Logics And Critical Thinking

Assignment

Jalal Mehmood
BBA (5th Semester)
ID 13871
Submitted to “Sir “
The Role and Influence of Mass Media
Mass media is communication—whether written, broadcast, or spoken—that reaches a large
audience. This includes television, radio, advertising, movies, the Internet, newspapers,
magazines, and so [Link] media is a significant force in modern culture, particularly in
America. Sociologists refer to this as a mediated culture where media reflects and creates the
culture. Communities and individuals are bombarded constantly with messages from a
multitude of sources including TV, billboards, and magazines, to name a few. These messages
promote not only products, but moods, attitudes, and a sense of what is and is not important.
Mass media makes possible the concept of celebrity: without the ability of movies, magazines,
and news media to reach across thousands of miles, people could not become famous. In fact,
only political and business leaders, as well as the few notorious outlaws, were famous in the
past. Only in recent times have actors, singers, and other social elites become celebrities or
“stars.”

The current level of media saturation has not always existed. As recently as the 1960s and
1970s, television, for example, consisted of primarily three networks, public broadcasting, and a
few local independent stations. These channels aimed their programming primarily at two‐
parent, middle‐class families. Even so, some middle‐class households did not even own a
television. Today, one can find a television in the poorest of homes, and multiple TVs in most
middle‐class homes. Not only has availability increased, but programming is increasingly diverse
with shows aimed to please all ages, incomes, backgrounds, and attitudes. This widespread
availability and exposure makes television the primary focus of most mass‐media discussions.
More recently, the Internet has increased its role exponentially as more businesses and
households “sign on.” Although TV and the Internet have dominated the mass media, movies
and magazines—particularly those lining the aisles at grocery checkout stands—also play a
powerful role in culture, as do other forms of media.

What role does mass media play?

Limited-effects theory

The limited‐effects theory argues that because people generally choose what to watch or read
based on what they already believe, media exerts a negligible influence. This theory originated
and was tested in the 1940s and 1950s. Studies that examined the ability of media to influence
voting found that well‐informed people relied more on personal experience, prior knowledge,
and their own reasoning. However, media “experts” more likely swayed those who were less
informed. Critics point to two problems with this perspective. First, they claim that limited‐
effects theory ignores the media's role in framing and limiting the discussion and debate of
issues. How media frames the debate and what questions members of the media ask change
the outcome of the discussion and the possible conclusions people may draw. Second, this
theory came into existence when the availability and dominance of media was far less
widespread.
Class-dominant theory

The class‐dominant theory argues that the media reflects and projects the view of a minority
elite, which controls it. Those people who own and control the corporations that produce
media comprise this elite. Advocates of this view concern themselves particularly with massive
corporate mergers of media organizations, which limit competition and put big business at the
reins of media—especially news media. Their concern is that when ownership is restricted, a
few people then have the ability to manipulate what people can see or hear. For example,
owners can easily avoid or silence stories that expose unethical corporate behavior or hold
corporations responsible for their actions.

The issue of sponsorship adds to this problem. Advertising dollars fund most media. Networks
aim programming at the largest possible audience because the broader the appeal, the greater
the potential purchasing audience and the easier selling air time to advertisers becomes. Thus,
news organizations may shy away from negative stories about corporations (especially parent
corporations) that finance large advertising campaigns in their newspaper or on their stations.
Television networks receiving millions of dollars in advertising from companies like Nike and
other textile manufacturers were slow to run stories on their news shows about possible
human‐rights violations by these companies in foreign countries. Media watchers identify the
same problem at the local level where city newspapers will not give new cars poor reviews or
run stories on selling a home without an agent because the majority of their funding comes
from auto and real estate advertising. This influence also extends to programming. In the 1990s
a network cancelled a short‐run drama with clear religious sentiments, Christy, because,
although highly popular and beloved in rural America, the program did not rate well among
young city dwellers that advertisers were targeting in ads.

Critics of this theory counter these arguments by saying that local control of news media largely
lies beyond the reach of large corporate offices elsewhere, and that the quality of news
depends upon good journalists. They contend that those less powerful and not in control of
media have often received full media coverage and subsequent support. As examples they
name numerous environmental causes, the anti‐nuclear movement, the anti‐Vietnam
movement, and the pro‐Gulf War movement.

While most people argue that a corporate elite controls media, a variation on this approach
argues that a politically “liberal” elite controls media. They point to the fact that journalists,
being more highly educated than the general population, hold more liberal political views,
consider themselves “left of center,” and are more likely to register as Democrats. They further
point to examples from the media itself and the statistical reality that the media more often
labels conservative commentators or politicians as “conservative” than liberals as “liberal.”

Media language can be revealing, too. Media uses the terms “arch” or “ultra” conservative, but
rarely or never the terms “arch” or “ultra” liberal. Those who argue that a political elite controls
media also point out that the movements that have gained media attention—the environment,
anti‐nuclear, and anti‐Vietnam—generally support liberal political issues. Predominantly
conservative political issues have yet to gain prominent media attention, or have been opposed
by the media. Advocates of this view point to the Strategic Arms Initiative of the 1980s Reagan
administration. Media quickly characterized the defense program as “Star Wars,” linking it to an
expensive fantasy. The public failed to support it, and the program did not get funding or
congressional support.

Culturalist theory

The culturalist theory, developed in the 1980s and 1990s, combines the other two theories and
claims that people interact with media to create their own meanings out of the images and
messages they receive. This theory sees audiences as playing an active rather than passive role
in relation to mass media. One strand of research focuses on the audiences and how they
interact with media; the other strand of research focuses on those who produce the media,
particularly the news.

Theorists emphasize that audiences choose what to watch among a wide range of options,
choose how much to watch, and may choose the mute button or the VCR remote over the
programming selected by the network or cable station. Studies of mass media done by
sociologists parallel text‐reading and interpretation research completed by linguists (people
who study language). Both groups of researchers find that when people approach material,
whether written text or media images and messages, they interpret that material based on
their own knowledge and experience. Thus, when researchers ask different groups to explain
the meaning of a particular song or video, the groups produce widely divergent interpretations
based on age, gender, race, ethnicity, and religious background. Therefore, culturalist theorists
claim that, while a few elite in large corporations may exert significant control over what
information media produces and distributes, personal perspective plays a more powerful role in
how the audience members interpret those messages.

Fallacies In Talk Shows

Our political talk-shows are of poor quality and have degenerated into a medium for various
kinds of logical fallacies. There is a lack of research, the arguments are full of whims and
surmises, which mostly project misinformation and personal biases of the participants. One
strong reason why our talk shows have become unpopular is that the participants are mostly
politicians who instead of giving objective and rational answers to important issues of national
importance, have to toe their party line, and would not accept a view based on pure logic and
reason. Moreover there is a lot of wrangling, cross talk and noise by the participants so that the
shows are often reduced into a cacophony of babbling voices and the discussion is hardly
audible to the listeners. The anchor-persons do not know how to manage the speakers and
steer the debate to its logical end.
some logical fallacies which are too commonly used in Pakistani politics. The most often
indulged in is the Hominen fallacy, which means “personal attack on the opponent.” Ironically,
personal attacks run contrary to rational arguments. Instead of advancing good sound
reasoning, an ad-hominem replaces logical argumentation with attacking language unrelated to
the truth of the matter. It often amounts to personal insults and mud-slinging etc. Instead of
addressing the candidate’s stance on the issues, it focuses on personality issues, and speech
patterns, and other features that affect popularity but have no bearing on their competence.
Thus this fallacy is unethical, as it resorts to name-calling instead of addressing core issues.
Impact Of Language On Attitude And Language
Contribution To Experiences and understanding
Being a Pakistani we have attitudes/feelings/beliefs about language in general, their language,
and the language of other people. They may feel that an unwritten language is not a 'real'
language. They may feel shame when other people hear their language. They may believe that
they can only know one language at a time. They may feel that the national language is the best
language for expressing patriotism, the best way to get a job, the best chance at improving
their children's future.
Attitudes cannot be observed directly but are demonstrated through actual behavior – for
example, how people treat speakers of other languages (avoidance, approach), or in their
desire (or not) to learn another language. The convergence of one’s speech to conform to
another’s speech suggests a “positive attitude” toward the other’s speech. By the same token,
divergence suggests an intention for the opposite outcome.
Attitudinal studies aid in identifying how people of one language group view the personal
character and social status of speakers of another language and how they form associations
about other languages. Therefore, the assessment of language attitudes aids in grouping
communities on the basis of their intergroup affinities and, in combination with other methods,
in estimating potential extensibility of materials.
Since attitudes cannot be studied directly, the assessment of language attitudes requires asking
such questions about other aspects of life. For example, a person can be asked about their
opinion of a person whose speech sample they just heard. The responses reveal attitudes about
both people and their language. Opinions and attitudes are noted about how those being
interviewed might be willing to accommodate to the people and languages that they just heard
on the recordings. Language attitudes can be identified by simply asking why certain languages
are in use (or not). For example:

 For what activities is the first language thought to be inadequate? Give reasons.
 For what activities is the second or third language not thought to be adequate? Give
reasons.
 Is it “good’ to speak X language? Why?
 Could someone who speaks only X language get a good job? Why?
 Can you think of a situation in which it is best not to use your mother tongue? Why?
 What is the most useful language to know around here? Give reasons.

Attitudes are personal beliefs, but there are patterns of attitudes throughout a community.
Similar people will have similar attitudes and a profile of the community can be developed.