Created by: Meghan Sayer

Monica and Bill. Bill and Monica. Have we heard enough? The media is guilty of telling us things that we don't want to hear. Sometimes I feel like it's the only thing going on in the world.

When Princess Diana died a year and a half ago, almost the whole world knew within the next twenty-four hours. The media has the power and responsibility to get information out to the public. What McCombs and Shaw have developed in this theory pose interesting ideas to consider. For instance, if I watched a news broadcast on the Brady Bill, saw footage on a drive by shooting, and listened to the interview of an inmate on death row in the same thirty minute broadcast, would I be influenced or persuaded to act accordingly to what I saw?

There are some simple criteria to follow when evaulating a theory. The Humanistic and the Scientific are the two approach options in critiquing a theory. The first task that each group tries to accomplish is an understanding or explanation of the data. A good example that Griffin gives is that during the 1950's and 60's people downplayed the influence of the media- television, magazines, and newspapers, and what affect it had on their lives. McCombs and Shaw came up with the concept that the press did indeed have the power, but the individual was free to choose. This idea is almost to obvious. However I don't think that it can true to all.

Some Americans are easily persuaded. A child sees Superman Flying on T.V. and thinks he can too. A pre-teen struggling with her identity watches her favorite movie star light up a cigarette and thinks that she's be cool too if she smokes. An elderly woman reads an anvertisement in the newspaper for a new insurance plan. It sounds good, but do we believe everything we hear?

The next criteria that we must evaulate is the pridiction of the future and clarification of values. The first looking into the future at what will happen and the latter at what ought to happen.

McCombs and Shaw do realize that people have different motives for watching television or picking up a newspaper and this in fact reprenents the publics values (what we view as important). By analyzing this behavior McCombs and Shaw can predict the future behavior of those who choose to watch T.V. or read a newspaper.

The third step in evaulating a theory answeres the question is it simple enough to understand? I think that McCombs and Shaw made it quite clear who the testing groups were, the medias' agenda, and in their example, the voters' agenda. They explain what is needed to prove their theory true and included a graph to help us get a visual picture of their wordy example. The simplicity the Scientific researchers look for is what the humanistic researchers call aesthetic appeal. Because the media is so prominent in our lives today I think that this theory would definitily catch the attention of maybe people going in to psychology or those working in the media. Another strong group that may be interested in this theory could be parents of young children wishing to censor what their kids view. Should the greusome details of real life shown on the nightly news be censored?

By testing a hypothesis, a scientific researcher has done what a humanistic would call a community of agreement. Personally I think that there are so many different means of receieving news and information that is nearly impossiable to test a thoery that deals with so much... stuff. McCombs and Shaw proved that they could test their theory, but I wonder just how accurate the results could possiably be. I think the surved sample is not nearly enough to get the reactions and attitudes of the entire nation. By testing the outcomes of a political race for president, they have already limited their survey to about sixty percent of the population. What about those under the age of eighteen but still get info from the media. Also, there are always those that don't follow or care about politics. What about the people that just choose a name on the ballot without know what the canidate stood for.

This is the aspect of the humanistic and scientific research that I have the hardest time accepting. I see many problems with the hypothesis. While they made a good guess at what could happen, the way they went about testing the theory left too many holes, thus forcing me to choose to partially discredit their theory.

The fifth and final Standard is Practical Utility and Reform of Society. In simplier terms these mean that 1. the theory offer practical help and 2. the theory generates change. Although I don't think that this theory helps us understand the media any better, it does leave us with something to think about. Thinking about the affects the media has on us certainly would lead to a change in attitudes or behaviors. We might not watch as much television or eliminate certain programs from our normal viewing. The purpose of this critique was to get you thinking about the affects the media has on you, not to tell you how to behave.



To see another source the media places info, check out Bill and Monica.

To view some information on teenage smoking click here.

To return to our home page go to Kara.