Thus, the diffusion of new ideas is carried out unevenly in different segments of society.
At one time, this model was developed by B. Berelson, P. Lazarsfeld, W. McPhee, concluding that the priority of interpersonal communication over the mass in trying to convince the audience in certain things.
But both among the leaders of public opinion, and among the media, there are their leaders of public opinion, who are within the refereed group. Therefore, this chain can be extended.
The author had the opportunity to see this during the planning and organization of one of the political companies in Ukraine.
In order to form a negative public opinion about the existing system of licensing and accreditation of higher education institutions (HEIs) in Ukraine, the Confederation of Non-Governmental Universities held a press conference at the Ukrainian Independent News Agency (UNIAN).
Of course, the journalists present at the press conference responded to this event with their messages within 1 to 7 days (television – earlier, weekly newspapers – later). But two weeks later, a second wave of publications appeared in publications that were not represented at the aforementioned press conference. Maybe they just reprinted materials from the UNIAN tape? At first we thought so.
But the analysis of the texts of the reports showed that the materials were copyrighted and not tied to a specific date and event (press conferences of rectors of private universities). However, a meaningful analysis showed that the “ideological line” of this press conference was clearly traced in these publications, which testified to the non-randomness of the published articles.
Then came the conclusion: journalists – authors of “second wave” publications creatively “reworked” information from “first wave” publications (ie leaders of public opinion). Given the fact that during the admission campaign to the university this topic was relevant to many readers, the newspapers of the “second wave” decided to publish this information.
Therefore, we received support from those publications whose help and propaganda resources we did not count on at all.
But there is another version of the two-stage model of communication.
If the version of “leaders of public opinion – mass media – consumers” is characterized by the transfer of influence, the version of mass media – leaders of public opinion – consumers in the first stage can be considered as a transfer of information, and in the second – as a transfer of influence.
Although, of course, all this is quite conditional, because even the most colorless, “most objective” information can be presented in such a way that it will make evaluative judgments, depending on the preferences of the author of the article or television story and censorship guidelines of the news editor.
Here is a simple example. At the above-mentioned press conference in UNIAN, the author said the following phrase: “The paradigm of training lawyers in public universities is aimed at training lawyers for law enforcement agencies. If we want to build a police state, it is obviously right. If our goal is https://123helpme.me/ethan-frome/ legal, democratic, the welfare state, as enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine, we also need to train lawyers in the fields of business, information law, intellectual property, human rights, etc. And it is better to be able to do non-state universities.
That’s how the media responded to this phrase.
The message of the newspaper “GCH”: “The rector of IAPM V. Bebyk stated that a police state is being built in Ukraine!”
The newspaper “M” reports: “Rector of IAPM – the largest non-governmental university in Ukraine V. Bebyk believes that they will train specialists in commercial law” better than state institutions. “
The newspaper “F” reports: “V. Bebyk, rector of a leading private university, believes that there are too many prosecutors and too few lawyers specializing in human rights in Ukraine.”
So, as many journalists as there are opinions, despite the fact that everyone has heard the same thing. The perception of what is heard and seen, as can be seen from the above examples, can be quite the opposite.
Spiral of silence
The author of this model is a German researcher E. Noel-Neumann. her hypothesis is that the media can manipulate public opinion by giving the floor to members of the minority and silencing the views of the majority.
At the heart of this phenomenon is the fear of remaining in the minority. To confirm her hypothesis, she conducted a so-called railway test, which showed that in a train car people are more willing to talk to a neighbor whose political sympathies are close to the ruling elite.
This spiral of silence, the researcher believes, explains the phenomenon discovered in 1940 in the United States by P. Lazarsfeld, when a certain group of voters (3-4%) vote at the last minute in the election (under pressure from public opinion ) for who is most likely to become the winner of the election race.
By the way, this “orchestra car effect” as it was called by II Lazarsfeld, found its confirmation in Ukrainian political practice. The philosophy of political choice of such citizens can be expressed by the phrase: “Candidate N may be the best, but the government will still make the president (mayor) candidate M. So why worry about the choice – everything is already decided.”
So everything is like in one of the commercials: “Why pay more if you can pay less?”
Model of diffuse theory
The essence of this model is to analyze the process of communication differently, in the context of different willingness of people to innovate.
According to the American researcher E. Rogers, according to the degree of perception of new ideas and products, five groups of people are distinguished:
Innovators (2.5%) who quickly “grasp” abstract ideas are mobile and sociable, prone to risk. Early hosts (13.5%), who have a certain authority and influence in society. An early majority (34%) who accept new ideas before they are adopted by ordinary citizens. This group is often guided by the opinion of the previous group (leaders). The late majority (34%) are skeptical and accept the new after the average citizen has already accepted these innovations. Late hosts (6%) are traditionalists and conservatives who agree to take the new last.
Thus, the diffusion of new ideas is carried out unevenly in different segments of society.
According to E. Rogers, in order to achieve the propaganda goal, it is necessary for 50% of the population to know about your ideas. If you manage to convince 5% of the population, consider that “the process is over”. And if you achieve 20% of the effectiveness of the advertising campaign, the “process” can no longer be stopped. The researcher believed that:
interpersonal communication among people of the same age and social group is very important; government propaganda is ineffective; the reliability of communication sources partially determines the success of the campaign; the media cannot change the behavior of people with a previously formed point of view.
It is not necessary to mechanically transfer this typology together with the percentage of different social groups according to the criterion of perception of innovations on Ukrainian soil. However, taking into account the Ukrainian mentality and socio-historical experience of the Ukrainian people, adjusted for the thesis “Ukrainians are harnessed for a long time and go fast”, E. Rogers’ diffuse theory deserves careful study.
Goalkeeper model
The author of the model is a famous American researcher Kurt Levin, who considered the “gatekeeper” (datekeeper) as a decision maker. If it’s a housewife, she decides what kind of meat to buy at home. If he is the editor of a newspaper, it depends on him what information to “put in the issue”.
Thus, the “gatekeeper” in this model is the one who controls the flow of news, dissects it, repeats, expands information, and censors it.
D. White’s research has shown that no more than 10% of the information messages received by the mass media are actually “put in the room”, ie used in the mass media.
As you can see, the space for the creativity of a potential censor is huge.
News structure model
According to the author of this communicative model AT Van Dyck, ideology dictates the relationship of social relations, affects the creation, transformation and application of knowledge, statements, social representations.
For example, the problems of national minorities, refugees, etc. are less covered by the media. The very construction of the structure of the information message affects the content of the latter.
For example, to support racism in society, the following structure of the title of the article is used: “I am not a racist, but …” And already in the very formulation of the problem there is a very clear argument.
News messages are often saturated with digital data (true and unreliable) to create an idea of the objectivity of the information provided. According to Van Dyck, it is mostly just a matter of modeling accuracy, because newspapers almost never correct the data given in previous issues of newspapers, even if these data were erroneous.
Thus, the structural blocks of news, in terms of incomplete information about the object of coverage, significantly affect the image of this object. And in this context, Van Dyck’s research is certainly important for understanding the mechanisms of public opinion formation through the media.
For example, if the media want to negatively portray an event such as a strike, they will communicate with administrators in cozy offices, and with strikers on an unattractive, noisy background. But journalists can also fall into similar traps.
A similar reception was used by the press service of US President Ronald Reagan, when he showed a smiling president against the backdrop of a helicopter with running engines near the White House. At the same time, journalists trying to shout at each other, as well as the noise of a helicopter, were contrasted as “uneducated, rude upstarts” against the backdrop of a kind and majestic leader of the nation who could easily confuse Paraguay with Guatemala … …
This format and structure of the news presentation – the arrival of the president from a country residence – allowed to say behind the scenes exactly what the White House communications service wrote in a press release. Add to that the visual contrast of the video, and you’ll understand whose side the public will be on in the event of a possible future conflict between the president and journalists.
Topic changes and new episode markers are also used, such as:
Meanwhile in Warsaw., (Change of location). The next day … (change of time). N.