Evolution of Mass Communication in the 21st Century

In discussing the different media through which advertisers broadcast their message, it is important to realize exactly how mass communication in conducted with the dawn of digital technology. The advanced technologies that we now have access to have created a limitless ability to send and interpret information in easier and more coherent ways than ever before. Take for instance education television; toddlers are now able to absorb and learn basic science concepts more effectively than in a traditional classroom setting (Shafer, 202). Additionally, mass communication is highly influential on the development of personality traits and cultural norms in everyday people. When observing young children, it was found that exposure to violent films increased aggressive behavior and imitate of content viewed than those who had not (Dickens, 218).

Figure 1. Preferred news sources for presidential campaign coverage.

An interesting point to note about mass communication is that it tends to lean towards a representation of hyper-reality. What this means is that actual events may be embellished with hyperbole and exaggerated details in order to shock and retain an audience and consequentially generate more revenue for the companies producing said content (McQuail, 97). Moreover, the content produced for mass communication is edited and crafted by the administrative leaders in order to manufacture a certain message. These companies are working on tight deadlines and budgets, and therefore assign their own league of “experts” to selectively choose content to produce for the masses (Holz, 196). The motivation by the mechanics behind mass communication is simply to attract both the attention and the capital found in a national audience. This is why the media has come under very heavy scrutiny as of late because of its focus on buzzworthy, sensationalist news rather than value-neutral, factual truth.

As a result, mass communication experts have now drawn to push for an emphasis on the regulation of media companies. Since self-regulation is the system currently in place for producers for media, the notion is that it is up to both the public and the government to call out incorrect news and provide checks for abusive media practices (Phenix, 17). While it is easy to immediately trust the news being communicated to you through the television screen, the reality is that we must be vigilant in how we interpret the information given to us and understand the influence mass communication has on our views on all issues and general practices in everyday life.

Works Cited:

• Shafer, Robert E. “Mass Communication.” Review of Educational Research, vol. 31, no. 2, 1961, pp. 197–207. www.jstor.org/stable/1169140.
• Dickens, Milton, and Frederick Williams. “Mass Communication.” Review of Educational Research, vol. 34, no. 2, 1964, pp. 211–221. www.jstor.org/stable/1169758.
• McQuail, Denis. “Sociology of Mass Communication.” Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 11, 1985, pp. 93–111. www.jstor.org/stable/2083287.
• Holz, Josephine R., and Charles R. Wright. “Sociology of Mass Communications.” Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 5, 1979, pp. 193–217. www.jstor.org/stable/2945953.
• Phenix, Philip H. “Education and Mass Communications.” The Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 43, no. 1, 1961, pp. 15–19. www.jstor.org/stable/20342657.