Communication and Media in the United Kingdom

Report for an 'International Media Studies' class. No good. Not to be taken seriously.


Communication and Media in the United Kingdom

Table of Contents

1 Introduction to the United Kingdom
2 Communication Forms and Media in the United Kingdom
2.1 Print Media
2.2 Broadcast Media
2.2.1 Radio
2.2.2 Television
2.2.2.1 The Television License Fee
2.3 Telecommunications
3 Policy and regulation of Communications and the Media in the United Kingdom
3.1 The Department for Culture, Media and Sport
3.2 The Office of Communications
3.3 The Press Complaints Commission
3.3.1 The Editor’s Code of Practice
4 Relevant Defining features of Media in the United Kingdom
4.1 Public Service Broadcasting in the United Kingdom and Australia
5 Challenges to Media and Communication Policy in the United Kingdom
5.1 Switching Over to Digital in the United Kingdom
5.2 Media Convergence in the United Kingdom
5.2.1 The Digital Britain Review
6 Recommendations and Conclusions for the Minister and for Media and Communication in Australia
6.1 Switching Over to Digital in Australia
6.2 Media Convergence in Australia
7 List of References


Executive Summary

This report is intended for Senator Stephen Conroy, Minister for Broadband, Communication and the Digital Economy, to aid his visit to the United Kingdom to discuss approaches to media and communications policy with the Minister for Communications, Technology, and Broadcasting, Stephen Carter CBE (Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2009, ‘Our…’). It gives a brief outline of the current situation of the media industry in the United Kingdom, identifying key challenges affecting media policy and the strategies being implemented to address them. This report highlights similarities between Australian media and communication industries and those of the United Kingdom, and suggests ways by which Australia might benefit from correspondence between the two countries on media and communication issues.

1 Introduction to the United Kingdom
The United Kingdom (UK) has long played a key role in international affairs, and is a significant member of organisations such as: European Union (Europa, 2009); the United Nations (Department of Public Information, 2009); and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO, 2009). The UK consists of Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales), and Northern Ireland. Queen Elizabeth II is head of state and the Prime Minister of the UK is Gordon Brown (BBC News, 2009).

2 Communication Forms and Media in the United Kingdom

2.1 Print Media
There is a widespread press presence in the UK, which includes Telegraph Media Group’s The Daily Telegraph (Telegraph Media Group Limited, 2009), Pearson’s The Financial Times (Pearson, 2009), The Guardian Media Group’s The Guardian (Guardian Media Group PLC, 2007), Independent News & Media PLC’s The Independent (Independent News & Media PLC, 2008), News Corporation’s The Times and The Sun (News Corporation, 2009), Trinity Mirror PLC’s The Mirror and Western Mail (Trinity Mirror PLC, 2009), Associated Newspaper’s The Daily Mail (Associated Newspapers Limited, 2008), Northern & Shell’s The Daily Express (N&S Network, 2006), and Johnston Press’ The Scotsman (Johnston Press PLC, 2009)(BBC News, 2009).

2.2 Broadcast Media
Public-service broadcasting has been a significant part of UK broadcast media since 1922, when the British Broadcasting Company began broadcasting on the radio. Commercial television was introduced in 1955 and commercial radio in the 1970s. These days the BBC competes with many commercial broadcasters (BBC News, 2009).

2.2.1 Radio
The BBC’s radio broadcasting role is extensive, with services that include eleven national radio stations, forty local radio stations and BBC World Service (BBC Radio, 2009). These non-commercial stations are funded by the Television License Fee (see 2.2.2.1). Some of the main commercial groups in radio broadcasting are Absolute Radio, Talk Sport and Classic FM. Radio in the UK is beginning to move away from analogue and into digital formats (BBC News, 2009).

2.2.2 Television
Public and private broadcasting companies provide television services in the United Kingdom. The Television Licensing Fee also funds the BBC’s non-commercial television services (see 2.2.2.1). Channel 4 and, in Wales, S4C are public stations financed by both Government grants and advertising revenue. There are also privately owned commercial broadcasters ITV, Five and Teletext. (Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2009, ‘The BBC…’). Television in the UK is also moving toward completely digital transmission (see 5.1). There are also many cable and satellite networks available.

2.2.2.1 The Television License Fee
The BBC Royal Charter authorises a Television License Fee, set by the Department of Culture, media and Sport, which funds the BBC’s public broadcasting services across the UK Television licenses are compulsory for households with a television receiver (BBC, 2009, ‘About the BBC: Royal…’).
A group of private companies called TV Licensing oversee the enforcement of this system under contract by the BBC.
There are currently 25 million active TV Licenses, 3.9 million of these are provided free of charge to people over 75 and about 40, 000 are provided at a 50% blind concession rate. The current annual TV license costs £142.50 for colour and £48.00 for black and white (TV Licensing, 2009).

2.3 Telecommunications
There are mobile and landline telephone networks in the United Kingdom and Broadband and Dial-up Internet service providers. Many traditional media (print, radio and television) are turning to the Internet as a new improved platform for reaching audiences (Thussu, 2006:217-218). Privately owned providers dominate telecommunications in the UK (p.67).

3 Policy and Regulation of Communication and Media in the United Kingdom
The main bodies that regulate the media and enforce policy in the UK include The Department for Culture, Media and Sport, the Office of Communications and the Press Complaints Commission.

3.1 The Department for Culture, Media and Sport
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport overlooks government policy for broadcasting, the arts and the creative industries (Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2009, ‘The BBC…’). Rt Hon. Andy Burnham MP, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and Stephen Carter CBE, the Minister for Communications, Technology and Broadcasting, work under this department (Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2009, ‘Our Min…’).

3.2 The Office of Communications
Under the Communications Act 2003, the Office of Communications (Ofcom) was established. It is the regulatory body for UK radio, television, telecommunication and wireless communication systems. The act describes their main duty as furthering the communication and media interests of citizens and promoting market competition in the interests of consumers (Office of Public Sector Information, 2003: Section 3).
Ofcom is also obligated to ensure diverse radio and television services, diverse broadcast providers, and the broad availability of electronic communication services. They are also responsible for protecting citizens from any possible harm, privacy infringement, unfair treatment or offense from television or radio programming.

3.3 The Press Complaints Commission
In 1953 a voluntary Press Council was established and since then UK print media has been mainly self-regulated. In 1991 the Press Council was replaced by the Press Complaints Commission, which regulates publications by responding to complaints and enforcing the Editor’s Code of Practice (Press Complaints Commission, 2009).

3.3.1 The Editor’s Code of Practice
The Editor’s Code of Practice is a set of values similar to those of Australia’s Media Alliance Code of Ethics. It provides guidelines for UK magazine and newspaper publishing, with a set of ethical standards relating to privacy, accuracy, discrimination, harassment, right to reply and many other possible media issues (Press Complaints Commission, 2007).

4 Relevant Defining Features of Media in the United Kingdom

4.1 Public Service Broadcasting in the United Kingdom and Australia
Public service broadcasting has been recognised by the UK as a key tool for shaping their national media identity. Not only intending to provide cultural access to wide sections of the public, but also to enable people the opportunity to fulfill their roles as citizens, the BBC model has greatly contributed to the global media presence of the UK (Jacka in Cunningham and Turner, 2006:345), still being one of Europe’s largest television program exporters (Thussu, 2006:119).
The BBC was established in 1927 and was originally intended to create a non-profit, publicly run broadcasting monopoly in the UK (Thussu, 2000:26). Australia’s public service broadcasters, SBS and especially ABC were originally based on the BBC model, but these channels did not enjoy as much government support as their UK counterpart, and continue to receive less funding yearly (Jacka in Cunningham and Turner, 2006:348)
The United Kingdom has forged a strong international identity with their cross-media pubic broadcasting sector and is evidence of how government support can strongly reinforce cultural development.

5 Challenges to Media and Communication Policy in the United Kingdom

5.1 Switching Over to Digital in the United Kingdom
The ‘switchover’ to digital radio and television broadcast services is one of the primary concerns of the broadcast media industries in both the UK and Australia at present. Under the Communications Act 2003, Ofcom initiated a plan to discontinue analogue broadcasting methods in favour of digital. Digital promises a wider range of subscription options, increased quality, greater selection of channels and wider access, in particular for the hearing and sight impaired. The plan was enacted in 2008 and will be carried out by 2012 (DigitalUK, 2009).

5.2 Media Convergence in the United Kingdom
As technologies become more accessible and advanced, the distinctions between different sectors of media, company interests and content areas are progressively becoming ambiguous. Australia and the UK alike are in an era marked by ‘media convergence’ that has resulted from the relaxation of cross-media ownership restrictions and deregulation of the industries. Companies are moving to expand their interests with acquisitions and mergers, resulting in a more concentrated ownership across media outlets (Thussu, 2006:98) The UK is responding to this change in the media landscape and its implications for policy and regulation. One of these responses includes the establishment of a core body of experts known as the Digital Britain review.

5.2.1 The Digital Britain Review
On January 29, 2009, the UK Government published a report proposing many steps toward asserting their country as one of the leading countries in the digital economy. This report listed 22 goals such as the digitalization of television and radio, increased access to broadband Internet and the possible creation of a second large-scale UK pubic service provider (Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2009, ‘Digital Brit...’). The Digital Britain review replaced the Convergence Think Talk, a joint initiative between the U.K. Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, which aimed to examine technological implications for media and help shape policy (Convergence Think Tank, 2008).

6 Recommendations and Conclusions for the minister and for Media and Communication in Australia

6.1 Switching Over to Digital in Australia
According to the Australia’s Department of Broadband, Communication and the Digital Economy, Australia’s deadline for switching over to digital media is end of 2013. The Digital Switchover Taskforce is the section of the department that will oversee the switchover and aims to address research, awareness, policy, information and access issues (Department of Broadband, Communication and the Digital Economy, 2009).

The Department of Broadband, Communication and the Digital Economy will benefit from dialogue with the United Kingdom over implementation of switchover timetabling and strategy, as well as discussion of awareness, intention of the public to convert and research into conversion rates.

6.2 Media Convergence in Australia
Media convergence will certainly call for a reconsideration of policy and regulation in Australia in relation to ownership across mediums, service delivery and content. The level of market competition increases as the variety of content provided by media outlets decreases (Cunningham and Turner, 2006), which could have positive effects such as encouraging providers to provide quality services at less cost to the consumer.
Like the UK, Australia too should prepare to change with the evolving landscape of the media. The growing influence of multinational and transnational corporations and the effects of industry globalisation mean that it is up to the Department to keep abreast of both international and domestic converging markets.

7 List of References

Associated Newspapers Limited, 2008. Daily Mail [Internet] Associated Newspapers Limited Website, available at: http://www.associatednewspapers.com/dailymail.htm [Accessed 29 April 2009]

BBC, 2009. About the BBC: BBC License Fee [Internet] BBC Website, available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/licencefee/ [Accessed 27 April 2009]

BBC, 2009. About the BBC: Royal Charter and Agreement [Internet] BBC Website, available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/policies/charter/ [Accessed 28 April 2009]

BBC News, 2009. Country Profile: United Kingdom [Internet] BBC News Website, available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/country_profiles/1038758.stm [Accessed 27 April 2009]

BBC Radio, 2009. Home [Internet] available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio [Accessed 28 April 2009]

Convergence Think Tank, 2008. Welcome to the Convergence Think Tank Website [Internet] Department for Culture, Media and Sport Website, available at: http://www.culture.gov.uk/Convergence/ [Accessed 26 April 2009]

Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2009. Digital Britain: The Interim Report – Government outlines plans for UK’s digital transition [Internet], Department for Culture, Media and Sport Website, available at: http://www.culture.gov.uk/reference_library/media_releases/5783.aspx [Accessed 29 April 2009]

Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2009. Our Ministers [Internet] Department for Culture, Media and Sport Website, available at: http://www.culture.gov.uk/about_us/our_ministers/default.aspx [Accessed 24 April 2009]

Department for Culture Media and Sport, 2009. The BBC and other Public Service Broadcasting [Internet] Department for Culture, media and Sport Website, available at: http://www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do/Broadcasting/bbc_public_service_broadcasting/ [Accessed 24 April 2009]

Department of Broadband, Communication and the Digital Economy, 2009. Digital Television Switchover, [Internet] Department of Broadband, Communication and the Digital Economy Website, available at: http://www.dbcde.gov.au/media_broadcasting/television/digital_televison_switchover [Accessed 26 April 2009]

Department for Public Information, 2009. United Nations Member States [Internet] United Nations Website, available at: http://www.un.org/members/list.shtml [Accessed 28 April 2009]

Digital UK, 2009. What is the digital TV switchover? Benefits, information and advice [Internet] Digital UK Ltd., available at: http://www.digitaluk.co.uk/what [Accessed 28 April 2009]

Europa, 2009. The European Union at a Glance [Internet] Europa Website, available at: http://europa.eu/abc/index_en.htm [Accessed 27 April 2009]

Guardian Media Group PLC, 2007. Our Businesses: Guardian News & Media [Internet] Guardian Media Group Website, available at: http://www.gmgplc.co.uk/Ourbusinesses/GuardianNewsMedia/tabid/129/Default.aspx [Accessed 28 April 2009]

Independent News & Media PLC, 2008. About INM [Internet] Independent News & Media PLC Website, available at: http://www.inmplc.com/about-inm/profile/ [Accessed 28 April 2009]

Jacka, E. 2006. ‘The Future of Public Broadcasting’, in The Media & Communications in Australia (2nd ed), Cunningham, S & Turner, G (Eds.), Allen & Unwin, Sydney.

Johnston Press PLC, 2009. The Scotsman Publications [Internet] Johnston Press PLC Website, available at http://www.johnstonpress.co.uk/jpplc/ourbusiness/publishingdivision/division.jsp?ref=7 [Accessed 29 April 2009]

NATO, 2009. NATO Member Countries, [Internet] NATO Website, available at: http://www.nato.int/structur/countries.htm [Accessed 28 April 2009]

News Corporation, 2009. Newspapers & Information Services [Internet] News Corporation Website, available at: http://www.newscorp.com/operations/newspapers.html [Accessed 28 April 2009]

Office of Public Sector Information, 2003. Communications Act 2003 [Internet] Office of Public Sector Information Website,available at:http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2003/ukpga_20030021_en_1 [Accessed 26 April 2009]

Pearson, 2009. About Us, [Internet] Pearson Website,available at:http://www.pearson.com/index.cfm?pageid=2 [Accessed 28 April 2009]

Press Complaints Commission, 2009. History [Internet] Press Complaints Commission Website,avaiable at: http://www.pcc.org.uk/about/history.html [Accessed 26 April 2009]

Press Complaints Commission, 2009. Newspaper and Magazine Publishing in the U.K.: Editor’s Code of Practice [Internet] Press Complaints Commission Website,available at: http://www.pcc.org.uk/cop/practice.html [Accessed 26 April 2009]

Telegraph Media Group Limited, 2009. Terms and Conditions [Internet] The Daily Telegraph Website,avaiable at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/about-us/3692012/Terms-and-Conditions.html [Accessed 29 April 2009]

Thussu, D. K., 2000. International Communication: Continuity and Change, Arnold, Great Britain.

Thussu, D. K., 2006. International Communication: Continuity and Change (2nd ed.), Hodder Arnold, Great Britain.

Trinity Mirror PLC, 2009. Nationals Division [Internet] Trinity Mirror Website, availabe at:http://www.trinitymirror.com/brands/nationals/ [Accessed 29 April 2009]

TV Licensing, 2009. TV License Information [Internet], TV Licensing Website, available at:http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/information/index.jsp [Accessed 27 April 2009]

Channel Nine and Four Models of Communication

Essay for a 'Communication Studies' class. Not serious.

Channel Nine and Four Models of Mass Communication

The technological facilitation of communication has become commonplace in the everyday lives of individuals of Western society. Devices for mass communication have found places in the houses and daily routines of many. It has, for example, become unusual for average homes to be without Internet and television provisions, and even less common for individuals to be completely without access to these media. Flew and Gilmour write that:

“Television is the most widely used mass media form in Australia and in the world. About 99 per cent of Australians own at least one television and, on average, they spend over 20 hours a week – or 36 per cent of their leisure time – watching television programs.”
(Productivity Commission 2000, cited in Flew and Gilmour, 2006:175)

While there is no doubt television has a role in Australian Society and culture, that role is not necessarily easy to define. McQuail (1994: 49-55) identifies four models by which we may attempt to describe mass communication media. These include the transmission model, a view which accounts for mass communication as mainly unidirectional and prescriptive, where messages are ‘loaded’ into media material and ‘fed’ to the masses; the ritual model, by which mass communication is the routine maintenance of public unity by reinforcing a collective cultural identity; a publicity model where the mass media’s main role is to attract and hold the attention of audiences; and a reception model, which locates the actual power over the effects of mass media in the hands of audiences themselves. While it is possible to identify fundamental properties of each of these models in specific examples of mass media, we will here explore whether it is possible to account for each idea simultaneously, using Channel Nine as an example of Australian free-to-air commercial television programming.

The Nine Network is one of Australia’s major free-to-air commercial television broadcasters, and is a prime example of mass media due to its scope and accessibility, with headquarters in Sydney, Darwin, Brisbane and Melbourne (Free TV Australia, ‘TV Stati…’, 2008). The television medium lends itself to earlier transmission views of mass communication with what could be seen as a predominantly unidirectional flow of information: from a central point (creators of content like Channel Nine) to multiple possible peripheral receivers (audiences like the Australian public). McQuail locates the transmission model at the core of common conceptualisations of mass communication (what he refers to as the “dominant paradigm” (p.41-45)), and describes it as the transmission of a fixed amount of information, or a ‘message’, that is determined by the sender and received by a broad audience (p. 49-50).
When we look at Channel Nine, it is not difficult to identify this process. If we were to ask Laswell’s question of ‘Who says what to whom, through what channel and with what effect?’ (McQuail p.50) we might, to use an example, answer: ‘Channel Nine gives gardening advice to the Australian public on their program Domestic Blitz, which is broadcast and received by Australians on televisions, and Australians become better gardeners’. But here we can already see an emerging flaw in the fundamental ideas of the transmission model; the supposition that reception of these fixed messages necessarily results in the fulfilled desires of the sender. We will later return to this idea when we discuss the reception model.
Westley and MacLean (1957, cited in McQuail) built on this early transmission view, suggesting that the sender determines what they send based on an assessment of what their audience wants. This incorporates a feedback idea, which more appropriately situates mass communicators as actual media (a medium between “events and ‘voices’ in society” and “receivers”) rather than as the source of messages (McQuail, p. 50). This feedback role reshapes this model from linear to more circular, but further implies that media has no further purpose than to reply to these ‘voices in society’ and satisfy audience needs.
While pleasing audiences is surely a key intention, suggesting it’s television’s only intention paints the image of a public-spirited mass industry without interests outside of the service of others. When factors like ownership and politics, advertising content and competition between broadcasters are considered, this appears to be an unlikely, oversimplified representation. A publicity model, which we will also discuss later, implies that these interests belong to those who use mass media for their own devices (advertisers, network owners, etc.), and not the mass media themselves, but it could be seen that these are one and the same, as surely it is these peripheral interests that determine the longevity of the medium. There are also many other possible motives for mass communication.

One of these possible motives is the preservation of culture. Unlike a transmission view, the purpose of mass communication from a ritual perspective places emphasis on maintaining a society, and less on ‘controlling’ it. The ritual communication model describes mass communication as celebratory in nature, with the power to help societies develop a rich cultural identity, a power commonly associated with art, religion and festivals (McQuail p.51). The repetitive nature of television programming (serials, regular news updates etc.), and the incorporation of television into everyday life (eg. morning cartoons, Saturday night movie, Friday night football) have ritualistic values not necessarily unlike those of religious practice (Carey, 2002:39). Like a religious ceremony would celebrate certain cultural values, Channel Nine dramas like McLeod’s Daughters and lifestyle programs like Domestic Blitz and Getaway could be seen to be celebratory of capitalist values and a perceived Australian culture of home-owning, land-loving, family-valuing and world-traveling.
It is important to note, however, that while not viewed as directly influential, ritual communication is not without consequence. There is a soft-power factor involved in the promotion of certain cultural values: it incidentally involves discouraging conflicting values, and so such communication can be seen to be ideologically loaded and, by its subtlety, seen to be a more sinister influence than a direct message. For example Getaway, a program where several charismatic presenters travel the world to sample many different forms of foreign culture (albeit often quite ‘packaged’ forms of culture), could be seen as ritual communication, designed for the pleasure of the communicator and audience; celebratory of the senses, with images like sweeping desserts and mountain ranges; and the sense of traveling vicariously through the program. However Getaway, as well as acting as a sort of exclusive extended video catalogue for destinations and services (like Hilton Sydney and Virgin Blue)(Getaway, 2008), it encourages a sort of consumerism by equating purchased experience with self-improvement and spirituality, and presenting the increasingly unattainable ideas of world travel and worry-free luxury to average Australians. While the value-setting nature of ritual communication is fundamental to the maintenance of culture, the selective role of the communicator, as highlighted by the transmission view, means that relatively small amount of mass communicators potentially have a very great amount of influence over society and culture.

Lifestyle programming was a key to the success of Channel Nine throughout the nineties and still plays an important role. Flew and Gilmour write that “lifestyle programming was most strongly associated with the commercial networks, particularly as it allowed close tie-ins between programs, program sponsors, associated magazines and the broadcaster’s website”(p. 183). In the last decade ‘reality’ television has risen to the front, Channel Nine’s current top five most popular shows including The Farmer Wants A Wife, Australia’s Funniest Home Video Show and Aussie Ladette to Lady (Channel Nine, 2009). Flew and Gilmour would identify reality television, despite the fact that most incorporate imported formats, as “culturally specific local content” (p.191). This particular genre fits well with a third model of mass communication: a publicity model.
The publicity model outlined in McQuail posits communication as an attention-seeking display, aiming simply to “catch and hold visual or aural attention” or generate “audience revenue” (p.52). It could be, in fact, that reality television is an audience revenue machine, having not only the content and production values (eg. theme songs, bright logos, exciting camera angles) necessary to attract and maintain large audiences, but the feedback mechanisms in place to actually measure their audience revenue; their viewer telephone voting systems, online content and live audience specials and finales. One prime example of this adaptable hybrid genre was Channel Nine’s successful renovation program The Block, which aired in 2003 and 2004. Flew and Gilmour write that The Block:

“…combined lifestyle and reality TV staples such as home improvement, competition among contestants, public auctions, viewer voting, dramatic tension among the participants and a quite breathtaking amount of product placement. It tapped into the national obsession with realizing capital gains through home improvement in the early 2000s…”
(Flew and Gilmour, 2006: 184)

However the audience revenue of The Block and programs like it is of little import without peripheral concerns like advertising. Audience revenue not only attracts the attention of advertisers for advertising in breaks, but during the program as well (sponsor logos are often visible and supplier lists available at the end of shows and online). While advertising agendas are evident, this model would suggest that these agendas belong to those who use mass media, while the purpose of the media themselves goes no further than creating and maintaining a potentially transient ‘spectatorship’, which is competitive because it ensures the media outlet continues to exist in its role of cultural maintenance. But, though peripheral, advertising and competition agendas also provide compelling motives for attention seeking.
There also remains the question of whether the idea of audiences as mere inactive spectators is in fact reasonable. While audience roles are acknowledged in the three models illustrated above, and obviously essential to the idea of mass communication, it is possible that their role has not yet been sufficiently accounted for. A transmission model, as we have seen, would hint at a malleable mass audience who yield easily to comply with media messages, while above we explored possibly negative implications to audiences from a ritual perspective. A publicity model situates audiences as idle onlookers, but these models have not yet acknowledged any potential agency of individuals in perceiving media messages.

A reception model instills significance in the encoding and decoding process present in mass communication. While, congruent with a transmission model, senders may be able to ‘encode’ meaning into media content, a reception perspective suggests that:

“…receivers (‘decoders’) are not obliged to accept messages as sent but can and do resist ideological influence by applying variant or oppositional readings, according to their own experience and outlook.”
(McQuail, p.53)

A model with its focus on reception would imply that an ideologically loaded lifestyle program could have little to no effect on a viewer whose knowledge and environment has predisposed them to be able to recognise unrealistic ideologies and separate them from their perception of reality. While this sunny situation for individual audience members is not always the case, the fact that it is possible must be considered. McQuail writes that:

“…the most significant point is that decoding can take a different course than intended. Receivers can read between the lines and even reverse the intended direction of the message.”
(McQuail p.54)

This approach is consistent with Pierre Bourdieu’s notion of habitus; that human thought and behaviour is relative to their practical knowledge of the world. Here a possible complication emerges: if perception depends on habitus, and habitus consists of “tradition, practice, and other forms of tacit knowledge” that form and exist within a cultural context (St. Clair et al, [nd], p.149-150), and mass media perpetuates culture, then a cycle becomes apparent where individuals may not have access to the knowledge that allows them such perceptions. But still yet there are those who do, just as mass media sustains a mass culture, alternative communication channels provide arenas for discourse and alternative views.
A reception perspective compliments and expands on other views of mass communication. It elaborates on the ‘feedback’ and ‘voices in society’ ideas suggested above in a transmission model. It acknowledges audiences’ possible awareness of the values sustained by ritualistic mass communication, and highlights the available option of opting out of participation. While a reception approach clashes with the idea of an inactive spectatorship, it adds a new dimension to the publicity model that increases cause for competitive production values: the possibility of a critical spectatorship.

The fact that it is possible to identify fundamental aspects of each of these models in a particular example of mass communication suggests that these models are not mutually exclusive; they do not conflict in ways significant enough to render them unable to co-exist. While some ideas are incompatible, like the transmission model’s underestimation of the audience role in shaping meaning as illustrated in the reception model, for the most part each of these ideas overlap. McQuail too suggests that these four models for mass communication are “not necessarily inconsistent” with each other (p. 49), suggesting that any single model would be insufficient to describe the mass media role. A more complete picture might incorporate ritualistic fulfillment of the transmission model’s feedback, communicator, message and audience roles, but without the implications that the message remains clear throughout the process (as it can often play second fiddle to attention-seeking devices as outlined in the publicity model) or that the receiver determines the message and acts as ‘intended’ (for, as illustrated by McQuail’s description of a reception model, the social contexts and personal choices of individual audience members can shape their interpretation of media material).
While here our discussion concludes with the idea that these models are not mutually exclusive, a more thorough study would, of course, more completely cover the topic. Shortcomings of this discussion include the extent to which Channel Nine broadcasting content could be deconstructed, and the fact that it provides merely a thumbnail sketch of the key ideas of these four different models of mass communication.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Carey, J. 2002. ‘A Cultural Approach to Communication’ in Dennis McQuail, McQuail’s Reader in Mass Communication Theory, Sage, London.

Channel Nine, 2009. ‘Home’ [Internet] Available from: http://channelnine.ninemsn.com.au/ [Accessed 9 April 2009)

Flew, T and Gilmour, C. 2006. ‘Television and Pay TV’, Chp. 10 in Stuart Cunningham and Graeme Turner (Eds.), The Media & Communications in Australia, Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest.

Free TV Australia, 2008. ‘TV Station Members’ [Internet] Free TV Australia Website. Available from: http://www.freetv.com.au/Content_Common/pg-TV-Station-Members.seo#Nine%20Network [Accessed 8 April 2009]

Getaway, 2009. ‘Getaway Fact Sheets’ [Internet] Ninemsn Website. Available from: http://getaway.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=799813[Accessed 9 April 2009]

McQuail, D. 1994. Mass Communication Theory: An Introduction. 3rd ed., Sage, London.

St. Clair, R., Rodriguez, W. and Nelson, C. [nd]. ‘Habitus and Communication Theory’, Intercultural Communication Studies XIII. [Accessed online Feb 2006, Published in 2006 CMNS1110 Introduction to Communication Studies Course Reader]