Introduction to Communication 2010 - BDC

8/8/2019 Introduction to Communication 2010 - BDC

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/introduction-to-communication-2010-bdc 1/26

Media Studies

Introduction to Media Studies

What is communication?

Shahbaz Ali



Grappling with the con cept of communi c ati on

Communication as not only an essential human, social andpsychological activity, it is also unavoidable.

Basic axiom: you cannot not communicate (Watzlawick et al.)

Then again, the breadth of communication defies the attempt to offer any simple, encompassing definition.

From the dance of bees, to primate interaction; from themessages of the media to codings of discourse and ideology;

from stylings of the body, to unintentional expressions andsignals; from the devices of language and the tropes andthemes of literary criticism, where does communication beginand end?



I nt ell ec tual c hall enges of Media Studi esGiven that a number of disciplinary approaches will benecessary in the study of communication, one of thechallenges we will have to face is a willingness to engage avariety of different theories and approaches to what were

studying.(IMP: as most of the evaluation is based on your understanding and use of these theories)

A useful exercise: devise your own brief working definition of communication. Well come back to this; if this course issuccessful, you should have occasion to question and

enlarge many of these understandings by the end of thecourse.

There will be a variety of necessary conceptualdisagreements in the approaches we encounter: it pays to

isolate these tensions.



C ommuni c ati on: some basi c appr oac hes

Communication understood as a basi c phen omen on central t oani mal an d human life; the universality of communication (thinkfor example of Chomskys Language Acquisition Device); the needto communicate to survive; the sociality of communication(evolutionary imperative to communicate)

Communication as a foun dati on of the s oc ial s c i en ces ;concepts of language, interaction, communication have becomeincreasingly important in social theory; the discursive or

communicational turn in the social sciences has seen a moveaway from the problematics of consciousness, towards; a means of implementing change, of attaining consensus and understanding

A problem of optimal design (efficiency, effectiveness); anawareness of ambiguity and misunderstanding importance of communicative efficacy in a multicultural world



C lassi f i c ati ons of communi c ati on

Monologue / dialogue (Television Vs. Web 2.0)

By sensory modality: vision, auditory, smell, taste, touch.

Often a predominance of verbal communication methods, we

should not forget, non-verbal and para-verbal (sub-vocalutterances, etc)

Informal: ad-hoc, spontaneous / formal: professional, official

Theory: Communication and language

language as general model = semiotics, semiology

A theory fallacy: a late achievement is taken as basis model

[Like taking the elephants trunk as a model for all noses]



I n for mal and for malis ed, mediat ed

communicati on Face-to-face Mediated, formal

prototypes: chat, conversation,

dialogue

y co-presence

y unity of time and space,

y everyday activity

y spontaneous

y immediate responsey concrete others

y speaker / audience defined

y communality of code

y equal rights of participants

prototypes: public speech,

newspaper, television, radio,

internet, pamphlets, book

y absence

y disjunction of time and space

y planned, purposive, constructed

y delayed response

y stereotypical othersy speaker / audience vague

y multiple codes

y asymmetry of rights

y third party technical

arrangements



D egr ee of c onsci ousn ess and openn ess of c ommunicati on

1. fully conscious: individual isaware and can report

2. subconscious : cognition at the

f ringe of consciousness, which

can easily become f ully

conscious;

3. non-conscious: cognition and

emotion that are not

represented, but can become so

under specif ic conditions/

eff orts

4. unconscious: repressed

cognitions and emotions, no

voluntary control; leads to

neurotic behaviour

1 fully communicated: open todiscussion, distribution

2 hardly ever mentioned; can be

discussed if needed; seen

unproblematic; routine issues

3 not communicated: cognition

and emotions that are not

shared; f ast and eff icient

problem solving in collective

routines; can become topic of

discussion with special eff ort

4 uncommunicable [unspeakable]: taboo problems;

bothers many group members,

but only secretly discussed;

leads to ineff icient group action



T owards a pr ov isi onal d ef initi on

of communi c ati on All communication seems to involve signs or codes, or, at very least, a variety of signals and expressions.

We might understand signs as signifying constructs asartefacts or signs that refer to something other thanthemselves.

Codes, by contrast are the systems into which signs areorganized and which determine how signs are related to oneanother.

Expressions seem to allow for a greater degree of latitude ininterpretation and understanding; signals, by contrast, seemto rely on a greater degree of immediacy, although they toomay include a degree of ambiguity.





Levels of communi c ati on

A) intra-p ersonal : li ver to brain ; brain to li ver ; s up er- ego to ego ; solilo quy, on e-s el f

B) int er-p ersonal : dya di c con versation ; e.g. do ctor-pati ent ,on e-t o-on e

C) intra- gro up : mainl y in f or mal , e.g. gro up dis cussion ,many-t o-many (within group members)

D) int er- gro up : bet ween gro ups , mainl y f or mal , e.g p ubli csp eech, n ews ; o f t en ta kes f or m o f on e (r epr es entati ve)-t o-

many (ot her gro up members )



Levels of communi c ati on (cont)

Def initi on of s oc ial an d publi c communi c ati on:

(A) + B + C + D = social communication; consider A internalised speech;

C + D = social and public communication in the narrow

senseT raditi onal voc abulary of publi c communi c ati on:

Persuasion, political communication, propaganda, publicopinion, rhetoric,

social influence, diffusion, public relations, rumours, massmedia effects, social interaction.



T wo d ominant appr oac hes:1: T he pr ocess s c hool:

Communication as t r ansmission of messagesConcer n with how sender s and r eceiver s encode and decodemessages

Questioning of how t r ansmitter s use the channels and mediaof communication

Issues of efficiency and accur acy ar e cr ucial

Communication is a pr ocess by which one p er son affects thebehaviour and state of mind of another .

Dr aws on social sciences, p sychology, sociology, and tends to

addr ess itself to acts of communication.Social inter action: the pr ocess by which one p er son r elates toother s, or affects the behaviour , state of mind or emotionalr esp onse of another (and vice ver sa).



T wo d ominant appr oac hes:2: T he s emi oti c s c hool:

Communication as the pr oduction and exchange of meaningsHow do texts, messages, inter act with p eop le in ord er topr od uce meaning? What is the r ole of texts within a givencultur e?

Pr ior itization of pr actices of signification; misund er stand ingsar e not necessar ily the r esult of miscommunication theymay r esult because of cultur al d iffer ences btw send er and r eceiver .

The main method of stud y is typ ically a var iation on semiotics

(the science of signs and meanings); it dr aws up on linguisticsand the ar ts, and tend s to focus on communicated contentsin their contexts; it addr esses itself to wor ks of communication.

Social inter action: that which constitutes the ind ivid ual as a

member of a p ar ticular cultur e or society.



S ome key di ffer enc es

Process school Semiotic School1). A message is what is trans- 1). Message as construction of

mitted in communication; signs, which, through interact-

2). Intention is often a crucial acting with receivers, produces

factor in what constitutes meaning;

a message ± even if 2). Sender, defined as trans-unintentional, it should be mitter of message, declines in

retrievable by analysis; importance: emphasis on the

3). The message is what the text and how it is µread¶.

sender puts into it by whatever 3). Reading is the process of

means. discovering meanings that

occurs when the reader

interacts or negotiates with the

text.



S ome key di ffer enc es

Process school Semiotic School1). Less concern with culture 1). Strong emphasis on what is

& constitutive role of aspects of cultural experience

interaction are brought to bear on signs

and codes of a text;

2). A message is what is sent 2). The message is an element

from A to B in a structured relationship

whose other elements include

external reality & producer/

reader; producing and reading

the text are parallel processes

3). Codes: means of encoding & 3). Codes: systems of meaning

decoding



A paradigmatic ex ampl e of the P r oc ess S chool:



S hannon & Weaver model Developed in WW2, apropos radio and telephone

technology, S & W were concerned with working out howchannels of communication could be used most efficiently;how might one send the maximum amount of informationalong a given channel, and measure the capacity of achannel to carry information

Communication presented in a simple linear model, whichhas subsequently attracted many derivatives and critics.

The source (decision maker) decides which message tosend; the selected message is then changed by transmitter

into a signal (physical form of message) which is sent through the channel to a receiver

(In conversation my mouth is the transmitter, the signal isthe sound waves which pass through the channel of the air,

and your ear is the receiver).



S hannon & Weaver: analytic utility

Noise: anything added to signal between its transmission andreception not intended by source; anythi ng that makes the signalharder to decode.

Whether originating in the channel, the audience, the sender, orthe message itself, noise always confuses the intention of the

sender and hence limits the amount of desired information that can be sent in a given situation in a given time.

S & W model helpfully identifies three levels of problem:

The technical problem: how accurately can the message betransmitted? (Channel failure; wrong channel; noise)

The semantic problem: how precisely is the desired meaning'conveyed'? (Problems with coding/decoding)

The effectiveness problem: how effectively does the receivedmeaning affect conduct/behaviour?



S hannon & Weaver: analytic utility I nformation: a m ea sur e of t he pr edi cta bi lit y of t he si gna l, a

m ea sur e of t he n um ber of choi ces o pen to it s sen der .I n t he ca seof a co de of t wo si gna ls (sin gle or do uble f la sh of li ght -bulb, sa y)

t he information contain ed i s t he sam e: 50% pr edi cta bi lit y.

The unit bit can m ea sur e information: a binar y yes/no choi ce. I f we ha ve to go t hro ugh a seri es of fi ve binar y choi ces to get an

an swer , t hen we ha ve fi ve bit s of information , beca use we ha vema de fi ve choi ces a lon g t he wa y.

Redun dan cy: t hat whi ch i s pr edi cta ble or con ventiona l in a m essa ge; t he o ppo sit e of entro py whi ch r esult s in lo wpr edi cta bi lit y, r edun dan cy r esult s in hi gh pr edi cta bi lit y.

A m essa ge wit h lo w pr edi cta bi lit y can be sai d to be entro pi c an dof hi gh information ; a m essa ge of hi gh pr edi cta bi lit y i s r edun dant an d of lo w information .



R edundancy and entropy Redundancy is not only us eful in communication, it is a bsolut ely

vital ; a d egree of redundancy is ess ential to practical communication .

Redundancy hel ps t he accu racy of d ecodin g and provid es a c hec kt hat ena bl es us to id entify erro rs (I can only id entify a s pellin g-erro r becaus e of t he redundancy in t he lan gua ge).

We a re al ways c hec kin g t he accu racy of any m essa ge we rec eiv ea gainst t he pro ba bl e; and what is pro ba bl e is d et ermin ed by ou rexperi enc e of t he cod e, cont ext, and ty pe of m essa ge by ou rexperi enc e of conv entional and usa ge.

Conv ention is a majo r sou rc e of redundancy, and t hus of easy

d ecodin g; a writ er who brea ks wit h conv ention do es not want to be easily und erstood .

Redundancy hel ps ov ercom e d efici enci es of a noisy c hann el . An adv ertis er whos e m essa ge has to com pet e wit h ot hers fo ratt ention will plan a sim pl e, repetitious, predicta bl e m essa ge.



R edundancy and entropy (cont) A message that is completely unexpected, or the opposite of what

is expected (i.e. entropic message which contains moreinformation and unpredictability), will need saying more thanonce, often in different ways, and may need some specialattention.

If one wishes to reach a large, heterogeneous audience,

one will need design a message with a high degree ofredundanc y; a small, specialist audience, can be reachedwith a more entropic message. P opular art tends to bemore redundant than highbrow art; speech tends to bemore redundant than writing (the hearer cannot

introduce his or her own redundanc y as a reader can byreading something twice).

The 1st function of redundancy is with overcoming practicalcommunication problems, problems associated with accuracy anderror detection, with noise, or the nature of the message or

audience.



P hatic communicationEntropy can be understood as m axim um unpredi ctabili ty; i t i s

often, effect i vel y, what const i tutes a comm uni cat i on probl em .Structuri ng a m essage accordi ng to shared patterns, orconvent i ons, i s one way of decreasi ng entropy and i ncreasi ngredundancy.

Sayi ng hell o i n the street i s sendi ng a hi ghl y redundant m essage

but i t i s not a comm uni cat i on probl em , but an i nstance of phat i ccomm uni cat i on, an act of comm uni cat i on that contai ns nothi ngnew, no i nform at i on, but that uses exi st i ng channel s sim pl y tokeep them open and usabl e.

In sayi ng Hell o one i s m ai ntai ni ng and strengtheni ng an exi st i ng

rel at i onshi p; rel at i onshi ps onl y exi st on the basi s of frequent comm uni cat i on.

Phat i c comm uni cat i on, by m ai ntai ni ng & reaff i rmi ng rel at i onshi ps,i s cruci al i n hol di ng a soci ety or comm uni ty together; convent i onal behavi ours/words i n i nterpersonal sett i ngs reaff i rm s soci al bonds.



S hannon & Weaver: basic

assumptions

There is a reliance here on the conduit metaphor: pipe, channel, epidermic needle, transport, transfer

Meaning here is simply contained in the message; however even if sender and receiver share the same identical codes (itself a questionableassumption) the resonances/implications/distinctive meanings of suchcodes may differ (?!)

S & W emphasize that improving the coding will increase semanticaccuracy but there are also cultural factors at work here which themodel does not specify: the meaning is at least as much in the cultureas in the message.

Sender megalomania, monological, one-way communication

Limited application: only for technical systems, not social meaning

The effectiveness problem of (behaviour change) makes communicationseem like a practice of manipulation or propoganda



S peaker Recipientmessage

C1 C2

S emi otic mod el of c ommunicati on

Non-identical,

OverlappingCode systems



Semiotics, semiology [the study of signs and sign usage]

Communication is based on the use of codified signs; the

understanding of all signs is modelled on language [=linguistics]

(Saussure, 1916) soc ial psyc hology = the study of signs.

Typ es of signs ( a sign stands for, refers to something else )

sy mbol: conventional association with reference: e.g. letters;

index: correlated to reference: e.g. smoke refers to fire;

icon: p artial similarit y to reference: e.g. a madonna p icture ( no,

not the singer ) ;Study of signs

sy ntax: sign-sign, grammar the dog was in the kitchen

semantics: sign-referent , literal meaning was( dog, in kitchen )

p ragmatics: sign-sign use, actual meaning: there is now a mess



E ss entials t ensi ons t o ex pl or e in

communi c ati on Basi c attitudes (k n owl edge int er ests)

Analysis & explanation (theory), or learning a box of tricks (plumming);

Efficiency, effectiveness (technique), or persuasion to what end

(ethics)Design to control (power), or critique & empowerment (enlightenment)

Theor eti c al perspec tives on communi c ati on

Evolutionary, born with, versus ontogenetically learnt

Signal & semiotic codes versus speech acts and inference;

Rhetoric, persuasion versus reaching mutual understanding;

Prisoners of discourse versus agency and intentions of speakers;

Power of social influence versus possibilities of resistance;

Social representation versus individual message processing

Documents

Introduction to Communication 2010 - BDC