a person’s identity. It is true in the views of Palfrey and Gasser that the way identity is formed among Digital Natives is different compared to how identity formation is done among pre-digital generations. This is simply because identity formation among Digital Natives is experimented and re-invented through various modes of expression, an act that was not reflected among pre-digital generations (Palfrey and Gasser 2008). Therefore, it is important to note that the identity of basically realizing that a person living within a digital era involves analyzing the real-space and how the online expressions say about the self. It is important to mention that a person’s social identity that matters most is not only one which is shaped by his or her own views and activities in the real space, but also the perception and actions of his or her friend towards such a person (Palfrey & Gasser 2008). This means that identity is an aspect of social development where a group people and individuals build, negotiate over and defend their own identity or self-identity. The ideas of liberalism and freedom of the press shows that media is an institution to shield the individuals or citizens from the unnecessary regulations or excesses of the state as well as to ensure that the rights and liberty of each citizen are protected. Therefore, the media are considered as medium through which the political systems of independence are promoted among the people (Errington & Miragliotta 2008). .In his theory of distinction, Bourdieu (1984) examines the significant social functionality of different cultural choices or tastes. Bourdieu argue that tastes are good at structuring social relations as well as the associated dynamics among people. Bourdieu considers taste as one of the major elements of social identity. It seems that Bourdieu is more interested in showing how cultural tastes occur and are stimulated to achieve social recognition or status. However, it is quite unfortunate that Bourdieu’s theory of culture is limited in addressing the media. It is true that Bourdieu failed to recognize the significance or existence of cultural industries in assessing the shifting social relations particularly of cultural producers (Hesmondhalgh 2006). Therefore, the idea of liberalism is important in understanding the role of social media in the media complex today because it emphasizes on the need for individual liberty as the major social good. It is important to note that human beings are created with some common and natural abilities, desires and prudence that make them morally the same. This implies that individuals who are self-determined in their capabilities will always demand the freedom or authority to shape their lives or simply make their own choices. Bibliography Bourdieu, P., 1984, Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste, Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Crawford, K & Lumby, C., 2011, The Adaptive Moment: A Fresh Approach to Convergent Media in Australia, JMRC, UNSW, Introduction and Section one, pp. 1-18. Chaffee, M & Berger, W., 1997, ‘Setting the Community Agenda’, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, Vol.73, No.1, pp. 7-16. Coonan, H., 2006, “New Media Framework for Australia,” retrieved October 4, 2013 from, Deuze, M., 2007, Media Work, Polity Press, Cambridge. Ellison, N, Steinfield, C & Lampe, C, 2007, ‘The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), article 1, http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue4/ellison.html, last accessed 4 November 2013. Errington, W & Miragliotta, N 2011, Media & Politics: An Introduction, 2nd edition, Oxford University Press, Melbourne. Errington, W & Miragliotta, N., 2008, Media and Politics, University Press, Australia & New Oxford Zealand. Goffman, E., 1974, Frame analysis: The organization of experience, Harper and Row, New York: Hesmondhalgh, D., 2006, Media production, Open University Press. Jenkins, H., 2006, Convergence Culture, New York University Press, New York. Kaplan, A.M & Haenlein, M., 2010, ‘Two hearts in three-quarter time: How to waltz the social media/viral marketing dance’, Business Horizons, Elsevier, Vol.54, No.3, pp. 253-263. Kosicki, G., 1993, ‘Problems and opportunities in agenda-setting research’, Journal of Communication, Vol. 43, No.2, pp.100-127. McCombs, M.E & Shaw, D., 1972, ‘The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media’, POQ, 36; 176-187. Nightingale, V., 2007, “Emergence, search and social networking”, In V. Nightingale & T. Dwyer (Eds.), New media worlds: Challenges for convergence (pp. 291–307), Oxford University Press, South Melbourne. Papacharissi, Z., 2012, “A Networked Self: Identity Performance and Sociability on Social Network Sites”, In Frontiers in New Media Research, F. L. Lee, L. Leung, J. Qiu, & D. Chu (Eds.), Taylor & Francis. Palfrey, J & Gasser, U., 2008, Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives, Basic Books. Wu, T., 2010, ‘History’s threat to internet freedom’, retrieved October 4, 2013 from, Read More

This means that the Agenda setting theory is relevant in explaining the rationale behind people with same media exposure value same issues. Therefore, it is important to note that although people from diverse corners of the world may have different perceptions about a particular issue, a number of people will consider same issues to be of significant value (McCombs & Shaw 1972). Chaffee and Berger (1997) critically examine the Agenda-setting theory from the scientific perspective. Based on the criteria for evaluating scientific theories, the authors argue in support that Agenda-setting is a significant theory because of its explanatory power of stating why a number of people perceive same issues as important.

In addition, Chaffee and Berger consider the Agenda-setting theory as a platform for further research particularly if proven false. For instance, when people are not truly exposed to the same media, it is obvious that they will not consider the same issues as of great value. However, the authors emphasize that the meta-theoretical assumptions of the Agenda-setting theory are more balanced on a scientific point of view (Chaffee and Berger 1997). Therefore, it is necessary to point out that the Agenda-setting theory has organizing power to put on surface the existing knowledge about media effects.

The ability to understand the liberalism and the freedom of the press can also play an integral role in determining what is to be considered important issues. This may involve analyzing the complex relations that exist between the media and audiences in society and political world. Errington and Miragliotta (2008) examine that in Western liberal democratic societies, the media are considered as the master of people as well as the guardians or controller of the independence of political systems.

This means that the media sectors can make this function globally recognized by being open and pluralistic in media ownership. Thus, it would be relevant to suggest that media outlets can be privately owned and allowed to operate freely without the unnecessary governmental regulations. In Australia, the liberal doctrine has been considered powerful in shaping the citizen’s expectations of the role of media in society as well as influencing the structural performance of the industry (Errington & Miragliotta 2008).

Agenda setting concerns the powerful influence of media in terms of its capability to inform people about significant issues. For example, McCombs and Shaw (McCombs & Shaw 1972) carried out investigations on the presidential campaigns in the periods1968, 1972 and 1976. In 1968, they focused their research on two major aspects, the awareness and information. In this case, MacCombs and Shaw aimed at understanding the really agenda-setting function played by the mass-media. Therefore, the researchers analyzed the relationship between what voters in a particular community considered to be important issues and the really contents of media messages related to the campaign.

Based on the research findings, MacCombs and Shaw reached a conclusion that the mass media had a significant influence on what most voters perceived as important issues in the campaign (McCombs & Shaw 1972). From the above research about voters’ views and the actual contents of media messages, it can be argued that the focus of agenda-setting can be extended to include other issues such as history, politics or even medical news. However, the most fundamental idea is that agenda-setting is more about public sensitization of salient issues via the news media.

Politics means power, its effects and distribution, indicating that media outlets possess power. For example, the power to create images of politicians, develop political agendas as well as debate on important issues (Errington & Miragliotta 2011). One of the major assumptions that can be made from most of the research involved in agenda-setting is that both the press and media are not realistic about what to be considered as important issues.

Read More