Laura Roa

DP3
September 27, 2016
Normative Theories of Mass Communication
Summary
As a part of this generation and when talking about the distrust in media; the
fact that we tend to get our news from multiple sources. Its interesting to
read about the debate and history of theories that go along with this theme.
This chapter poses some important questions such as; should media do
something more than merely distribute whatever content will earn them the
greatest profits in the shortest time? This sets up the rest of the chapter
discussion about normative theory; a theory that describes an ideal way for
a media system to be structured and operated. Included in this is the social
responsibility theory, which allows free press. The chapter discussing the
conflict of having people on one hand who wanted total freedom for press
and the others who wanted media controlled. The radical libertarians believe
that there should be no laws imposed on the media. On the other hand,
technocratic control are people who dont trust that the media can
communicate responsibly. John Keane identified three fundamental concepts
describing the view on freedom of the press: theology, individual rights and
attainment of truth. Its was interesting on how while I was reading, I thought
about why it is necessary to place limits on communication freedom? The
book addressed this question exactly when I was thinking and the answer is
conflict over basic rights. This goes back to the idea: are we capable of
picking the information that best suits our need? This leads to the next topic
market place of ideas; which is described as, the notion that all ideas should
be out before the public, and the public will choose the best from that
marketplace. Contrary to this is the fact that large companies own these
media outlets, therefore they control what people are exposed to. I found it
interesting when it mentions the fact that professionals in the field of law and
medicine need a certain degree of education and practice in order to be
recognized in their respective field. Unfortunately, in the area of
communication, it isnt like that so there is a much higher chance of The
people coming out and calling themselves journalist should fulfil the needed
level of education in order to be completely understanding of their
responsibility as social communicators. Another important part is that media
professionals have little control over their work, as stated before there is
always someone on top who controls what is published. In a world where the
internet has allowed everyone to create a voice, there should be more
regulation in terms of what information is out there to help people have a
better understanding of what a valid source is.
Application

When reading about this chapter, it reminded me of the Brian Williams NBC
Scandal that happened earlier this year; Brian Williams claimed that he was
riding in a helicopter that was forced down after being hit in March 2003.
Brian apologized for lying about exactly where he had been during the
incident. This is someone who represented nightly news, who people trusted.
How does someone with so much trust do when they loose it? It brings me
back to the fact that we never know what true and what isnt and that it
doesnt matter what the person looks like. This goes to show how important
it is to be media literate of what we are consuming because this is shaping
us and our society.
Questions
1. Should there be laws that regulate independent voices, such as blogs
and other sites that regulate the information provided or should this
just be a freedom of speech, for anyone to create?
2. Do you agree with the fact that communication majors should be more
educated in order to actually be recognized as communicators?
Impression Formation
Summary
Impression formation, is an image that we form of people we meet which
consists of beliefs that define or portray a person. According to the chapter,
there are four stages. 1. Observation 2. Attribute the cause for the behavior
3. Believing the person is the cause for that specific behavior which
concludes in the development of an impression. Based on this we develop an
evaluation whether or not we dislike or like the person. Naive scientist
metaphor: to describe relevant phenomena, to explain this phenomena, to
predict this phenomenon and to control this phenomenon. We behave much
like a scientist in the way that we examine anothers behavior and try to
interpret it. The first stage is observation of the other persons behavior; this
can be communicated through both verbal and nonverbal communication.
The second stage is attributing the cause of the behavior; when analyzing
behavior, we try to explain the behavior we have been observing. This can
be subcategorized depending on circumstance of the situation, whether its
the persons character or if its just personality. A trait is defined as, a label
we five to designate what we believe to be a characteristic of a persons
personality. As we observe we take into account what they have done in the
past to predict what they might do in the future. On the other hand,
behaviors are things we see; traits we cannot see. Attribution theories help
us differ between character and circumstance. We look for consistency, for
example, I personally feel uncomfortable when there is an inconsistency in
behavior. The third stage id forming the impression; here the author talks
about the halo effect, which is the tendency for people to presume that if
someone has a trait that we think of as good, the person also has other good

traits. Opposite to the halo effect is the horns effect, the tendency for
people to see one bad trait as implying other bad ones. The fourth stage is
making an evaluation based on all of the collected information. This chapter
focused on applying this to group leadership. An important part of the
chapter is though experience and education, people have acquired a set of
beliefs about the characteristics share by successful leaders.
Application
In terms of an application, this is more personal because its something that I
know I do (obviously) when meeting new people, interacting with friends and
family and observing strangers. I just found it interesting at how so many
things can affect the perception of someone else. For example, if I meet
someone at a club/bar I automatically know this isnt really their true self, in
the sense that they can be drinking, they enhance their appearance and are
in a social setting. When I see them in a normal setting, thats when things
get interesting and I start to identify their traits and characteristics. Its
interesting to see how they can come off as a certain way but behave
differently in other settings. I find it extremely uncomfortable when the
behaviors dont match what the person says, when the person looses
consistency. When I was an RA on campus, I had to see the bad traits of my
residents and that kind of followed me around whenever I saw them off
campus in another setting. Which is what the article said about the halo and
the horn effect. It was interesting to see how being in this position I get to
see the personal discovery of the freshmen.
Questions
1. Since we are constantly looking for what makes us us, is there a
change or an exception when a young adult is going through their
college years? Is this process different since we are constantly together
and see every aspect of each other (for example: roommates)?