Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Agenda-Setting and Agenda-building Theory
The theory under discussion is the agenda-setting theory, and the news and information effects of the theory in agenda building. The theory is about the influence of the mass media on the public agenda. According to the theory, if a news item or piece of information is covered prominently and regularly in the media, the public, who are the audience, will consider the issue to be important (McCombs & Shaw, 1972). In holding this assertion, the theory takes two fundamental assumptions. The first assumption is that the mass media and news filter and shape the reality other than reflect it. Secondly, the theory assumes that the concentration of the media on a few issues will consequently spark public opinion that sets and builds the agenda.
We would expect this theory to apply in politics where the focus of the media on an issue creates political discussions about it. The theory would apply on the political scene because it is the area that deals with consistent public commentary about an issue. At the same time, the issues covered in the media would most prominently be more political than other areas (Lee & McCombs 2012). This theory cannot apply in the area of science or scientific representation of facts.
However, this theory does not pertain to certain individuals, certain content, certain media, or within certain contexts. This is because the theory can be relevant in almost all the areas that the media can focus their coverage on (McCombs & Shaw, 1972). The theory therefore does not apply to only certain individuals or content, but all the people or content that can be covered. In addition, the theory is not limited to, certain contexts or certain media, but all the areas that an issue affects. The Agenda-Setting theory simply holds that news item or information featured regularly and prominently in the media will be regarded as the most important by the audience.
Importance of the theory’s predictions
The predictions of the theory are important in practice as represented by the practical implications of the setting of the agenda, which leads to the building of the agenda (McCombs & Shaw, 1972). One of the practical implications of the theory’s outcomes is the interaction of the public, policy makers and the media (Hans-Bernd & Mathias, 1990). Secondly, the mass media broadcasters practically shape the reality of the public domain. The theory determines the setting of an agenda that is consumed in the public domain, but propagated by the mass media. In addition, the implication of the theory is an explanation of the reason why political realities are associated with the media. The theory explains how the mass media create issues in the public domain, which are taken to be political.
The theory’s outcome is more important in two main audiences. The first audience is the media producers. The outcome of the theory explains to the media producers the responsibility that rests on them in regard to the stories, issues and items they focus regularly on their broadcasts. This will give them a caution that they should not create reality that may not be beneficial to the society. The second audience is the government officials and politicians. The outcome of the theory gives government officials and politicians a reminder of their public influence. This is because coverage of politicians in the media influences the public perception of their leadership and role in the country (Lee & McCombs, 2012).
The concerns about the theory are important because the outcomes of the predictions have economic, political, legal and social implications. This is because the reality that is shaped about an issue by the mass media broadcasters influences the way the public views the subject. The implications of the news items in the media become political and social when discussed items are politics. Similarly, the implications are legal when they infringe on people’s rights. At the same time, the implications are economic when the outcomes of an issue lead to economic changes or effects.
Current state of research on the theory
Research has been done on the agenda-setting theory and findings have proven the application and practicality of the assertions of the theory. The first research to review is by a team of researchers led by Wirth, Matthes and Schemer (2010). The research focused on the effect of the theory on the referendum campaign. The research specifically sought to investigate the flow of arguments among the public as presented in the media and campaigners. The research found out that the flow of the arguments and opinion is top-down in nature. The arguments move from the campaigners to news media organizations and then to the public (Wirth et al, 2010).
The second research was done by Conway, Kenski and Wang (2015) to investigate the gender-setting effect of the rise of Twitter and social media in political campaigns in presidential primaries. The research found out a symbiotic relationship between the conventional media and the topics being discussed on Twitter posts about the presidential primaries. This relates to the findings that the media affects the voter reactions in the presidential primaries (Lee & McCombs, 2012). There was a correlation between the issues discussed about democrats and republicans with those discussed in the modern media.
According to the views of the two studies, the current state of research is not any different from the way the theory was originally defined. This is because the theory presents the fundamental effects of the mass media broadcasters in relation to the public views on the issue run but the media (McCombs, 2012). The study by Wirth et al (2010), found out that the news broadcasters made a significant impact on the way the referendum campaigns were shaped. While the traditional media themselves influenced the public view, the airing of news and the posts on Twitter and social media by the campaigners and public showed a similar effect on the public opinion.
The theory is being applied to technology due to the use of technology in the mass media. The impact of technology is significantly felt in the way the mass media broadcast news and information in the modern world. Therefore, technology will be a critical, part of the application of the theory. While technology is influential, it only affects the way the information or news is broadcast. Therefore, the theory is applied to technology due to its use in the normal media.
The theory is still hot in the way it is applied and practically used. The implications of the theory in explaining the public agenda make it a significant explanation of the society. This makes it a hot theory, even in the present day. The relevance of the theory is realized when describing the interaction between the policy makers and the public through the mass media broadcasters (Kiousis & McCombs, 2004). The research by Wirth et al (2010), verifies this interaction by finding out the top-down movement of the arguments from campaigners to the public.
Application of the theory
The theory of agenda-setting can be applied in the field of business in terms of corporate image. A person interested in corporate branding and business image will find the theory useful in evaluating the implications of the issues, information and news about a firm in the media. The theory can be applied to solve a problem of why a company’s image is lowly regarded in the public.
If the corporate image a company is eroded drastically, with no changes in other fundamental factors like ethics and quality, the theory can be used. The theory is applicable to evaluate the effect of the media reports and news by broadcasters about the corporate organization.
In this regard, negative news about the company could hurt its branding and image if the broadcasters regularly and prominently feature the news or information about the company. The flow of opinion or arguments would be from the events that cause the news, to the broadcasters and finally to the public (Kiousis & McCombs, 2004). The arguments and the opinions in the public domains are the factors that shape the reality through agenda-setting and agenda-building.
However, the practicality of the agenda-setting outcomes and implications can also be used for positive corporate image. Just as the mass media broadcasters can lead to a negative image, the same broadcasters can be used to create a positive corporate image for companies. This can be achieved through prominent and regular featuring of the targeted corporate organizations in their broadcast. This explains why corporate bodies are engaged in events that attract the attention of the mass media broadcasters. Therefore, to solve the problems that may be associated with negative publicity, corporate bodies should engage in activities and events of public good. These will attract mass media broadcasters who will feature them in good image.
References
Conway, B.A., Kenski, K., & Wang, D. (2015). The Rise of Twitter in the Political Campaign: Searching for Intermedia Agenda-Setting Effects in the Presidential Primary. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication Volume 20, Issue 4, pages 363–380
Hans-Bernd, B., & Mathias, H.K. (1990). The Agenda-Setting Function of Television News: Static and Dynamic Views, Communication Research, Vol.17, No.2: pp.183-211
Kiousis, S., & McCombs, M. (2004). Agenda-Setting Effects and Attitude Strength: Political Figures During the 1996 Presidential Election. COMMUNICATION RESEARCH, Vol. 31 No. 1, February 2004 36-57
Lee, B., & McCombs, M.E. (2012). The Role of The Press in Determining Voter Reactions to Presidential Primaries, Human Communication Research, Vol. 4, No.4; pages 301–307
McCombs, M.E. (2012). Explorers and Surveyors: Expanding strategies for Agenda-Setting research. Proquest LLC, Journalism Quarterly
McCombs, M.E., & Shaw, D. (1972). The Agenda-Setting Function Of Mass Media, The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 2, 1972, pp. 176-187
Wirth, W., Matthes, J., Schemer, C., Wettstein, M., Friemel, T., Hänggli, R., & Siegert, G. (2010). Agenda Building and Setting in a Referendum Campaign. Investigating the Flow of Arguments Among Campaigners, the Media, and the Public. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly , 87(2), 328-345