Communication

Communication is the basic form of transferring information from one source to another. This can either be a two-way transmission where the receiver also becomes the transmitter or it can be one-way where the receiver only receives and never transmits [1]. This one-way communication is what is dangerous. In mass communication it is the few powerful organizations that control the information and it has become a one-way transmission where unfortunately, the masses act as sheep. The organizations herd the sheep of the populace into buying certain products, voting for certain politicians, as well as other manipulations as shown by Max Horkheimer in Hardt’s essay, “the media profess to adhere to the values and freedom of the individual, but they ‘fetter the individual’ to prescribed thoughts, attitudes, and buying habits instead.” [2].

What separates democracy from totalitarian rule is the participation of the public in the act of making political decisions. However, if the public is being manipulated by those in power already, there is little that separates the two. Unfortunately this seems to be the case in America, as Hardt explains, "The current practice of mass communication confirms the dominance of a private, commercial agenda in a democratic culture that has failed to deliver on the promise of participation" [3].

The solution to this may be centered around the public mass communicating with itself. Websites with public forums where anyone may enter and state what they desire may provide a way for the public to compete with power organized groups. However, even then money can corrupt those online communities as well. It is simple for an organization to simply pay an employee to post propaganda on these websites as well, and at times bury the opposition in sheer quantity. The owners of the websites must also fight their own greed as companies may pay them to give priority to the companies propaganda. However, teaching the public to distrust mass communication and analyze data themselves is still a step in the right direction.

[1]- Hardt, Hanno. Myths for the Masses: an Essay on Mass Communication. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2004. Print. pg 8

[2]- Hardt, Hanno. Myths for the Masses: an Essay on Mass Communication. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2004. Print. pg 2.

[3]- Hardt, Hanno. Myths for the Masses: an Essay on Mass Communication. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2004. Print. pg 3.

The Media Industry killed Art's Aura

Amidst a changing culture and the increasing technologies of a digital age. Walter Benjamin in his article Illuminations and Theodor Adorno along with Max Horkheimer in Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments, portrays the writers’ distaste of the mechanical reproduction of an artwork in relation to the jeopardy it places on the existence of that artwork’s “aura.” Benjamin begins his explanation of the aura in his passionate desciption of what distinguishes the presence of an authentic piece of art. He explains the significance of a piece’s unique place in time, and the determination of that existence throughout history as what substantiates the phenomenon for which people intake its originality (Benjamin 220-1). Adorno elaborates on this sentiment and presents the infection of sameness, likewise the death of originality, as a crucial epidemic to today’s society (Adorno 94-5).

            Adorno goes on to classify the media industry as a conforming synonym to an all-encompassing “culture industry” (Adorno 104). He quotes, “ Nevertheless, the culture industry remains the entertainment business. Its control of consumers is mediated by entertainment… ”(108). It is due to the fact that the concept of media becomes synonymous with the masses that destroys the art form at the base of its existence; that is, ruptures the aura around which art gathers significance. Benjamin urges his readers to realize that the mechanical reproduction of art has a social significance on the reaction to it. No longer do people enjoy art, they actively criticize and attempt to change it (Benjamin 234). This results from the culture industry’s inability to provide satiable value to the public. Everything in entertainment is a copy of itself. Everything within the culture industry is only unique so long as it can still fit within a predetermined framework (Adorno 112).

            This framework supported so unquestionably and then criticized so openly by the masses is the anti-aura of modern art. Art gathered its original and unalterable being from the existence of unique perspective. People did not question art because it represented a singular perception of the world surroundings (Benjamin 237). This separation of A and B artwork, A for the culture and study of the time, and B for the mild mass entertainment (the media industry of today) captures the current media industry and likewise halts the originality synonymous with Benjamin’s definition of “aura” (Adorno 114-5).

 Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical

Reproduction. New York, New York: Schocken Books, 1968. Paperback.

Adorno, Theodor W. Max Horkeimer. Dialectiv of Enlightenment: Philosophical

Fragments. Standford, California. Stanford University Press, 2002. Typeset. 

Communication Conceptualized

Communication is a process by which information or emotion is transmitted to one or more individuals. A traditional model of communication states the presence of both a sender and receiver. The sender’s message or intent is transferred to the receiver who then interprets said information. This model can also easily be applied to most forms of mass media, but is made complicated by the emergence of present day cyber communication, enabling one to possibly be both a sender and receiver.

Mass media is a term used to describe any method of communication intended for large audiences. Types of media intended for large scale communication include newspapers, magazines, radio, cell phones, and the internet. There are many inherent benefits and disadvantages in massively communicating both on a personal and societal level.

The health of a society’s democracy can be defined by its ability to communicate via mass media. When, social, political, and international information (in conjunction with advertising) is delivered massively, it can often be hard to find legitimate unbiased information on any topic. Currently, “mass communication (is) in crisis…and public confidence in the media remains low.”(Hardt 2) However, it is necessary to protect our freedom of press and it is our responsibility to examine the process and motives fueling each sender.

Presently, any individual or group with an internet capable device may access the internet where endless data are perpetually sent and received. News, text, video, photo, and advertising information stream via the World Wide Web and are presently appropriated for irrepressible display on widely popular social networking sites. As a result, the ability of both the sender and receiver in our traditional model is modified, making each individual both a sender and receiver, a sender or receiver, or neither. The sender’s intention in this cyber communication model is more ambiguous; interpretation, culture and language serve as barriers to the recipient.

Humans are communicating more than ever on a global scale. Traditional models and methods of communication are transforming rapidly to adjust to present cyber communications. Language, culture, and interpretation may limit the ability of transmitting information, including the ability to obtain a sufficient internet-capable device. However, the basic necessity to communicate face-to-face, with all its struggles implied, has remained unchanged and will continue to be vital, regardless of modernity.

Works Cited:

Hardt, Hanno. Myths for the Masses. An Essay on Mass Communication. Oxford, England. Blackwell Publishing. 2004.