'PHILOSOMCAL smucmass FOR BROADCASHNG SYSTEMS: AN EXAMiNATION-O? NEEB AND BEVELGPMEM . ’ Thesis. for the Degrée am. A. EéimEEGAN awe umvsasm; e I WW9: PARESIM gm -~ JHES‘S " 6mm '. "BAG 8: SUNS' 800K B'NDERY INC. Liam. w BlNDEfiS 591., ‘ realm ABSTRACT PHILOSOPHICAL STRUCTURES FOR BROADCASTING SYSTEMS: AN EXAMINATION OF NEED AND DEVELOPMENT By Martha Parisian The purpose of this study is to examine the need for and develop- ment of a philosophical framework in which a society defines and implements its broadcasting system for optimum social advantage. The problem is examined both on a general, theoretical level and specifical- ly in relation to the American broadcasting system. The basic assumption is that a society can adequately handle the major problems and controversies which surround broadcasting only with a complete, consciously constructed philosophic framework, and that the structure must reflect the philosophy. The primary conclusion is that such a philosophic framework and corresponding structure is arrived at through a combination of humanistic and scientific viewpoints. This study was undertaken as a preliminary examination leading to the formation of the basic concepts for an outline of a book dealing with philosophic structures for broadcasting systems. A second reason was to prepare the author to plan and instruct courses in the area of media responsibility and philosophy. Martha Parisian The thesis consists of two sections. The first is a report based on the problems to be presented in the book. The second is an initial working-outline of the book. The two sections are related in the follow- ing way. The outline presented in Section II gives only the factual content in the order to be presented and, therefore, the tone, intent and feel of the actual book is not apparent to the reader. Section I, on the other hand, illustrates how the proposed book will be developed and gives a fuller sense of purpose and point of view. The first sec- tion, however, is also a distilled version of the intended content and lacks much of the color and detailed explanatory material that will be contained in the final book. The information contained in the first section can also serve as a starting point for curriculum formation for such courses in the area of media responsibility and philosophy as mentioned above. These cour- ses would be suitable for high school, junior college, beginning broad- casting, non-broadcasting and adult education students. The course level is of an introductory nature and not intended for persons of an advanced student status. The book is likewise designed for introductory purposes and would be suitable for use in the above-mentioned type of courses. It is not, however, a textbook as such. It is hoped that the book could serveas a text or as supplemental reading for certain courses, but it is designed to be of a general enough nature that it would be a useful book for members of the general public who would be interested, for Martha Parisian whatever reasons, in questions of media philosophy and responsibility. The first section consists of five chapters. Chapter I presents a frame of reference for examination of the broadcasting phenomenon. It includes a discussion of the basic communication process, the basic mass communication process, and a comparison of media characteristics pointing out the specific broadcasting characteristics. Chapter 11 deals with the functions and effects of broadcasting. The five basic functions for which societies utilize mass media are discussed. The need for determining effects is examined; including methods for determining effects; and a discussion of the development of the communication research approach to effects determination. Chapter III presents the four basic philosophic structures for broadcasting systems. It describes how media systems develop out of, and in direct relation to, the philosophic and political structure of a given society. Chapter IV examines the American commercial broadcasting system in light of the philosophic basis and the resulting structure. The structural examination deals with the primary elements of economic sup- port and regulatory mechanisms as they influence programming, leadership, ownership, goals, etc. In conclusion, Chapter V discusses the need for and uses of philo- sophical frameworks for broadcasting systems. It deals with the limi- tations of communication research as the only method of answering these questions and examines humanistic and ethical criteria as factors Martha Parisian combining with scientific research for the formation of a directed, philosophical structure. The information contained herein resulted largely from research of the existing applicable literature, plus some personal observations by the author during her career as a network associate producer for ABC and NBC television in New York and Los Angeles. The material was gathered from books dealing with the various aspects of the problem, professional journals and trade publications. This study hopes to present information that will emphasize the importance of mass media, specifically broadcasting, to a society, and in the light of this importance, cause the reader to consider the many problems connected with the effective functioning of the broadcasting media. The search for answers to these problems concerns professionals and laymen alike. The solutions require an understanding of the mass communication process that includes humanistic, philosophic and scien- tific concerns. It is hoped that the basis for this understanding can, in part, be obtained from the information presented here. This study does not attempt to develop solutions for the simple reason that the examination of the problems and the development of solutions are two different endeavors. The develOpment and presentation of solutions to the situations discussed herein would constitute another entire book. PHILOSOPHICAL STRUCTURES FOR BROADCASTING SYSTEMS: AN EXAMINATION OF NEED AND DEVELOPMENT By Martha Parisian A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Telecommunication 1975 I \. Accepted by the faculty of the Department of Telecommuni- cation, College of Communication Arts, Michigan State University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts degree. Director 4f Thesis ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To Julia ... whose encouragement, patience and invaluable sense of humor ensured the completion of this thesis. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Page SECTION I INTRODUCTION .............................................. l I. BROADCASTING: A FRAME OF REFERENCE ....................... 13 The Basic Mass Communication Process ................... 21 Specific Media Characteristics ......................... 28 II. FUNCTIONS AND EFFECTS OF BROADCASTING ..................... 33 The Importance of Determining Effects .................. 36 The Problem of Determining Effects ..................... 39 III. BASIC PHILOSOPHIC STRUCTURES FOR MASS MEDIA SYSTEMS ....... 53 The Authoritarian Concept .............................. 54 The Libertarian Concept ................................ 58 The Soviet Communist Concept ........................... 63 The Social-Responsibility Concept ...................... ‘ 68 IV. THE PHILOSOPHIC BASIS AND STRUCTURE OF THE AMERICAN BROADCASTING SYSTEM .................................... 76 The Philosophical Basis of American Broadcasting ....... 85 An Examination of Philosophic Framework and Implement- ing Structure ....................................... 95 V. THE NEED FOR BROADCASTING PHILOSOPHY ...................... llO SECTION II INTRODUCTION .............................................. l22 I. THE BOOK OUTLINE .......................................... l24 REFERENCES ....................................................... l6O iv SECTION I INTRODUCTION The underlying assumption of this project is that mass communica- tion is a powerful part of man's total environment, and as such societies should handle their media systems in a responsible manner. A specific society's definition of responsible mass communication grows out of its basic philosophic framework and value system. A second assumption is that the American broadcasting system, as part of the total mass communication system, is not being utilized in a sufficiently responsible manner. This is not, however, a series of impassioned criticisms of American broadcasting, nor does it intend to preach moral judgments. The intent of this report is to examine the phenomenon of responi- ble broadcasting based on a consciously constructed philosophic structure. This problem is examined from a general point of view, considering such aspects as: the need for such a philosophic basis; can media systems exist without some stated or implied philoSOphic base; and given such a philosophic structure, how does it develop. The report attempts a dis- passionate examination of the American commercial broadcasting system in the light of this information. It should be noted here, that while the potential for alternative systems exists in this society with both cable television and the Public Broadcasting System, this examination is limited to the commercial system as it is the dominant broadcasting system in this society. It is hoped that the project will give the reader sufficient basic information that he can begin, for himself, a perceptive contemplation of what constitutes responsible broadcasting, the need for responsible broadcasting, and an assessment of this particular society's fulfillment of that need. The study does not attempt to develop solutions to the problems connected with responsible broadcasting for the simple reason that the examination of the problems and the development of solutions are two different endeavors. The development and presentation of solutions to the situations discussed herein would constitute another entire book. This study was undertaken as a preliminary examination leading to the formation of the basic concepts for, and outline of, a book dealing with philosophic structures for broadcasting systems. A second reason was to prepare the author to plan and instruct courses in the area of media responsibility and philosophy. The thesis consists of two sections. The first is a report based on the problems to be presented in the book. The second is an initial working-outline for the book. The two sections are related in the following way. The outline presented in Section 11 gives only the factual content in the order to be presented and, therefore, the tone, intent and feel of the actual book is not apparent to the reader.. Section I, on the other hand, illustrates how the proposed book will be developed and gives a fuller sense of the purpose and point of view. The first section, however, is also a distilled version of the intended content and lacks much of the color and detailed explanatory material that will be contained in the final book. The information contained in the first section can also serve as a starting point for curriculum formation for such courses in the area of media responsibility and philosophy as mentioned above. These courses would be suitable for high school, junior college, beginning broadcast- ing, non-broadcasting and adult education students. The course level is of an introductory nature and not intended for persons of an advanced student status. The book is likewise designed for introductory purposes and would be suitable for use in the above mentioned type of courses. It is not, however, a textbook as such. It is hoped that the book could serve as a text or as supplemental reading for certain courses, but it is de- signed to be of a general enough nature that it would be a useful book for members of the general public who would be interested, for whatever reasons, in questions of media philosophy and responsibility. The information contained herein resulted largely from research of the existing applicable literature, plus some personal observations by the author during her career as a network associate producer for ABC and NBC television in New York and Los Angeles. The material was gathered from books dealing with the various aspects of the problem, professional journals and trade publications. * * 'k 'k 'k 'k * * * The importance of electronic mass communication is virtually un- disputed. Nhile there is much discussion and disagreement as to exactly what the effects of radio and television are, that there are no effects is seldom suggested. Simply consider daily life without radio and tele- vision, and the alterations of basic life patterns become immediately apparent. The magnitude and potential of electronic communication can be illustrated in countless ways: the time spent with the media, or that they are themselves a source of reality, or that they provide instan- taneous world-wide communication, are all examples. Consider the often quoted figures of time spent with television. Ninety-eight percent of American homes have at least one television set, and the set is on, in the average home, over six hours a day. By age eighteen, an average child has watched twenty thousand hours of tele- vision. This is more time spent with the television set than at school, church or other educational and cultural activities.1 Broadcasting, especially television, provides each of us with reality. Ask any person who has never left the United States what it is like in Paris or Vietnam. He is sure that he knows, and it does not immediately occur to him that he has never been there. This electronic reality is assumed by most of us to be the same as physical reality. It is not. 1Ben Bagdikian, The Infonmation Machines (New York: Harper & Row, l97l), pp. 57-58, l83. A classic study by Kurt and Gladys Engel Lang using a parade for General MacArthur in Chicago illustrates this phenomenon. The study found major differences in perception between people who were actually along the parade route and perceived the real event and those who saw the parade via live coverage on television. The video viewer received a picture of the event that was magnified, intensified and contained added significance, that the person who viewed the "reality" of the situation did not sense.2 In other words, viewed over television, the event seemed to have a size and significance that did not exist in physical reality. Equally sobering in its significance is the advent of satellites in mass communication. Quite simply, they allow instantaneous communi- cation around the world. One satellite stationed twenty-two thousand miles above the earth's surface can cover a definite and continuous area up to a million square miles and be used to transmit telephone, teleh graph, radio or television signalsinstantaneously.3 It is technically possible for the entire world to receive the same message instantaneous to transmission. The potentialities of cable are yet another example of the scope of electronic mass communication. The long-range significance is not 2K. Lang and G. E. Lang, "The Unique Perspective of Television and Its Effect: A Pilot Study." In N. Schramm and D. Roberts, eds., Process and Effects of Mass Communication, revised edition (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, l974), pp. l70-l88. 3For a detailed discussion of satellite development see, Ben Bagdikian, The Information Machines (New York: Harper & Row, l97l), pp. 246-249. its ability to duplicate existing television programs. It is the possi- bility of two-way communications between the home and a vast number of information services. It will be possible to measure precisely the size, characteristic and location of an audience at any given time. The effect of this will possibly be the fragmentation of the mass audience and the development of specialized programming. The citizen in his home will be able to send out an instantaneous signal of his reaction or opinion that can be identified as his because his cable is connected to a computer. (The telephone company already uses this system to identify direct-dialed long distance calls.) The combination of cable and com- puter will ultimately result in reactive systems. A person at home, by utilizing his cable television which is connected with various computer systems, can order specific content and receive it immediately, such as information from the library, continuous in-depth news analysis on a specific subject, or food from the grocery store.4 By the use of electronic mass media, man has extended his conscious- ness to the furthest limits of his physical world, with the resulting awareness of the world as an interrelated whole. This awareness of man- kind as an interacting unit implies the need for the interacting parts to act responsibly toward each other for the equilibrium of the whole. The questions and problems connected with the use of these technical extensions of consciousness and the resulting interdependencies require utmost priority and wise consideration by a society if such equilibrium is to be achieved. 4Ibid., pp. 254-259 (for a detailed discussion of cable potentials.) Is the American society likely to exhibit such priorities and consideration? The answer will be the result of many factors and forces presently conflicting and combining to form what will be the future broadcasting reality. It is worth noting, that the United States is perhaps the only major country in the world that implemented its broad- casting system without extensive study by some form of commission of experts selected to determine the best policy for the society as a whole. The American broadcasting system had become a reality as a commer- cial entity by l922. It was not until several years later, with the passage of the Radio Act of l927 that there was any official statement of the principle that the airwaves belong to the people and that they can be used by private individuals only with the formal permission of the society and such use must be in the public interest, convenience or necessity. In essence, the American broadcasting system is an example of the structure developing before the philosophic framework, with the result of an inherent conflict between the philosophic base and the actual functioning structure. (This society delineates the philosophi- cal basis through such documentation as the Communication Act of l934, the NAB Code, the Canons of Journalism, the Radio Code, the Public Rela- tions Code, etc.) Broadcasting is an American business and the American business structure does not trade on a commodity that belongs to the society as a whole and does not function for the public interest, con- venience or necessity. It is not expected to. However, this society presented the already existing business structure of American broadcast- ing with a phil050phic framework that it could not possibly fit into without completely altering its structure. The conflict between the philosophy and the implementing structure, between private and public interest, has yet to be resolved. It should be noted here that philosophies reflect ideals, goals, and values that individuals and societies hold as most desirable. The human condition seems a continual attempt to attain what is perceived as ideal. Attainment of the ideal is, at best, momentary. The usual situation is rather a process of functioning at a somewhat less than ideal level, but with a sense of the ideal or goal present. As the philosopher Kahlil Gibran has observed: The significance of man is not in what he attains, but rather in what he longs to attain.5 The conflict that exists between the American commercial broad- casting system and the society's philosophical base for broadcasting is not the failure of the structure to reflect perfectly the goals or ideals. It is rather a conflict of opposing goals or ideals. The American broadcasting system, being essentially a commercial one at this point, has the philosophic goals of free-enterprise. These conflict with the goals of public service media systems. Adam Smith, the noted philosopher who originated free-enterprise concepts warns of this basic conflict: The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order (business enterprise), ought always to be listened to with great precaution.... It comes from an order of men whose interest is never the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even to oppress the public and who accordingly have upon many occasions both deceived 5Kahlil Gibran, Sand and Foam: A Book of Aphorisms (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., I969), p. l2. and oppressed it.6 This is not a condemnation of American business or of the American com- mercial broadcasting system. It serves merely to point up the basic conflict between the goals of a business structure and those of a social structure expected to serve the public interest. This factor is the essential irresponsibility connected with American broadcasting. It is the fault of both the society, for defin- ing a role for its broadcasting system and then allowing the system to function in opposition with that definition, and of the broadcasting system for attempting to maintain the conflict in the sense that it proclaims to reflect the philosophic basis while knowingly functioning in opposition to it. Can a society allow such a conflict to continue? What are the effects of saying one thing and doing another, of only giving lip service to philosophic assumptions? To answer this question, one must remember that philosophical structures are an attempt, either individual or social, to order the myriad of happenings that constitutethe perceived universe. Man intuitively attempts to perceive his environment as an ordered whole. He conceives of this whole as being truth or reality or the universal order. He attempts to determine his place within this reality and the appropriate actions that will allow him to exist in harmony with the reality, whole, or truth. This process results in his philosophic beliefs. 6Quoted from Marquis w. Childs and Douglas Cater, Ethics in a Business Society (New York: Harper & Row, Inc., l954), p. 39. TO A philosophy includes expectations of how the universe will act upon and react to the individual. Within these basic philosophic expec- tations, a society structures its various parts to maintain harmony within the whole, the universe or truth, as it is perceived. When these expectations are unfulfilled the result is a sort of social cognitive dissonance. (Cognitive dissonance is defined, in psychological terms, as the existence of two ideas or opinions that are psychologically in- consistent and that arouse a state of dissonance. Because dissonance is unpleasant, an individual tries to reduce it by removing the inconsist- ency in some manner.)7 As related to American broadcasting, an example of this dissonance situation is the basic philosophic expectation that truth triumphs over error, given an open exchange of all possible ideas. The broadcasting system, as defined through the philosophic structure, is to operate as an open marketplace in which all of these ideas can be presented to the society, helping truth to emerge. This expectation, however, is largely unfulfilled. Diversity of programming and presentation of dissenting ideas are essentially lacking in American commercial broadcasting. An individual experiencing conflicting expectations undergoes cognitive dissonance and immediately begins the process of attempting to restore consonance or harmony. As long as there is dissonance, there is conflict and anxiety. If the dissonance is not resolved, and har- mony not restored, the result ranges from impaired functioning due to 7Patricia Niles Middlebrook, Social Psychology and Modern Life (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., l974), p. l75. II the anxiety to total psychotic collapse. It is logical to assume that social organizations react in essentially the same manner. The American society is experiencing a degree of conflict and anxiety in relation to its broadcasting system. It is also attempting to resolve the dissonance and restore harmony. (Examples are the attempts to develop a public broadcasting system, pay-TV and cable systems, citizen pressure groups to affect change, etc.) It is as imperative for a society to resolve such conflicts as it is for an individual. For if the conflict (in this case between broadcasting philosophy and the free-enterprise broadcasting structure), is not re- solved the effects can range from ineffective functioning of the broad- casting system to complete collapse of the system. A society cannot long afford to have its media systems dysfunction to any serious degree. Responsible broadcasting develops out of a philosophic framework that is reflected in the structure and the operation of the system. This thesis states the problem thusly. To understand the need for a philosophic basis for broadcasting and a system that functions in accordance with that basis, requires knowledge of the following: the basic communication process and its importance to human existence; how mass communication is an extension of this process; the functions of mass communication; some awareness of the problems surrounding the question of broadcasting effects, a knowledge of different philosophical bases for broadcasting structures; and an examination of the specific society's broadcasting system, in this case the American commercial system. Intelligent resolution of social conflicts proceeds from 12 comprehensive understanding of the entire problem. It is hoped that this work will offer a beginning for such comprehension. CHAPTER I BROADCASTING: A FRAME OF REFERENCE An understanding of the basic communication process and its im- portance is necessary for a thorough examination of the need for and development of philosophical structures for broadcasting systems. Communication is an essential human activity. It can be assumed that communication is mandatory for any type of social or cooperative effort, and as such, is a basic function of human existence. Charles H. Cooley, a professor of sociology at the University of Chicago for many years, defined communication in an article published sixty years ago, as: . the mechanism through which human relations exist and develop--all the symbols of the mind, together with the means of conveying them through space and preserving them in time.... The more closely we consider this mechanism, the more intimate will appear its relation to the inner life of mankind, and noth- ing will more help us to understand the latter than such consider- ation.1 Melvin DeFleur stresses the importance in Theories of Mass Communication in this way: No student of human nature, whatever his disciplinary iden- tification or theoretical orientation, can study human behavior without recognizing at the outset that man's communication 1Charles H. Cooley, "The Significance of Communication." In_W. Schramm and D. Roberts, eds., The Process and Effects of Mass Communica- tion, revised edition (Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Press, l974), p. 643. I3 I4 processes are as vital to him, as a human being, as are his bio- logical processes. It is the latter which permit him to function as a living creature, but it is surely the former which permit him to function as a rational creature. It is the principles of human communication and not the principles of biological function- ing that most sharply distinguish man from other living organisms.2 Communication between human beings is the process which results in a mutual understanding between them, a sharing or an agreement of mean- ing. Communication is a process as opposed to an object. A spoken statement, a gesture, a newspaper are not communication. It is a proc- ess that basically requires: a source who wishes to communicate; the idea to be communicated, or shared, presented in some message form; and a receiver who attempts to comprehend the meaning intended by the sender. Communication requires symbols to translate the idea to be com- municated into a form that both represents the internal concept or idea and that can be transmitted to the receiver. The symbols can be verbal or non-verbal. Human communication consists of both types of symbols. However, verbal symbols allow a simpler, faster and yet more complete communication process than a process based entirely on gestures such as sign language. Therefore, verbal symbols (words) tend to dominate human communication. Words are verbal symbols that substitute for objects or events in the world of reality. They are the translation of immediate sense ex- perience into vocal symbols of the entire world that can then be evoked or retrieved at any time. However, to function in the communication 2Melvin DeFleur, Theories of Mass Communication, second edition (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1970), p. xiv. 15 process, words must have some degree of shared meaning. The meaning of a symbol (in this case, word) is the set of responses that an individual has learned to make to it. An object or event in reality is arbitrarily assigned a word to represent it in the language process. If this word is used consistently with shared meaning by the communicating parties over time, it becomes the conventionalized symbol for the object or event. Once learned, these symbols then arouse the meaning response that the original object or event aroused. This ability to deal sym- bolically with objects or events that are not present in the immediate environment and to do so at will with shared meaning is the essence of the human communication process. The use of models has developed to aid conceptualization and examination of this complex process. The simplest model of the basic communication act is of course the classic S-M-R model (see Figure l). source _______,. message -——————€»' receiver Figure I This model developed in correspondence with the early hypodermic or bullet theory of the communication process. It implies a simple, one-way communication of information from the source to a passive receiver who automatically absorbs the message intended. However, as research developed, the theory expanded to define the communication process as being considerably more complex. Essentially this simple model omits the variables that influence all of the elements in the l6 process, feedback from the receiver to the sender, and the influence of the medium itself on the elements in the process. Stated another way, using Harold Laswell's model, "Who, Says What, In Which Channel, To Whom, With What Effect?" the questions this model invites are essentially descriptive.3 Most communication research studies, instead of being simple description, however, relate the vari- ous elements in the process, i.e., the "Who" to the "Says What", the “Says What" to the "To Whom", etc. These types of studies have resulted in the empirical discovery of a multitude of relations between the dif- ferent components of the process. In other words, variables were dis- covered and attempts made to figure out how they influence the various components. These variables are any factor, internal or physical, social or psychological, that influence the communication process. Models grew correspondingly more complex (see Figure 2). 1* X z ty 2 * source + message + receiver + effects channel a? 3 “2 Figure 2 This model, of course, still presents the communication process as being unidirectional. It shows the communicator with absolute con- trol, overlooking the fact that messages are frequently unsuccessfully; 3Harold D. Lasswell, "The Structure and Function of Communication in Society.” In_Lyman Bryson, ed., The Communication of Ideas (New York: Institute for Religious and Social Studies, l948), p. Tl2. I7 transmitted and that the communicator utilizes feedback from the receiver to determine the success or failure of the transmission. The communication process is, therefore, a cycle with the receiver usually communicating back, or feeding back, reactions to the source. This model also makes relatively little attempt to specify the nature and influence of the medium itself on the source, message and receiver. There are numerous elaborated models which illustrate the expanded con- cepts of the communication process and include the variables, feedback and noise concepts. Figure 3 is the model developed by Melvin DeFleur, Figure 4 is that of Andrew Tudor (see pages 18 and l9). They both adequately attempt to illustrate the complexity of the communication process and the many influences and variables that are involved. The fact that human communication seldom achieves perfect corre- spondence of meaning is self-evident. However, the reasons for this lack of mutual understanding are numerous and complex. They are gen- erally psychological, cultural or mechanical reasons and are referred to as "noise”. Noise is any barrier that exists and disrupts or frus- trates communication. Mechanical noise and semantic noise are the two main types. Mechanical noise is defined as interference due to factors external to the cognitive processes of the participants such as static on the radio, laughing in an audience, torn pages, missing paragraphs, etc. Semantic noise is interference brought on by discordance or breakdown in the "meaning" of a message. The more confusion there is among the participants in the communication situation over the meaning of terms and concepts, the more semantic noise there is in the message. 18 uw>mo 1g) mummum ll* zuHP 3mzv cowuwvm ucoumm .cowumowcaeeou mmmz yo mmwgomnp .L=m_mmo =w>Pm= m mgamwu moH>mo xo~momm mmHoz H mw>Hmoum Aflzzwn zDHomx mm—o>:w mpcwsw_m one i 4$MHuodnuouv >MHmU< mom :memwm Ao .o>amnopaxo .osauwcuou powwowcsLfioo no coaquOH Hafioom [saves mo owxaucr— mccwuco Euweapifi u G A..- 532:3: & I ‘ acowuauoonxo vcm nacuuau20fiuo ¢>wunsam>o .o>«mnouaxo .obuuwcwoo 20 Given these understandings of the basic communication process, the process takes place in essentially four types of situations. These are outlined by John Merrill and Ralph Lowenstein in Media, Messages, and Men, as: l. Person-to-person, face-to-face, 2. Small-group, face- to-face, 3. Large-group, crown, and 4. Mass.4 The person-to-person, face-to-face situation is personal, informal and unstructured. The communicating parties are in immediate proximity and interact with much dialogue and empathy. The feedback element is an immediate one. Examples of small group, face-to—face situations are conferences, discussion groups, seminars, etc. These are more formal, better struc- tured and tend to be more institutionalized than informal person-to- person interchanges. The parties are still in physical proximity and there is immediate feedback. Large group, face-to-face situations are usually crowd situations. While the communicating parties are in immediate proximity, there is little dialogue interaction. Most of the participants are part of an audience, with one or a few persons doing the message sending. The interaction is very basic and largely emotional in the sense of being mostly group feedback from the audience to express simply approval or disapproval, acceptance or rejection, understanding or misunderstanding, etc. 4John Merrill and Robert Lowenstein, Media,_Messages and Men (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., l97l), p. l0. 21 The mass communication situation occurs when the source and the receiver are not in physical proximity and media (technical devices and organizations) are utilized to carry the source's message across time and space to a large number of receivers known as an audience. The audience members are usually not in physical proximity and they receive and react individually or in small separated groups to the messages from mass media. Immediate feedback is not possible. Given that the basic communication process between two partici- pants face-to-face is essentially an interaction to achieve mutual understanding between the source and the receiver by use of symbols transmitted over a channel, that all of the elements involved are sub- ject to many variables, and that interference on some level is almost unavoidable, when communication takes place in any effective manner it is remarkable. The process may be basic to human endeavors, but it is not simple. Expand the number of participants, and the distances separating them, add media for message sending, and the process becomes even more complex and subject to a higher degree of failure. This is the basis of the problems faced in the mass communication situation. The Basic Mass Communication Process Mass communication involves essentially the same basic process as face-to-face communication. There is a source, a message, a channel, a receiver, effects, feedback, variables affecting each element during the process, noise preventing the perfect correspondence of meaning that is the purpose of the communication act. 22 The major difference between face-to-face and mass communication is the technical extension of the human senses. In mass communication man extends his voice, his eyes and ears across time and space by use of some technical device. This factor, of course, effects all of the basic elements involved in the process. The communicator, or the source, is not present with his receivers during the communication process. He is aware of them only as a large, heterogeneous mass "out there somewhere". He does not have access to their immediate reactions, so he cannot adjust his messages accordingly. Of major importance in regards to the communicator in the mass communication situation, he cannot complete the message formation and sending alone. He must utilize media organizations with their gatekeeping communicators. In the mass communication situation, the message origination is usually the result of a group effort. This group effort may range from the formation of the original concept to be communicated to merely the aid of technicians to get the message across time and space to the audience. In other words, the media organization functions may range from forming the communication message to simply implementing the sending of an independent source's message. Whatever the degree of involvement, in a mass communication situation the source is almost never a single individual. The process requires media and distributing organizations to accomplish the origination and transmis- sion of a message. In a face-to-face spoken communication situation the channel is air, the transmitter is the source's cognitive processes and mouth, and the receiver includes the ear and cognitive processes. In mass 23 communication the channel is expanded to extend over space and time. It is described by Melvin DeFleur as being elaborated by a technical process for transforming one kind of information into another which is more effective in spanning distance.5 For example, words are trans- formed into electric impulses, which are formed into electromagnetic waves. These are transmitted to a technical receiver which reverses the process so the information can be utilized by the human eye and ear. These are elaborations in detail, however, and do not alter the basic communication intent of achieving a shared meaning. The differences in messages between face-to-face and mass situa- tions is essentially a matter of form and not content. The same message may be transmitted by word of mouth in a face-to-face situation, appear as an article in a magazine or newspaper, and appear on television. While the basic message may convey the same ideas, the form is likely to vary according to the communication situation, i.e., as when a novel is converted into a television drama, or the same news event is recorded in the print media and by film for television presentation. Quite simply, a communicator will put his message in the form that best fits and utilizes the characteristics of the medium being used for trans- mission. This is not to say that the effects of the message on the audience are the same regardless of the form in which the message is received. Much research is being carried on in this area, but to date there are few definitive theories of exact relationships between the 5Melvin DeFleur, Theories of Mass Communication, second edition (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., I970), p. 94. 24 message, the medium of presentation and differing effects on audiences.6 The receiver in the mass communication situation is part of an audience and is separated from the communicator always by space and usually by time. He most often receives the message in an individual situation and is unaware of the other members of the audience and their reactions to the message. He has no possibility of immediately express- ing his reactions to the communicator. The feedback elements in a mass communication process are always delayed. To date, there is no way for an audience to express immediate reaction to a communicator and the media organization. The methods for delayed feedback will be discussed more fully later in this chapter. The noise elements are greatly increased in the mass communication situation. Semantic noise, the interference brought on by discordance or breakdown in the "meaning" of a message, is greatly increased due to the fact that there is no immediate feedback, so the communicator has no chance of perceiving a misunderstanding and immediately altering his message. The possibilities of mechanical noise, interference due to factors that are not part of the cognitive processes of the participants, are higher due to the addition of the technical devices involved in the 6For additional specific information see: Daniel J. Boorstin, The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America (New York: Antheneum Publishers, 1961) in whiEhFMr. Boorstin discusses the creation of mes- sages or message-distortion to fit the needs of the medium; Marshall McLuhan, Understanding_Media (New York: McGraw—Hill Book Co., 1964) for an extensive discussion of media determinism; William L. Rivers, “The Negro and the News: A Case Study." In_W. Rivers and W. Schramm, Responsibility in Mass Corrmunication, revised edition (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1969) for an analysis of the images of reality pre- sented by media in the coverage of the 1965 Watts riots in Los Angeles. 25 mass communication process. In addition to human failure, there is the possibility of mechanical failure in the transmitting and receiving devices. As stated above, the most striking element in the mass communica- tion situation is the technical extension of human senses and processes. These extensions have become the mass media, i.e., the organizations that produce books, newspapers, magazines, radio, television, audio recordings, and motion pictures. It should be noted here the difference between the concepts of mass communication and mass media. Mass conmuni- cation is the full communication process which utilizes mass media as the technical extension. Because mass communication is not a simple matter of an individual using a mechanical device to communicate farther to more people, the process involves communication through a mass media organization. These organizations are structures developed to functionalize the technical extensions or the mechanical devices. To fully understand the mass communication process, media organi- zations should be recognized as social institutions or social systems in and of themselves, for they have a definite influence on the communi- cators who use them and the messages they communicate. A social institution may be defined as, "... an abstract set of norms, values, and beliefs that center on and define some segment of human life." It includes, "... both an organization of persons (or functionaries) who bring into fact and action those norms and so on, and the set of material instrumentalities used to translate them into 26 actuality."7 Put another way, social institutions are a concept and a structure. They are organized groups of individual persons that can accomplish certain tasks or goals in a manner that the individual persons separately cannot accomplish. Individual tasks are, in the face of social complexities, assumed by social organizations or institutions. Examples of such tasks are instructing new members of the social system, feeding the members of the society, watching for changes on the perim- eter of the physical environment, etc. As societies become more complex these functions are no longer performed on an individual basis, with individuals interacting directly with each other. In a society, there is always a tendency toward institutionaliza- tion to facilitate the functions required by the society for maintenance and development. As this process of institutionalization takes place, the individual members of the society become less individualistic and rely less on their own independent actions. They become more adaptable and flexible regarding their own personal desires and needs and more concerned about the collective whole, the society, the network of social institutions within which they function.8 Social institutions are by nature conservative. They are created by the larger social system to conserve the social heritage, maintain 7Roger G. Emblen, ed., Society Today, second edition (Del Mar, Calif.: CRM Books, 1973), p. 44. 8Complete discussion of the forces in the individual which con- tribute to this collectivizing and institutionalizing are found in Carl 6. Jung, The Undiscovered Self (New York: Little Brown & Co., 1957), and Erich Fromm, Escape from Freedom (New York: Holt, Rinehard & Winston, 1941). 27 social equilibrium, to achieve, through a kind of social unity, some specified goal. They are vested with a considerable degree of social control, and they attempt to retain and to exercise whatever control they have acquired and to extend it if possible. There seems to be a natural tendency for social institutions to become somewhat inflexible and reactionary, and for their leadership to be dominated by conserva- tive administrators. This does not mean, however, that social institu- tions do not change. They do change and adapt, but their adaptability usually follows the society in which they function. In the light of these assumptions, media systems are seen as social institutions created by a society to facilitate the mass communi- cation process. Their goals and tasks are based on the norms, values and beliefs of the society. The organization of persons whose function it is to bring these goals and tasks into actuality is also structured by the social system. A thorough discussion of the institutional structure of the major American mass communication systems is found in Melvin DeFleurs article, "Mass Media as Social Systems."9 He investigates the basis of social institutions and examines how the American media social system works. His discussion is primarily concerned with the ability of American mass media systems to withstand continuing attacks and criticism in regard to the presentation of "low taste" content. He contends that the media 9Melvin DeFleur, "Mass Media as Social Systems." IQ_W. Schramm and D. Roberts, eds., Process and Effects of Mass Communication, revised edition (Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1974), pp. 63-83. 28 social systems are an integral part of the American economic institution and as such this "low taste" content is the key element in their social system, as it fulfills the needs of the majority of the market (audience) and thus maintains the financial equilibrium and stability of the media social system itself. His discussion of the mass media as social systems illustrates how the basic social system is made up of a series of sub-systems. These sub-systems include the audience, production organizations, dis- tribution organizations, legislative bodies, voluntary associations for self-regulation, financial backers, and research and rating services. Media organizations are obviously complex social institutions designed to fulfill specific social goals, but also possessing their own goals and needs for survival. It should be noted that it is possible for the goals and tasks of the media system as defined by the norms, values and beliefs of the society to conflict with the goals of the social institution that is itself the media system. As such, a conflict would exist between the concept and the structure of the society's institution for mass communication. Specific Media Characteristics While all media are social organizations and function in essen- tially the same manner in this respect, each medium has basic specific characteristics that affect the elements of personnel, technique and message form. As discussed by John Merrill and Ralph Lowenstein in Media, Messages and Men, there are four basic factors which determine 29 a medium's characteristics.10 These shall be referred to in this report as information transmission, feedback systems, circulation, and economic support. The first three are characteristics of the physical and tech- nical nature of each medium and are uniform in all social systems. The fourth characteristic is a social factor and will vary with the social system. Information transmission relates to the elements involved in the reproduction or transmission of infOrmation. These elements are: l) verbal symbols, which are the ideographs or the phonetic alphabet to reproduce the spoken language; 2) picture symbols, which involve the use of any device to depict the original event; 3) sound, which is the reproduction or transmission of the original voices, music, noise, etc.; and 4) motion, or the reproduction and transmission of animation. Feedback systems for all mass media are delayed systems. No imme- diate feedback system is currently in practical production, although the development of two-way transmission via CATV is in experimental stages. Types of delayed feedback systems include: 1) personal verbal feedback, the most common forms being letters, telephone calls and critical reviews; 2) audience studies, which include ratings and demographic and motivation research; and 3) sales and subscriptions. Circulation refers to the elements required to achieve maximum distribution. These elements are: l) accessibility or the degree to 10John Merrill and Ralph Lowenstein, Media, Messages and Men (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1971), pp. 20-27. 30 which the medium's transmission is accessible to the audience members; 2) receiving control describes the ability of the message to be received and/or reviewed at the audience's convenience; and 3) transmission span or the time between the information origination and its reception by the audience members. Economic support can be one or a combination of four types: 1) single sales or the purchasing of a single unit of the transmitted message; 2) subscription, which is the purchasing of multiple units of the transcribed message to be received over a specified period of time; 3) advertising, which is the purchasing of space or time for the purpose of advertisement, and 4) subsidy or the support of a medium by govern- ment, industry or private citizen without the intent of advertisement. As this report deals specifically with broadcasting, a brief dis- cussion of the characteristics specific to that medium is in order. An analysis of broadcasting in terms of the above reveals: Information transmission: radio utilizes only sound while tele- vision encompasses all four elements of verbal symbols, picture symbols, sound and motion. Feedback systems: Audience studies are the main source of feed- back, personal verbal feedback is received, but is not of major significance as it represents such a small atypical percent of the total audience. The sales and subscription principle applies to pay television, but as it is not a major method of broadcasting in the majority of societies, this is not a main source of feedback. Circulation: Accessibility is highest with radio due to the deve10pment of the transistorized portable. This character- istic is fairly high with television, but limited by the relative largeness of the receiving set. Receiving control is low with both mediums. Transmission span is simultaneous, and this is the most significant feature of broadcasting in relation to the other mediums, as no other mass media has this capability. 31 Economic support: The majority of broadcasting systems are either comnercially supported or receive subsidy from a social institution of the society (government, church, etc.). Sales and subscription exist in the pay television and CATV situations. In addition to the above mentioned characteristics, the electronic media have these specific differences: 1) the media are time-locked, i.e., they exist in time and not space; 2) there is a channel limitation. This situation is being relieved by the development of cable, but while the number of channels is being increased, there is still a limitation that does not exist in any other medium; 3) the electronic media are present in the home in a continuous state presenting continuously chang- ing information; and 4) the emphasis of electronic media is on non- literate, simultaneous communication as opposed to the lineal, spatial, rational orientation of the print media. ********* In summation, this chapter has presented a telescoping view of broadcasting, beginning with the broad concepts of the general communi- cation process, and narrowing through the mass communication process down to specific broadcasting characteristics. It has been stated that the communication process is basic to human functioning and it is, therefore, essential that the process be carefully examined and under- stood. Mass communication, while being essentially the same process of attempting to achieve mutual understanding or shared meaning, does so by use of technical extensions of human senses and processes. This factor alters considerably the specifics of the process even if the 32 basic goal remains the same. One of the major alterations is the neces- sity for a media organization which functionalizes the technical exten- sion, i.e., the production and distribution organizations required to prepare and transmit mass communication messages. These media organi- zations are examined as social institutions in and of themselves, with the observation that they can operate in conflict with the society's conceptual expectations for its media systems. The intent of this chapter is to offer the reader a frame of reference for determining the necessity, importance and complexity of mass communication in general, broadcasting in particular. CHAPTER II FUNCTIONS AND EFFECTS OF BROADCASTING To determine the efficiency of a society's media institutions, as reflected in the philOSOphical concept and the implementing struc— ture, it is necessary to be aware of the essential nature of communica- tion, the elements involved in the basic process and how the mass com- munication process differs. It is also necessary to determine the uses of mass media systems and what the effects of those uses are. The basic uses, or functions, of mass media are the same for all societies, because the uses fulfill primary needs of all social systems. One of the earliest attempts to catalogue the basic functions of social communication was by Harold Lasswell, a professor of law at Yale Univer- sity. In his classic paper, "The Structure and Function of Communica- tion in Society," he defines the functions as surveillance, consensus, and socialization.1 Later communication scholars have added to his list, however. They have suggested that entertainment and contributions to the economic system are also primary functions of a media system. 1H. Lasswell, "The Structure and Function of_Communication in Society," In L. Bryson, ed., The Communication of Ideas (New York: Harper Publishing, 1948), pp. 37-51. 33 34 A classic analysis of these five functions was developed by Wilbur Schramm in both Responsibility in Mass Communication,2 and The Process and Effects of Mass Communication.3 The surveillance function is essentially to gain a common knowl- edge of the environment. It exists so that the individual member of a society may test or expand his picture of reality and learn of oppor- tunities or dangers in his environment. In traditional societies this function is served by the watchmen. In a complex, technological situa- tion this function is primarily filled by the news media. The consensus function is to gain support for governmental and social policy, to attain a working consensus among the society's members on such policy, to control behavior, and to disperse resources in the desired direction. This media use helps members of the society to reach decisions where choices are available, and to take action on an informed basis. Traditionally this function is filled by the tribal chief or council, while in urbanized societies it is filled by specific media uses for forming public opinion, exerting social control, and pr0pagan- dizing. The socialization function exists to instruct members of society how to effectively fulfill their roles and to accept and actualize the norms and customs of the society. This use of media enables members to 2W. Schramm and W. Ribers, Responsibility in Mass Communication, revised edition (New York: Harper & Row PuBTishers, 1969), pp. 14-16. 3W. Schramm and D. Roberts, eds., The Process and Effects of Mass Communication, revised edition (Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1974), pp. 19-22. 35 acquire the skills and knowledge necessary to live comfortably in the society. Parents and tribal elders traditionally fulfill this function. In modern societies, specifically the educational media are utilized to this end, however, most media uses pass on informal or unofficial infor- mation about the norms, customs, and role fulfillment of the society. The entertainment function allows members of the society to dis- tract themselves from troubles and dissatisfactions. It creates artis- tic form in varying degrees and allows members to enjoy themselves, relax and escape from real problems. Entertainment, however, may also provide subtle insightinto and understanding of these problems. In most technological societies all media are utilized to transmit information designed to entertain. Traditionally, the dancer, ballad singer, story teller and traveling performing groups fill this function. The economic stimulation function is to facilitate the movement of goods and services and to provide information necessary to stimulate and maintain economic activity on an individual and social level. Town crier's advertisements, traveling peddlers, word-of-mouth information regarding bargains, etc., accomplish this traditionally. In urban society, again, all media function in this manner when conveying informa- tion pertaining to economic activity.* It should be noted, of course, that while these five functions cover all types of mass communication activity, any given communication act usually fulfills more than one function. 36 The Importance of Determining Effects It is evident from the discussion above that societies utilize their media systems to fill very basic societal needs. Surveillance, consensus, socialization, entertainment and economic stimulation are primary to social equilibrium. That the effective use of media systems to accomplish these tasks is desirable, is a simple fact. But the determination of how effectively a media system is, in fact, fulfilling a specific function is far from a simple matter. However, the im- portance of determining effects cannot be overlooked by a society. A social system needs to know how effectively its media institutions are fulfilling these basic functions and also to know what additional, unintentional effects are being created by the mass media. Of course, in every society each specific medium fulfills these functions to vary- ing degrees and with differing effectiveness. For example, the discussion of the effects of broadcasting in our society is adamant and continuous. Much criticism of the uses of tele- vision exists, and considerable amounts of research are being carried on to determine the effects of electronic media in our society. Perhaps the simplest and most effective way to illustrate the importance and complexity of determining media effects is to consider the questions yet to be answered. The following is a summation of the main areas of examination and concern as concluded from a survey of existing communi- cation research, professional criticism and the goals of citizen pres- sure groups. 37 Some of the major questions and concerns needing solution in rela- tion to the five basic mass communication functions as they are fulfilled by the American commercial television system are: Surveillance function: (To gain awareness of happenings in the environmentf) 1. What is the effect of the time-locked characteristic of elec- tronic media on the content selection of news and information programming? . What is the effect of this same time-locked characteristic on objective reporting vs. editorializing, or fact vs. Opinion? . What is the influence of the entertainment emphasis of the American commercial broadcasting on objective news presenta- tion? . How effective is pressure by groups seeking specific advantages on controlling the content of news and public affairs program- ming? . What are the effects on perception and retention of the audi- ence's inability to absorb and analyze at their own speed, and to retrieve information for review and reanalysis? Consensus function: (To accomplish a working societal agreement on actions regarding happenings in the environment.) 1. How does the acceleration of social reaction time due to the instantaneous transmission of information affect political and social decision making? What are the effects of including minority groups in the con- sensus process that were not PFIOPIY reached by print media? . How much attempted control of information exists on the part of the government, i.e., news distortion, propaganda, etc.? . What is the role of primary group relations and opinion leaders in mass media effectiveness of political opinion formation? (Note: while the original studies were in the area of politi- cal activity, this communication pattern, referred to as the 2-step or multi-step flow, operates in all mass communication situations.) . How does mass communication affect the amount of individual political activity; such as, increased awareness and partici- pation or increased passivity? 6. 7. 38 What are the effects, political and social, of the tendency to merchandize political figures? What are the implications of the paid political-time policy; of media access being dependent on finances? Socialization function: (To teach and inform new members of the society about norms, customs and role fulfillment.) 1. What are the immediate and long range effects of continuous presentation of violent and aggressive action as an effective, socially sanctioned method of dealing with reality? . How does the presentation of materialism and consumerism as a highly valued social and personal goal affect the society? . What are the effects of presenting dissention and individualism as a negative value, while stressing conformity and adjustment as the most positive method of coping with most conflict or stress situations? . Is it to the society's advantage to present one set of values over the electronic media (self-indulgence, immediate gratifi- cation, short-cut to success, etc.) and another in the social institutions of schools, churches, family situations, etc. (thrift, self-discipline, productivity, emphasis on long-range goals, etc.)? What is the effect of distortion of truth for effective mer- chandising, as is the practice in both advertising and politi- cal elections? . What are the effects on the underprivileged segments of society of the presentation of man as creator of his own destiny with a primary goal being materialism? Entertainment function: (To provide relaxation and retreat from problems and dissatisfaction; create artistic form.) 1. What are the effects, on both the programming content and on the viewer, of programming to reach the largest possible mass audience rather than many specialized audiences? . Should the audience be considered as a market? How does this conceptualization effect the communicator, the content of the programming and the audience itself? . What are the effects on the audience and on artistic form of conceiving of television as primarily a business rather than as an artistic or a culturally instructive medium? 39 Economic stimulation function: (To facilitate the movement of goods and services afid'to provide information necessary to stimu- late ahd maintain economic activity on an individual and social level. - 1. To what extent does advertising influence American commercial television due to its role of exclusive economic support? 2. Does untruthful and distorted advertising exist and what are its effects on the society and its values and norms regarding truth? 3. What are the effects of utilizing the child viewer as a poten- tial market unit? 4. Is the American commercial broadcasting system really free or does the audience pay for this service in other ways? 5. How does the audience feel about and utilize television adver- tising? The above listing of areas for examination is, of course, not a complete list of all the questions to be answered and effects to be determined. It is simply to illustrate the importance of the questions that a society needs to answer to fully understand the significance of its media systems, broadcasting specifically, and to develop their potential. The Problem of Determining Effects While the importance of determining effects of media use can be readily seen from the nature of the effects to be studied, the problem of actually observing and assessing any specific effect is extremely complex. The communication process is an intangible entity which changes continually and is subject to almost limitless variables. It is a basic 40 social function of human beings and, as such, has all of the complexi- ties and subtleties of human existence. However, the questions of effective uses of mass media are ones a society must attempt to answer. The effectiveness of consequences of a communicative act can best be determined by observing and analyzing the actions and reactions of the parties concerned. There are two primary methods of observation and analysis. The first, and oldest, method of analysis results in humanistic, philosophical and ethical assessments as to the nature and effects of the communication process. This approach, utilizing observation and critical thought, results in speculative, unmeasurable conclusions. As communication is, itself, the basic foundation for human social activity, many of the questions and concerns surrounding the process are humanistic, philosophical and ethical in nature and as such require these methods of analysis for complete understanding and effective usage of the human communication ability. The second method of analysis is the scientific research method based on empirical observation. This observation results in data from which hypotheses are formed, tested, and if verified, can ultimately lead to theory formation. The results of this research method are observable and testable, i.e., scientific. This quantitative approach to the problems of mass communication effects can lend insight to many aspects of the process that are physically observable and measurable. Mass communication research began, as such, in the early 1930's. However, prior to the develOpment of scientific research techniques 40 41 applied specifically to mass communication, there was considerable theorizing about and analysis of the process by scholars and scientists from several disciplines. Early thinking about the mass communication process was heavily influenced by early sociological and psychological theory. The theories of the nature of mass society developed by Auguste Comte, Herbert Spencer, Ferdinanc Tonnies and Emile Durkheim all contributed to the early theories of how the mass communication process worked and what were its basic effects. Auguste Comte, one of the founders of the discipline of sociology, 4 He theorized developed the conception of society as an organic whole. that society exists in much the same manner as a biological organism. A society has structure, which consists of specialized parts that func- tion together to maintain the whole, and the whole is more than the sum of its parts. And like a biological organism, a social organism under- goes evolutionary change. The key element in this organic conception of society is specialization. The interdependent functioning of the specialized parts of the whole is what maintains social stability. He felt, however, that this principle of specialization could also be the seed of destruction to social equilibrium. If the specialization is allowed to become too pervasive, it results in increased social differ- entiation. Once this social differentiation reaches the point where 4For a complete discussion see: Auguste Comte, A General View of Positivism, translated by J. H. Bridges (Stanford, Calif. Academic Reprints, 1953). 42 effective linkages between parts of the whole is impaired, then the equilibrium and harmony of the whole are threatened. Herbert Spencer, who wrote First Principles in 1863, also con- ceived of society as an organism subject to much the same types of in- fluences as a biological organism.5 His primary concern, however, was the evolutionary aspects of the social organism's development. (It was from Spencer's evolutionary principles that Darwin drew his inspira- tion.) Spencer felt that the division of labor was essential, but he did not perceive any danger in over-specialization. He concluded that the most fundamental principle of nature is evolution, that it is a natural process and, therefore, can only be beneficial. His conclusion from this being, that any social changes brought about by natural evolution are desirable. There could be no evolutionary changes that would not ultimately be beneficial to the whole. It can be seen that Comte's theories perceive the possibility of human activity being destructive to the organic whole, and therefore, planned social change is necessary and desirable. Spencer, on the other hand, opposed any form of social improvement. Essentially, he theorized that only the fittest should survive. To these theories of social organization were added the concepts of Ferdinand Tonnies, who wrote Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft in 1887.6 5For a complete discussion see: The Works of HerbertySpencer, vol. 8 (London and New York: 0. Appleton & Co., 1910); and Jay Rumney, Herbert Spencer's Sociology: A Study in the History of Social Theory_ (New York: Atherton Press, 1966). 6For a complete discussion see: Ferdinand T6nnies, Community and Society(Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft), translated and edited by 43 Tonnies was less concerned with conceptualizing social entities as whole organisms than with the kinds of social bonds that exist between members of societies. He theorized that there were essentially two types of social organizations; one pre-industrial and the other a product of industrialization. The social relationships that exist within the two types of societies differ. In pre—industrial societies the relationships are essentially ggmeinschaft; wherein people are deeply bound to each other through tradition, kinship, friendship or some other form of informal social control. Even though the control is informal, however, it is strong and binding and depends primarily on reciprocal sentiment to keep the human beings functioning as a unified whole. Gemeinschaft relationships can exist on all levels of a social order, from the family through reli- gious and social affiliations to the entire society. In industrialized societies, the relationships between individual members tend to be ggsellschaft; wherein the basis of the relationship is the contract. This is a formal relationship, rationally agreed upon, with mutual obligations or forfeits of specific entities if the contract is breached. Whereas in a gemeinschaft relationship the bond is informal and highly dependent upon the characteristics and sentiments of the individuals involved, in the formal gesellschaft TGIBtIODSDIP the indi- viduals interact in a more impersonal and anonymous way. He is not Charles P. Loomis (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University Press, 1957); and Werner J. Cohnman and Rudolf Heberle, eds., Ferdinand Tonnies on Sociology (Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 1971). 44 treated or valued for himself or his personal qualities, but is primar- ily valuable to the degree he can carry out his portion of the contract. The relationship is essentially a competitive one, with each individual seeking to maximize his gains from the exchange and to minimize what he gives. In such relationships, individuals tend to become wary of each other, and a degree of alienation results. Emile Durkheim, in The Division of Labor in Society, published in 1893, attempted to synthesize the basic theories of Comte, Spencer and T6nnies.7 He theorized that the division of labor (specialization) was the primary source of social solidarity. Solidarity being the kinds of social and psychological bonds that unite the members of the society. If the specialization is altered in any way the unifying forces, or the solidarity, of the society undergo corresponding change. His conceptions of specialization are more than economically based. The specialization, or "division of labor", includes all of the varying social roles of the individual members of the society not just his economic ones. Durkheim felt that there were two kinds of solidarity; mechanical and organic. Mechanical solidarity refers to a homogeneous quality of the members of the society. The members are essentially alike and are deeply, commonly and uniformly committed to a set of norms and values. This type of interrelation in a society tends to submerge the individual personality development into the values of the whole. 7For a complete discussion see: Emile Durkheim, The Division of Labor in Society, translated by George Simpson (Glencoe, 111.: *Free Press, 1960); and Charles E. Gehlke, Emile Durkheim's Contributions to Sociological Theory (New York: AMS Press, 1968). 45 Organic solidarity results in a‘heterogeneous society. Specializa- tion results in mutual dependency, but it also produces individuality and social differentiation. Therefore, the members while dependent on one another, lack a consensus of thought and have differing individual viewpoints due to specialization. Along with the increase of individual heterogeneity, due to specialization, comes an increase in the number of formal, contractual relationships between the members of the society. Durkheim also felt that specialization produced harmony and social equilibrium only up to a point, and that disharmony develops when over- specialization results in the inability of the individuals to effectively relate to one another. It is from the above that the basic concepts of mass society developed. Edward A. Shil concisely summarizes the development of basic sociological theory of mass society: The main theme of nineteenth century sociology. developing as it did from the philosophy of history, was the emergence and operation of the large-scale society, the 'great society', 'bourgeois' society. In their perception of the movement from 'status' to 'contract', from gemeinschaft (community) to gesell- schaft (society), from mechanical solidarity to organic solidarity, sociologists saw modern society as impersonal, co-ordinated by actions based on expediential calculations, and highly individual- istic. Mass society, then, was seen to create increased individuality and heterogeneity. The informal methods of controlling the individual members of a mass society are replaced by formal contractual control 8Quoted from Roger L. Brown, "Approaches to the Historical Develop- ment of Mass Media Studies." lg_Jeremy Tunstall, ed., Media Sociology: A Reader (Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1970), p. 46. 46 relationships. The growth of segmental, contractual relationships increase the alienation of the individual from strong identification with his community as a whole and results in an increase in his psycho- logical isolation. In addition to these basic sociological theories atout mass society, early psychological theory presented the human being as posses- sing a uniform basic human nature that is primarily motivated by non- rational or instinctual processes. (The Freudian concepts of the id and subconscious motivation are examples of instinct psychology theory.) It is this concept resulting from early sociological and psycho- logical theory, of the isolated, unrestrained, instinctual, atomized individual which had the greatest impact on early ideas about mass com- munication. The early "hypodermic", or Source-Receiver theory conceptualized the mass communication process as the media being a powerful source- stimuli on the individual members of the mass. These media stimuli could tap inner urges, emotions or other processes over which the indi- vidual had little voluntary control. Because human nature was essen- tially uniform, each individual responded more or less uniformly. In addition, there existed few strong social ties to disrupt the influence of these instinctual, psychological responses, because the individual was psychologically isolated from strong social ties and informal social control. The obvious conclusion seemed to be that members of the mass society could be easily and directly influenced by those in posses- sion of the media, especially with the use of emotional appeals. 47 From 1900 to World War II this was the prevailing view of the mass com- munication process. A number of events during these years seemed to offer empirical support: the effective use of propaganda by Stalin to organize and maintain communist leadership in the Soviet Union; the take— over of Germany by the National Socialists; and the success of consumer advertising, particularly exemplified by the growth of commercial radio in the United States during the 1920's. As research continued, however, this proved to be a simplistic view of the mass communication process. Audiences simply did not respond passively and as expected to mass communication messages. The early S-R theory had to be modified, primarily in the conceptualization of the nature of the audience. Audiences began to be recognized as groups of individuals, each member possessing sociological and psychological factors which lead him to be an active participant in the mass communi- cation process. It seems, then, that individuals determine, in part, the effects the mass media have on them. Individuals do not exist in isolation as members of an audience. They belong to many social groups that are determined by the individual's age, sex, economic status, educational attainment, urban-rural residence, religious affiliation, etc. The individual's social background and his resulting social group activity influence his communication behavior and the manner in which he acts upon the message he gets from the mass media.9 9For specific discussion of sociological factors of audience be- havior see: H. H. Hyman and P. B. Sheatsley, "Some Reasons Why Informa- tion Campaigns Fail," Public Opinion Quarterly, 11 (1947), pp. 412-423; and Eliot Friedson, "Communication Research and the Concept of the Mass." IQ_W. Schramm and D. Roberts, eds., The Process and Effects of Mass Com- munication," revised edition (Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1974), pp. 198-208. 48 Research by Paul Lazarsfeld and associates was the first to show that the mass communication process is not necessarily a direct flow from media to individual. Mass media information tends to move through two basic stages. First, the information goes to well-informed indi- viduals who seek out the media, then from these "opinion leaders", by interpersonal communication, to those individuals with less direct exposure and who depend on others for their information.10 Therefore, informal, interpersonal communication activity is an important factor in the way an individual utilizes and is effected by mass media. In addition to sociological factors, the individual's personal psychological structure influences his mass communication behavior. The individual's biological make-up and his specific attitudes, values and beliefs resulting from differential learning situations, may be even more powerful than his social categories and groupings in determining his reactions to a message.]] Researchers have also discovered that, based on the psychological and sociological background of an individual, he will select what to pay attention to and how it is perceived. This principle of selective perception operates naturally in all human beings. Basically, it in- volves the process by which a person determines what he will pay 10For detailed discussion of the two-step flow theory of mass com- munication see: Paul Lazarsfeld, Bernard Berelson, and Hazel Gauden, The People's Choice (New York: Columbia University Press, 1948). 1]Extensive research regarding psychological factors involved in communication and attitude change was done by Carl Hovland and his associates, see: C. Hovland, A. Lumsdaine, F. Sheffield, Experiments on Mass Communication (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1949). 49 attention to and the form in which the information is cognitively per- ceived. The human senses are constantly bombarded by more stimuli than could possibly be attended to, so humans automatically classify what their senses take in by a cueing system that develops without realiza- tion as life experience is accumulated. This classifying of stimuli becomes second nature and is the basis of how an individual perceives that which he selects for attention.12 In summation, the basic result of research after World War II has been that the audience is no longer regarded as a passive body receiving, without question, what the media choose to transmit. But rather, there exists a process, or an interaction, between audience and media in which the media are as affected by the audience's needs and desires as the audience is affected by the media messages. The question seems to be not only what the media bring to the audience, but what does the audi- ence bring to the media? The most influential research regarding media as a reflector of society rather than a major forming influence was carried out by Joseph Klapper and his associates. He sees communications as operating 12The classic experiment of selective perception deals with pre- judiced people's use of anti-prejudice pr0paganda to actually reinforce their existing prejudices, see: E. Cooper and M. Johoda, "The Evasion of Propaganda," Journal of Psychology, 23 (1947), pp. 15—25. For addi« tional information on selective perception theory see: L. Festinger, A Theoryypf Cpgnitive DiSsonance (Evanston, 111.: Row, Peterson, 1957). See 0. 0. Sears anle. S. Freedman, "Selective Exposure to Information: A Critical Review," In W. Schramm and D. Roberts, eds., The Process and Effects of Mass Cfimmunication, revised edition (Urbana, IllinOis: UhiVersity of Illinois Press, 1974), pp. 209—234, for a review of re— search on audience selective exposure activity. 50 through mediating factors, and that these factors "... typically render mass communication a contributory agent, but not the sole cause in a process of reinforcing the existing conditions."13 0n the other hand, there exists the concept referred to by Melvin DeFleur as the "cultural norms theory" which proposes that the matter is not as simple as media merely reinforcing the status quo. According to this theory, mass media indirectly shape individual conduct. The mass media, through selective presentations and the emphasis of certain themes, create impressions among their audi- ences that common cultural norms concerning the emphasized topics are structured or defined in some specific way. Since a person's behavior is usually guided by cultural norms, the media would then serve indirectly to influence conduct. The media provide a 'definition of the situation' which the individual believes to be real. This definition provides guides for action which appear to be approved and supported by society. Therefore, conduct is indirectly shaped by exposure to communication.14 In either case, sweeping generalizations are inappropriate. Mass communication has neither unlimited power to transform society, nor does it simply reflect the society which it serves with no ability to affect its audience to change or grow. *******‘k* Communication research has resulted in less helpful, confirmed fact than had been hoped. The field tends, currently, to product frag- mented research and has become overly concerned with methodology rather 13J. Klapper, The Effects of Mass Communication (Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1960), p. 8. 14Melvin DeFleur, Theories of Mass Communication, second edition (New York: David McKay Co., 1970), p. 129. 51 than development of general communication theory. The difficulties and limitations which have created this situation will be discussed more fully in Chapter V. However, what theory has developed is of considerable importance to an understanding of the mass communication process and effects. In addition to the theories discussed above, most researchers would agree that the field has produced strong evidence to support the belief that the mass media are not too effective in changing well-established beliefs, opinions and values. The media, however, seem effective in creating new aspects of reality and in the forming of new opinions and beliefs. The effects of media on children are different than on adults. Children have fewer established beliefs and values and tend to learn more from mass media. It is felt, therefore, that media may function as a socializing agent with children. It is also agreed, that mass media effects over a long period of time are relatively unknown; however, it is suspected that media may be effective in creating some degree of change. Nothing has been definitely proved in the area of long-range effects, however. This chapter attempts to illustrate the important role of mass communication in a society by discussing the basic social needs that the media fill (i.e., surveillance, consensus, socialization, entertainment, and economic stimulation). In the light of these essential functions, mass communication seems necessary for social growth and stability. The point is made that because of the importance of mass media, societies should attempt to fully understand media use and to determine media 52 effects. There are two basic approaches to determination of effective media use. One is basically humanistic and philosophical, the other is primarily scientific. The development of communication research is summarized and some of the resulting basic communication theories are presented. A final comment by the author concludes that while communi- cation is the basic human social function and has all of the complexities and subtleties of human life, it is therefore a phenomenon requiring analysis on humanistic, philosophic, ethical and scientific terms. Any single approach is too limited to grasp the effects of the process as a whole. A society should utilize all of the tools at its disposal to understand and achieve effective use of the mass communication process. CHAPTER III BASIC PHILOSOPHIC STRUCTURES FOR MASS MEDIA SYSTEMS This chapter is based on the four concepts of mass communication developed by Theodore Peterson, Wilbur Schramm, and Fred S. Siebert in Four Theories of the Press.1 Their analysis of the four basic press systems and attendant, underlying philosophic concepts are widely read and accepted as classic descriptions. A detailed summation is presented here to illustrate to the reader that societies develop their media systems in direct relation to their basic philosophic and political beliefs. A totalitarian society, for example, would not develop a libertarian press system, as it would exist in opposition to the system and not aid in the maintenance of the equilibrium of the larger system that is the society as a whole. As stated earlier, a society or an individual develops a philos- ophy in an attempt to define truth (or the universe), and to determine man's relation to that truth or universe. A society creates social institutions (economic systems, governmental systems, educational sys- tems, media systems, etc.) in the light of this definition of truth,and 1T. Peterson, W. Schramm, and F. Siebert, Four Theories of the Press (Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1956). 53 54 these institutions function to aid the individual members of the society exist in proper relation to the society's conception of truth. Societies, of course, define truth (the universe, life, etc.), in different ways and develop differing philosophies. This is the second purpose of this chapter: to illustrate the fact that while the func- tions of mass media systems are basically the same for all societies, different societies create different media systems to fill these func- tions. Essentially these differences result from the societies' defini- tions of the nature of truth, how it is achieved, and how individual members of the societies relate to this truth. The chapter will conclude with a discussion of what the author feels are some limitations of the concepts as they were originally presented. The four concepts of media systems and their philosophical bases are: Authoritarian, Libertarian, Soviet Communist, and Social- Responsibility. The Authoritarian Concept The basic philosophic and political concepts of an authoritarian system of social organization derive from the belief that truth is given to or perceived by only a few and that the elite group who possess the vision of truth are responsible for those lesser individuals who cannot perceive or possess the truth. The source of truth may be by divine revelation, it may come from the accumulated wisdom of the race, or by the superior ability of the 54 55 elite individual to perceive the interrelated workings of the whole and therefore understand and act correctly. However it is obtained, the members of the elite are innately superior. The truth is theirs because of this innate superiority, not merely because they possess more informa- tion and power. The common individual is simply incapable of under- standing or possessing the truth. It is by virtue of this innate superiority that the elite assumes the responsibility of ruling. The individual member of such a society is subordinate to the state. As a single individual he is inferior and relatively powerless. He can realize his potential as a civilized human being only by sub- ordinating himself to the essence and needs of the state. The state, or the elite ruling class, functions as caretaker for the individuals that make—up the majority of the society, and movement between levels is usually prohibited. The main role of the ruling elite is to trans- late the truth into standards for all members of the society, and direct the common man in his carrying out of these standards. All types of persuasion and coercion are used to insure the maintenance of these standards and the power of the ruling elite. It must be remembered, ' however, that according to the basic assumptions of this philosophy, the ruling elite is never merely maintaining power. They are maintain- ing truth and universal order for a group of lesser individuals who would flounder miserably without their guidance. I It was in such an environment that printing using movable type was developed in the early 1450's. This marked the beginning of mass communication and its development continued in an atmosphere of author- itarian philosophy for several centuries.‘ 56 The omnipresence of authoritarian political philosophy in the Western world at this point was the result of three major factors. The first being a sound philosophical basis which had been profoundly laid by Plato centuries earlier. In The Republic, he argues for the governing of the populace by philosopher kings as being the only natural procedure. Plato: If philosophers have the ability to grasp eternal and immutable truth, and those who are not philosophers are lost in multiplicity and change, which of the two should be in charge of a state?.... Glaucon: It would be absurd not to choose the philosophers, if they are not inferior in all these other qualities; for in the vital quality of knowledge they are clearly superior. Plato also contends that the responsibility of the philosopher kings is to keep the material interests and selfish passions of the masses from dominating society. He proposed that once authority in the state is equally divided, social degeneration automatically begins. Plato's control of the masses extends beyond simply political control. He also felt that the artists, poets, and philosophers should produce in accordance to a rigid cultural code that prescribes what is beneficial for the cultural and spiritual well-being of the society. Philosophers continued developing his basic tenets for centuries, notable among these being Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbs. Machivelli essentially added the sentiment that all_was subordinate to the state including ethics and morality. Any act by a political leader, 2Plato, The Republic, translated by H. D. P. Lee (Baltimore: Penguin Books, Inc., 1956), p. 244. 57 particularly control of discussion and the dissemination of information, was justified by the need for state security. Thomas Hobbs' writings did much to expand the relationship between the state and the individual, particularly emphasizing the dependency aspects of the relationship. The second major influence in the maintenance of authoritarian political order was the Roman Catholic Church. The main contributions to authoritarian philosophy contributed by the Church are the concepts of divine revelation and the belief that the Church exists as the shepherd of mankind. As such, the duty of the Church is to protect the divinely revealed doctrine from contamination and to protect the masses from impure or heretical thought. The ability of the Roman Catholic Church to elicit the aid of the state in censorship activity remained unchallenged for centuries and still exists, to an extent, in some countries. A third factor responsible for the duration of the authoritarian political philosophy was the belief in the divine right of monarchs. This belief in the undisputed right to rule determined by divine selec- tion created throughout all of Europe powerful monarchies and hereditary nobilities which lasted for centuries. In light of the above, that printing (media) should exist for the benefit of or use by the common man was not even considered. This is still true today in authoritarian systems. The role of the mass media, as defined by authoritarian political philosophy, is primarily to pro- mote unity and continuity within the state. Media exist to present truth, as defined by the ruling elite, to the populace. Media are to 58 support the elite, and criticism of the ruling class or their policies is either restricted or completely prohibited. Media ownership in an authoritarian system may be either by private individuals or direct control by the state. If private ownership is the policy, then the state exercises control through the use of such techniques as legal restrictions, state regulatory organizations and unofficial pressures. Responsible or ethical media use in an authoritarian system is achieved when the media contribute to the greatness and development of the state by supporting the truths defined by the ruling elite. In this way, the individual members of the society can develop to their full potential and happiness. Irresponsible media use would be any criticism of the truth as outlined by the state and any attempt to pass on untruth- ful, and therefore destructive, information to the populace. Media help maintain the society's harmony and development by reflecting the truths and resulting policies of the ruling elite. The Libertarian Concept The basic difference between an authoritarian and a libertarian philosophic approach to social organization lies with the basic concep- tion of man and his relation to truth. The authoritarian philosophy views mankind as being essentially made up of inferior beings to be controlled by an elite of superior beings who are the only ones capable ' of perceiving and correctly acting on truth. The libertarian philosophy is dependent upon the concept of each individual being capable of rational thought to perceive truth and of self control as to his own 59 individual destiny. In other words, each individual is capable of being responsible for himself. Libertarian philosophy grew out of the period of intellectual change during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries known as the Enlightenment. The basic belief growing out of this period was that the human intellect and reasoning powers are capable of understanding and ordering the universe without recourse to spiritual or supernatural assistance by the church. The major contributing philosophers were Rene Descartes, John Milton and John Locke. Descartes was one of the first philosophers to propose that reason is the method by which man can determine truth. He felt that man has first to get rid of all_his ideas, renounce all_of his opinions, to make himself free of all_blindly accepted tradition, reject all_existing authorities. Only thus can he hope to regain the native purity of his reasoning power. Once attained, this ability to reason through a clear mind in a logical fashion will lead to the certainty of truth. He pro- posed four requirements for logical reasoning: never to accept any- thing as true if one had not evident knowledge of its being so; divide each problem to be examined into as many parts as feasible; direct one's thoughts in an orderly way; and make throughout such complete enumera- tions and such general surveys that one might be sure of leaving nothing out. According to Descartes: Those long chains of perfectly simple and easy reasonings by means of which geometers are accustomed to carry out their most difficult demonstrations had led me to fancy that everything that can fall under human knowledge forms a similar sequence; and that so long as we avoid accepting as true what is not so, and always 6O preserve the right order for deduction of one thing from another, there can be noth1ng too remote to be reached in the end, or too well hidden to be discovered.3 John Milton put forth the concept in Areopagitica, that men have reason and wisdom to distinguish between right and wrong, good and bad; they can determine truth. However, to exercise this reason to its full- est, man needs free choice, which means freedom from governmental restrictions and interference. He felt that given an open encounter, truth will triumph over error. For who knows not that Truth is strong, next to the Almighty? She needs no policies, nor stratagems, nor licensings to make her victorious; those are the shifts and the defences that error uses against her power. Give her but room, and do not bind her when she sleeps, for then she speaks not true ... but then rather she turns her voice according to the time ... until she be adjured into her own likeness. Yet it is not impossible that she may have more shapes than one. What else is all that rank of things indifferent, wherein Truth may be on this side or on the other, without being unlike herself? To the concepts of freedom from restriction for pursuing truth, John Locke argued that the government should not only not restrict man's ability to exercise his reason in the pursuit of truth, but that the will of the people was actually the center of power and that the people delegate their power or authority to the government. The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but to have only the law of nature for his rule. The liberty of man, in society, is to be under no other legislative 3Rene Descartes, Philosophical Writipgs: A Selection, translated by Elizabeth Anscombe and Peter Thomas GeachTTLondon: Thomas Nelson and Sons, Ltd., 1963) pp. 20—21. 4John Milton, Areopsgitica and Other Prose Works (London: J. M. Dent and Sons, Ltd., 1956), p. 37. 61 power, but that established, by consent, in the commonwealth.5 This, of course, is the exact opposite arrangement of power as that proposed in authoritarian philosophy. Basic libertarian philosophy can be summed up as the belief that man is independent, rational, and able to choose between truth and error without the guidance of a governing or spiritual elite. The state, in fact, exists to provide a social structure in which ideas are freely interchanged so that man may exercise reason and choice, thus finding truth for himself. If the state fails in its responsibility to the people, the people have the power to change or abolish it. Essen- tially, in place of formal controls by a governing body to determine and disseminate truth, there is trust in man's reason and the self-righting process of truth, hence all ideas must be expressed and all persons must have access to these ideas. This basic shift in the definition of truth and man's relation to it, changed the controlling emphasis of society from the church and absolute monarchies based on divine right toward secular powers in society, from theology to rational thought and scientific inquiry. The shift occurred over three centuries and involved major social changes. These included the theological movement known as the Reformation, which developed in opposition to the corruption of the Roman Catholic Church and severely challenged its absolute authority over the spiritual well- being of humanity and its censorship over dissenting theological ideas. 5Massimo Salvadori, Locke and Liberty: Selections from the Works of John Locke (London: Charles Birchall and Sons, Ltd., 1960), p. 152. 62 Many of the monarchies, notably France and England, underwent continuing erosion of absolute power by the demands of an increasingly enlightened populace. The social division of nobility and peasant classes became blurred by the development of a middle class of capitalistic tradesmen, and social mobility between classes became an increasing reality. The role of mass media in the libertarian view of reality and social order is essential and primary. Man's use of reason to determine truth for himself requires exposure to as many ideas as possible. Media's major responsibility is to present all ideas. Media provide an open market place for ideas so that truth (the correct assessment of reality), will emerge. John Stuart Mill, in the nineteenth century clearly defined this concept in his famous essay, On Liberty. If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.6 He concludes that if an opinion is silenced, it may well be the truthful opinion. Even if it is an incorrect opinion, it may contain the grain of truth from which the full truth can emerge. Furthermore, if the commonly held opinion is the full truth, that opinion is not rationally held, until it has been tested and defended, and unless the common opinion is tested by opposing opinion occasionally, it will lose its meaningfulness and effectiveness. Theoretically, an open market place of ideas requires two essential factors.) First there must be a private enterprise system with unlimited, 6John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, ed. Alburey Castell (New York: Crofts Publishing, 1947), p. 16. 63 privately owned media competing in an open market. Secondly, these media must be absolutely free from government control and interference. This latter factor implies another responsibility of media in a liber- tarian system. Media, while being separate from government, must assume the role of continuing critic of governmental activity. The responsible use of media in a libertarian political and philosophic framework depends on the existence of a pluralistic system. No single, privately owned mass communication outlet is responsible for the whole truth. Its responsibility is to present whatever truth or opinion it deems necessary. The presence of many, varying opinions will result in the truth. Irresponsible media use exists only when the plural- istic system is reduced and the presentation of ideas begins to be restricted in such a way as to represent limited points of view. The Soviet Communist Concept While the communist political philosophy is generally viewed by members of Western societies as being essentially the same as authori- tarian philosophy, there are very basic and potentially far reaching differences. The analysis of the Soviet Communist concept of media systems put forth by Schramm gt al,, is somewhat limited due to this interpretation of communistic philosophy being virtually identical with authoritarian philosophy. A fuller discussion of this limitation is contained at the end of this chapter. 64 Communist political and philosophical theory is based on the works of Karl Marx.7 It is similar to authoritarian concepts in the aspect of the individual need being subordinate to the need of the society or the state. Here, however, there is an important philosophic difference. The state is defined in authoritarian philosophy as being separate from and superior to the people. The state equals a ruling elite possessing truth with the responsibility of supervising and directing a body of less capable beings. In communist philosophy the state is equal to the populace, it is the populace. It is the social manifestation or organi- zation through which the people rule themselves. It is a collective. In a collective there is no separate ruling class, the ruling mechanism is derived from the classless whole. Therefore, to subordinate an individual need or desire for a need of the whole is to act responsibly for the good of the whole and of the individual self through the whole. To care for the whole is to care for the self. In an authoritarian system, to subordinate an individual need to the state (which does not equal the whole) is to subordinate an individual need to the needs of a ruling elite separate from the indi- vidual. The implications inherent in this basic difference for self- esteem and the resulting creative, positive participation in the whole 7See: Karl Marx, Capital: The Communist Manifesto and Other Writings, edited by Max Eastman (New York: The Modern Library, 1932) for his own philosophical foundations for communism; Erich Fromm, Marx's Concept Of Man (New York: F. Ungar Company, 1966) for an excellent sum- mation oerarx's philosophical conception of man by Fromm, also selec- tions of Marx's major economic and philosophical manuscripts, and bio- graphical information on Marx; Bertell Ollman, Alienation: Marx's Conception of Man in Capitalistic Sociesy (Cambridge, England: UhiVersity Press, 1971)ifor an insightful sociological interpretation applied to current technological society. 65 by the individual are evident. The Marxist view of a stateless society, therefore refers to the lack of a controlling social force which exists separate from and in opposition to the good of the populace as a whole, i.e., the state as it is defined by authoritarian theory. Marx did not envision a society without any social controlling mechanisms. The basis of social control was to be the collective, which is philosophically quite different from the authoritarian state. In a communist theory, man and his relation to truth is viewed in basically the same way as in libertarian theory; man is capable of decerning truth himself, of determining his own actions in relation to that truth, and of creating social orders to control himself. He needs, however, freedom from the elitist domination of the capitalistic class and education as to the methods for achieving the collective society. There is, indeed, strict control of social development but the nature and use of that control develops out of a body that is the same as the people being controlled. The control does not exist, in theory, separate from and superior to the people. It must be remembered that Marx developed his philosophy in rela- tion to the failures of libertarian philosophic and political reality, not in criticism of authoritarian concepts. His were attempts to improve the libertarian conceptions. He felt that man's inability to achieve the freedom and truth proposed by libertarian philosophy lay in the development of a capitalistic class, which in truth functioned in as Oppressive a manner on the populace as had the authoritarian ruling elite. He viewed the two classes as functioning in essentially the same manner and at the expense of individual truth and freedom. He saw 66 libertarian theory as having produced an authoritarian-functioning capitalistic elite ruling by virtue of economic inequities. He theorized, based on an interpretation of Georg Hegel's dialec- tic principle, that capitalism contained the potential for its own destruction. A capitalist society would always exist in a state of economic imbalance and crisis. The rich would grow richer and the work- ing class poorer, resulting in a capitalistic imperialism that would produce wars and finally prove so unbearable to the working class that they would overthrow the capitalistic elite and form a classless, collective society in which all economic apparatus and systems would be controlled by the populace. This change in basic economic structure and relationships would alter all other elements of society. The resulting classless society is the ultimate power in that the power resides in the people. This power is generated by social action through social institutions. These institutions include control of natural resources and the means of production. These basic improvements in society would create an environment conducive to the development of the individual member who would in turn be in a better position to improve the collective. Truth, then, is attainable by all members of the society. All members are capable of governing themselves; the populace is the supreme power and achieves truth and the correct actions in relation to this truth through a classless collective. Communist philosophy differs from libertarian in that once the truth or the correct perception of reality is arrived at, the continued challenge by conflicting ideas is useless 67 and tends to diminish the powers of the people and their social organi- zations. The role of media in a communistic philosophic order is primarily educational and propagandistic. They are instruments of the people, as are all other social systems, and they function to translate the economic, political and social policies from communistic ideology into social reality. The functions of media are positively defined. They are seen as tools with specific functions and positive social goals to accomplish. This is a different approach than that of authoritarian censorship, which simply determines what the media are not to do. The tone of all information transmitted over mass media is serious and historically significant in that it relates to the development of the collective society. The communistic view of objectivity is that it is a negative factor in relation to the presentation of truth. Factual description is an impossibility in that every fact exists within a frame of reference or a larger interaction. To present a fact, event, or idea without putting it in the proper context of social and class evaluation is distortive and irresponsible. Frivolous information used for pure escapism is avoided. According to communistic media philosophy, criticism is absolutely essential in both directions: from the social controlling mechanisms downward and from the populace upward. Media are utilized for such criticism of all elements of the society, and the criticism is seen as an important method for keeping the system functioning properly. However, the actual structure of the system and the philosophy behind it 68 are sacrosanct. They are not to be criticized. This is the illustra- tion of the basic disagreement with the libertarian belief in the self- righting process of truth in an open-market place of ideas. The essential view of media freedom is that the media are not free. The people are free, the media is their tool. The media are not to interfere with the people's freedom by communicating harmful informa- tion, false teachings, or debasing entertainment. Responsible media use is to educate the people about the need for social responsibility. It is to help the individual achieve the point of view where he can be unselfish, and unegotistical enough to forego his immediate personal gratification for the good of the whole group of individuals of which he is a member, and in so doing he achieves for himself maximum benefits. The Social-Responsibility Concept The social-responsibility philosophy is essentially an evolution of the libertarian philosophy, with the primary change being the inclu- sion of the concept of responsible action on the part of the members of the social system for the benefit of the whole. This philosophic re- emphasis of human rights stresses that no right exists in isolation. It has an accompanying obligation: man keeps his freedom only by responsible action in relation to the welfare of the whole. The basic libertarian philosophic view defines man as a rational creature, capable of assessing truth given an open flow or exchange of ideas. It emphasizes the rights of the individual in relation to the state. Continued scientific and rational inquiry developed theories of 69 human evolution, psychology, statistical mechanics and relativity that have contributed to a slightly different view of man and his social orders. These concepts basically altered both the simplistic view of man as atotally rational creature and the assumption that the existence of an open marketplace of ideas is automatic. Observation of the actual development of libertarian societies and their social systems seems to indicate two basic factors. First, man does not always act in a completely rational manner. On many occa- sions his decisions and actions are the result of instinct, intuition and mysticism. Secondly, events have shown that classical laissez faire economics and the common good are not directly, positively related. The result of these altered perceptions on the basic libertarian philo- sophical concept of truth was that the conceptions of truth remained unchanged (truth emerges from an open exchange of ideas and man is cap- able of perceiving it), but the open marketplace has to be ensured through some sort of responsible social action, lest man, who proves to be somewhat less than rational at all times, be manipulated by self- serving social organizations. As stated earlier, the use of mass communication in a libertarian social system is essential to ensure that freedom of expression, the presentation of all ideas, be a reality. It is in guaranteeing this freedom of expression that the basic social-responsibility philosophy applies to mass media. The philosophical basis of media use in this system is that the media have a responsibility to the people and the society of which they are a part. Media are not "free" to do as their owners see fit regardless of the effects on the society. 70 This sensed need for responsible use of mass communication grows from two basic factors. First, the pervasiveness of mass communication in modern technological society and, secondly, the immense growth of media use have caused mass communication to be viewed as a powerful social force. As such the responsible use of so potent a tool becomes the concern of the society as a whole. Secondly, the inherent limited access aspect of modern mass media, due to economic requirements and electromagnetic limitations, makes the automatic existence of an open marketplace for ideas almost an impossibility, particularly if the exist- ing media are primarily controlled by a single segment or interest of the society. Some sort of responsible social action is required to insure the existence of this very basic philosophic requirement; i.e., the free exchange of all ideas. How is the definition of socially responsible action arrived at and how is it enforced? It may be done by a social organization separ- ate from the media structure, such as a public corporation responsible to a board of distinguished authorities and citizens as is done in Britain, or by a governmental organization functioning as a representa- tive of the populace; or definition and enforcing may be by the communi- cation professionals themselves through professional groups. However the responsibility is defined and arrived at, its essence is a media system that is aware of its responsibility to the society and that actively seeks out truth and presents it objectively in such a manner as to result in a balanced presentation of views and ideas. There must be access to the media systems by all groups representing 71 any idea or view, this particularly in relation to electronic media with its limited channels. In this way truth and freedom will continue and the social system will maintain growth and equilibrium. According to social-responsibility philosophy, the placing of self-serving goals of media organizations above social goals and needs is irresponsible behavior. ******‘k** It is the feeling of the author that, as the above philosophical concepts were originally presented, the authoritarian and libertarian conceptualizations are adequate. However, the analysis of the communis- tic and social-responsibility concepts seem to contain some limitations. The above presentation of the four basic political and media philosophies contain the author's re-emphasis as explained below. The first problem exists with Schramm et al.'s description of the communistic philosophy. Essentially, the problem lies with the fact that on a philosophic level they equate communism with authoritarianism. The reason is simple. The majority of opinion about communist theory has been based on the development and nature of the Soviet system, which seems to have stagnated in an authoritarian control of the proletariat. (This is particularly evident in this case, as the labeling used is "Soviet'I communist. Perhaps it was the authors' intent to deal only with that particular society's actualization of communism, but the tone of their work seems to indicate a more general application.) The other major attempt at actualizing basic Marxist theory exists in China. Unfortunately, there is in communist societies an inherent 72 mistrust of capitalist societies with a resulting tendency to restrict the flow of information between themselves and capitalist systems. Therefore, very little is known in capitalist societies, the American society in particular, about the actual development and nature of com- munist political social systems. In addition, the attempts of the Chinese to isolate themselves during their reorganization and basic developmental stages proved so effective that virtually nothing has been known until very recently about their particular communistic system. As interaction and communication between the Chinese and the rest of the world increases, it is becoming evident that the two major attempts at communistic social organization have resulted in somewhat different types of societies, especially in relation to the oppressive totalitarian nature of the relationship between the populace and the governing structure. It is beginning to appear that in Communist China the Marxist intent of oneness between the governing structure and the populace is being more closely achieved and the totalitarian aspects of state control have more successfully "withered away" and been replaced by a communal, collective social control of the people by the people. It is beginning to be suspected that the Chinese communist populace exists without the sense of oppression that at least a percentage of Soviet people seem to exhibit on various occasions. It may well be that the communistic political philosophy does not automatically result in authoritarian social control, and that Marx's envisioned goals of a classless collective society are, in part, achievable. The failure of the Soviet authoritarian state to “wither away" into a collective system of social control may well rest in the 73 nature of the particular Soviet situation, rather than in the basic philosophic theory. The point being, that any theory, when applied to human existence will result in varying degrees of perfection. In examining and defining a concept, therefore, one must avoid the danger of limiting the examina- tion by considering only a fraction of the examples. It seems that Schramm et al. have done this to an extent. Their discussion of commun- ist political and media philosophy is limited only to the Soviet example which is regrettable given the physical size and political potential of China and Southeast Asia. The second essential problem of the presentation by Schramm et al., is the seeming omission of one of the major philosophical and political systems in existence in the modern world: socialism. Their concepts, as discussed in Four Theories of the Press, omit the social organization structures of such countries as England, Denmark, Sweden, Japan, Canada, etc. Given the underlying assumption discussed above that Communist equals Soviet equals authoritarian, and another basic assumption that socialism is essentially an outgrowth of communism, socialistic forms of political and media systems should then automatically fit into the :Soviet Communist philosophic structure. However, Schramm et al., make r10 direct mention of this type of political and media system in this <:1assification. The only mention of such systems exists very briefly vvith reference to the British, Canadian, Japanese, Australian, French iand Belgian media systems in the authoritarian discussion. However, 1:hese systems do not qualify under this philosophic definition as they 74 are not propagandistic, heavily censored tools for the dissemination of elitist truth. The philosophical basis for both the political and media systems of these societies is simply not authoritarian. It is in all cases a development of socialism from varying combinations of libertarian and authoritarian philosophy. All of this is not to say that their four concepts do not include the basic socialistic philosophy; they do. Socialism, as it has devel- oped and exists in such societies as England, Japan, Denmark, Sweden, Canada, etc., seems to be based on the same principles of social respons- ibility as outlined in Schramm et al.‘s last philosophical concept of social-responsibility; i.e., as an extension of libertarian principles with the attempt at responsible action on the part of the society to prevent the loss of individual freedom to any special interest group. While Schramm et al., utilize the American commercial media system as the prime example of the social-responsibility philosophical concept, in actuality, the American commercial media system better illustrates libertarian philosophy with its laissez faire economic principles. The media systems of socialist countries like those mentioned above better illustrate the evolved social-responsibility philosophy with its empha- sis on responsibility being defined and stressed by some socially sanc- tioned body. In these societies, the major media systems do not operate as businesses for a profit and they seem to make a more serious attempt to fulfill their various societies definitions of socially responsible mass communication. 75 It should be noted again that the author's discussion of the com- munist and social-responsibility concepts has been expanded to include these alterations. In conclusion, it must be remembered that the four theoretical concepts discussed above reflect broad ideals or categorical descrip- tions. Any such generalizations seldom exist in reality exactly in the form of the theoretical concept. Individual political systems each create media systems to fit their specific needs and individual inter- pretations. However, a media system will basically reflect the political and philosophical basis of the society of which it is a part. CHAPTER IV THE PHILOSOPHIC BASIS AND STRUCTURE OF THE AMERICAN BROADCASTING SYSTEM The importance of broadcasting in this society can be assessed by considering these four factors: first, the absolutely essential nature of communication for social action of any kind; second, the primary importance of the basic functions of mass communication to the equilib- rium and growth of any society; third, the necessity of mass communica- tion to maintain the open marketplace of ideas essential to libertarian societies; and finally, the importance of the questions regarding effec- tive use of mass communication yet to be answered. Mass communication, including the media systems developed to facilitate the process, are so primary to a society's stability that irresponsible use can result in negative, detrimental effects seriously impairing the society's well-being. This, however, raises the complex question: what is irresponsible use? The answer to this question depends upon the particular society's definition of responsible mass communication. These definitions are developed within the philosophical framework of any media system. To determine what a society expects of any particular medium, one has to examine the philosophical framework developed for that medium. (How these expectations are then carried out is another matter.) 76 77 Before beginning such an examination of the American broadcasting system, a brief historical perspective is helpful. From the earliest stages, broadcasting (radio) development in the United States had its primary impetus from business interests. As early as 1916 the potential of radio as a mass medium with economic benefit for those who developed it was clearly outlined by David Sarnoff, then a young engineer with American Marconi. In a memorandum sent to his superiors, he outlined the possibilities as follows: I have in mind a plan of development which would make radio a 'household utility' in the same sense as the piano or phonograph. The idea is to bring music into the house by wireless.... The 'Radio Music Box' can be supplied with amplifying tubes and a loudspeaking telephone, all of which can be neatly mounted in one box. The box can be placed on a table in the parlor or living room, the switch set accordingly and the transmitted music received. The same principle can be extended to numerous other fields as, for example, receiving lectures at home which can be made per- fectly audible; also events of national importance can be simul- taneously announced and received. Baseball scores can be trans- mitted in the air by the use of one set installed at the Polo Grounds. The same would be true of other cities. This proposition would be especially interesting to farmers and others living in outlying districts removed from the cities. By the purchase of a 'Radio Music Box' they could enjoy concerts, lectures, music, recitals, etc. While I have indicated a few of the most probable fields of usefulness for such a device yet there are numerous other fields to which the principle can be extended. Unfortunately for American Marconi, no action was taken on Mr. Sarnoff's perceptive suggestions. RCA was formed in 1919 to break the dominance in American communi- cations of the British-based Marconi company. It was a consortium 1Gieason L. Archer, History of Radio to 1926 (New York: The Ameri- can Historical Society, Inc., 1938), pp. 112-113. 78 formed of General Electric, Westinghouse and Western Electric, the manu- facturing arm of American Telephone & Telegraph. This cartel would share in the resulting radio and other communications patents and divide the profits. General Electric and Westinghouse were given the exclusive right to manufacture radio sets and RCA was to sell them. AT&T was granted the monopoly in the manufacture, lease and sale of transmitters.2 The early development of radio was slow and confused due to private ownership and the resulting profit motive aspects. Every little inven- tion was patented in the United States, England and other European countries. Consequently any improvements made by any company usually led to lengthy court battles over patent claims. However, this intense competition by business interests did result in considerable amounts of money being invested in research and development. World War I saw the suspension of all patent litigations and re- strictions and the assumption of complete control of the infant industry by the federal government. The result was a period of rapid technical advancement due to the cooperative effort of all concerned that would have taken much longer in peacetime. However, at the completion of the war pressure was immediately applied by business interests to regain their control and the government was equally reluctant to interfere overmuch with the newly emerging mass medium. This reaction on the part of the administration, of course, was due to the basic philosophic structure underlying the American press system which strictly prohibits government control of a medium. 2Ben Bagdikian, The Information Machines (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1971), p. 168. 79 Continued technical development, primarily by Dr. Frank Conrad working with Westinghouse, finally resulted in the establishment of the first radio station. In 1920 KDKA began broadcasting in Pittsburgh. It was owned and operated by Westinghouse for the purpose of stimulating the sales of home radio receivers. Other stations were quickly started by competing interests and by the first half of 1922 there were 254 stations and the manufacture of home receivers was lagging hopelessly behind orders.3 This rapid growth of radio stations, however, preceded the develop- ment of a sound economic support base for the new medium. The majority of the new stations simply could not support themselves and had to devise a way to survive economically. The resulting solution was adver- tising. Commercial radio was born on August 28, 1922 when AT&T's radio station in New York City, WEAF sold a ten minute time slot to the Queensboro Corporation to promote the sale of apartments in Jackson Heights.4 The reaction by Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover re- flected the society's philosophic ideal for the future of commercial broadcasting. It is inconceivable that we should allow so great a possi- bility for service, for news, for entertainment, for education and for yital commercial purposes to be drowned in advertising chatter. 3Melvin DeFleur, Theories of Mass Communication, second edition (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1970), p. 59. 4Erik Barnouw, A Tower in Babel (New York: Oxford University Press, 1966), p. 110. 5Bryce Rucker, The First Freedom (Carbondale, Ill.: Southern Illinois University Press, 1968), p. 81. 80 Even the National Association of Broadcasters insisted into the early 1930's that advertising should be limited to daylight hours, leaving the evening "family hours" free of commercialism. It must be noted, however, that over time, the conflicting situation between the philo- sophical definition of broadcasting and the reality of the commercial implementing structure eroded the industry's self-regulation of commer- cialism. Another example of the inability of the industry to regulate itself due to the competitive nature of commercial broadcasting is seen in the interference situation that had developed full-blown by 1925. By this time every single frequency was occupied, some by several sta- tions. The Coolidge administration was reluctant to interfere and hoped the industry would solve the problem itself. After two years with no solution forthcoming, President Coolidge finally asked Congress to enact legislation to regulate broadcasting in this country. The result was the passage of the Radio Act of 1927 which first enunciated the princi« ple that the air waves belong to the people, that they can be used by private individuals only with the formal permission of government on a short-term license basis, and that that use must be in the public interest, convenience and necessity. The Radio Act was only a temporary solution to allow time for observation, trial and readjustment. The seven years that ensued evidenced much pressure by industry to influence the amount and type of control that would finally result. For example, in May of 1934 the Wagner—Hatfield amendment proposed to reserve twenty—five percent of the Spectrum for noncommercial use. Senator Dill also proposed an alternative solution that commerical 81 stations give a specified percentage of time to education and religion. William S. Paley, the president of CBS at the time, testified in opposi- tion to these proposals. He pointed out that only about thirty percent of CBS time was commercial with the remaining approximate seventy per- cent being available for noncommercial programming, implying that this situation was a permanent policy and that the proportions would remain essentially unchanged.6 Any sort of legislation restricting commercial usage was defeated partially due to Mr. Paley's testimony. Within twenty-five years, only five percent of CBS programming time was devoted to noncommercial educational programming.7 In the midst of this controversy and pressure by all of the vary- ing interests, the Federal Communication Commission was formed with the passage of the Communication Act of 1934. The act which created the permanent regulatory agency for American broadcasting was passed without a quorum present.8 The next major developmental step to be accomplished by the young industry was the formation of nationwide networks. Again the impetus was a commercial one. To compete with newspaper advertising, radio had to offer a national market, something the newspapers could not possibly do. AT&T was the first to link stations together. By 1924 it had a 6William S. Paley, "Radio as a Cultural Force," remarks before the FCC, Oct. 17, 1934 (New York: CBS Brochure, 1948). 7Harry Skornia, Television and Society (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1965), p. 62. 8Congressionai Record of House Debates; June 9, 1934, 73rd Congress, Second Session, p. 10995. 82 twenty-three station national network. RCA decided to do the same thing, only when it attempted it, AT&T threatened to refuse them use of the telephone lines that are, of course, necessary to make up a network. It took two years, but by 1926 they had reached an agreement whereby RCA could form a network and AT&T would be given exclusive right to supply radio stations with communications lines. RCA formed the National Broad- casting Company in September, 1926. By 1927, NBC had grown large enough to split into two networks, the Red and the Blue. In 1928, CBS was formed in an attempt by independent stations to pool their resources and ’compete. However, NBC continued to dominate broadcasting until finally in 1943, the FCC forced the network to divest itself of one of its net- works. NBC Blue became ABC. In the meantime, radio had become a national institution. A television image had been successfully transmitted by Philo T. Farnsworth in his San Francisco apartment in 1927. He used the dollar sign as a test pattern. The new medium grew quietly but rapidly being primarily developed by the existing commercial radio interests, who were the first to recognize the potential as a mass medium. The first commer- cial television license was granted to an RCA station in 1941. American television, therefore, emerged with essentially the same type of commer- cial media structure that radio had. The first major decision to be faced by the new television indus- try and the FCC concerned the number of channels to make available. The choices were to utilize Very High Frequency (VHF), Ultra High Fre- quency (UHF), or both. Technological development on VHF was farther along and these frequencies had the advantage of a stronger signal 83 reaching farther: forty miles with a strong signal and forty more miles with a fair picture. The major disadvantage of VHF was its existence in a crowded part of the radio wave spectrum. There are only thirteen channels, and Channel 1 is unusable due to interference with radio- telephone frequencies. Therefore, with only twelve channels available, in actuality only an alternating six can be utilized in adjacent areas. UHF, on the other hand, exists in a large, uncrowded section of the spectrum with seventy available channels. However, the signal is reli- able for only twenty-five miles, which means that it will not reach into the suburbs of most larger American cities where the majority of the consumers live.9 In terms of economic effects, if the maximum number of channels were to be utilized, then the success of the existing broadcasters would attract others who would put out competing products which would justify even more channels. This would result in a diversity of choice for the consumer and a lower cost for each channel. If, on the other hand, a limited number of channels were available, there would be fewer new- comers, and the existing broadcasters would have possession of the medium with a monopoly on programming and profits. In addition, the costs for the limited channel space would rise. The FCC's decision was to utilize the VHF band only. RCA had pressured to restrict transmission to VHF, and in actualizing this restriction the FCC had preordained commercial television to a limited 9Ben Bagdikian, The Information Machines (New York: Harper & Row, 1971), p. 237. 84 number of outlets whose programming would be controlled by a few national organizations. As new stations went on the air, however, another electronic crisis arose, similar to that in radio's development. The theoretic elimination of interference by alternating six channels in adjacent areas failed. The channels interfered with each other after all. With this unexpected interference problem and the fast growing popularity of television, there was very quickly not enough space under the original VHF plan to satisfy the demand. The FCC froze all new applications on September 30, 1948 to review the problem and attempt a solution. The "freeze" lasted four years and resulted in the FCC decision to add the UHF band to television, expanding the potential number of stations from 650 to 2,035.10 However, the original pressure by RCA and other industry members to restrict competition had successfully crippled the UHF competition potential. When UHF stations begin going on the air in 1952, virtually none of the existing television sets were equipped to receive the signal. By 1954 only eight percent of existing television sets could receive UHF signals and in the ten ensuing years this number had grown to only ten percent.]1 When the FCC freed the use of the UHF wave- lengths, it recommended that it be required for all television sets to be manufactured with UHF capability built-in. However, Congress refused 10Ibi ., p. 238. Ibid. 11 85 to enact such legislation. It must be remembered that the majority of television sets in the United States are manufactured by RCA (which owns NBC) or by companies who pay royalities to RCA for the use of their patents. The pressure by those interests to defeat such legislation was considerable and effective. It was not until 1964 that Congress finally passed the legislation. The attempts to limit competition in American broadcasting con- tinue to be successful. Public broadcasting, pay television and cable TV have all felt the effects of the efforts by the commercial television structure to eliminate competition on both the commercial and non- commercial level. The potential for these alternatives to provide diversified, specialized programming, to increase public access by creating more outlets, to allow more localized programming to fulfill local needs, etc., has been thoroughly discussed and continually pointed out since the late 1950's. To date, however, these alternatives remain discussed potentials only, not broadcasting realities with any signifi- cant power. The major broadcasting media system in this society is still the same commercial system that developed in the 1930's. The Philosophical Basis of American Broadcasting As stated earlier, a society's expectations of responsible broad- casting are officially defined in the philosophical base it sets for its media organizations. The philosophical basis for American broadcasting developed, through time, from three main sources: the libertarian philosophy on which the majority of our social systems are based, our 86 political and economic systems being prime examples; the journalistic ethic, which is, of course, an outgrowth of libertarian philosophy, but which as an ethic for a media institution specifically influenced broad- casting philosophy; and the aesthetic criteria of popular art form. (There are those who would argue that "aesthetic" and "popular art" are a contradiction of terms. It is, however, beyond the scope of this paper to debate this issue. The assumption here is that popular art is a valid art form.) In summation from the preceding chapter, the basic libertarian philosophy defines truth as the emerging universal order resulting from a continuous clash of all ideas in an open marketplace accessible to all members of the society. All members of the society possess the poten- tial for rational thought with which to perceive the truth, and they require freedom from restriction (particularly governmental), to utilize this ability to its fullest. The governing structures exist to serve the people, with the power residing in the people to alter the govern- ment if it fails in its responsibility to the people. Attendant to American libertarianism are laissez faire economic principles. Free enterprise, open competition, minimal governmental interference in the American business structure are basic to this society's philosophic beliefs. This society translated the above into a journalistic ethic which sets standards, norms, principles that are intended to lead, not force, the journalist to make certain ethical decisions. The primary function of the press system is philosophically outlined in the preamble of The Canons of Journalism: 87 The primary function of newspapers is to communicate to the human race what its members do, feel and think. Journalism, therefore, demands of its practitioners the widest range of intelligence, of knowledge and of experience, as well as natural and trained powers of observation and reasoning. The Canons go on to set broad standards of responsibility, freedom, independence, sincerity, truthfulness, accuracy, impartiality, fair play and decency. The American society views its press system as a forum for the open exchange of ideas, and fairness must exist in the overall balance of ideas presented. The press exists to serve the people and has the responsibility of presenting objective, truthful, accurate information. It must maintain its freedom to do this, particularly from governmental interference, but also from any particular pressure group that would prevent the presentation of objective, truthful information. The press system has the responsibility of keeping check on government, openly discussing and criticizing its activities. In addition to the libertarian philosophy and the journalistic ethic, American broadcasting philoSOphy derives much from the concepts surrounding popular art. According to Russell Nye, a scholar who has written an excellent analysis of the emergence and existence of popular art: The existence of what is now called 'the entertainment industry' can be easily recognized as early as 1750, when market- able cultural goods began to be manufactured in quantity to meet the needs of (the) mass public, to the profit of those who pro- duced them. 3 12"The Canons of Journalism," in W. Schramm and W. Rivers, Responsibility in Mass Communication, revised edition (New York: Harper & Row,il969), p. 253. 13Russel Nye, The Unembarrassed Muse: The Popular Arts in America (New York: The 0151 Press, 1970), p. 2. 88 Popular art, then, is an artistic form requiring somewhat differ- ent circumstances than either elite or folk art. There must be a large middle class audience with a degree of education and some economic means to purchase and appreciate the product. Technological development is necessary so that the products of the popular art effort can be cheaply produced and widely distributed. The creative motivation for popular art is a strange blend of artistic satisfaction on the part of the artist and the profit motive. The artist's role in popular art is to create, for a profit, the kind of art the mass audience wants. He creates to confirm the experiences of the mass audience. Popular art seldom deals with disturbing or innovative concepts. The relationship between the popular artist and his audience is an impersonal one. He is not sensed as an individual by his audience; rather, the audience experiences his creations without much thought as to who did the creating. Likewise, the p0pular artist views his audi- ence as a heterogeneous mass separated from him by many intervening factors, many of which influence, in part, the essence of his creative endeavor. Producers, advertisers, agents, distributors, salesmen, editors all intervene between the artist and his audience. His rela- tionship with the audience is neither direct nor critical. It could even be defined as ambiguous. By comparison, elite art is created by artists who are, or become, known by their audience. According to Nye, "... the subjective element—— that is, the presence of the creator or performer--is vital to its 89 effectiveness."14 Both artist and audience respond to a consciously aesthetic context and an accepted set of rules. The success or failure of an elite art endeavor is judged in relation to a normative body of recognized classics. The intent of an elite art creation is the dis- covery of highly perceptive or new ways of recording and interpreting reality. Folk art is less clearly separated from popular art than is the elite form. The folk artist is usually completely unknown by his audi- ence and the possibility of public recognition is almost completely absent. The folk artist creates with less conscious aesthetic context and purpose and his creations tend to be thematically simple, technically uncomplicated, and often fulfill a pragmatic purpose rather than an aesthetic one. Popular art obviously lies somewhere in between. Essentially it is an artistic form to please many and to make a profit for its pro- ducers. Popular art, libertarian philosophy and journalistic ethics are all aspects of universal reality and it is from various aspects of such reality, from assorted ethical and moral considerations, that specific philosophies emerge. The process is a social and psychological phenom- enon of immense complexity, occurring over time. The philosophic basis for American broadcasting is a typical example of this process. However, the interesting factor concerning the entire broadcasting system, i.e., the philosophic base and the implementing structure, is that the Ibid., p. 3. 90 structure developed a bit ahead of a consciously constructed philosophic base. Broadcasting's rapid emergence upon the American social environ- ment found the society relatively unaware of the nature and magnitude of the new medium. The only previous major mass media experience avail- able came from the print tradition of journalism and popular entertain— ment via the novel and magazine. It was natural, then, to simply apply the journalistic philosophy to the infant broadcasting medium and create an implementing structure accordingly. Unfortunately, this ethical base applies primarily to the dissemination of serious information and news. There is an entertainment aspect of electronic media that printed matter, especially newspapers, do not have. The resulting inadequacies of the journalistic ethic were filled in by popular art concepts. Therefore, the broadcasting structure that had developed by the early 1920's had piece-mealed various philosophic concepts into a unique system which consisted of an implementing structure without a specific philosophic base of its own. Essentially, the broadcasting media structure was a free enterprise, laissez faire, pluralistic medium, intent on remaining free of government control with the same responsibilities as the press in regards to its news functions. However, in addition to these news functions there was the need to entertain by the conveyance of popular art products, at a profit, to a mass audience. This latter function concerns ethical and philosophical considerations not covered by the journalistic ethic. An audience approaches entertainment with a different frame of reference than that used for perceiving serious information. It was 91 primarily due to this differing psychological set and the immense growth of electronic media use that society became increasingly aware of and critical about the effects of the popular art aspects of broadcasting. As Wilbur Schramm points out: The objections (to popular art) are usually moral. That is, they are objections to what people are taught by popular art--the opinions and kinds of behavior they might learn ... (there are) only two ways to judge popular art, besides the purely commercial test. That is, is it good art, and is it good teaching?15 Because people approach their entertainment with their "defenses down", so to speak, and because such presentations do still instruct and inform to some degree, a sense of broadcasting in the public interest based on moral needs for social responsibility began to emerge. It became clear that the nature of electronic mass communication required a somewhat altered philosophic basis from that adequate for the press media system. In addition to the differences created by the popular art aspects, the electronic media are time locked with limited access. Therefore, the open marketplace necessary for the self-righting process of truth was not the simple, natural matter that it had been in early press development. Limited channels and high costs of investment and production require a special responsibility: to make a marketplace which is restricted exist as a truly free marketplace of ideas and information. It is on the basis of these specific broadcasting charac- teristics that the society created a philosophy for and definitions of responsible broadcasting that accommodate this increased sense of social 15Wilbur Schramm and William Rivers, Responsibility in Mass Com- munication, revised edition (New York: Harper & Row, 1969), p. 203. 92 responsibility not inherent in the libertarian philosophy or journalis- tic ethic. American broadcasting philosophy is reflected in such documenta- tion as the First Amendment of the Constitution which guarantees press freedom, The Communications Act of 1934, The Canons of Journalism, The Radio Act of 1927, The Radio Code, and The Television Code. An examina- tion of these documents shows that the essential underlying principle of broadcasting philosophy in this society is the need to broadcast in the "public interest, convenience and necessity," as is directly stated in the Communication Act of 1934. The Radio Code precedes its guidelines for responsible program and advertising standards with these basic concepts: ... (broadcasting) influence in the arts, in science, in education, in commerce, and upon the public welfare is of such magnitude that the only proper measure of its responsibility is the common good of the whole people; ' That it is our obligation to serve the people in such a manner as to reflect credit upon our profession and to encourage aspiration toward a better estate for all mankind.16 The Television Code sets standards for the advancement of educa- tion and culture, outlines the responsibility toward children and the community, enumerates general program standards, deals specifically with news and public events, controversial public issues, political and religious programs, and sets advertising standards and limitations. All of these are outlined within the general principle of responsibility to the public interest. 16Quoted from "The Radio Code," ibid., p. 273. 93 Television and all who participate in it are jointly accountable to the American public for respect for the special needs of children, for community responsibility, for the advance- ment of education and culture, for the acceptability of the program materials chosen, for decency and decorum in production, and for propriety in advertising. This responsibility cannot be discharged by any given group of programs, but can be discharged only through the highest standards of respect for the American home, applied to every moment of every program presented by television.17 This stress on the public interest is due to the underlying con- cepts that the airwaves are a natural resource owned by the public and that the right to use them is granted by the public to a specific broad- caster for a limited time and, therefore, what he transmits over them must be in the public interest. Broadcasting philosophy basically covers three primary areas: the responsibility to enlighten the public, to reflect public morals and beliefs, and to restrict the advertising use of the medium. Broad- casting content has three basic substances: news, entertainment, and advertising, and each of the basic philosophic emphases deal with a corresponding information substance. In responsible enlightenment of the public, the broadcasting medium is expected to function in essentially the same manner as the press. Broadcasting news and serious information content is to present a balance of views and ideas (in this way helping to keep the Open marketplace concept); present factual, objective, accurate information from reliable sources; distinguish between reporting and commentary; remain free of any pressure or control by outside parties to obstruct 17Quoted from “The Television Code,” ibid., pp. 256-257. 94 the presentation of truthful, objective information; and allow access to the medium when it contributes to the public interest and well- balanced program structure. In addition, ethical broadcasting requires, due to the entertain- ment functions, a concern for public morals, values, and beliefs that merely dispensing information avoids. According to the Radio Code, broadcasters should: Observe the proprieties and customs of civilized society; Respect the rights and sensitivities of all people; Honor the sanctity of marriage and the home; 18 Protect and uphold the dignity and brotherhood of all mankind; The moral concerns connected with entertainment and popular art increase the broadcasting emphasis on socially responsible actions. The broad- casting medium has a specific place in the lives of the members of society. According to the Television Code: Television is seen and heard in every type of American home. These homes include children and adults of all ages, embrace all races and all varieties of religious faith, and reach those of every educational background. It is the responsibility of tele- vision to bear constantly in mind that the audience is primarily a home audience, and consequently that television's relationship to the viewer is that between guest and host. In relation to general programming policy: Program materials should enlarge the horizons of the viewer, provide him with wholesome entertainment, afford helpful stimulation, and remind him of the responsibilities which the citizen has towards his society. The intimacy and confidence placed in television demand of the broadcaster, the network and other program sources that they be vigilant in protecting the audience from deceptive program practices. In regards to children's programming: 18"The Radio Code," ibid., p. 273. 95 The broadcaster should afford opportunities for cultural growth as well as for wholesome entertainment. He should develop programs to foster and promote the common- ly accepted moral, social and ethical ideals characteristic of American life. Programs should reflect respect for parents, for honorable behavior, and for the constituted authorities of the American community.19 The broadcaster should, through his entertainment function, respect the same moral principles and institutions that the society as a whole attempts to maintain. He operates under a considerable degree of social responsibility. In relation to the responsible handling of advertising, such con- tent should conform to the standards of programming for enlightenment and entertainment. It should be truthful, accurate, presented by reli- able sources or firms of integrity and avoid being objectionable to the majority of the society. The ethical broadcaster should keep advertis- ing in pr0per proportions and exercise continual supervision of the form it takes. An Examination of Philospphic Framework and ImplementingyStructure The above summarizes the basic philosophical principles set for broadcasting by this society, either directly through governmental legislation or indirectly through self-defined professional codes. However, as stated in Chapter I, broadcasting is a social institution or system and as such the philosophical base reflecting the abstract 19"The Television Code," ibid.. pp. 256-257- 96 norms, values and beliefs of the society is only half of the system. There must also be an organization of persons and facilities which brings into fact and action those abstract norms, values and beliefs. It is here that the American society and its broadcasting system operate in an irresponsible manner. The organization of persons and facilities to actualize the philosophic basis of American broadcasting is a business enterprise. There is a natural conflict of interests. Business corporations such as NBC, CBS and ABC are created to operate for profit, regardless of any desire by their officials to serve public interest first. They must serve their owners and stockholders first, returning to them as large a profit as possible. A Michigan Supreme Court ruling in the early 1900's specifically defined this relationship when Henry Ford, upon deciding to reduce the price of Ford cars, was taken to court by an objecting stockholder. A business corporation is organized and carried on primarily for the profit of the stockholders. The powers of the directors are to be employed for that end.... The discretion of directors is to be exercised in the choice of means to attain that end and does not extend to a change in the end itself.20 The laissez faire, competitive business practices and traditions of the American society are basic and essential to capitalistic democracy. Historically and philosophically such activity has usually preceded activity in the public interest or for socially responsible motives. For example, programming to serve the public interest is usually not as appealing to large numbers of people as a bit of sex or violence and is 20Michigan Rsports: Cases Decided in the Supreme Court of Michi- ggp, vol. 204 (Chicago: Callaghan and Co.,—1919), p. 507. 97 therefore less profitable; hence the basic conflict. Which does a business structure designed to make profits present? Harry Skornia in Television and Society, illustrates the conflict this way: . . the difference between total public interest and indus- try interest would perhaps be better understood if we visualized how fully the total public interest would be represented if sta- tions and networks were gll_controlled by labor unions or ... religious groups, as in Holland, instead of by business or commer- cial firms.... However sincerely a labor union, a religious group, education, advertising, or any other one group may seek to repre- sent the whole interest of society, it cannot. For it is itself only a part of the whole. Its interests are competitive with, as well as different from, those of other groups which make up the whole.21 However, attempts to alter the implementing structure to better reflect the philosophic framework are difficult and slow. The discus- sion of social institutions in Chapter I illustrated how such institu- tions as the American conmercial broadcasting system are by nature conservative and resist change. They become, over time, inflexible and reactionary and attempt to maintain their existing functions and organi- zation. In addition to the natural sociological tendency to resist change, the business interests that control American broadcasting are economically powerful and experienced in all forms of competitive activity necessary to survive. So the conflict between philosophical framework and implementing structure continues. A perspective of the effects of this conflict can be gained by a brief examination of the leadership, ownership, goals, programming and regulatory structure of the American commercial broadcasting system. 2lHarry Skornia, Television and Society (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1965), p. 73. 98 The most significant factor about the leadership at the top level of American broadcasting is that they are all corporate businessmen. William Paley, David Sarnoff, Leonard Goldstein, Frank Stanton, all top corporate executives, are not very different from the corporate chiefs who manufacture automobiles in either their backgrounds or their orienta- tions. Their leadership has more to do with finance than with philosophy or aesthetics. Top leadership of commercial broadcasting seldom includes religious, educational, artistic or literary professionals. This latter type of individual seldom rises above the level of producer or second vice—president in charge of public affairs programming. The main reason being, that broadcast leaders, to succeed and therefore make their ways up through the ranks, must primarily understand and sympathize with the corporate process, i.e., they must be businessmen. Another significant factor in the leadership of the commercial broadcasting system is the fact that the majority of the network leaders have been in their positions since the early 1930's with the result that many of their economic and social concepts are outdated. These leaders began operation when production was a major national problem, when there was real competition in the old sense of the word, when it was still possible for the little man to compete favorably with established com- panies, when it was firmly believed that government regulation always reduced freedom, and when network broadcasting was a risky and insecure business. Virtually none of these assumptions holds true today. It is natural that the leadership of commercial broadcasting is made up of businessmen. Commercial broadcasting is a business. 99 The leaders of American broadcasting are truly remarkable businessmen engaged in tremendously large, complex financial enterprises. However, this leaves them little time for program matters. As Skornia sums it up: Whether a given policy or program is in the public interest is a question far down on their agenda: making thesgzdecisions would be a waste of their un1que management talents. However, it is difficult to overemphasize the influence of these broad- cast 1eaders' decisions on the daily life and values of every member of this society. The most significant factor regarding ownership of the majority of broadcasting outlets in the United States is the lack of diversified ownership on a local level. This was the original concept of ownership for this society's broadcasting system: locally controlled stations primarily fulfilling local needs with local programming. However, in reality the majority of stations are either chain owned, cross-media controlled or network affiliated. Chain ownership of stations has exhibited a steady increase despite the FCC 7-7-7 rule which forbids common ownership of more than seven stations each of AM, FM and TV. For example, most radio station trading is among chain owners, and each year shows a net increase in the number of stations owned by chains and an increase in the average number of stations per chain. Ben Bagdikian cites figures for chain ownership growth of com- mercial AM radio stations from 1939 to 1967. In 1939 there were 39 221bid., p. 34. lOO chains owning 14% of all AM commercial radio stations. By 1967 there were 373 chains owning 31% of the stations.23 In television, chains control 74% of all commercial stations. While the 7-7-7 rule limits the number of television stations owned to seven, evasion is frequently achieved by interlocking directors and common ownership of chains by individuals, so that there may be super- chains made up of collections of chains that are not subject to the reporting rules of the FCC, these rulings being directed at corporate rather than individual holdings.24 Cross-media ownership is primarily exhibited by the ownership of broadcasting stations by newspaper interests. For example, newspapers own 25% of all television stations in the country, with these stations showing 34% of all revenues. In the top twenty-five TV markets, where the majority of all United States households are located, they own 35% of all TV stations with 38% of all revenue.25 This type of ownership, as well as chain ownership, can have detrimental effects on the oppor- tunities for local programming and diverse types of information, both of which are essential to the fulfillment of this society's philosophic expectations for responsible broadcasting. Network affiliation has its biggest effect on local programming. It utilizes the most desirable broadcasting time for national 23Ben Bagdikian, The Information Machines (New York: Harper & Row, 1971), p. 167. 24Bryce Rucker, The First Freedom (Carbondale, 111.: Southern Illinois University Press, 1968), pp. l93-194. 25 Bagdikian, 9p. git, 101 programming. Stations sign contracts with the networks to become affili- ates and are expected to carry a certain percentage of network program- ming during these prime hours. The quality, both technically and artistically, of national network programming is usually superior to any local effort for mere economic reasons if nothing else, so local stations are perfectly willing to carry and local audiences to view these nationally originated programs in preference to local efforts. Network ownership is as complex an issue as is station ownership. All three major networks are owned by conglomerates, which are organiza- tions for common ownership of dissimilar enterprises to give diversified activity, so that the decline of any one kind of business will not cripple the parent corporation with a shriveling market. For example, Bagdikian reports the CBS controlling conglomerate as being made up of: Columbia Records; Fender Musical Instruments; The New York Yankees; Creative Playthings; educational film strip companies; Holt, Rinehard & Winston Book publishing; movie studios, medical textbook publishing; the magazines Field & Stream, Popular Gardening, Living Outdoors, and Home Modernizipg Guide. It has investments in underwater exploration and control of companies in at least eighteen foreign countries; is an important supplier of the defense and aerospace activities; and in 1965 had $21 million invested in the credit affiliates of General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler. For every dollar the three television networks grossed in their broadcasting activities for their controlling conglom- erates, three were grossed in nonbroadcasting activities.26 26Ibid., p. 176 102 Such ownership circumstances as outlined above do not promote local, diversified programming, but rather programs for a national mass audience. The selection of the types of information and cultural con- tent for such programming is a complex and obscure process and to assume that economic self—interest does not play a part would be naive. However, how much of a part when broadcasting becomes a minority by- product of larger corporations has not been sufficiently studied. The area of goals for commercial broadcasting illustrates most obviously the conflict between the philosophic framework and the imple- menting structure of this society's major broadcasting system. The primary philosophic goal, that of broadcasting in the public interest with all of its ramifications, has been discussed earlier in this chapter. The primary goal of commercial broadcasting, however, is to operate at a maximum profit, with all of the attendant policies of attempted elimination of competition, economic secrecy by closed books, programming decisions based on purely economic standards, etc. The industry's profit goal has been achieved. According to FCC reports, the gross profits for the entire television industry rose from 41.6 million dollars in 1951 to 244 million in 1960. This is a 600 percent increase in nine years. Network profits during this period rose over 1,000 percent from 9 million dollars to 95.2 million dollars.27 Broadcasting is extremely profitable and the networks continue to operate at an increased profit each year, as do the majority of 27H. Skornia, Television and Society (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1965), p. 118. 103 individual stations. How this obvious conflict is rationalized by the society and the industry deserves brief attention. Although the process is extremely complex and subtle, essentially one serves the public interest, for a maximum profit, by programming the content the public wants. If they want it, it must be in their best interest, particularly if it is mainly entertainment content that is not morally offensive. What the public wants is determined by ratings. An interesting observation is made by Wilbur Schramm about the process of determining what the public wants: It isn't a sharp question, for a number of reasons. For one thing, our knowledge of what the public 'wants' inevitably looks backward.... What a producer would really like to know is what the public will want .. and there is no sample-survey technique for determifiifig'that.28 Ratings reveal information about the past actions of the audience only. Another question is whether the public can, indeed, know what it wants. The public (individual persons), can know what they prefer among altern- atives they have already experienced, but they can not know whether they want what they have not experienced. Also, is there g_public, or are there many publics? There is a public for quiz programs and a public for a documentary series, etc. However, even a majority public for a prime-time hit special is, in reality, only a minority of the total public. As Schramm again points out: When we talk about what the public wants, we are usually talking about what some ssgment of the public will want or, rather would want if it had experienced the kinds of choice it will have sometime in the future.29 28W. Schramm and W. Rivers, Responsibility in Mass Communication, revised edition (New York: Harper & Row PuBlishers, 1969), p. 196. 29mm, p. 197 104 The wisdom and difficulty in assessing what the public wants is dis- cussed by Lord Reith, head of the BBC during its formative years: As we conceive it, our responsibility is to carry into the greatest possible numbers of homes everything that is best in every department of human knowledge, endeavour, and achievement, and to avoid the things which are, or may be hurtful. It is occasionally indicated to us that we are apparently setting out to give the public what we think they need--and not what they want, but few know what they want, and very few what they need. There is often no difference.... In any case it is better to ovegaestimate the mentality of the public than to under-estimate it. That the commercial broadcasting goal of maximum profits is achieved by under-estimating the mentality of the American audience is simply an actuality of the conflict under discussion. The effects of such a policy will be evident with time if in no other way. That the leadership, ownership and goals of the commercial broad~ casting system determine programming is obvious. The American commer- cial broadcasting system programs to capture the One Big National Audience because advertisers want to reach as many viewers as possible at a given time, as opposed to the philosophical goal of diversified presentation of all ideas in an open marketplace situation. To program for the largest possible number of viewers, the themes must appeal to the most basic level of human existence which is primar- ily emotional experience such as conflict, sex, violence, fear, romantic love, etc. The result of this emphasis is primarily light entertainment programing accompanied by narrow standards for debate and limited presentation of dissenting or controversial ideas. In addition, there 30J. C. W. Reith, Broadcast Over Britain (London: Hodder & Stoughton, Ltd., 1924), p. 34. 105 is little diversity even in the types of light entertainment programs available because the most popular program gets the highest advertising price, so a successful programming formula is imitated by the other net- works in an attempt to exploit the formula that brought success. Diversified and controversial national programming or programming on a local level does not fit the national advertiser's needs, and the commercial broadcasting system needs the national advertiser. As the late Howard L. Gossage, a San Francisco advertising executive contends: ... (advertising) will tend to shape all the contents of any communications medium that it dominates economically, and in our society that is very nearly the lot ... (this control) is not by intent, but throggh the simple ability of advertising to bestow or w1thhold favors. Such are the economic realities of a commercial broadcasting system. The significance of the national mass audience concept for program- ming is seen in these figures. In the top fifty markets where 75 per- cent of the population in this country live, three commercial television networks have 94 percent of the audience, as measured in weekly circula- tion. Thus, three organizations, and occasionally three corporate leaders decide what 70 percent of the American population will see on television.32 While the conflicts illustrated above exist between the philosophic framework and the implementing structure of American broadcasting, the conflict that surrounds the regulation of American broadcasting is even 3lQuoted from J. C. Merrill and R. L. Lowenstein, Media, Messages, and Men (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1971), p. 84. 32 Bagdikian, pp, 913,, p. 173. 106 more basic. It is a conflict within the philosophic framework itself. There are two main types of regulation that operate in this society, governmental and self-regulation. Libertarian philosophy clearly defines the relationship between the media and government. It is a hands-off situation. The First Amendment clearly states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peacefully assemble, and to petition the government for redress of grievances. The media is to be free of all governmental interference and function as a check on governmental activity. Media should regulate itself and then only rarely as social evolution and the self-righting process will keep the necessary order. However, when these principles were developed they applied only to print media, as stated earlier. The electronic media, with its limited access aspects and the social responsibility concerns resulting from the popular art/entertainment function seem to require some degree of governmental restriction. Such are the conclusions of the Social Responsibility philosophy as discussed in the previous chapter. Both of these philosophical concepts operate in the definition of responsible American broadcasting. The question then is obviously: given a degree of governmental restriction, to what degree does it restrict? The industry, naturally resists practically all attempts at restriction based on libertarian 33Merrill and Lowenstein, 9p, sit,, p. 195. 107 press philosophy. The government keeps trying varying degrees of restriction to insure broadcasting in the public interest based on social responsibility concepts. The result is that the FCC as the governmental regulatory agency has developed into a relatively ineffec- tive organization for promoting social responsibility. The basic problem is that the original concepts behind FCC regula- tory power were to prevent the development of industrial monopolies of publically owned frequencies. This was the theory behind the three- year licensing policy. The early, and basic, regulations were designed to control isolated, competitive stations licensed to individuals not corporations. No networks were in existence at the time of the forma- tion of the original Communication Act of 1934. Stations produced their own programming. The combination of broadcasting growth, both economically and politically, and the basic philosophic reluctance on the part of the government to interfere with the society's media systems resulted in the occurrence of the very things the FCC had been created to prevent. Corporation ownership of stations became the norm and station ownership exceeded three years in the majority of cases. For example, all three networks have controlled some stations for more than thirty years. This continued conflict between powerful corporations and the FCC is carried on primarily in Congress. Pressure by industry is applied to Congress to pass legislatiOn affecting FCC activity. An excellent example exists with the situation surrounding the AVCO Rule. As this rule originally existed, the FCC would ask for competitive bids for a broadcast property being transferred and then consider which 108 bidder, as the new licensee, would best serve the public interest. Congress, as a result of pressure by large monopoly groups and newspaper interests, amended this rule stating that in acting on transfers of station ownership the Commission could not consider whether the public interest, convenience and necessity might be served by the transfer, assignment or disposal to a person other than the proposed licensee. In other words, a dummy front-person could acquire a station through FCC approval, then transfer it to a large corporation without the review or 0K of the FCC. Examples such as this are numerous and have resulted in preventing the FCC from effectively controlling the areas of ownership, policy, or program content. As it exists, the FCC offers no threat of excessive regulation to the commercial broadcasting system. The American commercial broadcasting system prefers to rely on self-regulation. The philoSOphic base provided by the professional codes is admirable and very adequate for providing guidelines to respon- sible broadcasting in the public interest. However, they are unenforce- able and tend to assume second place to the profit motive when such decisions arise. It is safe to say that American commercial broadcast- ing is possibly the least restricted, freest system in the world, if not the most responsible. In the area of socially responsible restric- tions the conflict between libertarian and social-responsibility philosophy has yet to be resolved by either this society or its broad- casting industry. ********* 109 In summation, this chapter examines the philosophic basis of American broadcasting. This basis is seen to have developed out of libertarian philosophy, journalistic ethics and popular art concepts. These latter popular art concepts added the social-responsibility philosophy as part of American broadcasting philosophy. However, a philosophic framework must be implemented by an organi- zation of pe0ple and facilities. An examination of the historical development of American broadcasting reveals how the American implement- ing structure developed ahead of the consciously constructed philosophic framework, with a resulting inherent conflict. The philosophic frame- work requires socially responsible broadcasting in the public interest while the implementing structure is a business system requiring total freedom for profit seeking. A perspective on this conflict is presented by a brief examination of the existing commercial broadcasting system's goals, leadership, ownership, programming policies and reaction to attempted regulation. The final observation of this author is that the commercial tele- vision system, as it has developed and exists in this society has reached a degree of near perfection. There is nothing wrong with such a system. Humanity has always preferred to be entertained.) To laugh is better than to cry. However, imbalance and overindulgence on any level merely begs the issue of human existence. CHAPTER V THE NEED FOR BROADCASTING PHILOSOPHY This report will conclude with a discussion of the need for and uses of broadcasting philosophy. To examine the need for philosophical frameworks for broadcasting systems requires answering the question: what is a philosophical frame- work? As has been stated before, philosophies define appropriate rela- tionships between man and his perceived universe. They contain guidelines for beneficial behavior to maintain truth and universal order. Among other things, they define responsible behavior. A broad- casting philoSOphy, then, defines responsible broadcasting. The ques- tion of a need for broadcasting philosophy, therefore, becomes the same as that of the need for responsible broadcasting. Does a society need responsible broadcasting? This question can be contemplated by considering the implications of a society consciously claiming that their broadcasting systems do not require responsible use, that irresponsible or unconcerned use of such systems would be accept- able and would not effect the development or harmony of the social sys- tem as a whole. However, as this report has stated, communication is possibly the most basic human social process. Mass communication is the extension of this basic process to cover expanded time and space. The functions 110 111 of mass communication are basic to a society. Media systems are used to gain common knowledge of the environment and expand the picture of reality; to attain a working consensus for social action among the members of the society; to instruct members of the society how to effectively fulfill their roles and to accept and actualize the norms and customs of the society; to offer entertainment and relaxation to the members of the society and to create artistic form; and finally to facilitate the movement of foods and services and to provide information necessary to stimulate and maintain economic activity in the society. Could a society withstand irresponsible actions in carrying out of any of these functions? Assume that the media systems of a society prevented in some way the public awareness of a serious danger present, say, within the gov- ernmental system such as a major corruptive situation. Or failed to aid the citizens in making necessary political decisions, such as those necessary to vote or to achieve increased effort needed to accomplish a five-year plan in a communistic system. Suppose the media system in- structed members of a communistic system to value individual needs above those of the collective whole, or taught the members of a libertarian system to confrom and accept the word of an authority figure above their own creative thought processes. Suppose media systems did not carry want ads or advertisements, or in the case of a communistic system were not utilized to facilitate the reorganization and education necessary to accomplish the economic switch from private to common ownership? What if media systems did not entertain? This perhaps is the only basic function that if impaired would not have a serious negative effect on 112 the social system involved. Human beings seem to entertain themselves in any situation with whatever is available. Media systems are too vital to the well-being of a society to be irresponsibly utilized. There is, it can be assumed, little question as to the need for responsible media use. There are different ways to define such use, however, as the earlier discussion of basic media philosophies illustrated. But whatever the society's definition or philosophy, any media system within that particular society should attempt to proceed accordingly and the society should ensure that the media system does so. In this way some level of responsible media use can be achieved. In another sense, a broadcasting philosophy is a basis for deci- sion making on the part of both the mass communicator and the audience. It helps the broadcaster determine how to beneficially utilize the medium and it aids the audience in determining if the broadcasting sys- tem is beneficial to their existence. The current violence issue provides an example. Is excessive presentation of violent acts to cope with life's problems responsible broadcasting? The broadcasting philosophical framework of this society clearly includes the concept that programming should represent the society's values and aid in the socialization of the society's members, children in particular. Outside of the current television presentations, are violent acts to deal with reality on a day to day basis, a value or norm that this society wishes to have taught to its members, particular- ly the children? If this is not a social value then any medium pre- senting this form of action continually as accepted behavior is acting 113 irresponsibly. If on the other hand such behavior is socially sanc- tioned, and accepted as a recommended way for society's members to treat each other, then the media are carrying out their responsibility. Such considerations as these and their attendant decisions are essentially moral or humanistic decisions. They fall in the realm of how men should treat each other and concern basic concepts of man's humanity to man. However, such emotional activities as violent behavior have always fascinated humanity, as the phenomenon of the Roman circus or public executions well illustrate. The American commercial television system must utilize this type of activity to appeal to the numbers of people required to make up a mass audience. The conflict between the philo- sophic base and the implementing structure discussed in the preceding chapter is immediately apparent. The most current attempt to resolve this conflict centers around the use of communication research to solve the problem. The situation is this: this society does not generally sanction violent behavior as the most acceptable form of problem solving; the media presentation of such actions as an acceptable behavior pattern is therefore an irresponsible act unless the presentation of acceptable violent behavior via the broadcasting media does not instruct the members of the society to behave in like manner. The broadcasting media has thrown this last issue to the communication researchers for an answer. Communication research is an immensely useful tool for the organi- zation of physically observable data and the prediction of results dependent upon this data. Such research deserves serious respect and consideration, for much has been uncovered about effective and ineffec- tive messages and their positive and negative results. However, one 114 must still approach such research with healthy skepticism and recognize the limitations of this approach to decision making. One must keep in mind that the findings are usually fragmentary, since communication research can as yet delve only a tiny distance into the immense complex- ity of the human communication process. For example, content analysis of the broadcasting media presents the researcher with a near impossible task of coding the sound and motion elements of a message. To date, such coding is usually restricted only to the verbal, and this often means printed, aspects of a broadcasting message. There are not yet in existence even elementary devices for cataloguing sound and motion bias. The networks have been known to consider a program adequately content analyzed after the sggipt had been codified. One of the problems during the early development of communication research was the lack of one central discipline. Research about the communication process was carried on by scientists and scholars from the areas of sociology, psychology, political science, anthropology, history, international relations, linguistics and communication. The result was an almost inherent tendency to fragmentation, if for no other reason than attempting a simple review of existing literature and research was a monumental task. Communication research currently suffers from too little general theory and an overabundance of quantitative research which also con- tributes to this fragmentary overtone. William Albig, a social scien- tist of an older academic generation, has surveyed some of the American 115 public opinion research between 1936 and 1956.1 He notes the rising proportion of quantitative studies carried out during these two decades, and contends that it was inevitable for older, more philosophical approaches to be supplanted. However, he feels it regrettable that too little attention was paid during this period to the development of general theories about the public opinion process. Similar comments might be made about other branches of communication research. Some insightful comments about the relationship between methodo- logical refinement and theoretical advancement are made by Roger L. Brown in his article, "Approaches to the Historical Development of Mass Media Studies."2 He contends that some of the reasons for the emphasis on methodological development are inherent within the academic system itself. Methodological refinement is a less complicated and time con- suming research procedure than theory development, and the academic atmosphere of pressure to publish results tends to produce quickly exe- cuted pieces of research designed to reflect current fashion. Lab experiments and small scale surveys lend themselves readily to these pressures. It is somewhat easier to make a secure reputation perfecting methodological devices than attempting long term theory development and such perfection can become an end in itself. Reputations can be 1William Albig, "Two Decades of Opinion Study, 1936-1956," Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 21 (1957), pp. 14-22. 2Roger L. Brown, "Approaches to the Historical Development of Mass Media Studies," in Jeremy Tunstall, ed., Media Sociology: A Reader (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1970), pp. 49-50. 116 established on the basis of a series of small, self-contained and rela- tively ad hoc research projects which are methodologically impeccable. but which as a whole do not form a sequence designed to achieve theo- retical advancement. Academic mass media research has some of its roots in applied research in the same field, and the majority of applied research is not executed for theory development. Also, on a continuing basis, much university research is funded by the media or related interests, and this naturally keeps the social scientist very much involved with applied research rather than theoretic advancement. Andrew Tudor, a British media researcher specializing in the motion picture medium, summarizes the situation in this manner: In the final analysis the problem, I think, is twofold. First, mass media studies have for many years engaged in haphazard 'fact capturing'. That they are not alone in this is hardly the point. This has served to direct attention away from certain of the important, and admittedly complex, issues. Secondly, the methodological process has become almost an end in itself. It is not just a turn of phrase to suggest that the history of mass media studies is also the history of sociological methodology. There is a considerable pressure on researchers, whatever the demands of the particular topic, to pay lip service to the gods of positivistic science. Scientific we must be but not, I think, necessarily in this monistic way. There are other perspectives in circulation and go reason at all blindly to accept the received word from the past. The major problem regarding communication research is that there is very little substantially proven theory that has resulted from the forty-some years of research. Going back to the original question of violence presentation, while considerable effort has been spent in 3Andrew Tudor, "Film, Communication and Content," ibid., p. 103. 117 attempting to determine the effects surrounding presentation of such material, it has resulted in an extensive amount of conflicting research with no conclusions, and this unfortunately is not an isolated example. The main reasons for this situation are that the mass communication pro- cess is so complex and involves so many variables. The messages of the mass media cannot be isolated from the psycho- logical structure of the individual viewers. Therefore, innumerable personal variables cause the same message to have differing effects on different receivers. One medium cannot be easily isolated from other media. Therefore, it is extremely difficult to determine the exact effects of a specific medium exposure outside the laboratory situation. The average person is inundated with messages from a variety of media and is usually unaware of the exact input of any given medium. He may not even re- member exactly from where he received his information. The message cannot be isolated from the physical conditions sur- rounding the receiver. For example, a magazine or newspaper can be put down in the middle of the message reception, a television message may be received alone or in the midst of interacting peers, and usually in the familiar home situation, etc. So when laboratory experimental con- ditions are imposed, they may affect the results, yet the results would be impossible to obtain under normal receiver conditions. There is also a great difficulty in getting representative I'control" groups in the sense of relatively unexposed individuals. The mass media penetrate and saturate the total American environment. A person not exposed to information and without pre-existing bias and 118 conditioning on many of the most vital areas of communication research would be completely unrepresentative of the majority of this society. Obviously, researchers are able to obtain control groups under near normal conditions. But because of the pervasiveness of mass communica- tion some of the most basic effect questions virtually defy accurate research. There is difficulty in determining long-range effects. It is virtually impossible for communication researchers to determine in any scientific way the cumulative effects of certain kinds of communication messages. Quite simply, the researcher cannot remain with the receiver for anything but a limited period of time, nor can he isolate the receiver from the hundreds of other influences that are affecting the messages and the receivers personality. Finally, there is the age old chicken-egg situation. When is the message the cause and when the effect? It is virtually impossible to obtain a scientific perspective to determine if the media form the society or the society forms the media, or to what degree both phenomena operate. Unfortunately these last two areas, long-range effects and cause-effect relationship, are among the most vital mass communication questions needing answering. The broadcasting media and the society, however, continue to face complex, vital broadcasting problems requiring immediate decisions and solutions. To rely exclusively upon mass audience research and statis- tics as the sole basis to make these decisions is inadequate. As Carl Jung once pointed out in relation to the mass society tendency to create faceless averages, if each stone in a yard is weighed and the average is 119 found to be two pounds, the person who receives this information still knows very little about what the individual stones are like. All may be gravel-sized except for one or two each weighing several tons. There may be no single stone which weighs two pounds, etc. The statistical method, and the use of averages tends to falsify rather than reveal the true nature of the stones. It may well be that it is the etheric sum of the differing true natures that creates the continually changing diversity that is life. To measure a specific moment with these specie fic stones with the expectation to then equate it to all moments and all stones may be a somewhat limited view of the interrelated workings of the infinite variables that are reality. Until communication research is shown as being capable of decifering this complexity of changing, interacting variables, the answers required by modern mass communication require an open-minded combination of all facilities available to man- kind, scientific, humanistic, philosophic and ethical. The reality of the situation is, and it appears will be for some time, that major mass communication and broadcasting decisions are made mainly by intuition. How does a broadcaster know what his mass audience wants, or how well he has done with his message, when he should change or stop his messages, when unintended effects have resulted from a message, etc.? He has access to surveys, polls and selective delayed feedback, but these only give him a feeling about the process, he is left having to rely primarily on his own intuition and educated guesses. Responsible broadcasting, then, becomes a matter of personal ethics. Ethics may be defined as the branch of philosophy that helps determine what is correct action in a moral, humanistic sense. It is 120 moral philosophy, a normative science of conduct, with conduct con- sidered as voluntary actions. Ethics lead, not force. They are a per- sonal matter in the sense that they arise from a personal concern for one's own conduct and depend upon self-direction and self-enforcement. If an ethical standard is externally imposed, it then becomes a matter of legalism, for the aspects of free-will of the individual are removed. Given that ethics are based on the concept of man's free will and choice, man can, of course, choose to accept no position in relation to ethics. He is free to make no self-restrictions with respect to moral conduct towards other members of humanity. Such a person is regarded as either immoral or amoral and this has become a very popular and convenient stance in mass society for reasons beyond the scope of this paper. The only point to be made here is that made by Immanuel Kant, the eighteenth century German Idealist philosopher. He contends,that man's freedom is attainable and maintainable only by self—defined and self-enforced duties_and restrictions. That any act is moral only so long as there is no outside compulsion such as reward or punishment. That there is only one basic factor, or categorical imperative, to which man must voluntarily respond to determine his duty at any given moment. He must act as if his action were to become universal law. ... when I conceive of a categorical imperative I know at once what it contains. In addition to the law, the imperative contains only the necessity that the maxim (subjective principle of action) conforms to this law. As the maxim contains no condi- tion restricting the maxim, nothing remains but the general state— ment of the law to which the maxim of the action should conform, and it is only this conformity that the imperative properly represents as necessary. Therefore, there is only one categorical imperative, namely this: act only on a maxim by which you can will that it, at the 121 same time, should become a general law.4 This is a sobering thought for self-indulgent twentieth century American society. Modern society is on the threshold of changes in human communica- tion that are perhaps the most powerful ever. Computers, cable, satel- lites, the transistor, printed circuits, integrated circuits, micro- photography, etc., have altered the transmission of signals, the capacity for transferring information from point to point, and the methods of feeding information into this system and of retrieving it. The future telecommunications systems will essentially involve computers in the storage, delivery and switching of popular communications. There will exist a capacity for the individual to receive a greater variety of information that is now available, and the ability for him to control the timing, content and form of information flow in ways that are now barely imaginable to him. The decisions to be made about the develop- ment and control of such systems are essentially philosophical as they concern the manner in which human beings treat each other. The ultimate effect of these new techniques will, like nuclear fission, depend not on any inherent evil or virtue in the physical process itself, but on the morality of the men who use it and the comprehension of its power by those most affected by it. Like nuclear weapons, it will test the ultimate humanism of civilization.5 4Carl J. Friedrich, ed., The Philosophy of Kant (New York: Random House, Inc., 1949), p. 170. 5Ben Bagdikian, The Information Machines (New York: Harper & Row, 1971), p. 45. SECTION II INTRODUCTION Section II consists of the outline for a book dealing with the need for and development of philosophical structures for broadcasting systems. The preceding section illustrates how the actual book will be developed and is intended to give the reader the tone and intent of the proposed book. The following section presents the full outline of the factual information in the order of presentation to be contained in the book. The book is designed for introductory purposes and to be of a general enough nature that it would be useful for members of the lay public who would be interested, for whatever reasons, in questions of media philosophy and responsibility. It is hoped that the book could also serve as a text or as supplemental reading for certain courses dealing with media philosophy. The book outline could, with minor modification, serve as a starting point for curriculum formation for such courses. In the same manner as the book, the courses would be suitable for high school, junior college, beginning broadcasting, nonbroadcasting and adult education students. The information level is of an introductory nature and not intended for persons of an advanced student status. The major purpose of the proposed book is to fully examine the problems surrounding the need for and development of philosophical 122 123 structures for media systems. The scope of the book does not include the development of solutions to the problems beyond the observation that humanistic, ethical and scientific methods must all be employed if adequate solutions are to be developed and implemented. CHAPTER I THE BOOK OUTLINE I. Broadcasting: A Frame of Reference for Examination A. The basic communication process 1. 2. 3. Importance to human endeavor and condition Communication is a process How communication works a. Communication in insects b. Communication in animals c. Communication in human beings . Some models of the basic communication process a. Harold Lasswell b. Melvin DeFleur c. Andrew Tudor . Feedback and noise . Types of communication situations a. Person-to-person; face-to-face b. Small group; face-to-face O . Large group; face-to-face d. Mass 124 125 B. The basic mass communication process 1. A a. a. b. basic definition Essentially the same basic communication process as dis- cussed above . Examine differences by elements of the process; communicator, channel, message, receiver, feedback . Major difference; technical extension of the human senses-- communication possible across space and time . Investigation of the technical extension of mass media Difference between mass communication and mass media Mass communication not a simple matter of an individual using a mechanical device to communicate farther to more people . Communicate through the mass media 1) An institutionalized person 2) A structure to functionalize a technical extension . Mass media as social institutions and/or social systems C. Historical development of mass communication 1. 2. Pre-literate stage--discuss verbal society structure Introduction of written symbols; example of societal changes in Greek civilization . Writing surfaces; the development of paper technology and the importance to development of mass communication a. b. . The development of movable type . The growth of the press from 1450-1930 Early use of printing--elitist and religious Earliest press 1) Sixteenth century--Gazeta 2) Seventeenth century--German developments h. i. 126 3) l621--English corantos . General trend in social change due to increased printing . 1813--the rotary press, Friedrich Koenig . Elements needed for mass press; commercialism, middle class, improved technology, mass public education . Penny press in the United States (Note: development discussion limited to United States and Great Britain from this point on.) . News agencies Yellow journalism Maturity and self-regulation 6. Electronic mass communication . Pre-telegraph; through-the-air communication . Separation of transportation and message transmission . Samuel Morris--1837 patented telegraph; its impact on mass communication development . Marconi and the development of the wireless telegraph . Voice of wireless--l906; the way opened for radio . Discuss electronic problems needing solution before radio and television become realities in the home 0. Comparison of the basic characteristics of media 1. Four factors which determine a medium's characteristics a. Information transmission; elements involved in the reproduc- tion or transmission of information 1) Verbal symbol 2) Picture symbol 3) Sound 4) Motion 127 b. Feedback system 1) No immediate feedback in existence for any mass medium at this point 2) Personal verbal; letters, telephone, critical reviews 3) Audience studies; ratings, demographic and motivation research 4) Sales and subscriptions . Circulation 1) Accessibility; how accessible to the audience members 2) Receiving control; at audience convenience 3) Transmission span; time span between information origina- tion and the reception by audience . Economic support (varies according to the social system) 1) Single sales 2) Subscriptions and service charges 3) Advertising 4) Subsidy and contributions 2. Analysis of broadcasting re: above characteristics a. Information transmission; radio--sound, television-~all four elements . Feedback; mainly audience studies (ratings)-—personal verbal has minor significance . Circulation: highest with radio, television has good accessibility; receiving control is low with both mediums; transmission span is simultaneous, this is most striking characteristic of electronic media. . Economic support; usually is advertising or some form of governmental or social subsidy 3. Specific broadcasting characteristics a. Time-locked medium 128 b. Limited number of channels c. Complex and expensive to operate d. Present in the home almost continuously with continuously changing information e. Emphasis on non-literate, simultaneous communication-- McLuhan concepts of lineal, spatial, rational vs. iconic, organic, involved participation-—“Global Village" concept II. Functions and Effects of Broadcasting A. Five basic functions (based on concepts of Wilbur Schramm) 1. Surveillance-—objective to gain awareness of happenings in the environment 2. Consensus--objective to accomplish a working societal agree- ment on actions regarding observed happenings in the environ- ment 3. Socialization--objective to teach and inform new members of the society norms, customs, values and roles 4. Entertainment--objective to provide relaxation and retreat from troubles and dissatisfaction; create artistic form 5. Economic stimulation--objective to facilitate buying and selling of goods and services throughout the society B. Importance of determining effects 1. Introductory remarks a. A society utilizes its media for surveillance, consensus, socialization, entertainment and economic stimulation-- these are basic to social equilibrium--effectiveness varies, so society must determine how well the media carry out these functions b. Discussion of the effects of broadcasting is adamant and continuous due to feeling that electronic media are highly potent and omnipresent 2. Areas of concern for surveillance function in American broadcasting 129 a. The news system of broadcasting media primarily fills this function . The ultimate significance of the news system is social--is a source of reality itself . Main concerns or areas of criticism 1) Selection of what is presented and eliminated due to time restriction of media 2) Fact vs. opinion--due again to time restriction, not as clear—cut as in spatially determined media 3) Audience relation to presentation--cannot absorb and analyze at own speed--cannot review easily 4) Influence of entertainment essence of broadcasting on objective news presentation 5) Influence of pressure by advertisers, government, and network controlling interests on truthful, unbiased news presentation 3. Areas of concern for consensus function in American broad- casting a. c. d. Broadcasting use in this function is to convey information necessary for the population to make decisions about social action . Some types of social action--citizen pressure groups, demonstrations, strikes, boycotts, disaster relief, etc. This function accomplished by news system, public affairs programming and political broadcasting Main concerns or areas of criticism 1) Acceleration of social reaction time due to instantaneous transmission of information--implications for emo- tional, unwise reactions 2) Inclusion of groups in the consensus process not ordinarily reached by print media-—i.e., Blacks in South, ghetto populations--therefore their problems will be included in the consensus function and not be ig- nored (civil rights movement an example) 130 3) Control of information by authorities in power for the public good; censorship and release of deceptive infor- mation, i.e., propaganda 4) Role of the opinion leader and the two-step or multi- step flow process in the effectiveness of mass media in political opinion formation 5) Creation of passivity 6) Merchandising of political candidates 7) Paid political time--access to media dependent on finances 4. Areas of concern for socialization function in American broad- casting a. Socialization function is the area of most concern to critics and thoughtful observers--difficult to ascertain effects because the absorption of norms, values, customs is a cumulative process over time--all types of program- ming involved . Educators and psychologists hold that the total environ- menteducatesand trains an individual--broadcasting is an ever-present element in the environment--average child spends more time watching television than in school . Exact effects of media not ascertained, but general agree- ment that electronic media do affect society in some ways . Main concerns or areas of criticism 1) Effects of continuous presentation of violent acts to deal with reality 2) Continual presentation of materialism and consumerism as the ultimate good 3) Presentation of conformity and adjustment as the better way to deal with life problems rather than individual- ism, creativity and dissension. 4) Truth vs. merchandising--in advertising and politics 5) Conflict of values presented on media (self-indulgence, immediate gratification, short-cut to success) and those taught by social institutions of school, church, family (thrift, self-discipline, productivity, empha- sis on long-range goals) 131 6) Effects on underprivileged of exposure to materialism as the best way of life and the concept of man as creator of his own destiny . Areas of concern for entertainment function in American broad- casting a. Broadcasting is primarily an entertainment medium in United States--public conditioned to utilize it mainly for relaxation and escape . Technically excellent standards achieved--form is mastered although content under contention . Roughly 75% of all programming devoted to entertainment-- seven basic types; dramatic, musical, variety, comedy, game and audience participation, talk and discussion, movies . Main concerns or areas of criticism 1) Programming to reach the largest possible mass audience rather than many specialized audiences 2) Audience viewed as a market--content of programming affected by need to sell products 3) Art form vs. business-~media not an art form, purpose not a cultural or artistic one--created for public taste and to make money . Areas of concern for economic stimulation function in America broadcasting a. Primarily advertising (commercials) fulfill this function-- commercials are a substitute for the salesman b. Purpose of commercials 1) To persuade the audience to buy 2) To inform the audience of the benefits, price and availability of products . Press fulfills this latter function more completely 1) Classified ads move goods between individuals 2) Retail ads deal with a broader range of products and relate to the individual for action on a local level 132 3) Television advertising mainly of a national nature, less specifically useful information d. Television advertising deals with small number of products of a somewhat superficial nature--80% of network commercial income is from deodorants, cosmetics, beverages, soap, toothpaste, hair preparation, patent medicine, breakfast foods, etc. e. Main concerns or areas of criticism 1) The influence advertising exerts on American broadcast- ing due to its role of exclusive economic support 2) The extent to which the advertiser influences specific program content 3) Existence and effects of untruthful and distorted advertising 4) Exploitation of children by advertisers 5) Examination of the concept of "free" radio and tele- vision due to advertising support--what it really costs the American public 6) Examination of how audience views television and radio advertising C. The problem of determining effects 1. Introductory remarks a. Necessity for a society to be aware of the effects b. The cohesiveness and growth of the society depends on the awareness of the relationship between media and the members of society c. Difficult to determine this relationship 1) Communication process is intangible, changing continual- ly and subject to limitless variables 2) Communication is the basic human social function and has all of the complexities and subtleties of human exist- ence 133 3) Communication is a phenomenon requiring analysis in humanistic, philosophic, ethical and scientific terms-- one single approach too limited d. The effectiveness or consequences of a communicative act can only be determined by observing and analyzing the actions and reactions of the parties concerned e. Two primary methods of observation and analysis 1) Careful observation and critical thought--many of the facets of the process are humanistic, phi1050phic and ethical in nature and as such are not codifiable 2) Scientific research--the quantitative coding approach can lend insight to many aspects of the process that are physically observable and measurable 3) Both approaches necessary for full understanding and effective use of the mass communication process 2. Early development of communication research a. Mass communication research began as such in the 1930's b. Prior to the development of the scientific research tech- niques applied specifically to mass communication, think- ing about the area was heavily influenced by early sociological and psychological theory 1) Auguste Comte-~theory of society functioning as a biological organism and the role of specialization 2) Herbert Spencer-~theory of social evolution 3) Ferdinand T6nnies--concepts of two main types of social organizations; gemeinschaft and gesellschaft 4) Emile Durkheim--division of labor (specialization) develops social solidarity-~two types of solidarity; mechanical and organic 5) Consensus of social scientific opinion of the character of the mass society that influenced deve10pment of early communication research theory a) Western world experiencing increased heterogeneity and individuality b) Reduction of informal social controls 134 c) Alienation of the individual from his community-- growth of segmental, contractual social relationships c. Development of the S-R theory of mass communication process 1) Based on theory that humans have a uniform basic nature that operates in instinctual more often than rational manner 2) Individuals operate alienated in a mass society without influence of intimate family or peer groups 3) Media is a powerful device for directly influencing members of the society 4) From 1900 through World War II this theory seemed veri- fied by: a) National Socialists take over in Germany b) Stalin's efforts in the U.S.S.R. c) Success of consumer advertising in the United States d) The development of the public relations industry 3. Expansion of the basic S-R theory a. Mainly the changes occurred in the concept of the audience 1) Interpersonal communication effects on mass communica- tion--two-step flow concept 2) View audience members as differing individuals with personal specific characteristics and needs 3) Selective perception concept b. Began to see media as reflecting society rather than as a major forming influence--what the audience does with the media c. Discuss cultural norms theory as opposing this concept d. The research concerning the elements of communicator, medium and the message is the least developed 1) Communicator--"gate keeper" studies, some examination of media controller personality structure; mass media examined as institutions III. 135 2) Medium--McLuhan, pseudo event studies 3) Message--content analysis; limits of analyzing non- print stimulus 4. Additional basic communication research concepts a. Opinion, attitude, value change; the media not too effec- tive with well-established beliefs b. Media seem effective in creating new aspects of reality and in the forming of new opinions and beliefs c. Effects on children different than on adults--children have fewer established beliefs and values--learn from media--can function as a socializing agent d. Mass media effects over a long period of time unknown-- suspected that media may be effective in creating change e. The communication research area has resulted in less help- ful, confirmed theory than had been hoped--the field tends currently to produce fragmented research and has become overly concerned with methodology rather than general com- munication theory Basic Philosophic Structures A. A society creates its mass communication system compatible with its philosophical and political structure B. Discussion of four basic philosophic frameworks for mass communi- cation systems as defined by Fred Siebert, Theodore Peterson and Wilbur Schramm C. These are considered classic categories and cover the basic structures that exist in the world to date D. Four concepts are: Authoritarian, Libertarian, Soviet Communist, and Social Responsibility Theory E. Authoritarian Theory 1. Basic political concepts a. The individual is subordinate to the state b. Elitism is the basis of the ruling segment 136 . Through the state the individual is able to reach his potential as a civilized being . Truth (perception of reality) is restricted to the elite, but is translated into the standard for all members of society . The state has the responsibility to care for the individual and the individual is dependent on the state . All types of persuasion and coercion used to maintain unity and social stability 2. The role of the mass media a. To promote unity and continuity within the state--to con- tribute to the greatness of the state . Present truth, as defined by the state, to the populace . Support the leaders of the state, no criticism of the ruling elite is permitted . Ownership may be private or direct state control . If private ownership, then control by the state exercised through legal restrictions, state regulatory organizations and unofficial pressures . Examples of authoritarian mass media systems: discuss Spanish systems F. Libertarian Theory 1. Basic political concepts a. Based on the philosophic movements of the 17th and 18th centuries--the Enlightenment 1) Human intellect and reasoning powers capable of under- standing and ordering the universe without recourse to spiritual or supernatural assistance 2) This changed controlling emphasis from the church and absolute monarchies based on divine right, toward secular sections of society--from theology to science . Contributing philosophers 137 1) Descartes--reason, man's intellectual abilities, leads to truth 2) John Locke-~The will of the people should be the center of power 3) John Milton--man's reason can distinguish between good and bad, right and wrong; to exercise this reason to its fullest however, man needs free choice; in an open encounter truth will triumph over error c. Basic premise of man as independent and rational, able to choose between truth and error d. The state exists to provide a social structure in which ideas are freely interchanged so that man may exercise reason and choice and thus find truth e. If the state fails in its responsibility to the people, the people have the power to change or abolish it f. In place of formal controls there is trust in the self- righting process of truth, hence ideas must all be expressed and all persons must have access to channels of communica— ‘ tion 2. The role of mass media a. The media used to present all ideas so that the people can have access to the information necessary for rational, logical choices, decisions and actions b. Media provide the open marketplace for ideas so that truth (correct action in relation to reality) will emerge. c. Privately owned media competing in an open market is essential. d. Media must be free of state control and functions as a critic of the government e. Examples: discuss United States systems G. Soviet Communist Theory 1. Basic political.concepts a. Basically authoritarian form of government with the individual need subordinate to the good of the state 138 b. Basic difference is in the concept of the state--it exists as an institution equal to the people, for their good-- ultimately the authoritarian functions are to cease as the populace understands and achieves social existence as a collective c. Karl Marx--the philosophic founder of this political concept d. Basic inspiration from Georg Hegel--the dialectic l) Thesis, antithesis, synthesis 2) Capitalism contains the potential for its own destruc- tion--the power elite will grow richer and fewer, the workers more numerous and impoverished 3) Overthrow of capitalism and building of classless society by the workers resulting in a change of the basic economic structure and flow of society e. Power resides in the people and is generated by social action through social institutions--these institutions include control of natural resources and means of produc- tion 2. The role of mass media a. The media are an instrument of the people (state)--they are to be used to educate the people--they are propagan- distic and function to translate the economic, political and social policies from communist ideology into reality b. The functions of the mass media are positively defined-- media seen as tool with specific functions and goals to accomplish--as opposed to authoritarian systems which determine what the media are not to do c. The tone of information is serious, historically signifi- cant (as related to development of the collective society), interpretative rather than objective--frivolous informa- tion used for escapism is avoided d. Mass media are not simply controlled, they are utilized in building the social order e. The media are expected to criticize the government and social institutions, but the type of criticism is limited f. Examples: discuss Communist Chinese system 139 H. Social Responsibility Theory 1. Basic political concepts a. An evolution of the libertarian political theory--based on the advancements of human knowledge since the Enlightenment 1) Evolution theory, statistical mechanics, relativity 2) 3) 4) 5) theory, psychology contributed to a different view of man and social orders Man acts irrationally (i.e., instinctually, intuitively, mystically) on many occasions Events have shown classical laissez-faire economics and the common social good are not directly, positively related The existence of inherent rights has been replaced by consequence ethics--existence of a right with a corre- sponding obligation Resulting in a less naive, simplistic view of man's relation to universal truth through his reasoning abilities 2. Role of the mass media a. Essential premise of mass media role is that media have a social responsibility to the people and society--not "free" b. to do as the owner sees fit regardless of the effects This need for responsibility due to: 1) 2) 3) Maintenance of an open marketplace for varying opinions with access by all members of society has proved more difficult than early press development seemed to indi- cate . The limited access due to economic requirements and electromagnetic limitations makes the free marketplace situation impossible The tremendous growth of the press and the presence in virtually every home of the electronic media has caused mass communication to be viewed as a powerful social force not to be irresponsibly handled 140 4) In the case of a commercial media system, the control of the media by one interest group theoretically threatens the concept of free access and free flow of ideas c. The media have the responsibility to seek out truth and present it objectively d. Requires the defining of social responsibility by a separate organization (from both the state and the media), such as a public corporation responsible to a board of distinguished authorities and citizens as done in Britain; or by the communication professionals themselves through professional groups; this responsibility is self-imposed not externally enforced e. A balanced presentation of views and ideas is essential, there must be access to the media by all f. Examples: discuss British system 1. Concluding observations 1. These theoretical concepts reflect broad ideals or categorical descriptions . Any such generalization seldom exists in reality exactly in the form of the theoretical concept . Individual political systems each create media systems to fit their specific needs and individual interpretations . This should be kept in mind when analyzing any particular society and its media system . Systems may overlap or show characteristics of more than one basic concept Note difference of interpretation with Schramm et al.--this report defines the American system as Libertarian rather than as Social Responsibility Theory a. The media are primarily business enterprises that operate for a profit b. Broadcasting in particular seems to operate at odds with the public interest and does not evidence a strong sense of social responsibility 141 7. Their political concepts do not clearly include the socialist form of political organization, such as exists in Britain, Japan, and the Scandinavian countries 8. Social Responsibility Theory seems better to fit the media structures of these types of political systems a. Media systems do not operate as a business for a profit b. Seem to make serious attempt to fulfill their system's definition of social responsibility IV. History and Structure of the American Broadcasting Systems A. Historical Development 1. 1906 transmission of voice by wireless--opened way for radio development . 1916 David Sarnoff memo to his superiors at American Marconi outlining his vision of potential of radio as a mass medium-- music box in every home . Early development was chaotic and slow due to private owner- ship and profit motive-~every invention and improvement was patented--much litigation . World War I--all patent litigation and restrictions tempor- arily suspended—~Federal government in total control--resulted in cooperative effort and rapid advancement . After World War I private industry defeated efforts to retain government control . l920--Dr. Frank Conrad, engineer working with Westinghouse, developed new radio transmitter--early broadcasting efforts from his home . First radio station--KDKA, established in Pittsburgh in 1920 by Westinghouse to stimulate sales of home receivers . KDKA broadcast the results of 1920 presidential election-- major popular success . Rapid growth of radio stations-~by 1922 were 254 stations . Several problems the infant industry faced: a. Needed method to exist financially 142 1) First stations owned by equipment manufacturers as a way to stimulate sales for their equipment 2) As number of stations grew, new owners not in equipment manufacturing--needed other financial basis 3) First commercial--August 28, l922--AT&T advertised itself a) Negative reaction b) Quotation from Herbert Hoover c) AT&T limited even itself and threatened to withdraw telephone and wire service from any station that advertised 4) Commercials, however, proved way of making broadcasting self-supporting--trend grew despite AT&T threat and government objection 5) Major companies begin to advertise 6) For many years advertising frequency was controlled by industry itself--limited to day-time hours--evening programming for the family, no commercialism . The problem of electronic interference 1) By 1923 stations in most major cities 2) 1925 every frequency occupied, some by several stations 3) Interference problem was extreme 4) Federal government reluctant to interfere--Radio Act of 1912 was only legislation--it was totally inadequate-- wanted industry to regulate itself 5) Industry unable to eliminate the choatic situation 6) 1927--Radio Act a) Air waves belong to the people b) Used by private individuals only with permission by the government on short-term basis c) Licenses granted or revoked in the public interest, convenience and necessity 143 d) All previous licenses revoked 7) Radio Act of 1927 was temporary--trial period for observation--FCC formed by Communication Act of 1934-- this still major regulating agency c. National distribution of programs 1) When advertising seen as source of support for broad- casting--newspapers resisted radio entry into advertis- ing market 2) "Versailles Treaty"--threatened lock-out of advertisers by newspapers 3) Kept radio advertising insignificant for several years 4) To offer an advantage over newspapers—-developed mass audience concept to offer network contract to adver- tisers 5) AT&T--first to link stations together--l924 had 23 stations 6) RCA attempted to do same--AT&T blocked it for two years 7) 1926--Agreement for RCA to form network; AT&T given exclusive rights to supply communication lines to radio stations--still applies for radio and TV 8) RCA formed NBC--1926; by 1927 had divided into Red and Blue network 9) Contracts of affiliation develop as means of expanding where could not buy stations outright 10) CBS formed by independent stations in attempt to com- pete-~bought by William Paley in 1928 11) NBC dominated for many years--1943 FCC forced them to divest themselves of one network--NBC Blue becomes ABC 11. Radio popularity grew steadily during Depression and World War II--it fit specific needs of the society a. Entertainment for people during unstable social period b. Free entertainment C. 144 Available in the home--behavior pattern of the family in relation to the radio became deeply institutionalized-- family activity during evening hours 12. Early development of television a. 1927--Philo T. Farnsworth transmitted television images without wires--in his apartment in San Francisco--used the dollar sign as symbol transmitted--raided by police because suspected of distilling alcohol . First broadcast experimentally in England in 1927--in United States in 1928—«but was not until 1936 RCA began to seriously experiment with the medium-«had 17 experimental stations by 1937. . First public impact—rNew York World‘s Fair demonstration 1939 . First FCC license for commercial television granted July 1, 1941 to an RCA station . 10 stations followed—«World War II began, only six stations actually broadcast during the war years . At the end of the war, less than 5000 television sets in American homes 13. Growth Years--"The Freeze" a. The potential for television as a mass medium best sensed by radio interests rather than motion picture . Television corporate development grew out of radio--RCA (NBC) being the first to enter the new field, gained firm- est foothold . Economic results at the beginning were disastrous--1948, 46 stations broadcasting to 1 million home television sets--four networks made $8 million with expenses of $23 million . VHF vs. UHF allocation--first major FCC decision regarding television 1) RCA favored VHF--limited outlets with few national corp- orations controlling programming 2) CBS--favored UHF--larger number of channels attracting competition, diversity of programing and lower cost for each channel 145 3) Technical characteristics of VHF and UHF 4) FCC chose VHF--far reaching effects on characteristics of American television 5) UHF development was delayed until 1952 when FCC included the UHF band for station allocation but television sets not equipped to receive e. Unexpected interference problem 1) VHF—-on1y 12 available channels for whole country 2) TV signal does not follow curvature of earth's surface as does radio-~theoretically two stations on same chan- nel if far enough apart 3) As new stations went on air, however, channels inter- fered with each other 4) The "freeze“ a) Stopped all new applications--Sept. 30, 1948 b) Lasted four years--to solve problem of more demand than space--added UHF and lifted freeze in 1952 14. Becoming an American institution a. Replaced the radio as the institutionalized family home activity 1) At first radio attempted to compete--unsuccessful 2) Resorted to alternative audiences with alternative needs 3) Transistor and the youth market--guaranteed continued existence of radio as economic success b. Elements of the rapid growth of television 1) Manufacturing figures; number of sets in homes 1940— 1970 2) Social and cultural conditions which contributed to the rapid expansion a) Cultural practices and attitudes concerning broad- casting already existed 3) 146 b) Sufficient technological ability to produce home television sets economically c) Financial base and structure copied from existing radio pattern d) Talent available from radio, film and stage e) Audience used to sound and picture from film f) Network development came quickly Networks a) Needed capacity for simultaneous distribution of programs nationally--telephone lines inadequate for television signal b) Early use of kinescope c) Coaxial cable and microwave developed spread--coin- cides with rise of set sales d) September 4, 1951 first coast-to-coast live tele- vision program--signing of Japanese Peace Treaty-— seen by 52 stations 4) DevelOping alternatives: PBS, cable television and pay television 8. Philosophical basis of American broadcasting 1. Complex structure, deriving basic premises from two main sources; journalistic ethics and the aesthetics of popular . Philosophy is socially defined in such documentation as the Communication Act of 1934, the NAB Code, the Radio Code, the Canons of Journalism, etc. . Basic philosophical concept: broadcast in the public inter- est, convenience, and necessity--discuss 4. The philosophic basis of the American journalistic ethic a. A forum for the open exchange of ideas b. A servant of the people with responsibility of presenting objective, truthful information 147 c. Conception of fairness--in the over-all press system a balance of ideas should exist d. Free from government control--functions as a check on governmental activities e. Independent local organizations providing daily information for its own community 5. Popular art-~the aesthetic basis for broadcast entertainment a. Requires a large, middle-class audience with education and some economic means b. Requires technological development so the products of the popular art effort can be widely distributed cheaply c. The artist's role in popular art is to create for a profit the kind of art the large, middle-class mass audience wants d. The popular artist and his audience 1) Has many factors between himself and his audience (producers, advertisers, distributor, editors, etc.) 2) His relationship with the audience is not direct or critical 3) He is seen in an impersonal way by his audience, not as an individual e. Popular art confirms the experiences of the audience--tends not to deal with innovative or disturbing concepts f. Comparison of elite, folk and popular art 1) Audiences for 2) Support structure 3) Aesthetic context 6. American broadcasting--a business a. Combining certain factors from our journalistic ethic and popular art concepts, the business of American broadcasting developed 1) Lack of government control 148 2) Laissez-faire, pluralistic press 3) Need to please the largest possible audience 4) Popular art products make money 5) Popular art products deal with the familiar experience common to the majority b. Our present system is neither accidental nor natural 1) Consciously formed by business interests for profit 2) To reach a large audience 3) Not because this form serves the public interest any better than alternative systems might C. Economic basis of American commercial broadcasting 1. 2. As a business, the marketable commodity is broadcasting time The logical purchaser of the time, American business for advertising purposes . American broadcasting theoretical purpose-~to operate in the public interest, convenience and necessity . American broadcasting reality--have to sell time to adver- tisers--who in turn want the time they buy observed by the maximum number of people with the economic means to buy the advertised product . Conflict of interest between public and corporate interests a. Rationalize corporate interest the same as national interest--"what's good for General Motors is good for the USA." b. Degree to which public interest served if broadcasting controlled by another interest group besides business-- labor, government, religious interests, etc. c. No single segment of a society can adequately represent the whole--insufficient diversity and balance . Some major effects of business orientation in American com- mercial broadcasting a. Leadership 149 1) Corporate leaders are businessmen 2) Broadcast corporate leadership seldom includes religious, educational, artistic, literary professionals 3) Broadcast leaders, to succeed in their field, place corporate interest above public interest--profits above public need 4) Majority of network leaders have been in their posi- tions since early 1930's 4) The leader's economic concepts are outdated b. Goals 1) Publicly stated goals a) Broadcast in the public interest b) Interpreted by broadcast corporate leaders as giving the people what they want c) Determined through ratings 2) Primary goal through analysis of actual broadcast activity a) Operate at a maximum profit 1) Closed books--economic secrecy 2) Cancellation policy for programs on economic basis--insufficient profits 3) Profit record for industry for ten year period following end of "freeze"--l952-l962 b) Discussion of actual policy guidelines--exists unofficially--changeable c. Ownership 1) Original concept of American media--diversified owner- ship on local level--serving local needs 2) Majority of stations in use are: a) Chain ownership; 7-7-7 ruling b) Cross-media ownership 150 c) Network affiliated 3) Network conglomerates 4) Competition a) Reduces profits b) Industry attempts to minimize competition by unoffi- cial agreements-~price-fixing, wage-fixing--fair trade practices d) Programming 1) Advertising support tends to shape programming content 2) One Big National Audience concept 3) a) Lowest common denominator in programming--conflicts, sex, violence, etc., to attract this audience--lack of diversity b) Narrow standards for debate or presentation of dis- senting ideas c) Limited number of channels and the advertising need of a mass audience results in local stations pre- senting duplication of program types from national source rather than local, diversified programming d) 75% of population live in top 50 markets--3 tele- vision networks have 94% of this audience-~thus 70% of American population see what three organizations program Ratings a) The method for determining what the mass audience wants and accepts--based only on audience size b) Viewers function as audience, market, public--define each function c) Ratings deal only with audience function d) Types of rating data collection e) A. C. Nielson--the principal television rating service--discuss how this service works 151 f) Limitations of ratings: what share of audience actually means, in terms of number of viewers; Hawthorne Effect on sample; statistical deviation and rating point differences e. International broadcasting activities 1) Because a business--needs new markets 2) This factor has caused American intervention in foreign broadcasting in ways no other country in the world has functioned ' 3) Forcing commercial television systems in countries with controlled broadcasting a) Example of development of conmercial television in Britain b) Use of pirate ships c) United States involvement in South and Central America 4) Foreign distribution of American television programming-- implications for foreign image of United States 0. Regulation 1. Types of regulation a. Governmental b. Self-regulation c. Citizen pressure 2. Governmental a. United States system has developed with minimum govern- mental control--inherent in basic philosophical structure of the broadcasting system--First Amendment b. Specific legislation relating to broadcasting l) Punitive laws for harmful publication a) Libel b) Copyright and privacy 2) 152 c) Fraud d) Sedition e) Obscenity Regulations to prevent access to information . Major governmental regulation agency is the FCC 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Concepts on which government regulation is based are obsolete or unenforceable due to industry growth and pressure Original concepts to prevent the development of indus- trial monopolies of publicly owned frequencies a) 3-year licensing policy b) NBC and CBS and others have controlled some stations 20 to 30 years c) Example of anti-trust convictions against RCA, Westinghouse and General Electric--1icenses not revoked Regulation designed to control isolated, competitive stations licensed to individuals not corporations-~no corporations--no networks in existence then, stations produced own programming Major limitations on FCC by direct Congressional action-- bills passed to directly effect FCC functioning--AVCO Rule, McFarland Bill, defeat of Dill Bill Unofficial Congressional pressure a) Congressmen own or have financial interest in broad- casting stations b) Congressman need access to broadcasting stations for election purposes--a "favors“ situation develops Congress tends to protect broadcasting corporate inter- ests rather than public interest--recent legislation mainly regarding protection of property and rights of the broadcasters Congressional actions have essentially prevented the FCC from dealing with the areas of controlling owner- ship, policy or program content In" :1 111i 111 "11 1'1 153 8) Areas this commission has to control besides radio and television--telegraph, telephone, walkie-talkie, taxi, multiplex and fascimile companies 9) Small staff and budget a) Both controlled by Congress and Bureau of Budgets-- examine how process works b) Examine the actualization of this problem as it is illustrated by the license renewal process 10) Exemption from common carrier status a) Based on fact that individual station was creator of and directly responsible for material sent over its facilities b) Networks changed this basic premise c) Common carrier requirements: detailed reporting to regulatory agency; prescribed accounting procedures; open books; rate regulation 3. Self-regulation a. Essential basis for self-regulation 1) Stringent educational and professional standards 2) Entry based on specific credentials and disciplines 3) The underlying premise that members of the profession will not do certain things for money 4) These all lacking in American broadcasting b. NAB Code 1) Summarize 2) Adopted in 1952 just prior to proposed Congressional investigation 3) Stations not required to subscribe to the code 4) Violations of the code go unheeded by the industry c. Industry self-regulation seldom effective--examples of the need for child labor laws, food and drug restrictions, 4. 154 legislation controlling investment activity--broadcasting not proving any more successful at self-regulation than any other American industry d. Examination of quiz show "rigging" as example of self- regulation Citizen Pressure Groups a. Relatively new form of social pressure in this society b. Basic assumptions 1) Television is a major socializing agent in this society 2) The viewers should have a direct voice in what types of programming effect their lives c. Unofficial, spontaneously formed groups d. Effects they attempt to achieve 1) Affect local station programming and hiring practices 2) Cancellation or inclusion of network programs by local affiliates 3) Direct challenge of licensees'right for renewal 4) Changing network programming content--violence currently the main concern e. An example; summary of the development and activities of Action for Children's Television f. Industry reaction to ACT V. The Need for Philosophic Structure A. Summation of points considered above 1. 2. 3. Communication is one of the basic human processes Mass communication is an extension of human senses-~human consciousness is therefore extended around the world 1n- stantaneously The functions of mass communication help form and maintain the basic societal structure, i.e., surveillance, consensus, socialization, entertainment, economic stimulat1on 155 . The major effects of the mass communication process are essen- tially undetermined . The political and philosophical basis of a society determine the role and structure of its media system . No medium exists without such a structure, whether consciously or unconsciously arrived at . Brief examination of the American system reveals: a. The American broadcasting system's philosophical basis is consistent with the society's political and philosophical structure b. The development of the structure was the result of con- scious effort on the part of the society's business interests c. American broadcasting is essentially a business-~its primary goal is to make a maximum profit d. Conflict of interest between business and public interests 1) Philosophic view that broadcasting exists for the public interest, convenience and necessity and that it must provide a free marketplace of ideas so that truth may emerge, vs. 2) Implementing structure's need for economic survival and profit-making B. Some basic philosophic considerations re: American broadcasting 1. 2. 4. Magnitude of mass communication process generally accepted The dramatic increase in communicative behavior brought about by technological advances is a fundamental change unequaled in the history of man . A broadcasting system should operate to fulfill all the diverse elements of a society and not operate in favor of a single private interest A commercial basis for broadcasting does not present a balanced system . The American public views the governmental structure as inimi- cal to free communication processes--adult citizen has a vote in the governmental system, however, and not 1n corporation activities 156 6. Balanced, diverse, quality programming should pay--if not, should quality programming or the competitive, commercial system based on profit be sacrificed? 7. Needed is a public communication policy based on philosophical, ethical, humanistic and scientific considerations that will fill the informational needs of the society in the face of continued rapid growth of the mass media systems C. The question of effects 1. Whether intentional or unintentional, the question is not if media affects, but how and when 2. Communication research has to date not been able to determine this to any specific degree--two basic reactions to this situation: a. Feel a need for caution, consideration and performance to the highest ideals as a safeguard until proved exactly what harmful effects the media is capable of creating in a society b. To proceed without concern until question of effects is answered 3. The role and limitations of communication research a. Communication research looked to by industry and the public to describe effective and ineffective messages and their positive and negative effects b. Mass media research has been the concern of many fields: communication, sociology, psychology, political science, anthropology, history, international relations, linguis— tics--so research lacks central discipline c. The rise of the number of quantitative studies during first 20 years of communication research (mid-30's to mid- 50's) supplanted older, philosophic approaches--too little attention to developing general theories of the mass com- munication process d. Development mainly methodological, much valid data, little general theory, reasons: 1) Methodological refinement less complicated and time consuming research procedure than theory development 2) Structure of academic life f. g. h. 157 3) Interests of media themselves; financing of research . This tendency to data collection and seeing methodology as an end in itself; the avoidance of the complex central issues of the mass communication process; contradictory research results, due to: 1) Media message cannot be isolated from the personal variables of the receiver 2) One medium cannot be easily isolated from other media in the environment 3) The message cannot be isolated from the physical condi- tions of and surrounding the medium itself 4) Difficulty of securing representative control groups 5) Difficulty in determining long-range or cumulative effects 6) Problems in determining whether the message is the cause or the effect Much valid research--but also must treat the research with healthy skepticism 1) Usually results are not proven fact, only in theory stage--public tends to treat the research results out of context, as proven fact 2) Findings usually fragmentary, any single research project deals only with a minute aspect of the whole at a specific point in time and space 3) Quantitative data can easily be made to reflect any aspect of reality; unconscious bias may exist Many of the effects questions, i.e., violence, pornography, propaganda, have to be dealt with on a philosophic basis not only a statistical or quantitative one--whether a society wishes to socialize its members with massive expo- sure to violent acts is answerable only on the basis of the philosophic and ethical structure of the society There are some areas where quantitative research results in additional knowledge and insight, but far too many important areas where this method has to date proved insuf- ficient to be relied on solely. 158 D. The basic structure of the philosophic approach 1. How does a mass communicator make decisions about what the audience wants, effectiveness of the message, how to alter messages, etc.--mainly by intuition, in a self-projective, existential manner 2. Intelligent, perceptive decision making then required, based on rational, philosophical and ethical considerations a. Discussion of basic ethical concepts 1) Normative science of conduct 2) Sets forth guidelines--leads not forces 3) Personal concern for one's own conduct 4) Directed by reason, self—directed and self-enforced 5) Immanuel Kant--Categorical Imperative concepts of duty, self-legislation, conduct as universal law 6) Various typologies a) Absolute/relative b) Objective/subjective c) Attitudinal/consequence d) Situation ethic E. Future trends and implications 1. Magnitude of future decisions 2. Basis needed for decisions about type of media system and its regulation should be based on a balance of scientific and humanistic insight 3. A balanced broadcasting system achieved through several tech- nological advancements--discuss: a. Cable television and pay television b. Satellites c. Computers 159 4. Public Broadcasting System in America a. History and development b. Implications for balanced, diversified broadcast system in this society REFERENCES CITED REFERENCES Albig, William, "Two Decades of Opinion Study, 1936-1956," Public ijnion Quarterly, Vol. 21 (1957). Archer, Gleason L., History of Radio to 1926. New York: The American Historical Society, Inc., 1938. Bagdikian, Ben, The Information Machines. New York: Harper & Row Publishing Co., 1971. Barnouw, Erik, A lower in Babel. New York: Oxford University Press, 1966. Boorstin, Daniel J., The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-events in America. New York: Antheneum Pub1i§hers:_l96l. Brown, Roger L., "Approaches to the Historical Development of Mass Media Studies," in Jeremy Tunstall, ed., Media Sociology: A Reader. Urbana, Illinois: University of IllinOis Press, 1970. Childs, Marquis W. and Douglas Cater, Ethics in a Business Society. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1954. Cohnman, Werner J. and Rudolph Heberle, eds., Ferdinand T6nnies on Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971. Comte, Auguste, A General View of Positivism, translated by J. H. Bridges. Stanford, California: iAcademic Reprints, 1953. Congressional Record of House Debates, June 9, 1934, 73rd Congress, Second Session. Cooley, Charles H., "The Significance of Communication," in W. Schramm and D. Roberts, eds., The Process and Effects of Mass Communica- tion. Revised edition, urBana, Illinois: Uhiversity of Illinois Press, 1974. Cooper, E. and M. Johata, "The Evasion of Propaganda," Journal of Psychology 23 (1947. DeFleur, Melvin, "Mass Media as Social Systems," in W. Schramm and D. Roberts, eds., Process and Effects of Mass Communication. Revised edition, Urbana, Illinoi§3 UniverSity of Illinois Press, 1974. 160 161 DeFleur, Melvin, Theories of Mass Communication. Second edition, New York: DavidlMcKay Co., Ific., 1970. Durkheim, Emile, The Division of Labor in Society, translated by George Simpson. Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press, 1960. Emblen, Roger 6., ed., Societ Toda . Second edition, Del Mar, California: CRM Books, 1973. Festinger, L., A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Evanston, Illinois: Row, Peterson Co.,—1957. Friedrich, Carl J., ed., The Philosophy of Kant. New York: Random House, Inc., 1949. Friedson, Elliot, "Communication Research and the Concept of the Mass," in W. Schramm and D. Roberts, eds., The Processand Effects of Mass Communication. Revised edition, Urbana, Illinois: Univer- sity of Illifiois Press, 1974. Fromm, Erick, Escape from Freedom. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1941. Fromm, Erich, Marx's Concept of Man. New York: F. Ungar Co., 1966. Gehlke, Charles E. Emile Durkheim's Contributions to Sociological Theory. New York: AMS Press, 1968. Gibran, Kahlil, Sand and Foam: A Book of Aphorisms. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1969. Hovland, C., A. Lumsdaine and F. Sheffield, Expsriments on Mass Commun- ication. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1949. Hyman, H. H. and P. B. Sheatsley, "Some Reasons Why Information Cam- paigns Fail," Public Opinion Quarterly 11 (1947). Jung, Carl 6., The Undiscovered Self. New York: Little, Brown & Co., 1957. Klapper, J., The Effects of Mass Communication. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1960. Lang, K. and G. E. Lang, "The Unique Perspective of Television and Its Effects: A Pilot Study," in W. Schramm and D. Roberts, eds., Process and Effects of Mass Communication. Revised edition, Urbana, Illinois: Uhiversity of Illihois Press, 1974. Lasswell, Harold D.,"The Structure and Functions of Communication in Society," in Lyman Bryson, ed., The Communication of Ideas. New York: Institute for Religious and Social Studies, T948. 162 Lazarsfeld, P., B. Berelson, and H. Gauden, The People's Choice. New York: Columbia University Press, 1948. Marx, Karl, tgpitalt_The Communist Manifesto and Other Writings, edited by Max Eastman. New York: The MBdern Library,1932i' McLuhan, Marshall, Understanding Media. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1964. Merrill, John and Robert Lewenstein, Media, Messgges and Men. New York: David McKay Co., Inc., 1971. Michigan Reports: Cases Decided in the Sppreme Court of Michigan 204. Chieago: Callaghan & Co., 1919. Middlebrook, Patricia Niles, Social Psychology and Modern Life. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1974. Mill, John Stuart, On Liberty, Alburey Castell, ed. New York: Crofts Publishing, 1947. Milton, John, Areopagitica and Other Prose Works. London: J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1956. Nye, Russel, The Unembarrassed Muse: The Popular Arts in America. New York: *The 0151 Press, 1970. Ollman, Bertell, Alienation: Marx's Conception of Man in Capitalistic Society. Cameidge,_England: UhiverEity Press, 1971. Paley, William S. "Radio as a Cultural Force," remarks before the FCC, October 17, 1934. New York: CBS Brochure, 1948. Peterson, Theodore, Wilbur Schramm and Fred S. Siebert, Four Theories of the Press. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1956. Plato, The Rspublic, translated by H. D. P. Lee. Baltimore: Penguine Books, Inc., 1956. Reith, J. C. W., Broadcast Over Britain. London: Hodder & Stoughton, Ltd., 1924. Rucker, Bryce, The First Freedom. Carbondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois University—Press, 1968. Rumney, Jay, Herbert Spencer's Sociology: A Study in the History of Social Theory. NeWFYdrk: Atherton Press, 1966. Salvadori, Massimo, Locke and Liberty: Selections from the Works of John Locke. London: Charles Birdall & Sons, Ltd., 1960. 163 Schramm, W. and D. Roberts, eds., The Process and Effects of Mass Com- munication. Revised edition, Urbana, Illihois: .University of I111nois Press, 1974. Schramm, W. and W. Rivers, Responsibility in Mass Communication. Revised edition, New York: Harper & Row Publishers,il969. Sears, 0. O. and J. S. Freedman, "Selective Exposure to Information: A Critical Review," in W. Schramm and D. Roberts, eds., The Process and Effects of Mass Comnunication. Revised edition, Urbana, Illinois: University of Illihois Press, 1974. Skornia, Harry, Television and Society. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1965. Spencer, Herbert, The Works of Herbert Spsncer 8. London & New York: 0. Appleton & Co., 19102 Tdnnies, Ferdinand, Community and Society (Gemeinschaft undgssell- schaft , translatediand editediby Charles P. Loomi§l East Lansing, M1c 1gan: Michigan State University Press, 1957. Tudor, Andrew, "Film, Communication and Content," in Jeremy Tunstall, ed., Media Sociology: A Reader. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illin6is Press, 1970. GENERAL REFERENCES Blakely, Robert H., The People's Instrument: A Philosgphy_of Program- ming for Public Television. WaShington, D.C.: Public Affairs Pressiil97l. Bretz, Rudolf, ,A Taxonomy of Communication Media. Englewood Cliffs, New JerSey: EdUCational Technology PUBlications, 1971. Chaney, David C., Processes of Mass Conmunication. London: Macmillian, 1972. Colle, Royal 0., Perspectives on Mass Media Systems (Bulletin #4). Ithaca, New York: Dept. ofiCommunication Arts; N. Y. State Colleges of Agriculture and Home Economics; Statutory Colleges of the State University, 1968. Emery, Michael and Ted Curtis Smythe, eds., REAdIDQS In M355 COMMUNI- cation: Concepts and Issues in the Mass Media: Dubuque: W. C. Brown, Co.,—1972. Emery, Edwin, Introduction to Mass Communication. New York: Dodd, Mead, 1970. Friendly, Fred, Due to Circumstances Beyond Our Control. New York: Random House,_1967. Green, Timothy. The Universal Eye. New York: Stein and Day, 1972. Kennel, LeRoy Eldon, Ecology of the Air Waves. Scottsdale, Penn.: Herald Press, 1971. Kirschner, Allen and Linda, eds., Radio and Television: Readings in the Mass Media. New York: Odyssey Press, 1971. Mao, Tse-Tung, The Chinese Revolution and the Chinese Communist Party. Fourth edition, Peking: Foreign Language Press,i1965. Mayer, Martin, About Television. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1972. Noll, Roger and Merton Peck and John McGowan. Economic Aspects of Television Regulation. Washington, D.C.: The Broekings Insti- tute, 1973. 164 165 Schiller, Herbert, Mass Communication and American Empire. New York: Augustus M. Kelley, Pfiblishers, 1969. Schramm, Stuart R., The Political Thought of Mao Tse-Tung, Revised edition, New York: Praeger Pfiblishihg, 1969. Schramm, Wilbur, Mass Media and National Development: The Role of Information in the Developing Countries. Pale—Alto, California: Stanford University Press, 19642 Seldes, Gilbert. The New Mass Media: Challenge to a Free Society. Washington, D.C.: PubliElAffairs Press, 1968. Simonson, Solomon, Crisis In Television: A Study_of the Private Judgment and the PUblic Ihterest. New Yerk} LiVing Books, 1966. Stein, Robert, Media Power: Who Is Shaping Your Picture of the World? Boston: Houghton-Mifflih, 1972. Steinbert, Charles. Mass Media and Communication. New York: Hasting House, 1972. Stephenson, William, The Play Theory of Mass Communication. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1967. Summers, Robert and Harrison Summers. Broadcasting and the Public. Belmont, California: Wadsworth PubliEhing Co.,41966. Voelker, Francis and Ludmila. Mass Media Forces in Our Society. New York: Harcourt, Brace, JovanoVich, 1972. Wells, Alan. Mass Media and Society. Palo Alto: National Press Books, 1972. Winick, Charles. Children's Television Commercials: A Content Analy- sis, New York: ‘Praeger,i1973. Wright, Charles, Mass Communication: A Sociologjcal Perspective. New York: Random House, 1959.