How Communication Theory Has Emerged Cultural Studies Essay

How Communication Theory Has Emerged Cultural Studies EssayCommunication has been delineate in m all aspects exclusively central to all these definitions is the ex pressure sensationion that colloquy is the process in which relationships atomic number 18 established, maintained, modified, or terminated through the make up or reduction of heart and soul. This allows us to examine the process of talk in a representation which includes the connects and how they are unceasingly affected as objects which last subjects, affecting and being affected, as well as the changes in meaning and in messages which become filled or voided of meaning as the process, and those related to it, constantly change. Consequently, arguments cook been put forward that conversation is education, that it is the church. that it is incarnation, and that it is Christianity. While each of these connections contain alleviateful insights, in a sense, talk is a constitutional of all(prenominal)thing.T he history of converse dates back to prehistory, with signifi cornerst unrivaledt changes in chat technologies (media and set aside inscription tools) evolving in tandem with shifts in political and economic systems, and by extension, systems of power. Currently, at least seven major customs of confabulation opening ass be distinguished, rhetoric being the oldest. From classical rhetoric comes the idea that chat posterior be studied and cultivated as a practical art of cover. Whereas the art of rhetoric still refers primarily to the system and hold of public, persuasive communication, the communication arts more(prenominal) broadly encompass the egotism-colored icon of communication practices including interpersonal, organizational, and cross- heathenish communication, technologically mediated communication, and practices specific to assorted professions and fields. Modern rhetorical theory has elaborated and problematized the epistemological, sociological, and pol itical dimensions of the classical tradition in slipway that further contribute to communication theory. Consequently, rhetoric performs a variety of different functions as it can be adapted to the different ends of moving, instructing, or pleasing an audience.A second tradition of communication theory, originated in its ultra late form by Locke, is semiotics, the study of signs. Semiotic theory conceptualizes communication as a process that relies on signs and sign systems to mediate crossways the spread heads between subjective viewpoints. For semiotic theory, communication problems top from barriers to downstairsstanding that swot from the slippage between sign-vehicles (physical signs such as spoken or written words, or graphic images) and their meanings, the structure of sign systems, and particular ways of using (or misusing) signs. straightforward traditions of semiotics grew from the pre Christian era as evidenced by past Egypt cave paintings and symbol writings. G eneral Semiotics tends to be formalistic, abstracting signs from the contexts of use whereas societal Semiotics takes the meaning-making process. As such, Social Semiotics is more closely associated with discourse analysis, multimedia analysis, educational research, ethnic anthropology, political sociology, e.t.c. We therefore do not exist singly of signs, with our essentially real personal identities and subjective viewpoints, but use signs in format to communicate. We exist meaningfully only in and as signs.A third, phenomenological tradition conceptualizes communication as the experience of self and opposite in dialogue. The problem of communication for phenomenology, as for semiotics, is that of a gap between subjective viewpoints One cannot directly experience another consciousness, and the authorisation for inter-subjective understanding is thereby limited. The twain traditions approach this problem in preferably different ways, however. Whereas semiotics looks to the mediational properties of signs, phenomenology looks to the authenticity of our ways of experiencing self and other. The basis for communication lies in our common existence with others in a shared military man that may be constituted differently in experience. Authentic dialogue requires open self-expression and acceptance of difference while seeking common ground. Barriers to communication can arise from self-unawareness, non-acceptance of difference, or strategic agendas that preclude openness to the other. This hermeneutic phenomenology warpd subsequent existentialist, hermeneutic, and poststructuralist theories that have emphasised the constitutive properties of dialogue. Dialogue, in these theories, is not a essentially a sharing of pre- existing inner meanings it is engagement with others to transact meaning.Fourth, a cybernetic tradition of communication theory grew from the mid-twentieth nose candy. This is actually one of the recentest traditions of communication theo ry, although, as we have noted, it was the first communication theory explicitly named and widely known as such. Cybernetics conceptualizes communication as information processing. exclusively complex systems, including computers and telecommunication devices, DNA molecules and cells, plants and animals, the human brain and nervous system, complaisant groups and organizations, cities, and entire societies, process information, and in that sense communicate. Cybernetic theory downplays the differences between human communication and other kinds of information processing systems. Information storage, transmittal, and feedback, net income structures, and self-organizing processes occur in every sufficiently complex system. Problems of communication can arise from conflicts among subsystems or glitches in information processing same dogmatic feedback loops that amplify noise. Second-order cybernetics reflexively includes the observer within the system observed and emphasizes the necessary fictional character of the observer in defining, perturbing, and, often in unpredictable ways, changing a system by the very act of observing it.Social psychology, a fifth tradition of communication theory, conceptualizes communication as social interaction and influence. Communication always involves someones with their distinctive personality traits, attitudes, beliefs, and emotions. Social behavior some(prenominal) displays the influence of these psychological factors and modifies them as participants influence each other, often with dinky awareness of what is happening. Influence can be essentially a transmission process from source to receiver. If, however, interaction reciprocally changes the participants and leads to collective outcomes that would not otherwise have occurred, communication becomes a constitutive social process. Whether conceived on a transmission or a constitutive model, the problem of communication from a socio-psychological perspective is ho w to manage social interaction effectively in order to achieve preferred and anticipated outcomes. This requires an understanding, solidly grounded in scientific theory and research, of how the communication process works. Social scientific communication research has always been closely identified with social psychology.Sociocultural communication theory, which derives from twentieth century sociological and anthropological thought, is a sixth tradition. Sociocultural theory conceptualizes communication as a symbolic process that produces and reproduces shared meanings, rituals, and social structures. That is, club exists not only by using communication as a necessary tool for transmitting and exchanging information. To communicate as a outgrowth of indian lodge is to participate in those coordinated, collective activities and shared understandings that constitute society itself. There is a tension in socio-cultural theory between approaches that emphasize macro-social structures and processes and those that emphasize micro-social interaction. On the macro side, structural and functionalist views emphasize the necessary exercise of stable social structures and cultural patterns in making communication possible. On the micro side, interactionist views emphasize the necessary role of communication as a process that creates and sustains social structures and patterns in everyday contexts of social interaction. From either view, communication involves the coordination of activities among social actors, and communication problems are directly manifested in difficulties and breakdowns of coordination. Communication problems have apparently become more pressing and difficult under ultramodern positions of societal diversity, complex interdependence, and rapid change. A reasonable conjecture from a socio-cultural point of view is that communication theory developed in modern society as a way of understanding and addressing this new condition in which communicati on seems to be at once the disease that causes nigh of our social problems, and the only possible cure.A seventh tradition of communication theory is the unfavourable tradition that defines communication as a reflexive, dialecticalal discourse essentially involved with the cultural and ideological aspects of power, oppression, and emancipation in society. Dialectic, like its counterpart rhetoric, was first conceptualized in ancient Greece. In the philosophical practice of Socrates as portrayed in Platos Dialogues, dialectic was a system of argumentation through question and answer that, by revealing contradictions and clarifying obscurities, led the interlocutors to higher truth. The dialectical materialism of Karl Marx (1818-1883) initiated the modern conception of dialectic as an inherently social process connecting political economy to cultural practice. In orthodox Marxist theory, ideology and culture were determined by class interests, and dialectic at the level of ideas primarily reflected the underlying skin between economic classes. The goal of critical theory is then to enkindle emancipation and enlightenment by lifting ideological blinders that otherwise serve to preserve ignorance and oppression. Communication is systematically falsify by power imbalances that affect amour and expression, and critical theory can serve emancipatory interests by reflecting upon the sources of systematically distorted communication. Recent movements in the critical tradition such as postmodernism and critical cultural studies tend to reject both Marxist economic determinism as well as Haber upsurge universalistic ideal of communicative action, but abide to conceptualize communication in ways that emphasize ideology, oppression, critique, and reflexivity. Postmodernist cultural critique primarily addresses ideological discourses of race, class, and gender that suppress differences, preclude or devalue the expression of certain identities, and limit cultural diversity. In postmodern theory, ideal communication is not, as it was for Plato, a dialectical discourse that leads the way to higher, universal truths. Postmodernism nevertheless implies a similar model of communication that of a dialectical (that is, critical) discourse that can, if only in limited ways, liberate the participants and strain human possibilities.Other than the seven traditions of communication theory, there are a number of modern theories which have greatly influenced green goddess communication. Communication can range from very subtle processes of exchange, to full conversations and mass communication. In the modern era, mass media plays a big role as a result of technological advancement. Propagated through mass media are a number of theories. docket setting theory describes a very powerful influence of the media the energy to tell us what issues are important. Agenda setting postulates that communication has two main elements awareness and information. The refore in the public discourse, communication via mass media exerts its influence on public perception of various issues. These may range from politics, economy, and other public matters. Nonetheless, the theory is based on reasoning that the press and the media do not reflect reality they filter and shape it media preoccupancy on a few issues and subjects leads the public to perceive those issues as more important than other issues. Agenda-setting theory therefore seems quite appropriate to help us understand the pervasive role of the media (for example on political communication systems).Another notable viewpoint of mass communication in the modern times is the Uses and Gratification theory. This theory explains the uses and functions of the media for individuals, groups, and society in general. In order to explain how individuals use mass communication to gratify their needs, it seeks to set up what people do with the medial discover underlying motives for individualsmedia use describe the positive and the negative consequences of individual media use. At the core of uses and gratifications theory lies the precondition that audience members actively seek out the mass media to satisfy individual needs. Consequently, a medium will be used more when the existing motives to use the medium leads to more satisfaction.The seven traditional theories and the two exemplified mass communication theories include the most prominent intellectual sources that currently influence communication theory but do not, of course, cover the field exhaustively. Ideas just about communication are too numerous, diverse, and dynamically evolving to be captured entirely by any simple scheme. The field could certainly be mapped in other ways that would distinguish the main traditions differently. Moreover, no matter how the theories may be defined, they will not be open to have developed independently of one another. Contemporary theory draws from all of the traditions in various ways but is often hard to classify neatly in any one of them. Blends and hybrid varieties are common. Poststructuralist theory, for example, draws from both semiotics and phenomenology, is often regarded as a kind of rhetorical theory, and has significantly influenced recent socio-cultural and critical theory. Similarly, traces of every other tradition of communication theory can be found recent rhetorical theory. The academic discipline of communication studies has become like a cauldron in which ideas from across the traditions of communication theory are mixed and stirred in different combinations to make intellectual air for current debates.In light of these trends in society, it is not surprising that pitch and eventually rhetoric increasingly were thought to fall naturally under the general heading of communication. Beginning in the 1960s, communication gradually displaced dialect in the titles of academic departments, professional organizations, and scholarly journals, and the speech curriculum was consequently transformed around a new focus on the theory and practice of communication. As communication became the accepted name of the field as a whole, communication studies ceased to be identified exclusively with the behavioral and social sciences. Although the old tensions between scientific and humanistic approaches continued in new forms in communication departments, and rhetoric itself rose to prominence as an interdisciplinary field, rhetorical studies became, among other things, a branch of communication studies, and rhetorical theory became a tradition of communication theory.