GEMEINSCHAFT vs.
GESELLSCHAFT
LOCATION RURAL SETTING
SIZE OF POPULATION SMALL (EVERYBODY KNOWS
EVERYBODY)
STABILITY OF POPULATION VERY STABLE
CENTRAL ECONOMIC FORCE/ACTIVITY AGRICULTURE
(DEPENDENCE ON NATURE)
CENTRAL SOCIAL FORCE TRADITION (PAST IS VALUED)
PRIMARY SOCIAL UNIT THE COMMUNITY
(AND EXTENDED FAMILY)
DEGREE OF SOCIAL DIFFERENTIATION LITTLE DIVISION OF LABOR (OR
PERSPECTIVE); CONSENSUS OF
THOUGHT & ACTION; UNIFIED “TOTALITY.”
NATURE OF SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS COOPERATION (“RECIPROCAL BINDING
SENTIMENT”); ECONOMIC, FRIENDSHIP, &
KINSHIP SPHERES OVERLAP; PEOPLE
KNOW EACH OTHER IN MULTIPLE ROLES.
VIEW OF INDIVIDUAL COMPONENT OF UNIFIED SOCIAL GROUP;
LIMITED SENSE OF “INDIVIDUALITY” OR
PERSONAL PRIVACY OR INDEPENDENT
ACTION.
SOURCE OF CONTROL INFORMAL SOCIAL CONTROL (FROM ALL
DIRECTIONS)
Joshua Meyrowitz, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, USA
Adapted from: Ferdinand Tönnies (1855-1936), Community and Society (Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft),
trans. and ed. Charles P. Loomis, Michigan State University Press, 1957 (originally published in 1887).
URBAN SETTING
TOO LARGE TO KNOW EVERYONE
UNSTABLE (MANY “IMMIGRANTS”)
INDUSTRY – “mastery over nature”
(DEPENDENCE ON TECHNOLOGY)
PROGRESS (CHANGE IS VALUED)
THE INDIVIDUAL
(AND NUCLEAR FAMILY)
SOCIALLY AND ECONOMICALLY
SEGMENTED; DIVISION OF LABOR (AND
PERSPECTIVE); LUXURY AND POVERTY.
CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIPS;
SEPARATION OF BUSINESS, “PERSONAL,”
AND FAMILY SPHERES; PEOPLE KNOW
EACH OTHER IN SINGLE ROLES;
ALIENATION, BUT ALSO FREEDOM FROM
RESTRICTIVE TIES.
INDEPENDENT ENTITY; DEFINED IN
TERMS OF ROLE(S) AND UNIQUE
PERSONALITY; STRONG SENSE OF
PERSONAL PRIVACY AND RIGHT TO “OWN
BUSINESS”; INDIVIDUALS “COMPETE”
WITH EACH OTHER.
FORMAL LEGAL CONTROL (FROM
DOMINANT SOURCE: “THE LAW.”)
Gemein-Gesell chart D4_IMS_S17
 HOW MASS SOCIETY AND MASS MEDIA “FIT” TOGETHER
MASS SOCIETY MASS MEDIA
1. LOSS OF COMMUNITY 1. MASS MEDIA SERVE AS LINKS BETWEEN PEOPLE AND AMONG
GROUPS. INDIVIDUALS MONITOR ENVIRONMENT THROUGH MASS
MEDIA.

2. IMPERSONALITY AND IRREGULARITY OF SOCIAL ENCOUNTERS 2. MASS MEDIA TAKE THE PLACE OF MANY SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS
[NOT EVERYONE YOU SEE KNOWS YOU, AND THOSE YOU KNOW MAY AND PROVIDE INTERACTIONAL REGULARITY [FOR SOME PEOPLE A
NOT BE SEEN BY YOU ON A REGULAR BASIS.] NEWSPAPER OR TV PROGRAM STRIKE IS EQUIVALENT TO HAVING A
FRIEND IN A COMA.]

3. LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE FROM DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS. NO 3. MASS MEDIA REPLACE TRADITION AS COMMON EXPERIENCE AND
COMMON TRADITION. COMMON SOURCE OF CUSTOMS AND BEHAVIOR. [A NEW, MEDIATED
“GENERALIZED OTHER.”]*

4. NEW DEGREE OF LUXURY AND LEISURE TIME 4. MASS MEDIA FILL UP LEISURE TIME AND PROVIDE PRODUCTS TO
CONSUME. [MASS MEDIA ARE PRODUCTS THEMSELVES & THEY ALSO
IDENTIFY GOODS THROUGH ADS.]

5. INDUSTRIALIZATION AND DIVISION OF LABOR. TECHNOLOGY AND 5. MASS MEDIA MATCH DIVISION OF LABOR WITH DIVISION IN
WORK INTEGRATED. DIVERSION, YET SIMULTANEOUSLY UNITE THROUGH SIMILAR
SOURCES OF NEWS AND ENTERTAINMENT & NEW FORM OF “SHARED
FRAGMENTATION” [VS. FULLER SOCIAL ISOLATION IN DEEP PAST].*
THE MEDIA BALANCE OFF TECHNOLOGICALLY RELATED WORK WITH
TECHNOLOGICALLY PRODUCED ENTERTAINMENT.

6. ALIENATION–BUT ALSO FREEDOM FROM BINDING AND 6. MASS MEDIA PROVIDE “RELATIONSHIPS,” BUT RELATIONSHIPS
RESTRICTIVE TIES. WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS OR COMMITMENT. [“PARA-SOCIAL
RELATIONSHIPS,” OR “MEDIA FRIENDS.”]*

©1980-2017 Joshua Meyrowitz, University of New Hampshire, Durham, USA. Thanks to Gary Gumpert, my college media prof, for getting me thinking about these things.

*I describe the “mediated generalized other” & “media friends” in my No Sense of Place (1985) and other publications and “shared fragmentation” in Meyrowitz & Maguire, “Media, Place, and Multiculturalism,” Society, 1993.

May be used freely for non-profit educational use as long as no changes are made without permission. {Mass soc-mass media D4 IMS_S17}