Africa Media Review Vol. 1. No. 2. 1987 
© African Council on Communication Education 
Current Debates in the Field of Mass 
Communication Research: 
Abstract 
Resume 
An African Viewpoint 
by Professor Frank Okwu Ugboajah* 
This paper discusses the kind of mass communication research 
that is required in Africa. After a thorough review of the 
controversy between the adherents of the (American) 
administrative and (European) critical research schools, the 
author argues that as far as African mass communication research 
is concerned, the problem is not only that of conceptualization but 
also that of social research process and administration. The paper 
registers a general dissatisfaction with African social research 
based on foreign theoretical and methodological assumptions. It 
ends with a call for 'back to our roots', having outlined four major 
research agenda for African mass communication researchers. 
Cet article traite du type de recherche dans le domaine de la 
communication de masse dont l'Afrique a besoin. Apres un examen 
approfondi de la controverse entre les adeptes des Creoles de 
recherche administrative (americaines) et critique (europeennes) 
l'auteur d^montre que la recherche en matiere de communication 
de masse en Afrique est confronted non seulement a un probleme 
de conceptualisation mais ^galement a un probleme 
d'adminstration et aussi de processus social de recherche. L'article 
rdflete une dissatisfaction gene'rale en ce qui concerne la recherche 
sociale en Afrique base'e sur des assomptions the'oriques et 
me'thodologiques etrangeres. II lance un appel pour "un retour a 
nos sources" et eVionce quatre programmes de recherche 
importants pour les chercheurs africains des communications de 
masse. 
1
INTRODUCTION: 
Communication research is relatively a new area of study 
compared with other areas of the social sciences. It is also an area 
which contemporarily attracts the largest volume of intellectual 
controversy. Some theorists have contended that communication 
research itself has not yet matured into a discipline and should be 
regarded as a field (Schramm, 1959). Others have dismissed as 
banal any attempt at theory construction in communication, 
claiming that "we do not need a theory of mass communications 
but a theory of society" to generate guiding propositions in mass 
communication research (Golden and Murdock. 1978). Barelson 
(1959) was of the opinion that the current •immaturity" of mass 
communication research stemmed from the desertion of the 
seminal thinkers of the field to newer, more exciting areasl. There 
is also the claim that the weakness of the field is as a result of the 
underlying idealism in the simple idea that communication means 
human relations. Another weakness is that mass communication 
research in contrast with research in social sciences has been 
remarkably free of active efforts at reanalysis and replication 
(Hirach, 1980). 
Administrative vs Critical Concepts 
But so far the sharpest controversy has been the choice between 
the so-called administrative research strategy ot the American and 
the critical research of the European. Current "Year Book" and 
Journals of communication research have devoted several pages to 
this debate. Peter Golding and Graham Murdock of the Centre for 
Mass Communication Research of the University of Leicester 
characterize a current and typical European voice. 
'Professor Frank Okwu Ugboajah was until his death Professor of Mass 
Communication, Department of Mass Communication. University of Lagos, Nigeria. 
He passed away in March 1987, after presenting this paper at the 5th Biennial 
Conference of the ACCE. Harare, Zimbabwe. 13th- 18th October, 1986. ACCE owes 
the development of AFRICA MEDIA REVIEW, to the foresight and dedication of this 
great African communication Researcher, and former Vice-President of the Council. 
2
Their major contention is that American mass media 
researchers fall prey to a concentration on the integrative effect of 
mass communication. They tend to ignore its cultural 
stratification which would seek the ways in which the media are 
conceived as functional institutions of socialisation, not part of a 
legitimization apparatus in an egalitarian social order (Golden and 
Murdock, 1978). The Europeans, most of them proletarian 
sociologists, further contend that the practical concern with 
manipulation, effects and influence were not without a theoretical 
yield, especially at the level of social psychology. But later, observers 
started noticing that these interests were administrating rather 
than theoretical and invited elaboration of quantitative 
techniques to measure effects rather than more general 
elucidation of communication theory. Also there is the obsession 
with methods which betray a theoretical vacuum in which the 
paucity of ideas is masked by a dazzling display of empirical 
ingenuity. 
The African researcher might see the so-called 
administrative research, especially "mass media Tor national 
development" and "diffusion of innovation" research as favouring 
the effects of the communication media where development is 
defined in ethno-centric terms and a realization of western 
economic and mechanical standards. As Hamelink (1976) well 
noted, in such circumstances, "social change is usually conceived 
as individual enlightenment rather than structural social change 
and dil rusion of innovation is usually idealistically understood as 
the diffusion of new ideas (on a two-step flow). There is aproneness 
to consider the technological advantages of mass communication 
rather than understand the part the media play in society from the 
point oi view of their processes within appropriate contexts. There 
is also the tendency for theorists to fail to substantiate their ideas 
with any extensive and systematic data. Few are equipped with 
enough range of questionnaires of projective tests. Results cast 
do lbt on the theory that dependency typifies personality. Instead 
we have reports from which it is not easy to disentangle the preconditions 
of researcher or author. 
Kurt Lang (1979) and to some extent, Jay G. Blumer (1981) speak 
strongly in favour of American Mass Communication research. 
Paul Lazarsfeld has shared more of the blames of the Critical 
School as being the father of administrative research. Lang (1979) 
apologetically replies that where research has been designed to
answer a particular event, a practical purpose, research must be 
enriched and vitalized by the incorporation of perspectives derived 
from formulations by critical theorists about how general trends in 
society effect the way mass media function and affect certain basic 
values. He contends, "Lazarsfeld welcomes critical theory as a 
potentially vitalizing influence on administrative research." He 
goes on to elucidate the objective of administrative research as 
practised by Lasarsfeld. Such research is based on the idea that 
modern media of communication are tools handled by people or 
agencies for given purposes. It centres on a more or less 
standardized set of problems, including the nature of the audience, 
the impact of message content and how the one affects the other. 
Because these things are not obvious, in order to gain an 
understanding of them, one requires empirically grounded 
knowledge. Such knowledge is pertinent if one needs to 
understand the more general role of the media of communication 
in present social system. The empirical validation of theory, as 
Lang well points out, is a tricky business for those intent on 
developing skill in this area. They ought to be denigrated because 
there is less sharp incompatibility between administrative and 
critical research. 
Blumler (1981) notes that Europe is undoubtedly providing a 
congenial proving ground for the development of much critically 
oriented mass communications enquiry, albeit based on self 
evident truths, yet "a shocking indictment of the field in Europe" is 
the paltry "cumulative traditions of effect research that can 
stand comparison with American work in such areas as knowledge 
gap, agenda-setting, trust in government and social construction 
of reality (particularly the Annenberg social indicators and 
cultivation analysis studies). He warns that such a neglect should 
no longer be tolerated, for the study of mass communication as a 
process, without systematic investigation of audience response, is 
like a sexology that ignores the orgasm. Blumler also notes that the 
current American mass communication research scene appears to 
lack its pioneering synthesis and binding quality. What he sees is a 
spectacle more like a boxing gym in which each individual is doing 
his own thing - some people are skipping rope, some are punching 
bags, some lifting weights, some sparring, some taking showers 
and some just having a rest. Blumler finally comes to the 
conclusion that American mass communication studies are 
unrivaled in theoretical precision, methodological rigour, technical 
imagination and sophisticated data handling, but they are shaky 
in philosophical underpinning.
Annenberg Cultural Indicators 
One major study which has attracted controversy among social 
researchers across the world is the Annenberg Cultural Indicators 
Projects especially its theory of cultivation led by Professors George 
Gerbner and Larry Gross of the University of Pennysylvania. 
The design of the cultural indicators profile study consists of the 
interrelated parts of message system analysis and cultivation 
analysis (Gerbner et al., 1980). Message system analysis is the 
annual monitoring of samples of prime-time and weekend daytime 
network dramatic programming. This includes series, other plays, 
comedies, movies, and cartoons. Cultivation analysis investigates 
the conceptions of the viewer in regard to social realities associated 
with the most recurrent features of the world of television. 
The Annenberg project attracted great attention by its repeated 
measurement of incidents of violence on American television. 
Gerbner's definition of violence is "the overt expression of physical 
force (with or without a weapon, against self, or others) compelling 
action, against one's will on pain of being hurt and/or killed or 
threatened to be so victimized as part of a plot." Part of the study's 
theoretical thrust is the consideration of television plays as 
assembly-line drama rather than unique works of craftsmanship. 
The study also claims (Gerbner et al., 1978) that viewers do absorb 
"broad facts" from their experience of many hours in the world of 
television irrespective of whether or not they believe any specific 
plot. The Gerbner group maps out a cultivation differential in 
which "the world" of a group of heavy viewers was compared with 
that of light viewers. 
Their verdict is that "heavy viewers have internalized a certain 
view of society and a tense of values and norms coupled with it - a 
logic of winning and losing, a system of victims and aggressors, a 
certain role-partition, idea about the risks in life and the price that 
should be paid for breaking the law". 
Gerbner roots his theoretical formulation on the conception 
that "the industrial revolution reveals itself in the domain of the 
production of messages," (as a result), mass media produce a shortcircuit 
in the other field of social communication (and experience),
hence ideology develops mainly and with all Its consequences, 
through the mass media particularly through the machinery of 
television. The claim is that the cultivation analysis provides 
support for the theory of pervasive cultivation of mistrust 
apprehension, danger and exaggerated "mean world" perceptions. 
It suggests that television viewing is associated with a cultural 
"mainstream", which tends to assimilate groups that diverge from 
it and the salience of certain real-life circumstances is likely to 
boost television cultivation potentials. There is also the conception 
that environmental factors may "resonate" with television 
messages and even augment them. A unique reasoning in my 
estimation. 
Promise of Cultural Indicators 
Halloran (1978) sees promise in Gerbners cultural indicators 
approach owing to its sensitivity to the possibility that televised 
violence can be used to legitimize and maintain elitist power. The 
Annenberg approach appears more realistic and serious than 
previous individual modelling behavioural approaches used in 
experiments. Other researchers have been equally impressed by 
the Annenberg model. 
A notable adaptation of the model is the Swedish Symbol System 
undertaken by Professor Krarl Erik Rosengren and his colleagues 
in 1977. The purpose of that study was to construct standardized 
instruments for measuring various aspects of the symbol in the 
cultural environment of Sweden as conceived in a broad 
perspective so as to indicate society's predominant opinions, 
values, attitudes and beliefs, to wit, those cultural factors which 
interact with more material factors to contribute to the shaping of 
society. Like the Gerbner study, measurement was by means of 
several time series of cultural indicators, covering not only 
television but also the areas of domestic politics, foreign policy, 
religion, advertising, literature and sex role structures. The optimal 
objective was to relate the various time series to each other and to 
other relevant times series (economic, social and political) in the 
overall summary. Unlike Gerbner, Rosengren notes the distinction 
between indicators intended to measure actual conditions and 
those intended to measure experiences or attitudes towards those 
conditions. The physical standard of living (material resources) 
and the quality of life (personal relationships) do not seem to be the 
decisive factor in how one perceives his standard of living or the 
quality of his life. In other words, a person can be displeased while 
/ 6
in an apparent state of well-being, and happiness Is possible In an 
apparent state of misfortune. 
Even the most vocal and more involved critics of the Annenberg 
work have very good things to say about Its dlstinctiveness. 
Newcomb (1978) describes the study as "most significant 
particularly in its contribution in the careful mapping of 
television's social world. It is also agreed that in current mass 
communication research, the Annenberg projects have strongly 
influenced research agendas and theoretical bases. Graduate 
students and professional researchers seldom launch a project 
about television without first seeking to relate it to the Annenberg 
results and/or adopting its paradigms {Hirsch, 1980). The 
innovativeness of the Gerbner-Gross projects is acclaimed for its 
foresight in the collection of data on a systematic, long-term basis 
and moving out of the laboratory and away from the closed 
experimental model. Poecke (1980) regards as persuasive 
Gerbner's global vision of the relation of media, culture and society. 
The most out-spoken critic of the Annenberg study. Professor Paul 
M. Hirsch of the University of Chicago, is full of praise for the efforts 
of Gerbner and his team to link content analysis empirically to 
audience perceptions. This he regards as an important and 
systematic contribution to communication research. 
Criticisms 
Hirsch decided in 1980 to do a reanalysis of the work of Gerbner 
and his colleagues in the area of "Cultivation Analysis". The 
purpose of this reanalysis was stated as "to open a scholarly 
dialogue on the virtues and defects of the Annenberg group's 
cultural indicators project and to point out a need of more and 
expanded research frameworks to study the role and impact of 
television in society (Hirsch, 1980)." 
It will be important here to list a few of the major objections to 
and disagreements with the Annenberg projects. Paul Hirsch's 
disagreements are mainly on its methodological significance. First 
is that most of the findings reported by Gerbner and his group in 
their "Cultivation Analysis" as their strongest, "virtually 
evaporate" on exposure to multiple classification analysis. Second, 
Gerbner and his group failed to ensure sample comparability,
introduce multiple controls and report items where data do not 
support the argument for the television's cultivation of beliefs and 
attitudes. Third, on many of the items, the scores of "nonviewers 
are higher than those of television's "light medium, heavy and/or 
extreme viewers". In other words, what small relationships there 
are between viewing and other variables are non-linear wherever 
people who watch no television turn out to be more fearful, 
alienate or anomic than those classified as "light", "medium" or 
"heavy" viewers. Fourth, it was surprising to find that the scores of 
non-viewers" on all of the items analysed for television viewers have 
not been reported or discussed in the Annenberg group's articles 
on the cultivation hypothesis. This, according to Hirsch, is not 
because non-viewers' responses were excluded in their analysis of 
the NORC and CPS data, rather because in both cases, 
"nonviewers" have been defined as "light viewers" and their scores 
coded into that category and besides the NORC data, properly 
analysed, contain very little which can be found to support 
cultivation analysis. The cultivation theory, Hirsch concludes, is 
incomplete, anomalous and needs further development. 
Apart from this methodological gauntlet, a humanistic challenge 
was also put forward against the work of Gerbner and his team. 
Horace Newcomb (1978) asserts plausibly that from the 
humanistic angle, it would be both more cautious and useful to try 
to determine a meaning of violence as it is understood by the 
characters themselves in the fictional world of television-One could 
then compare the definition with others, commonly understood, in 
order to take the first interpretative step towards 
order to take the first interpretative step towards understanding 
Gerbner and Gross measure the incidence of violence as the 
impute have defined it, aesthetic and behavioural effects to the 
incidence so measured, and then interpret the world of television 
in the light of that effect. According to Newcomb, the Gerbner- 
Gross analysis operates, at least in its definitions, with a 
monosemic and univocal theory of symbols and this puts it into 
trouble. 
Also, there is a leap from the measured incidence of violence (or 
any other dramatic element for that matter) to the assertion that the 
dramatic world is ruled by the single particular dramatic factor in 
which the researcher is most interested. Newcomb notes that the 
definitions, procedures and reports of results place the violence 
profile work of Gerbner firmly in the realm of transportation 
theory. Suggesting that research on the meaning of symbols must 
begin with the complex of previous meanings associated with such 
symbols, he cautions that researchers would have to recognize the 
8
fact that for Americans, violence has had many meanings and 
uses. A symbolic analysis that takes this into consideration would 
thus begin with conventional "history of ideas" with the focus on 
the symbolic nature adding a dimension that approaches a sort of 
"archeology of ideas". There is a need to develop techniques for 
audience ethnography for the collection of data on long-term bases 
for understanding the variations of human response to art, and 
entertainment. 
Another critic. Lue Van Poecke (1980) accuses Gerbner of an 
obsession for measures and numbers as a reassuring guarantee 
for truthfulness of the scientific discourse. He goes on, 
It is not that one regards culture as a sacred cow that might 
choke on a computer programme, or that one considers the 
idea that culture can be measured economically as an 
infamous attach on the human richness and complexity of 
our culture. It is striking though that Gerbner's research 
strategy shows once more the idea that the concrete analysis 
should be quantifying results in the simplification of the 
theoretical problem. 
Poecke observes that the starting point of the model is 
quantitative and this influences the whole theoretical base, 
weakening its interpretative power so as to provide figures for 
concrete analysis and so leaves so many problems unsolved. One of 
such problems is the unclarity of the system character of symbols; 
another is the exclusion of rhetoric from structural theory. He 
questions in conclusion, 
"... how much value has an analysis of the television drama 
when one does not have insight into the specific logic that 
rules the story and the laws that characterize each genre?" 
The Problem in Africa 
In Africa, the problem is not only that of conceptualization but 
also that of process and administration of social research. Many 
areas of social research in Africa have until recently suffered in part 
from erratic conclusions, wild generalizations and foreign 
dominance. Sometimes quite erroneous results have been drawn 
from data analyzed by academics who have had little or no 
experience of Africa. Others have suffered patently contradictory 
conclusions (for revealing examples of both of these categories in 
one field - psychology - see, for example, the cases discussed in 
Wober, 1975). The extent to which the communication field in the 
Third World has been defined and dominated by researchers from 
9
the West has been described as striking' by Hamelink (1976). He 
writes: 
The need for Third World communication research has been 
(and continues to be) largely defined by the interests in 
operational effectiveness and audience feedback, 
conveniently leaving aside the gigantic problem of 
communication media carriers of Western domination. 
Questions about methodology, cultural differentiations and 
the validity of research schemes and models are often posed 
by scientists from the West. 
'But this point of view,' continues Hamelink, seems to neglect 
the possibility that such generally valid schemes raise serious 
science-philosophical questions for critical research. 
The most disturbing area of field research In the Third World in 
communication studies happens to be diffusion studies, with 
agricultural and health extension work and are therefore 
accompanied by a messianic/cultural invasion. There should be a 
de-emphasis on communication and national development" 
approaches of the Wilbur Schramm, Daniel Lerner and Everett 
Rogers types which were carried out with paramount academic 
qualifications but not necessarily with social relevance. 
In Africa, for example, communication research should 
emphasize case studies and observational approaches. Imported 
models should be put to the test first and carefully selected and 
adapted. There is, therefore, a dire need for the parallel 
development of indigenous technology of communication and 
concepts of national development. As in all Third World countries, 
four major problems militate against communication research in 
Africa 
The first is the lack of trained and locally socialized indigenous 
researchers. The second is the absence of developments in the area 
of innovative and adaptable research methodologies for 
communication problems. The third is the lack of awareness and 
response by policymakers and research institutes of the need for 
communication and social research in the process of development. 
The fourth is the inability of interested researchers to attract 
financial and moral support either nationally or internationally. 
So, for communication researchers in Africa, the story is one of 
despondency and endless frustration. 
Africa also shares some of the field problems which have been 
noted for Asia The use of pad and pencil or a tape recorder by the 
field worker militates against the assurance of confidentiality to 
respondents and therefore makes it difficult to collect field data 
10
especially where feedback requires free answers and depth 
responses. The question becomes: what kind of approaches, 
distinctly African, will aid in minimizing the disenchantment of 
interviewers and avoid the contamination of the responses? 
Other problems that crop up are the unavoidable use of urbanoriented 
interviewers, the relative deprivation of respondents, the 
weakness of questionnaire as the best instrument for tapping 
accurate field responses, the unworkability of the sampling 
procedure which limits the power of generalizations and the 
official involvement of untrustworthy village leaders in the 
conducting of surveys. 
The nebulous but dangerous underestimating of the importance 
of communication research and its implications for national 
planning led to an emergency meeting of researchers under the 
auspices of UNESCO in Nairobi in August 1981. The meeting was 
summoned to take stock of the communication research 
capabilities of the African region, to define research needs and 
priorities and to propose concrete actions for developing and 
strengthening regional capabilities' (UNESCO, 1981). 
The meeting resolved that the interplay between communication 
processes and the forces of Africa's culture and history was bound 
to give communication in Africa a different profile from that in 
other regions of the world. As a result it was valid for 
communication researchers in Africa to arrive at different sets of 
problems and research priorities than those which interest their 
colleagues elsewhere. The meeting took four assumptions as the 
guidelines for its recommendations: 
(1) the fact that the overwhelming majority of Africans live in a 
rural setting; 
(2) the need to examine the role and effect of communication 
within the context of development objectives and activities; 
(3) the need to focus on different communication modalities and 
styles, values underlying different communication 
structures, constraints inherent or imposed on 
communication; and 
(4) the need to achieve regional self-reliance in the development 
of communication research. Recommendations or proposals 
for communication research activities were advanced as 
follows on these agreed areas: 
1. Traditional (indigenous) communication which will require: 
(a) a comprehensive annotated bibliography on the use of 
traditional media needed to permit a meaningful 
11
approach to the development of problem statements for 
research; 
(b) an inventory of folk media systems and structures 
showing their origins and purpose, their mode 
(language or process), their format, their technology, 
their adaptability or convertibility and their possible use 
for development; this is required on a basis of inter- 
African research collaboration so as to identify 
similarities and differences in folk media forms on the 
continent; 
(c) specific case studies of important folk media structures 
or processes, e.g. a case study of the village gongman; 
(d) studies which involve possible integration of folk media 
forms with modern mass media or group media; such 
studies could be centred around normal events 
including development campaigns which are regular 
features in most African countries; 
(e) effectiveness studies which would compare one folk 
media structure with another or with a mass medium, 
such as radio, against a folk media system or group of 
systems. 
Communication in rural areas which will involve: 
(a) compiling an inventory of communication facilities in 
the rural areas, e.g., number of radio sets in an area and 
access to these, and to communal listening and viewing 
facilities; 
(b) discovering sources of information in rural areas, so as 
to ascertain the major primary sources of information on 
various topics for rural people, and the relative 
importance of sources such as radio, press, extension 
workers, government information officers, opinion 
leaders, traditional leaders and other categories of 
interpersonal channels; 
(c) assessing the perception and credibility of mass-media 
messages among the rural populations - reliability, 
trustworthiness and dependability of sources; 
correlation of rural and urban-oriented messages in 
terms of communality of interests; 
(d) examining broadcasting in rural areas to understand its 
structure for the rural clientele in content of 
programmes, media consumption patterns, audience 
reaction and media credibility; 
12
(e) studying rural newspapers in terms of comparative 
studies of content and relevance to community needs, 
their use in development campaigns and their attempts 
at being financially self-sufficient; 
(f) evaluating problems of language policy and language use 
in the mass media of rural areas, the problem of giving 
fair and equal representation to local languages in the 
media versus the need for national integration; 
(g) developing evaluation and effectiveness studies which 
measure the impact of media influences on target 
audiences. 
3. The concept of a New World Information and 
Communication Order (NWICO) requires research 
which will examine some of the implications of NWICO, 
namely the existence of communication imperialism, 
media dependence, infringement of national 
sovereignty. It will also need to assess charges that 
NWICO is in fact a dubious concept in view of the 
absence of an existing international communication 
order. Priority concerns of research should be: 
(a) the international flow of information. In this area 
research would focus on the interchange of 
communication between the urban and rural sectors of 
the nation and on policy questions behind media 
decentralization, media language development and 
grassroots broadcasting; 
(b) inter-African information flows with research tools 
examining the flow of information and ideas between 
different regions of the continent, e.g. between 
Anglophone and Francophone, between Francophone 
and Lusophone and between Lusophone and 
Anglophone countries with emphasis on news 
structures, movement of media personnel and political 
actors, slants of news reports in terms of attitude, time 
and space, movement of books and other media such as 
films and recorded software; 
(c) the flow of information between Africa and the Diaspora 
(Black America, West Indies and Black Britain) along the 
lines indicated above; 
(d) human carriers: communication arising from human 
movements found in migration, tourism and 
'refugeeism' - studies would be interdisciplinary involving 
historians, anthropologists, sociologists, experts in 
13
communication, psychologists and geographers, 
involving questions on the impact of such human 
movements on national character, culture and 
communication; 
(e) problems posed to communication in the training of 
African media personnel in non-African countries 
involving a profile on professionalism including the 
question of press freedom and information flow in the 
context of culture; 
(f) the Principles for a New World Information and 
Communication Order" as espoused by the UNESCO 
General Conference, Resolution No. 8, adopted the 
Belgrade on the McBride Commission and raised a 
number of issues which required research to assess the 
precise nature of the forces involved. These included: 
— the elimination of the negative effects of certain 
monopolies and excessive concentration; 
— the removal of internal and external obstacles to a free 
flow of information, and wider and better balanced 
dissemination of information and ideas; 
— a plurality of sources and channels of information; 
— the freedom of the press and information; 
— the capacity of developing countries to achieve 
improvement of their own situations, notably by 
providing their own equipment, by training their own 
personnel, by improving their infrastructures and by 
making their information and communication means 
suitable to their needs and aspirations; 
— respect for each people's cultural identity and the 
right of each nation to inform the world public about its 
interests, its aspirations and its social and cultural 
values; 
— respect for the right of the public, of ethnic and social 
groups and of individuals to have access to information 
sources and to participate actively in the 
communication process. 
4 New communication technologies: their implications 
and impact. Because Africa's access to the new 
technologies is fraught with various problems, which are 
of interest to research, investigations would address the 
following problem areas: 
(a) surveys and case studies on the introduction of these 
technologies with a view to presenting a picture of the 
14
situation and making an in-depth evaluation of their 
social impact in particular well-defined contexts; 
(b) studies involving research, development and 
manufacture of appropriate communication hardware 
in Africa; 
(c) technological, sociological and legal studies concerning 
the impact of external technologies, especially satellite 
communication, on the psychology and cultural identity 
of African peoples; 
(d) studies on the use of 'big media' for regional integration 
and cultural education cooperation in Africa; 
(e) detailed studies to provide information on the quality 
distribution, content and impact of audio and video 
cassettes, video discs, etc., and of similar programme 
recording and reproduction systems. 
The direction of the above studies would explore: 
— existing legislation concerning copyright and its applicability to 
new technologies; 
— the consequences of the introduction of these media on the 
development of other media, e.g., cinema, television, etc. 
— the feasibility of using these new media for educational 
purposes; 
—the ways and means of integrating these new technologies into 
rural community development and cultural policies and grassroots 
communication programmes; 
— problems related to the recording, preservation and 
presentation of oral tradition and other aspects of the indigenous 
cultural heritage, through these new media. 
Conclusion: 
There seem to be some meat in the criticisms of the Annenberg 
projects but the fact that projects have attracted worldwide 
attention is a fitting credit to its significance. The Annenberg team 
themselves have vigorously defended their strategy and adduced 
evidence to show the superiority of their methods and the 
replication and validation of their findings (Gerbner et al., 1980). 
Should one reanalysis be different from the other one can rest 
assured that the debate is continous and more reanalyses are on 
the waiting list. The most important issue is the general 
application of the theoretical concepts of the Annenberg study. One 
is also impressed by the huge size of the study and the ingenuity in 
data handling. One cannot speak for the United States where 
television, according to Gerbner, "has become a key member of the 
15
family" telling most of the stories to form a coherent analytical 
world in every US home. But for an African home television does not 
dominate the symbolic environment even in most of the cities, it 
rather competes poorly with other more effective symbols, 
therefore that concept might not in the meantime apply to our 
continent. 
Nonetheless, Gerbner's general framework and methodology can 
be adapted just as was the case in Sweden, mentioned above, for the 
construction of cultural indicators and the explanation of some 
social realities. This writer has personally understudied the 
Annenberg projects and sees great merit in it and plans are at a 
stage to test some of its findings in the city of Lagos which could be 
described as "the media city of Nigeria". 
The violence issue in Gerbner's reports seems to me a bit 
troublesome. As Halloran (1978) points out, 
the Surgeon General's report is really cautious, in its 
conclusions (about television violence). It refers to a tentative 
indication of a casual relation between viewing violence on 
television and aggressive behaviour, operating only on some 
children who are predisposed to be aggressive and only in 
circumstances recognizing that both heavy viewing of 
violence and violent or aggressive behaviour could be joint 
products of some other common source, symptoms of wider 
condition. 
Wober (1978) in challenging the cross-cultural implication of 
Gerbner's work insists that the thesis has not been demonstrated 
convincingly enough in the US and the effect exists neither there 
nor in Britain. 
These observations point out the need for further work and more 
replications and reanalysis of the work by other researchers. 
Gerbner properly noted, in his reaction to Horace Newcomb's 
points, that criticisms of his work are welcome and he and his 
group are ready to give serious attention and to be "more precise, 
cautious and clear" in their further analysis. One feels impressed 
by the contribution of the Annenberg model to communication 
research. This is the kind of model required for building a bridge 
between the so-called administrative and critical concepts, the type 
that Blumler (1978) has invited, a model which in his words is 
neither thorough-goingly pragmatic nor fiercely Platonic 
(somewhat) Aristolelian in spirit, meliorative in aim and diagnostic 
and formative in approach." The debate continues. But for Africa, 
specifically, it is back to our roots. 
16
NOTES: 
1. Berlson was referring to pioneer researchers such as Hovland, Lasswell, 
Lazarfeld and Lewin. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
Berelson. B.. 'The State of Communication Research." Public Opinion Quarterly. 
No. 23, pp. 1-6. 
Brumler, Jay G., "Purpose of Mass Communications Research: A Transatlantic 
Perspective," Journalism Quarterly, VoL 55 (1978) pp. 219-230. 
"Mass Communication Research in Europe: Some Origins and Prospects," in G. 
Cleveland Wilhoit (editor). Mass Communication :Review Year Book. Vol. 2, London: 
Sage Publication Ltd. (1981). pp. 37-49. 
Gerbner, George and Larry Gross, "Editorial Responses: A Reply to Newcomb's 
"Humiuiistic Critique"", Communication Research, Vol. 6. No. 2 (1979), pp. 223-230. 
"The Mainstreaming' of America: Violence Profile No. 11". 
Golding. P. and G. Murdock. "Theories of Communication and Theories of Society," 
Communication Research, VoL 5. No. 3 (July 1978) pp. 339-356. 
Halloran, James D., "Mass Communication Symptoms or Cause of Violence." 
International Social Science Research. Vol. xxx. No. 41. UNESCO (1978). 
Hirsch, Paul M.. "The Scary World' of The Nonviewer and Other Anomalies: A 
Rearialysis of Gemner et al's Findings on Cultivation Analysis," Communication 
Research VoL 7. No. 4 (1980) pp. 403-456. 
Lang. Kurt. "The Critical Functions of Empirical Communication Research: 
Observation on German-American Influences." Media, Culture and Society, Vol. 1 
(1979). pp. 83-96. 
Newcomb. Horace, "Assessing the Violence Profile Studies of Gerbner and Gross: A 
Humanistic Critique and Suggestion." Communication Research. Vol. 5. No. 3 
(1978) pp. 264-282. 
Poecke. Lc Van. "Gerbner" s Cultural Indicators. The System is the Message." in G. 
Cleveland Wilhoit (editor). Mass Communication Review Year Book. Vol. 1. London: 
Sage Publications 11980), pp. 423-431. 
Rosengren. Karl E- et aL. "Cultural Indicators: The Swedish Symbol System. 1945- 
1975." A Research Programme carried out at the Universities of Lund. Helsinki and 
Bergen and funded by The Bank of Sweden Tencentenary Foundation (1977). 
Schramm. W.. "Comments on Berelson." Public Opinion Quarterly No. 23 (1959). 
17