How Do Agenda-Setting, Framing and Propaganda Work in Practice - Essay Example

Agenda- Setting, Framing, and Propaganda Name: Institution: Agenda- Setting, Framing, and Propaganda Outline Introduction The introduction contains the explanations to the three approaches of agenda setting, framing, and propaganda as used in relevant information sources in the society at a national and global setting. Their mediums and provision for negative and positive aspects are provided. Discussion The discussion details the triangular model of the three aspects with case studies of China and US. In both, differential societies and representation towards authoritative and liberal forms are given. The resultant effects from political influence, tensions of participatory spheres as well as reaction are detailed. Conclusion The conclusion summarizes clear roles of each priming aspect contained in of agenda setting, framing, and propaganda. It gives the necessary utilities according to relevant present-world information sources, their control, and effect to society. Introduction Freedoms, regulations, and neutrality towards issues that deserve national feedback and responses by the public are often under scrutiny for varied reasons. The ability of news media in influencing the salience in topical representation of public agenda has become common in the world today. That if a certain news item is given frequent coverage and prominence to the audience, it will be regarded as being important. Priming and agenda-setting theories facilitate the simulation of related thoughts and expected reactions in minds of audience members. The former is responsible for expected imitation of a certain action that is deemed acceptable after a certain while, while the latter is mainly used against the public perceptions. In most cases, the society in question depends on the authoritarian or liberal spheres in order to effect the standard decisions made by use of influence through the media. Agenda setting, framing, and propaganda are both effective and negative depending on the society enabled through the reception from the public. Discussion The influence of public opinion on media coverage as well as government policy can be used for authoritative society in terms of control and effective regulation. As opposed to the traditional media, which had no equivocal framework in guiding of agenda from the citizens, today’s settings ensure that the opposite is true. For example, in China, the country boasts the highest number of internet users. In such circumstances, the online use of public opinion has an effect towards the governance, political deliveries, and policies formed for the society (Klaehn, 2010). In order for the government of the day to keep these avenues in check, agenda-setting was used as means of control, limitations, priming and reducing the frequency of such motives. Content scrutiny had to be effected in order to monitor the information shared among the citizens as means of streamlining and accepting government policy. Public sphere in the liberal society requires unlimited forms of interaction, communication between citizens and public office holders as well as response to effected policies. On the opposite, masking and enforcing policies in an authoritative society required the use of priming, framing, and agenda-setting techniques. Kuypers and Denton (2008) supports the fact that the fear lay in the social relationships formed as threat to the government’s mandate especially where coalitions could be formed or rebellion towards the governing party. Differential issues can also be discussed with the target of changing traditional means of reputable deliveries to the society. As such, the government shields such uncontrollable and immeasurable forms of tensions within a political sphere by using the triangular model of media governance. Empirical and equal quantitative measures unsure that the people access what is driven from the government and their feedback is in unison with the delivered material. Agenda-setting theory resonates well with communist perception from the years back as it views the media as guiding role in the public sphere. The media thus becomes the instruments for the political system and government to propagate their ideologies and policies, which affect the lives of the nation. The effective propaganda and control of public opinion makes it easier for both the citizens and the government achieves national cohesion and developmental framework according to the set standards (Green-Pedersen and Walgrave, 2014). In addition, there is bilateral affiliation on the sociopolitical basis of incidents as importance of an occurrence can be driven to matters of concern through propaganda and perpetuation by the media. Citizen journalism is therefore limited as the influence from public denotation, is equated to the traditional media and does not allow for varied citizen-generated content. Accountability and transparency rests with the source, which in this case is the government. In the construction of the three agendas as means of enabling agenda-setting, framing and propaganda through the media and social network limitation, the case study of China points to three types. The public agenda setting points at the public as the dependent variable although it is not driven and utilized as national entity. The second one is media agenda setting where it is treated as the dependent variable while the final is the policy agenda where elite makers of policies drive the cause. In the three regards, the balance is achieved through central non-conformity to participatory media. In this case, the public’s opinions and agendas are not used as levels for accessibility and developing of policy basis (Heath, 2005). In addition, mass communication is used as an easy to target to achieve the results in part from the government. In sharp contrast, the triangle model of framing, agenda setting, and Meta coverage through the media, social networks, and online basis can be compared to that of United States of America. The US dominates the global telecommunication infrastructure by a majority percentage. It includes the layout basis, operation, and establishment in the flow of data to respective destinations on a global scale. They are routed to the country while the submarine cables are entirely owned by private and limited affiliations to it. Through the DNS servers and root names, control on the flow of information is determined through a hierarchical manner. The instructions are directed from the federal government with enabled mechanism on the master server as the centralized command. Corman, Tretheway and Goodall (2008) note that, the passage of data on its territory from other countries is intercepted and scrutinized on the content enabled through the underground sea cables in an efficient manner. Despite the relative ease of avenues for enacting the triangular model of framing, agenda setting, and Meta coverage, the US offers little use of the priming mechanism. In comparison to the rest of the world, it is a free-orientated access area. Few restrictions and enabled policies by the government are delivered. The public domain has freedom of access, speech, responses, and feedback on all the matters enabled through mass communication. It is governed by the constitutional jurisdiction and it guarantees it to all the citizens while prohibitions to the deferral government are delivered through the same. Limitations of content are derived from threats to national security while the political sphere and public derivatives are not in contention. Luo (2012) argues that the enabled limitations are through copyright rules and violations, indecent content according to age limits, defamatory nature and harmful derivatives as well as confidential information. The public sphere and media effects have a built tension when in conflict, especially if the public agenda is not driven as expected while the media effects is sourced from influenced sources. At the turn within the last year, federal appeals court had struck down neutrality of the net regulations thereby raising concerns on discrimination in treatment of content. In terms of the journalism basis, self-censorship was witnessed and writers too. The anonymity led to increased threats that were potentially based from political drivers. As such, priming in order to drive political agenda was limited due to the scrutiny it obtained. Scheufele (2008) notes that the dimension realized was the advent of powerful media effect towards the citizens regarding the policies and outlook of the leaders. The priming effect is based on assumption that the public’s knowledge is not taken into account of the intended purpose as propagated through the sphere. The audience contingent is responsible for agenda setting according to the obtrusiveness. It is noted within the scholars that in an effort to mirror the image effects created by the media, the model includes derived forms propagated propaganda, framing, and priming of the expected outcome from the public. Through constant delivery and intake from the public, accustomed beliefs and viewer ship as importance is instituted. The lesser-classified influencers of political will or agenda-setting influences are used to create the reaction required (McKewon, 2012). With limitations on the enabled audience, influence is turned from the common figures into friendly and closer sources to the least expected individuals. For example, an enable framing and propaganda campaign through media will be effective to the least citizens who rely on news or media sources for information. It is true, as their opinions will be shaped by closer members like family, friends, and colleagues. Transparency in part of the propagandists, framers and primers and protest from the public are the varied reactions from the process of agenda setting. Through surveillance of the content and manner of the information flow, the in charge figures during the actions leveled out in liberal society have to ensure that there is no backlash or determined cause for any foul play. Any compelled relay of important information is expected as accepted by an authoritative society as compared to the liberal one (Curran Gurevitch, 2005). Protest is used in the latter as means of expressing displeasure on the mechanism used to the public agenda and policy. In the liberal society, the participatory media would experience the negative feedback on any manner of the triangle model of activation as protest and decry would be used widely. The effects of agenda setting within the online environment offer a differential view especially in comparison to the traditional media. Over the years, channeled efforts have been diverted to the online environment as means of fast and reliable relay of intended information by the respective sources. It has been noted that these have weakened the traditional media like the radio, television, and print forums. In sharp contrast, the electronic boards offer a new lease of life for the similar mechanism (Moy, 2010). This is because the variables of attention, concern, awareness, and leads to differential outcomes cannot be measured or guaranteed. Inflated correlations are then derived from the coefficients of each category of the effected agenda setting while the aggregated position puts the public as passive. Conclusion Agenda setting, framing, and propaganda are both effective and negative depending on the society enabled through the reception from the public. The ability of news media in influencing the salience in topical representation of public agenda has become common in the world today. However, the reception and access to the intended purpose differs from one society to another. In most cases, the political influences are behind such forms of media effect to the public domain. Masking and enforcing policies in an authoritative society required the use of priming, framing, and agenda-setting techniques while in the liberal society, the protest and transparency effects do not allow for the enablement of such avenues. References: Corman, S. R., Trethewey, A., & Goodall, H. L. (2008). Weapons of Mass Persuasion: Strategic Communication to Combat Violent Extremism. New York: Peter Lang. Curran, J., & Gurevitch, M. (2005). Mass media and society. London: Hodder Arnold. Green-Pedersen, C., & Walgrave, S. (2014). Agenda setting, policies, and political systems: A comparative approach. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press. Heath, R. L. (2005). Encyclopedia of public relations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Klaehn, J. (2010). The Propaganda Model and Sociology: Understanding the Media and Society. Academia, 1, 1-4. Kuypers, J. A., & Denton, R. E. (2008). Politics and communication in America: Campaigns, media, and governing in the 21st century. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press. Luo, Y. (2012). The Internet and Agenda Setting. Internal Journal of Communication, 2. 7, 11-23. McKewon, E. (2012). Talking points Ammo. Journalism Studies, 13:2, 277-297. Moy, P. (2010). Theories of Public Opinion. Digital Communications, 1, 1-17. Scheufele, D. (2008). Framing, Agenda Setting and Priming. ResearchGate Journals, 2, 11-37. Read More