Past and Present of Siebert and Colleagues' Theories of the Press: Sequential Modifications of Press Theories Associated with the Media's Social Obligations Within the Framework of the Social Environment of the Day. (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Social Theories of the press: journalism and society
Brazilian Journalism Research
Between the end of the 19th century and the middle of the last century, the press was explored by a group of German and American scholars, who had somehow occasionally shared the journalistic practices, the concern about teaching journalism in academic settings, the study of newspapers and its relation to society, as well as sociology as a fi eld of journalism investigation and teaching. The extensive reviews on the diff erent theories of journalism display a huge gap on this historical content which comprises the so-called "social theories of the press" (H. Hardt, 1970), except for isolated references to the study of journalism and society conducted by M.
How the press impinges on the political and sociocultural sub-systems.
2004
This paper examines the interface between the media and the society. While maintaining that the society may not need the media to function, it states that the media need a society to function in. The media links the people with the political processes. The paper looks at the various ways that the media have acquired power within the society and in turn have used such to impact on the activities in the society. Special attention is drawn to interventionist media influence on the political institutions, structures, the rules of governance and societal culture.
Beyond the four theories of the press: A new model of national media systems
Mass Communication and Society, 2002
Work on categorization of national press systems in the last 40 years has been grounded in the well-known Four Theories of the Press. Whereas this approach has been strongly criticized by international scholars for its idealism and its poverty of empiricism, it is still widely taught in introductory journalism courses across the country, and few theorists have engaged in grounding the theory with data in international settings. Although journalism is contextualized and constrained by press structure and state policies, it is also a relatively autonomous cultural production of journalists negotiating between their professionalism and state control. This article thus proposes a new model incorporating the autonomy of individual journalistic practices into political and social structural factors-the interaction of which might currently more accurately represent press practices in the new international order. With an understanding of the background of the journalistic practices and state policies of 4 countries/cities, the multinational media coverage of a specific event is explicated in the light of the new model. This new model explains the journalistic variations that cannot be clearly revealed using a statepolicy press model alone.
and Keywords Siebert, Peterson, and Schramm's Four Theories of the Press has been a powerful influence on scholarship on comparative press systems and normative press theories in the years since its publication in 1956. Its appeal comes from the way it combined a history of Western development with a normative schema that is simple and teachable. Critics have pointed out the shortcomings of both its historical accounts and its theoretical structure, charging that the book expressed a Cold War mentality, elided non-Western and nonliberal theories and practices, and neglected the complicating dimensions of race, class, gender, and ethnicity. Critics also note that actual press systems are usually governed by hybrid norms, and that press systems are increasingly interconnected, overlapping, and global. Yet, Four Theories of the Press retains significant influence despite these criticisms. One reason is that no real replacement has appeared and it is unlikely that a new map of normative theories will win acceptance. The work emerged at a unique moment of Western liberal global hegemony and a successor would require a similar hegemonic moment.
On Press, Communication, and Culture
The current study goes back to the beginnings of media communication in order to re-examine and valorize this field’s specific aspects. Special attention is given to the invention of the printing press in Europe, by Johann Gutenberg, or by another person hidden under this name, and to his influence in spreading information and entertainment. The printing press would become an industry, seen as a business. This liberal approach of printing texts necessary to an ever growing and increasingly educated public would contribute to the emergence of the first publications (journals or gazettes). Their diffusion would be enabled by the readers’ need for news and entertainment, as well as by the interest in profit, as proven by the owners of such businesses. Keywords: Gutenberg, print, communication, typographic technique, information, news, occasionals.
Digital Journalism, 2021
This theoretical essay considers how the institution of journalism, now threatened by authoritarian attack and other challenges, has been conceptualized and proposes a refinement on previous defi- nitions: An institution is a complex social structure—formed by an interlocking network of rules and activities, roles, technologies, norms, and collective frames of meaning–which work together to sustain its coherence, endurance, and value. Guided by this general definition, and to better accommodate new institutional forms of journalism specifically in the hybrid media system, I introduce a typology based on two dimensions: level-of-analysis and structural emphasis, that is whether on trad- itional news organizations or emerging assemblages. In balancing their roles as critic and champion, I argue that academic observ- ers must not take institutional stability, coherence, and value for granted, which previous perspectives have over-stated, but rather take a more explicitly normative assessment of how different structures contribute to those qualities.
The Press as a Consultative Forum: A Contribution to Normative Press Theory
Baha'i Studies Review, 2010
The contemporary press has, in many countries, evolved into a discursive battlefield characterized by a war of words and images. Against this backdrop, some normative theorists of the press assert the need for alternative models of journalistic practice in which the press serves as a forum for more thoughtful and constructive processes of democratic deliberation. As a contribution to the field of normative press theory, this paper articulates a model of the press that derives from the teachings of the Baha'i Faith. At the core of this model are the principles and objectives of consultation, which is a collective decision-making process that Baha'is employ. This paper explores elements of this normative model of the press, which are scattered throughout a wide range of primary Baha'i texts, in order to bring the model into clearer focus. The purpose of the paper is to highlight the heuristic value of the model for press theorists and practitioners, inside and outside the Baha'i community. In its coverage of public policy issues and current events, the contemporary press has, in some countries, evolved into a discursive battlefield. 1 Within this battlefield, public discourse is characterized by a war of words and images. Diverse interest groups vie with one another to influence and dominate public perceptions. The most powerful interest groups mount sophisticated communication campaigns while less powerful groups respond with guerrilla communication tactics. Commercial news organizations often capitalize by reporting, and arguably encouraging, the drama and spectacle, while citizens grow more divided, alienated and cynical. These patterns of media content are epitomized in the American media, which tend to represent human society metaphorically as a 'war of all against all'. 2 Yet these patterns, which are in part a result of the hyper-commercialization of media, are increasingly being exported to, and emulated within, other countries that are following the American lead in this regard. 3 Against this backdrop, some normative theorists of the press, such as those who advocate models of civic journalism or public journalism, assert the need for alternative models of journalistic practice in which the press serves as a forum for more thoughtful and constructive public dialogue regarding issues that require collective attention. 4 According to such theorists, journalists need to become more effective at facilitating modes of democratic deliberation that
Historical Roots of the Normative Model of Journalism
Journalism, understood as the discipline of news, has been defined in many ways. The hegemonic western model of journalism, which has dominated normative discussions for the past century, derives from a set of relationships and practices formed around relatively monopolistic daily newspapers and wire services at the end of the 19th century. This model assumes that news organizations are relatively autonomous from the state and that individual journalists are independent agents engaged in an agonistic relationship to power while representing the people by, among other things, giving expert accounts of affairs of public importance. It assumes that journalists' capacity for independence is provided by the media organizations that employ them. This model of journalism never described more than a sector of the news environment, especially outside the West. At the end of the 20th century, its usefulness in the West diminished with the erosion of the bottlenecks that had enabled some news organizations to acquire significant autonomous power, and with the rise of a new news environment with new news practices. These changes have opened the possibility of the redefinition of journalism, along with a rethinking of the relationship between journalism and democracy.
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 2023
The Four Theories of the Press has earned sustained prominence in the field's canonical literature since its publication in 1956. Like many such "seminal" works, the book has accumulated a history of its own, obligatory nods in countless literature reviews, and layers of interpretation through the many citations to its insights-I suspect by many more than have actually read the original (including until recently, I admit, the present reviewer). The many critiques since publication include several book reviews, a well-researched intellectual history (Rantanen, 2017), and a full-length edited volume (Nerone, 1995). A number of themes recur in these engagements with the book, including that it is oversimplified and appears thrown together by the authors, each following its own path with little overall coordination. Lacking a fuller introduction and an actual concluding chapter, the broader U.S. liberal point of view characterizing the work is embedded as basic premise, with a clear "We" in an Us vs. Them, Cold War-era framing, making it easy in retrospect to fault the authors for their American overconfidence and taken-for-granted ideology. These criticisms did not and have not hurt the still-robust sales, leading me to question anew the reasons for its enduring place in the field's tradition, and indeed consider what else there is to add to the discussion after all these years. Appropriate for a review commemorating this journal's 100 years, I would start by recognizing that the book is firmly rooted in the early development of journalism (and mass communication) education, promoted here by three authors then at one of the field's core pioneering programs at the University of Illinois: Fred Siebert, a dean of the college of communication arts at Michigan State University; Ted Peterson (one of Siebert's doctoral students), a dean of the College of Journalism and Communications