UNIT-4

COMMUNICATION THEORY

MEDIA SYSTEMS

We have access to many mass media, from newspapers, magazines, radio, television, films, audio cassettes, video, and now Internet. Man's need for information, entertainment and generally to be in touch with the outside world along with the immense technological advancements have resulted in the above mentioned mass media. And today the world has shrunk, as Marshal McLuhan once put it, in to a 'global village'. Mass media inform, educate,entertain and persuade. They also have been instrumental in bringing down governments, starting wars, bringing about and felicitating change and development. They have grown into such statures that they are considered to be the fourth pillar of democracy. However, media do not grow up in a vacuum. These mass media have emerged, grown, changed and even may die as a result of geographical, technological, economic, cultural and other forces.

Mass media operate differently in different countries. Different countries have different governmental systems, political situations, and socioeconomic & cultural conditions. They have different goals. They also have different approaches towards achieving these goals. And in different countries, different systems have evolved with regard to the functioning of the mass media. For example countries like the USA, which are free societies, the media enjoy a lot of freedom. In fact, the First Amendment of the Constitution of USA ensures freedom of Press (and thus all mass media). Countries ruled by dictators or Kings and monarchs exercise a lot of control over the media. In many such countries censorship is a common practice. Many countries don't interfere with the functioning of media. The mass media, in these countries, are considered social institutions, which function in a socially responsible manner. All these various systems of media emerge out of the social, political, economic, cultural situations prevailing in different countries.

MEDIA SYSTEMS- AN INTRODUCTION:

A total of six media systems are prevalent in different countries. These are the Authoritarian system, Libertarian system, Social-Responsibility system, Soviet-Media (Communist) system, Development-Communication system, and the Democratic Participation System. These systems are also referred to as theories of media. Some countries have a single media system. In fact, most of the countries have a combination of different systems. The first four of these six theories or systems have been in practice since a long time. But they were first enunciated and documented in 1956 by Fred Siebert, Theodore Paterson and Wilbur Schramm in their book "Four Theories of the Press". The word 'Press' was used as at that time only the newspaper was the major mass medium as magazines, radio and television, etc., had not fully realized their potential. These four theories - Authoritarian, Libertarian, Social Responsibility, and Soviet-Media theory - present a Western viewpoint. And each of them suits particular political and economic circumstances of the developed West. The rest two, Development Communication theory and Democratic-Participation theory, have been developed specifically for the developing countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America. 

.

AUTHORITARIAN THEORY (SYSTEM):

Kings, monarchs, dictators, military rulers and even democratically elected governments have tried to control the flow of information in the mass media. According to this theory, mass media should abide by the governments dictates. The media are expected to be subordinate to the established authority. The authority expects the mass media not to offend majority morals, political and economic values. This system holds the State in higher status than any other entity. The saying "State is the Law" fits this theory.Dictatorial, monarchical and even democratic governments use this system to exert authoritarian control over the mass media. The strictness with which the ‘Official Secrets Act’ is enforced both in Britain and India goes to prove that even democracies practice authoritarianism. The authoritarian system resorts such control measures as pre-censorship and banning. Many laws and acts have been enacted in different countries by different regimes. And these legislations are enforced strictly. 'Licensing' is another means of authoritarian control. In the authoritarian system, stringent measures are taken against those who raise their voices against the State or the ruling classes. Under this system, media personnel lack freedom and independence. Their reports often have to be submitted for advance censorship. This censorship is justified on the ground that the State must always take precedence over others. Such censorship is more rigidly enforced during times of emergency as experienced in India during 1975-1977.  The authoritarian regimes of Latin America do not generally use a formal system of censorship. However, they regularly intimidate and terrorize journalists into suppressing news unfavorable to the regime. South Africa has a Censorship Board for books, periodicals, films, plays and audio records. They, however, do not interfere much with the newspapers. In India, the government exercises a lot of control over two major media channels Doordarshan and All India Radio. Also there are many regulatory bodies like the Central Board for Film certification, which censors films. This authoritarian system was prevalent throughout the 17th century and extended its reign till the later half of the 18th century. While a majority of countries do not adhere to this complete authoritarian system, some countries in Latin America, Africa, the Middle East and Asia still operate under this system. The Authoritarian system was slowly taken over by the Libertarian system in the early part of the 19th century. However, authoritarianism still remains in the certain degrees as different kinds of control are exercised over mass media in many countries even now.

 LIBERTARIAN THEORY:

Mass media perform many functions, which include information, entertainment, education and persuasion. These media help discover truth by presenting all kinds of evidence. Media also function as watchdogs- keeping an eye on all kind of happenings and bringing them to fore. The authorities did not take this ‘watchdog’ function of the media lightly and they had clamped restrictions.But early in the 17th century, people voiced against this authoritarian approach. Liberationists like epic poet John Milton (in his ‘Aeropagitica’) and John Stuart Mill (in ‘On Liberty’) argued for free and fair treatment of the press. Slowly this movement became stronger and by the early 19th century, Libertarianism was being practiced in many countries. This great change was the result of changing political philosophies and the coming of democratic governments. Libertarians universally regarded 'public enlightenment' as a major function of the press (later all mass media). From Milton, to Stuart Mill to Locke, every body considered the media as an important partner in the search for truth. Libertarians considered the press as a feeder of information (so that man could form his own ideas), as a stimulator by presenting ideas of others. This way the press was considered as one of the most pervasive (wide spread) and inexpensive of educators. Then came the great American libertarians like Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and James Madison, They, along with others, argued that the state exists to serve the needs of the people and not the people to serve the needs of the state. This was in utter contrast to the prevailing authoritarianism. Liberationists made their arguments on the basis of the fundamental rights of an individual to freedom of expression and right to information. Soon many democracies - particularly in the West - started adopting this libertarian approach. According the libertarian theory, the individual, and not the state is supreme. Thus popular will is granted precedence over the power of the State. This theory argues that 'truth' can be arrived at only through freedom of speech and diverse points of views. Thus free press (media) is highly essential to a free society and to uphold the dignity of the individual. Under this system, the government or State is not to be involved in the running of mass media. To ensure complete freedom to the press (media), the mass media should be privately owned. Only then the media can perform its duties of being informers, enlighters, educators. Also private ownership of media ensures that the media can play the role of 'watch dog' over the Government or State. Otherwise, media owned by the Government could be more interested in perpetuating the interests of the party in power than encouraging a free exchange of information and ideas. Also media subsidized by the government would threaten the autonomy of the privately owned media. The libertarian theory also links media autonomy with profit making. Like in free economies, where each individual working for his own gain ultimately contributes to the wealth of all, in the market place of information and ideas, each individual (or media) freely expressing ideas and opinions furthers the inevitable emergence of truth. Also this way the media are concerned about the needs and wants of the people and as George Sokolsky had once expressed, "the battle for circulation (or listenership or viewership) becomes a battle for the truth". Contemporary critics, however, have challenged this notion. They are of the view that bad publications (or media) tend to drive out good publication (or media). Liberationists viewed man to be essentially moral. But that does not hold true today. People would go to any extent to make a profit. Another criticism of the libertarian theory is that it provides the so-called 'freedom' to only a privileged few. Only the rich and the elite have access to the media and the large mass of poor people get marginalized further because of lack of access to media. The poor do not have either access or affordability to use media as tools of free expression. Also this 'freedom to few' leads to monopolies. Media owners use this freedom to expand their business. This theory protects only the rights of the media owners and not others. Also market forces play a far greater role in deciding what kind of information and other fare to be disseminated through the media. Public good does not play any role here. For this reason only the social - responsibility theory was initiated.

SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY THEORY:

 The libertarian theory, while having quite good points, has it own shortcomings. To find out there shortcomings and the means of overcoming them, the Commission of Freedom of the Press was instituted in the USA in 1949. This Commission found out that the free-market approach to press freedom had not met the informational and social needs of the less well-off people. On the other hand, this free approach had increased the power of the rich and elite. Also by this time other media like films, radio and television had emerged. The emerging scenario demanded a fresh approach. The burning question was the accountability of the media. Also some kind of public control was suggested. Thus emerged the social-responsibility theory. This theory is based on the proposition: "Whoever enjoys freedom has certain obligations to society". Proponents of this theory, like those supporting the libertarian theory, say that the press (and other media) has to perform the function of enlightening the public, safe guarding civil liberties, etc. However, the social-responsibility theorists say that the media, which enjoy protected and privileged positions (as in case of US media that are guaranteed freedom under the first Amendment of the American Constitution. The Indian Constitution does not guarantee any exclusive freedom for the press). In return, the media should pay back by being socially responsible. This theory shifts the focus from the individual to the society. Also excluded from its purview is profit- making as the sole motive. There is no place for political patronage either. Horace Greeley, who shaped the American press to a great extent in the mid 19th century, wanted the press to ignore profit making and political bondage (being subservient to some

political party). Henry Raymond of the New York Times called on newspapers "to give readers the broadest possible coverage and to actively promote community welfare". Later William Rockhill Nelson (of the Kansas City Star) wanted newspapers to be an aggressive force for community betterment. Still later Joseph Pulitzer advocated commercialism to be banned from the editorial room. He was of the opinion that commercialism in the editorial room was a degradation and destroyer of moral power. Pulitzer also said "Without high ethical ideals a newspaper not only in stripped of its splendid possibilities for public service, but may become a positive danger to the community".

Many other eminent media personalities in the 20th century have reminded their fellow media men of the responsibilities which went with freedom. This sense of responsibility has been represented by codes of ethical standards for the media. One of the first such codes of ethics was the Canons for Journalists, adopted by the American Society of Newspaper Editors in 1923. These are perhaps the most comprehensive codes and include acting with responsibility to the general welfare, truthfulness, sincerity, impartiality, fair-play, decency and respect for individual privacy. These codes of ethics are more attuned to libertarian theory. The codes enumerated for films and the broadcasting media in most parts of the world are much more restrictive. The codes for the Press have mostly been self regulatory being developed by the media men themselves. These codes endorse high professional standards including truth, accuracy,objectivity and balance. On the other hand, the codes for electronic media have been marked by government intervention and regulation. Examples such codes in India are the Cinematograph Act, Broadcasting Code for AIR and Doordarshan, Cable TV Regulation Act, etc. However, under the social responsibility theory, public interest is of greater value than unregulated freedom of expression. Thus news offensive to religious and ethnic minorities, or news likely to lead to social tension and violence needed to be under-played. Self-regulation became the key to social responsibility. Thus Press Councils were established. These councils evaluate the state of the media from time to time and draw up codes of ethics. Anti-monopoly legislations (in the face of growing concentration of media leading to monopolies) also were by products of this theory. While the media evolved their own self regulating codes, this theory also legitimized state and public intervention to keep a check on unwanted practices by the media. This system exists largely in most democracies of Western Europe and the more developed countries of Asia.

SOVIET MEDIA THEORY:

This theory is an extension of the authoritarian theory. It has developed from the Marxist- Leninist-Stalinist philosophy to mass communication. Following the 1917 Revolution, Lenin advised the communist press to "Learn, organize and propagandize'. Lenin viewed the press as "a powerful instrument, no less than bombs and machine guns'. The Communist Party, accordingly, controlled the Soviet press. Later on other media were also subjected to a similar treatment. The basic assumption of the Soviet media theory was that "the individual should change so that he or she will share with and support society as a whole". Its main purpose was to support the Communist Party in its efforts to revolutionize society, to make each person work for the good of the whole society rather than his or has own interests. Thus the mass media were owned by the State i.e. the Communist Party. Every piece of information and every idea disseminated through the media had to be interpreted by members of the Communist party. Lenin was of the view that the government must not be criticized when it did what it believed to be right. However, criticism was not totally banned. Criticism and exposure (mostly of anti-party and anti-government activities and persons) was the chief function of the media. Even party workers and bureaucrats were not spared. But Institutions could not be criticized. Under this system, the media were used to "socialize" the people. The primary function of media, thus, was to educate, inform, motivate and mobilize people; and to support progressive movements everywhere in the country. Censorship and other restrictions on media were legitimized under this system. While the Central Committee Propaganda Department looked after controlling news, the Censor Board (GLAVLIT) looked after censorship. It employed as many as seventy thousand 'censors'. They read each and every news story and article and approved them before they were published. This kind of extensive censorship ensured effective and complete control over information as also resulting in conformity of views as intended by the Communist Party. However, the era of Perestroika and Glasnost under Mikhail Gorbachev brought sweeping changes in this system. So much so that the once powerful and united Soviet Union broke up. Sweeping changes have also occurred in other countries where this system was prevalent. These countries include Romania and Poland. NORMATIVENESS OF THE FOUR THEORIES OF PRESS: Dennis McQuail has termed these four theories or systems - Authoritarian, Libertarian, Social Responsibility and Soviet media theory as normative or what ought to be. That is because these theories mainly express the ideas of how the press (media) should act or how they can be expected to operate under a prevailing set of conditions and values. In practice, however, no media system follows any one of these theories exclusively

(except perhaps the Soviet media theory). What must media systems follow is a mixture of two or three of these theories. 

SUPPLEMENTARY THEORIES (SYSTEMS): The four original theories of press (media) are mostly in tune with the political philosophies and socioeconomic circumstances of the developed western world. The developing third world countries with their prevailing political, social, economic and cultural conditions could not directly follow these systems. For these countries - especially those in Asia, Africa and Latin America - two other theories have been developed. These are the Development Communication Theory and the Democratic Participation Theory.

 DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION THEORY:

None of the four theories of media is fully applicable to the developing countries. This is because of the peculiar situations prevailing in these countries. First the press in many of these countries is free and commercially run. The broadcasting media in Asia and Africa to a great extent are run by the state. The broadcast media in Latin America is privately owned. Another feature of these countries is that they are dependent on the developed world to a great extent for both hardware and software. Although, these countries have stated producing on their own, they are far from being self-reliant. The most common feature of these countries is perhaps their commitment to social and economic development. For this reason, these countries want to use the mass media as tools of development. Unlike in the above-mentioned theories, the emphasis here is on the larger national interest and public good. So certain freedom of the media is curbed and certain limitations are imposed. These curbs and restrictions are in the interest of causes like national integration and nation building. Development communication means the media have the responsibility to support the national governments in their efforts of nation building including eradicating illiteracy, promoting family planning, increasing production and employment, etc. The mass media are expected to work in close contact with the government to promote (and help implement) the various developmental plans, programmes and projects of the governments. This theory also has a shortcoming. Media people often equate 'development' with government propaganda and thus do not believe what the government has to say.

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION THEORY:

In most parts of the world and especially in the affluent West, the mass media have become highly commercialized. These media are considered to be 'commodities'. Another feature of mass media around the world is top-down, one-way and non-participative nature of the communication. The communicators usually plan and prepare communication programmes sitting in ivory towers and have no idea about the ground realities. The resultant communication is usually an imposition on the receivers (readers, listeners and viewers). Such communication does not take into account the audience's needs and wants, does not involve them and thus is not very effective. Many critics raised protests against this non-participative nature of mass media. Most of these critics were from Latin America and they included Paulo Freire, Reyes Matta, Luis Beltran, Diaz Bardenave and Fuen Zalida. These critics emphasized the positive uses of the media and also on the need for "access" to the media and "right to communicate" Thus emerged the Democratic Participation Theory. It is also called the participatory theory or the democratization theory. This theory lays stress on the need for local and community participation in media and specifically news and programme production. Participatory theorists argue that people must speak for themselves and not spoken through by professional journalists and programme producers. Also Participatory theorists oppose any kind of commercial, political or bureaucratic control of media. Their view is that the media exist to serve the people and not the interests of governments or commercial enterprises. Another feature of this theory is 'demassification". The ultimate purpose is to put the media in the hands of communities. Examples of these are the small community newspapers and radio stations in many Latin American countries where the people own and run them. Farmers, working as reporters and subeditors, run ‘Adike Patrike’ of Karnataka. Participating theorists claim, that such a system would lead to the 'liberation' of the people (politically, economically and culturally) through a process of conscientization.