Communication can be defined as the circulation of ideas and information through means of physical and emotional expression: thanking someone in front of you for holding the door, the firmness of a handshake or being lectured among a group of students. It is instinctive in almost every scale as it is the basis of any functioning society, stable or corrupt. The term itself is traced back to the process of “making common” and “establishing commonality”. [1] However, these terms are broad in the way communication is viewed, now; there is no need for making common and instead, all that is needed is confirmation that the message was received. This act is the foundation to all global simplicities or complexities as the exchange is accompanied by the distribution of layers of information. In today’s society, the issue of distance is slowly diminishing and the range of communication can be observed through either a personal or global level.
Effectively, the means of communication has been altered drastically as the reliance on technology has skyrocketed though the years. It becomes more apparent that the majority of the population relays information by means of mass communication either aware or unaware or its source’s “desire to dominate individuals (or societies) though persuasion and manipulation.” [2] Considering the grand scale of the mass media, there is the issue of the identity of the original source as well as the issue of miscommunication, both inevitable in the long run. In conclusion, communication is a form of interaction between parties and in today’s society, succeeds in molding an individual’s beliefs with very little effort, especially via media outlets.
[1] Hardt, Hanno. Myths for the Masses: An Essay on Mass Communication. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2004. Book. p.8
[2] Hardt, Hanno. Myths for the Masses: An Essay on Mass Communication. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2004. Book. p.7.
Interesting definition! Technology has definitely improved over the past few years and made communication easier, both on the individual and global scale. However, do you think that having the means to communicate better have made us better communicators? It seems that with such an abundance of communication going on, the interactions have become more shallow somehow.
ReplyDeleteI agree, in a way the means to communicate has been abused to the point where it has, indeed, made the interactions more shallow. There is a level of informality, in today's society where substance is less of an issue compared to dominating the means of which information is transferred.
ReplyDelete