Media effect the culture, the stock of knowledge, the norms and values of society and this indirect effect of mass media is related with the dominant group’s ideology. This group create own opinion and they can spread it easily with a tools of media. when we want to see this concept in a clearly way, we can watch the film which is called ” Citizen Kane”. The main character of this film that is the millionaire newspaper tycoon Charles Kane Foster like agenda setter. He has a newspaper and he is writing everything without thinking true or not.Thus, according to him the powerty links with the createnes of puplic opinion.
Agenda setting describes a very important and powerful effect of the media.The impact of the media is about giving people what to think about and also how to think about it.
Here is an example from the website of International Agenda Setting Conference about how media decides what is important, what is not.
”There was a perceptible difference between the coverage on the tsunami that hit South-East Asia in December 2004 and the earthquake that hit Pakistan in October 2005. The tsunami received far more extensive coverage in all countries analyzed in both television and print media which in turn affected people’s behaviour in terms of private donations. Public were not aware of the need for help in the earthquake effected region of Pakistan. In Germany, for example, the tsunami received 666 reports in the three TV channels in comparison to 66 on the earthquake. These 666 reports contributed to private donations amounting to $USD178 million while only $USD8 million has been collected for the earthquake so far. ”
As we can see from this example there is an important difference between ”reality” , ” media reality ” and ” public perception of reality ”. Media has a control in our access to the news and information.The mass media determines what we think or worry about.From this website you can find other examples about the subject. www.agendasetting.com
As we discussed in our last class, the media have several impacts on society and mostly on defenceless ones of the society; children. This is really controversial issue in every single country, especially in America. Nowadays, in Turkey, this issue is taken under consideration; if media affect on children/teens and how this effect occured?
In deeply research, there are different levels of the media’a effect on children, so there are different levels of consequences. There are several debates around this topic and the television is the most common guilty medium in this issue. A study by the Mediascope Institute found that many children by age six have spent more time watching TV than time they will spend talking to their fathers in their entire lifetime.
Nithin Coca who wrote in editorial argueing says that “Studies have shown that the effect of violence in the media on children can be small, leading to more violent behavior in maybe 15% of children. But other studies have shown that this effect can be greater when children are “raised by the media”. It is hard to say whether a certain child will become more violent or aggressive due to the media, and I believe that other factors contribute to violence in children, such as problems at home, the influence of peers, or lack of a positive source of morals. But as a society we need to make sure that there are options for children in the media so that they do not have to exposed to so much mature content, and I believe that currently the protections in place are terribly inadequate.” (click for the full argument )
According to me, I agree with him and his ideas about preventing children from these deep subliminal messages. For supportive and more visual describing of these effects such as violence, sexual content, obesity and subliminal stimuli you can watch several videos.
Firstly; please click here to watch detailed and academical conducted video about the media’s effect on children.
On the other hand, teens are real fregile part of this content. Because some effects are nonrecoverable such as pregnancy.
Here are some videos about media effects on teens and general society. Click here and here.
Also, this is really good advertisement from Australia called “Children See, Children Do“.
Information is filtered for dissemination is called GATEKEEPING in the process of publication, broadcasting, the Internet, or some other type of communication.
it is found in lots of fields . They are communication studies, journalism, political science and sociology. Primary it focus on the mass media with its few-to-masses dynamic
Kurt Lewin who was first instituted the theory in 1947. In addition it is still an important theory in the field of mass communication and journalism.
The gatekeeper has a power to decide which information will go forward, and which will not. That is to say a gatekeeper decides which of a certain commodity materials, goods, and information in a social system so may enter the system. The crucial point in this process is gatekeepers are able to control the public’s knowledge of the actual events by letting some stories pass through the system but keeping others out. Sum up they have no control over what we think but have power on what kind of issues we will talk about
The term “agenda setting” is defined by Dearing and Rogers (1996) as a process of “an ongoing competition among issue protagonists to gain attention of media professionals the public and policy elites.”
Agenda setting has attracted mass communication researchers because it seems to offer an alternative to the search for directional media effects on individual attitudes and behavior change.
McCombs and Show concluded that the mass media exerted a significant influence on what voters considered the major issues of the campaign.
In fact we may say the basic assumptions underlie most research on agenda setting; one of them is the press and the media don’t reflect reality and they filter and shape it. The other one is media concentration on a few issues and subjects leads to public to perceive those issues as more important than other issues.
“The agenda setting” is used by many politicians or people who have dominance in a society to attract many people from one way to another or actually to take away from realities.
For example, In Turkey when relations with European Union were present, the government calls attention to ‘turban’ and people lost focus on EU’s subject and they start to argue another topic which is not exactly related to our relations with Europe.
I think this is a politic behavior that AKP tries to adapt us because they are successful to confuse European and Turkish people with this ‘agenda setting’. European people think that Turkey is a country where people can’t solve their internal problems. Besides, Turkish people focus on the argument on ‘turban’ and they can’t think other way.