Esprit Rock

Agenda setting theory is about the influence of mass media on the public focus attention who and what people are thinking about

Agenda setting theory is about the influence of mass media on the public focus attention
who and what people are thinking about. It examines the media effect on the perceived
importance of issues held by public. (McCombs, Lymas, Lopez-Escobar and Rey, 1997:705)
McCombs and Shaw who are the theorists of agenda setting theory, focused on the two
elements: awareness and information in 1968 presidential election campaign, Chapel Hill.
Investigating the agenda-setting function of the mass media, they attempted to evaluate the
relationship between what voters in one community said were important issues and the
actual content of media messages used during the campaign. McCombs and Shaw
concluded that the mass media exerted a significant influence on what voters considered to
be the major issues of the campaign. Agenda setting refers to the media’s capability, through repeated news coverage, of raising
the importance of an issue in the public’s mind. (Severin and Tankard, 2001: 219) Agenda-
setting, has made its way over the years into newsrooms and think-tank analyses of public
debates. (Kosicki, 1993:100) Rogers, Dearing, and Bregman identify more than 200 articles
about agenda setting in the social science literature since the publication of McCombs and
Shaw’s seminal article in 1972. Scholarly research has been steady since then, with the
widely spaced key years of 1977, 1981, 1987, and 1991 each producing 17 to 20 publications.
1987 and 1991 share the record for the publication of agenda setting studies. (McCombs,
Shaw, Donald, 1993:59)
Traditional agenda setting deals with issue or object salience, that is, how media put certain
subjects on the public agenda. (Huckins, 1999:76) The newest development in agenda-setting
research is a focus on a new level of agenda seeing, a level that McCombs and his associates
have called the second level of agenda setting. Second-level agenda setting examines attribute salience, how descriptions of aspects of the
object or issue are transferred from media to receiver. (Huckins, 1999: 76) It builds upon the
idea that an agenda is an abstract notion and that many things other than issues could be
items on the list. Media agenda researchers studied on how media agenda takes form, what effects the media
agenda and what sets the media agenda. Rogersand Dearing explained the media agenda as
‘it’s a issues’ and problems’ list that takes place in a specific period of time.’ (?rvan, 1997:72)
Many issues exist on mass media like pollution, terrorism and high cost of living. These
issues make up the media agenda. (Atabek, 1997: 44) The basic studies on media agenda
researches are focused on detecting the process of news production which is a compound of
how media selects news stories from many issues in the real life, how news stories are
produced and how the media content is presented. (Yüksel, 2001:59)
Public relations specialists may try to set media agenda through the interests and objectives
of the company they work for. First thing to do for public relations specialists is to carry the
issue, to the media agenda, by the means of question of availability.
• First-level agenda setting This is the level that is most traditionally studied by researchers. In this level the media use objects or issues to influence the public. In this level the media suggest what the public should think about (amount of coverage).

• Second-level agenda setting. In this level the media focuses on the characteristics of the objects or issues. In this level the media suggest how the people should think about the issue.

There are two types of attributes:
• cognitive (sustentative, or topics)
• affective (evaluative, or positive, negative, neutral)

Strengths of Theory
• It has explanatory power because it explains why most people prioritize the same issues as important.
• It has predictive power because it predicts that if people are exposed to the same media, they will feel the same issues are important.
• It can be proven false. If people aren’t exposed to the same media, they won’t feel the same issues are important.
• Its meta-theoretical assumptions are balanced on the scientific side.
• It lays groundwork for further research.
• It has organizing power because it helps organize existing knowledge of media effects.
Limitations
• Media users may not be as ideal as the theory assumes. People may not be well-informed, deeply engaged in public affairs, thoughtful and skeptical. Instead, they may pay only casual and intermittent attention to public affairs and remain ignorant of the details.
• For people who have made up their minds, the effect is weakened.
• News media cannot create or conceal problems, they may only alter the awareness, priorities and salience people attached to a set of problems.
• Research has largely been inconclusive in establishing a causal relationship between public salience and media coverage.

Gatekeeping trust is a particularly problematic form of media trust because it suggests ignorance of factors other thanproblemimportancethatin?uencenewsstoryselection.Researchonnewsproductionand gatekeeping has delineated many such factors (Atwood, 1970; Atwood & Grotta,1973; Brown, 1979; Price & Tewksbury, 1997; Shoemaker & Vos, 2009; Tuchman,1978).Insummary,newsworkersprimarilyassessnewsworthinessintheirdailywork in terms speci?c to individual news events instead of any underlying social problems(Lester, 1980; Shoemaker & Vos, 2009), and are strongly in?uenced by an event’snews values such as timeliness, novelty, con?ict, and drama (Price ; Tewksbury,1997),allofwhichcanbeindependentfromorevenoppositetosystematicjudgments

This study explores causes and consequences of gatekeeping trust, a new media trust construct de?ned as trust that the news media selects stories based on judgments of the importance of problems. If this form of trust—rooted in a misunderstanding of news story selection practices—is what drives agenda setting effects, these effects can be seen as a miscommunication between the media and the public, and perhaps a correctable one. An experiment manipulating exposure to and expression of media criticism ?nds
This study explores causes and consequences of gatekeeping trust, a new media trust construct de?ned as trust that the news media selects stories based on judgments of the relative importance of social problems. Gatekeeping trust is a particularly problematic form of media trust because it suggests ignorance of factors other thanproblemimportancethatin?uencenewsstoryselection.Researchonnewsproductionand gatekeeping has delineated many such factors (Atwood, 1970; Atwood ; Grotta,1973; Tuchman,1978).In summary, news workers primarily assess news worthiness in their daily work in terms speci?c to individual news events instead of any underlying social problems(Lester, 1980) and are strongly in?uenced by an event’s news values such as timeliness, novelty, con?ict, and drama (Price & Tewksbury,1997),all of which can be independent from or even opposite to systematic judgments of problem importance. The primary motivation for our interest in gatekeeping trust is the possibility that it may have implications for agenda setting, both in terms of its cognitive mechanisms and its normative implications. Agenda setting is the effect of media coverage on
that has generally failed to ?nd any evidence of partisan bias in news content produced by professional mainstream news outlets Because task-speci?c forms of media trust can have such divergent normative implications, it can be dif?cult to draw normative conclusions about any research results involving only general media trust. Although some media trust measures used in past research contain individual items that at least indirectly relate to beliefs about how stories are selected, it appears that no scale has been developed to measure trust that the media selects stories based on problem importance judgments. We will now review the quite diverse measurement of media trust in past research, with two goals: First, to identify an ef?cient scale measuring general media trust that has minimal conceptual overlap with gatekeeping trust (speci?cally, we adopt the 5-item scale used in Tsfati, 2010);and second, to assess whether any individual items used in existing data sets could bere analyzed as indicators of gatekeeping trust (we ?nd only one such item, in Miller A widely cited and quite comprehensive measure of general media trust is media credibility scale. This reliable 12-itemscale covers general media trust without items that seem to overlap strongly with gatekeeping trust. It does contain three items related to perceptions that the news media care about the public interest. However, these items do not necessarily tap gatekeeping trust, because the belief that journalists care about the public interest does not necessitate the belief that this goodwill is a driving factor in news story selection. The large number of items in this scale also made it impractical for our purposes. We follow in re?ning this to a more ef?cient 5-item scale that does not include these potentially overlapping perceptions about the news media’s concern for the public interest. As discussed above, two recent studies have used media trust as moderators of agenda setting and priming effects. These

CRITICISM OF THE AGENDA SETTING THEORY
Agenda Setting is the media’s attempt to create and transfer salient issues into the public domain to enable the public to discuss, deliberate or debate on these issues to make informed decisions. Basically, Agenda Setting talks about how the mass media pay attention or highlight certain issues while neglecting others. This theory fails to address certain pertinent issues which I proceed to discuss.

The Agenda Setting theory assumes that if people are exposed to the same media contents, they will place importance on the same issues. This assumption is not true. People have different frames of reference, and therefore what one may consider important after filtering the issues through his frame of reference is different from the other person’s. People are therefore not always likely to place importance on the same issues even if they are all exposed to the same media content.

Secondly, this theory fails to consider the personal interest of the individual. Any issue considered salient by the mass media and put in the public domain will not necessarily be considered salient by the public. The audience consciously choose a media product that gives him gratification or that addresses his needs ,and it is such issues he may consider to be salient. This theory assumes that once the media considers any issue to be salient and give it dominance, the public automatically regards the issue as salient. The public only considers such issues salient if they personally have interest in them. In such situation, one cannot claim that the issues are considered salient by the audience simply because the media regard them as salient, but rather because they serve the interest of the public.

The Agenda Setting theory uses a very scientific approach, not humanistic, and therefore in practical terms it is not able to stand the test of scrutiny since human beings are known to be very unpredictable. Nonetheless, it is a very useful theory in the effect tradition of the mass
WEAKNESSES OF THE USES AND GRATIFICATION THEORY.
The main objective of this theory is to focus on the consumer or audience instead of the actual message by asking what the people do with the media rather than “what media does to people”(Katz 1959).We all have different perception about the uses of the media .According to (Litttle John 1996)there are two kinds of belief :belief in a thing and belief about a thing in the uses and gratification theory. According to Moores (1993),use can be seen as how individuals use the media .Example resources are used to satisfy their needs and achieve their goals. Gratification in modern day means to please the mind and senses of the desires and needs of an individual. According to the theory ,audience have a free to decide how they will use the medium and how it will affect them .One of the shortcomings of this theory is that the media is not able to address the presence or absence of the effects of the content of television and radio programmes on the audience. the media relies heavily on surveys based on assumption and not on the actual response of the audience.
People use the media as barriers between themselves and other people .This is quiet evident between rival politicians and political party supporters. Children use the excuse of helping in household chores and participating in certain activities with the excuse of watching a movie ,playing a game or watching cartoons. In trying to please the mind and senses , desires and needs of an individual or group the media tend to exaggerate some unnecessary and indecent things such as those on front pages of most private owned newspapers and some magazines. The idea that people simply use the media to satisfy a given need does not fully recognise the power of the media. Uses and gratification is viewed as the optimist’s view of the media but this is not the case in every media .
CRITICISMS OF THE AGENDA SETTING THEORY
Agenda setting can be explained as the media’s attempt to create and transfer salient issues into the public domain to enable the public to discuss ,deliberate ,or debate on these issues to make informed decisions .The main objective of this theory is to talk about the assumption that the media through its productive processes and gatekeeping functions gives prominence to certain socio-political issues while neglecting others of similar importance. The two proponents of this theory Malcolm McCombs and Donald Shaw in 1972 argued that the media makes certain political ,economic, and social salient issues in the society.
There are two types of strategies of media agenda setting: framing and priming. Framing was used to analyse how the media presents issues to the public. Framing is the quality form of communication that leads others to accept one meaning over another. It is a skill that most successful leaders possess yet one that is not often taught. From statement about the importance and interpretations people attach to potential items on the public agenda are strongly influenced by how the media presents stories .The media in an indirect and unconscious way position our minds whether we like it or not. The minds of the audience are directed on specific issues we tend to discuss or ponder about for hours, days or even years. Some of these issues of less importance are given much attention while others fall by the wayside The media and politicians shape public opinions on what is considered important in this time and day.
The media adapts certain methods or techniques which are used to draw the attention of the audience on the issues under discussion or forthcoming issues .Some of these issues provide the audience with a ‘window’ of viewing the “world” or” reality”. These” eye catching “issues which are mostly captured in headlines and on front pages, sometimes do not have any connection with the main articles or content of the newsletter. Pictures attached to these headlines are very disturbing especially in most private owned newspapers and magazines. The human mind tends to store most of the things the eyes are exposed to .The agenda setting theory in recent times is viewed as having latent reasons aside the its main function.
WEAKNESSES OF THE USES AND GRATIFICATION THEORY.
The main objective of this theory is to focus on the consumer or audience instead of the actual message by asking what the people do with the media rather than “what media does to people”(Katz 1959).We all have different perception about the uses of the media .According to (Litttle John 1996)there are two kinds of belief :belief in a thing and belief about a thing in the uses and gratification theory. According to Moores (1993),use can be seen as how individuals use the media .Example resources are used to satisfy their needs and achieve their goals. Gratification in modern day means to please the mind and senses of the desires and needs of an individual. According to the theory ,audience have a free to decide how they will use the medium and how it will affect them .One of the shortcomings of this theory is that the media is not able to address the presence or absence of the effects of the content of television and radio programmes on the audience. the media relies heavily on surveys based on assumption and not on the actual response of the audience.
People use the media as barriers between themselves and other people .This is quiet evident between rival politicians and political party supporters. Children use the excuse of helping in household chores and participating in certain activities with the excuse of watching a movie ,playing a game or watching cartoons. In trying to please the mind and senses , desires and needs of an individual or group the media tend to exaggerate some unnecessary and indecent things such as those on front pages of most private owned newspapers and some magazines.The idea that people simply use the media to satisfy a given need does not fully recognise the power of the media.Uses and gratification is viewed as the optimist’s view of the media but this is not the case in every media .
Report this ad

There are two types of strategies of media agenda setting: framing and priming. Framing was used to analyse how the media presents issues to the public. Framing is the quality form of comunication that leads others to accept one meaning over another. It is a skill that most successful leaders possess yet one that is not often taught. From Chyl and McCombs( 2004 )statement about the importance and interpretations people attach to potential items on the public agenda are strongly influenced by how the media presents stories .The media in an indirect and unconscious way position our minds whether we like it or not. The minds of the audience are directed on specific issues we tend to discuss or ponder about for hours, days or even years. Some of these issues of less importance are given much attention while others fall by the wayside The media and politicians shape public opinions on what is considered important in this time and day.
The media adapts certain methods or techniques which are used to draw the attention of the audience on the issues under discussion or forthcoming issues .Some of these issues provide the audience with a ‘window’ of viewing the “world” or” reality”. These” eye catching “issues which are mostly captured in headlines and on front pages, sometimes do not have any connection with the main articles or content of the newsletter. Pictures attached to these headlines are very disturbing especially in most private owned newspapers and magazines. The human mind tends to store most of the things the eyes are exposed to .The agenda setting theory in recent times is viewed as having latent reasons aside the its main

In choosing and displaying news, editors, newsroom staff, and broadcasters play an important part in shaping political reality. Readers learn not only about a given issue by also how much importance to attach to that issue from the amount of information in a news story and its position. In reflecting what candidates are saying during a campaign, the mass media may well determine the important issues