University of North Carolina Asheville

A Senior Thesis Submitted

in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Bachelor of Mass Communication

Dialog of Communication: A Study of Mass Media and Effects

By

Erin Dalton

Submitted to

Alan Hantz

Fall 2016

2

Introduction:

Society develops from an interaction between people via the exchanging of ideas and

goods. For instance, trade is one of the basic forms of communication because a dialog is

generated from exchanging of ideas and goods. In the contemporary age, media enables an

expansion of this dialog in various styles and platforms. This permits a larger scale of dialog that

circulates through the world, and from the dialog there are three roles highlighted by theorists

previously, like characters in a play: the viewer, who is the consumer, the communicator, who is

the reporter, and the artist, who is the critic. The viewer, classified under the title of ‘consumer’

or ‘audience’, makes up the majority of society. Skilled communicators use artistic techniques to

their benefit, while sourcing information for the public. Finally, the artist can speak to the public

very similarly as the communicator, but utilizes symbols and ‘speaks’ to the larger society’s

emotions. By these means, artists run the risk of their message being misconstrued, or missed

entirely.

“We are told about the world before we see it. We imagine most things before we

experience them,”1 is what the viewer perceives to be real; however, this doesn’t align or

permanent within society. For example, the social set of sexuality and race classification are

presently in the throes of change, and, as a result, impacting individuals’ understanding and

perception of the world around them. Social laws, on the other hand, are more of moral and

ethical codes that members of society are to follow and enforce. Saying something such as

“gravity is real” can be considered a social law because there is evidence supporting the

perception. Regardless of these semblance of unity, what the viewer believes comes down to

(more often than not) what they perceive, which in turn impacts the circulation. Mr. Chester,

who Lippman refers to in Public Opinion, notes an interesting point about the viewer in a 1 Walter Lippman, Public Opinion, Dover Edition (2004), 49.

3

modern society: the viewer “is intrinsically insecure because it is based on the notion that all men

will do the same thing for different reasons.”2

A communicator is the term for a representative who enacts the action of communication.

They act as observers and speakers. However, what are they communicating? They speak to an

idea, to inform the public, and of the truth. In the mass media realm, the communicator can take

on multiples forms, and thus allowing to be in several corners of society. For example,

journalists, reporters, film directors, photographers, and advertisers are all specializations of the

communicator. Each of these roles compose what the viewer understands to be media. This in

turn permits the viewers to welcome the communicator into their living rooms and to talk

directly to them of varying interests. As Price, a manager of Nixon’s campaign said, “It’s not

what’s there that counts, it’s what’s projected-- and carrying it one step further...It’s not the man

we have to change, but rather the received impression.”3 For the sake of this paper, the focus will

be retained on the journalist and the advertiser as our main communicators.

Finally, the artist plays a unique role in this equation because they are very similar to the

communicator, yet at times can play the role of the viewer. Their perception stems from the

role’s innate ability to remain outside the realm of the viewer and communicator, while still

demonstrating criticism and commenting on the affairs of society. All through history we can

track such works, but at the turning point of change and technological development, the artist

begins to step out from under the commissioner’s weight. “The serious artist is the only person

able to encounter technology with impunity, just because he is an expert aware of the changes in

2 Ibid., 12. 3 Joe McGinnis, The Selling of the President: The classic account of the packaging of a candidate, (Penguin Group, 1988), 37.

4

sense perception.”4 Modern to Contemporary artists such as Jasper Johns, Warhol, Picasso, and

Cindy Sherman take a new role as artist in society: critics. The artist is similar to the

communicator, but they play a role as the critic of society as well. They see things as both

communicator and viewer, merging two insights to create a greater concept. They can also pass

judgements or issue opinions like a court judge (concepts being the wrongs of society or the

stereotypes). Present artistic notions presented have come about in more recent times with the

beginnings of Fauvism into what we consider to be Contemporary Art. Prior to these Modern and

Postmodern movements, artists were commissioned to document the world around them in

service of monarchies, religious authority, or families of wealth.

The dialog occurring between them is abstract, and composed of the pre, present, and

post interactions that occur either simultaneously or independently between people.

“Communication can be seen as an integral part of a culture and consciousness, as well as a tool

of human activity...”5 We are exposed to it every day in many forms, and with the recent

developments in technology (eg.: social media), this has become even more complex. Each

create their versions of reality via shared or individual perceptions that go into a grander

composition. This includes informing, commenting, criticism, and reaction/expression.

Analytically speaking, this is when the roles of society can intermingle as each tries to define and

create a specific version of a definition or statement. Each member of the roles stated have

responsibilities to uphold to the other. When there is a gap or shift in the communication process,

it can shift the whole tone of the dialog. Such shifts can be tracked through the overall evolution

of mass communications via the viewer’s trust in the media. Through outlets like the media,

society is, in some degree, enriched through the circulating of ideas and opinions. Since the 4 Marshall McLahun, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, (Gingko Press, 2003), 31. 5 Denis McQuail, Sociology of Mass Communication, (Annual Reviews, 1985). 95.

5

viewer has the ability to comment back to the communicator. The most important commonality

between all three is that they cannot operate without the other.

The Viewer:

To start a conversation, one must have a thought or a desire that leads to a motivation to

communicate. A child from an early age understands this as they cry not yet knowing how to

speak. Gradually over time, through experience and observation, they learn how to start the

dialog with a word. The words form into statements and their role can evolve, they take part in

constructing and defining of the society they will live in.

McLuhan wrote, “The whole of society, so to speak, is founded upon a single fact;

everything springs from a simple principle.”6 This single principle that everything springs from

is the anchoring point to what is real. Real, by its dictionary definition, is something that actually

exists as a thing or occurring in fact, not imagination or supposed. For example, a vast majority

agrees gravity is real due to the scientific evidence and its constant presence in daily life. The

statement of gravity’s weighted existence, therefore, becomes the single hinging principle

society understands. It becomes the kind of statement that the lowest denominator of a group can

understand. Everything else seems to follow. If it were so simple to define reality, why can’t

everyone seem to absolutely agree on what society should be like?

The answer rests along the thin, complex line metaphorically drawn between everyone:

perception, “The web changes the dialog where factual content, opinion, and conversations often

can’t be clearly separated.”7 Anyone can construct a version of reality. It is also a factor of life in

which everyone can create, refute, and play into. A known fact of the communication realm is

that everyone forms their own opinions and understandings of the world since birth. Societally- 6 McLuhan, Understanding Media, 26. 7 Manovich, The Practice of Everyday (media) Life: From Mass Consumption to Mass Cultural Production, 326.

6

speaking, the larger population accepts various definitions of what is real because overarching

beliefs, systems, and stereotypes. “The subtlest and most pervasive of all influences are those

which create and maintain the repertoire of stereotypes. We are told about the world before we

see it. We imagine most things before we experience them,”8 theorist Walter Lippman said.

Some of the viewer’s mindset and perception comes from childhood into adulthood lessons, such

as economic class, race, upbringing, and gender. The difference formed between people allow

for opposing views to grow creating a diverse public. Each individual adds a layer, and each

layer may blend or clash. This ability to construct not only encourages miscommunication, but

also makes the viewer important to the cycle.

The viewer plays a complex role into the circulation of communication. They serve as the

backbone of the societal cycle because they want something, whether it is information, product,

or validation. The viewer additionally plays the commentator in which they talk back to the

communicator and artist. This feedback generates criticism and tension that leads to a spectrum

from gradual to stark shifts within the cycle. The vierwer’s focus remains on their wants and

needs, which in turn the communicator and artist feed into. As an illustration of the cycle. the

journalist eagerly hunts down a story to provide to their readers, searching and observing the

happening of the world. When they have a story, they write it up for diverse reasons, chief

amongst them informing, entertainment, and promotion. Depending on the journalist and their

editor, the particular stories written may have an agenda or is tailored to a certain audience e.g.

liberal or conservative, which is ethically questionable. To clarify, the act of setting an agenda

loses a degree of objectivity required by the journalist to uphold, such as CNN and FoxNews.

Following the understanding of communication and consumption, there is the matter of

the audience to address; who is viewing, why they are viewing, and how it might impact them. 8 Lippman, Public Opinion, 49.

7

The journalist, as discussed, provides information and fact. This particular exchange often occurs

simultaneously. As the journalist writes, the viewer consumes, reacts, and searches for more. The

information consumed almost immediately begins to be integrated into their perception of

reality. Now if the message is tailored to fit their views the viewer loses a window chance of

being well-informed. Flip side the viewer finds validation and more subtle content of information

through the pieces an artist creates. In particular, validation comes from the unique experience of

when the viewer connects with a piece, and it evokes some emotional response.

Technological advances take it one step further: the viewer can become the

communicator. This breaking of boundaries is often called citizen journalism, or blogging.

Seeing that social media outlets allow the viewer to comment, and 24-hour news saturates

society, it can change tones of how the public addresses an issue and what issues should hold

their focus. While the viewer is looking to be informed or entertained in terms of formal

journalism, there needs to exist a line between information and entertainment. This line has

become steadily blurred as viewers become overwhelmed, and the news industries are looking

for the sensual “if it bleeds it reads” kind of content. Thus, the dialog evolves to become more of

a circular exchange than a one-way track, “We must stop talking to Americans as special interest

groups and start talking to special interest groups as Americans.”9 As the viewer is impacted by

technology, the communicator utilizes it. The medium becomes secondary despite the effects it

can have on the message. Social Media and citizen journalism have allowed for the circulation to

shift to more of a push and pull between the viewer and the communicator, “…if in the 1990s the

web was mostly a publishing medium, in the 200s it has increasingly become a communication

9 McGinniss, The Selling of the President, 143.

8

medium.”10 On one hand, templates like social media are beneficial to the communicator in

understanding what the public wants more clearly. On the other hand, it breaches into the role of

the communicator, changing the relation between the two, and creates tension.

In the contemporary cycle, the viewer has become somewhat detached. This could be a

result of information being readily available and overwhelming; as a result, a tension develops.

This tension exists as both abstract and physical as it is formed through the interaction between

the viewer, the communicator, and the artist. The strongest point of this tension in the realm of

the viewer comes from the development of pseudo-environments to the extent that (in theory)

they are hunting and consuming news that only fits to said environment. Any information

contrasting the viewers’ beliefs and perception become lies or questionably fabricated in the

extremes. In some way or another reality can almost be completely personalized, and the theory

of the pseudo-environment becomes the norm. As Daniel Boorstin was quoted saying, “We have

become so accustomed to our illusions that we mistake them for reality. We demand them.”11

This becomes an issue because theoretically speaking it means no one is truly informed, and

journalism loses its objectivity. Then the viewer is not at fault, but the media, to a degree, feeds

into this, “...as an enemy of active intellectual endeavor but that the media, while they may not

actually be the message, inevitably reshapes content to fit a form that subordinates both the

spoken and the written word to visual images.”12 By doing so, there can be a literal verbal

change in communication that affects the mindset and effort of all parties involved. Susan

Jacoby’s example is the political use of “folks”. In mass media, the viewer does (or can) lose

their individuality, both in a willing sense (being united), or unknowingly because they’re of this

10 Lev Manovich, The Practice of Everyday (media) Life: From Mass Consumption to Mass Cultural Production, (…), 320. 11 McGinniss, The Selling of the President, 27. 12 Susan Jacoby, The Age of American Unreason, (Pantheon Books, New York 2008). 11.

9

struggle for inclusion and personal environment. Consider Donald Trump’s campaign and his

primary slogan, “Make America Great Again”. It is simple and direct. More importantly, it is

abstract enough that everyone can put their beliefs into it and say that is what it means to be

great. The dilemma in using this phrase is not because the term is too common, but the setting in

which it is being used. Saying “folks” in a political setting potentially takes away the

individuality of the people, therefore, importance of the groups and diversity that make up the

society. She even goes on to write, “political speech is always ahead of the curve, especially

because today’s media possess the power to amplify and spread error with an efficiency.”13

Since the 60’s, the relation between the viewer and the communicator have been in a

constant state of tension and shifts. Tension marks the interaction and exchange between the two,

and the shift marks a change in behavior and tone. For example, the introduction of investigative

journalism during Watergate was a shift, while the events of 9/11 was another. One shifted the

tone to trusting the media, and the other lost the same trust. Here is the weighted point: if the

dialog shifts, who is media talking to and what are they saying?

The Communicator:

The basic purpose of the communicators is to inform. They are capable of moving in and

out of the pseudo-environment. The communicator, therefore, develops the skill set to analyze

and observe society through different events and the people presenting them. A communicator

can be the journalist, new anchors, advertisers, film makers, photographers, and PR

representatives of campaigns and groups. Each role fulfills the goal to inform in different, and to

uphold some element of honesty or truth. Where the journalist hunts for their story, the advertiser

observes to better know how to sell to their audience. Although an advertiser may seem to spin

the truth by being dramatic or theatrical; however, by law they are required to not sell false 13 Jacoby, The Age of Unreason, 6.

10

advertisement or skew their numbers. A film maker may work purely in fiction or the opposite in

documentaries, but this is known beforehand. While the journalist is tasked to inform the public

through an objectivity, transparent lenses in which there is no fabrication. The communicator, as

listed, is the verb. They are ones who are talking or pushing an idea or story forward into the

public. At the same time, they are interacting with the public by observing, talking, recording,

and capturing the various facets of the community or nation they live in. It is then the medium

that becomes their conduit to reach a larger public. This is called mass media, “Communication

can be seen as an integral part of a culture and consciousness, as well as a tool of human

activity.”14

The realm of mass media is comprised of various platforms enabling an expansive means

to communicate. Each form, known as “the medium”, has an impact to how, when, and where

the message is perceived. The evolution of mass media starts with the printing press, a

revolutionary way to spread words, and continues with the internet, a complex void of code

shooting across the world. Falling in-between is television, radio, movies, and social media, but

no medium lacks the ability to hold weight or impact, “If the TV tube fires the right ammunition

at the right people, it is good.”15 This marks the physical evolution of mass media; however,

there is a more tactical layer of mass media. This raises question that many mass communication

theorist have asked: what impact does media have on society? If media, and therefore the

communicator, are only to inform then they have selective impact based on how the viewer is

consuming them. It allows the power to be in the hands of viewer, and the communicator is

plainly answering to their desires and need for information. The counter to this seemingly neutral

stance is that the media prioritizes what the public should care about. This is known as agenda

14 McQuail, Sociology of Mass Communication, 97. 15 McLuhan, Understand Media: The Extensions of Man, 23.

11

setting. Theorists Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw called this “agenda setting” in 1972.

Assuming that in our 24-hour news cycle and constant bombardment of commercials permits this

theory to be of some truth, “does this mean that people’s identities and imaginations are now

even more firmly colonized by commercial media?”16 To a degree, mass media does have this

range of impact, especially in the field of advertisement and fashion. However, the theory also

removes the viewer’s influence. Therefore, what must first be established is the amount of

influence the communicator has over the public. The communicator has a fair amount of

influence because they are one of the sources for the viewer to see, hear, and understand the

world around them; which is accomplished through the various stories told on different

mediums.

Communication does not stop at the viewer, or the moment it has left the hands of

communicator. What follows the publication of a story or an idea is a cycle of the information

that steadily changes or halts entirely. In a way, communication operates as one big game of

telephone. The journalist goes out to get the story, picks up quotations, write, and passes it on to

the editor. They then edit it, send it back, read it again, and when it fits, they publish the account.

Then it goes to the reader (or the consumer) who reads, shares, and adds comments to it. Given

the platforms modern society has now (such as social media), this cycle can occur quicker and at

a cost of objectivity: how does the communicator keep up with a society moving a mile a minute

where the viewer can more easily disagree, ignore, and construct their reality? Basically, how

does mass media evolve to fit the demands of a technological advance society?

Ethically, a journalist’s responsibility is to document and inform the public of events and

facts that allow them to form an opinion of their own. This makes communicators and mass

16 Manovich, The Practice of Everyday (media) Life: From Mass Consumption to Mass Cultural Production, 321.

12

media not inherently evil. The journalist’s produces the truth through their stories and quotations.

However, if the journalist is bias they compromise this ethical responsibility and the viewer is no

longer properly informed. The issue with this is not only the lack of an informed public in

which, “Our democracy is based upon the concept of an enlightened and informed public”17 but

the dialog between the two becomes sensualized and the tone changes entirely. Seeing as the

communicator, such as the reporter or director, can have influence over someone’s environment

and upbringing because of how accessible they are and the terminology communicate with

already-present stereotypes or opinions can be reaffirmed, “mass media are examined not so

much as definers of “reality”, but as dynamic sites of struggle over representation, and complex

spaces in which subjectivities are constructed and identities are contested.”18 So if the dialog

becomes more sensual and the tone more paranoid the stereotypes can emphasized despite the

chance of them being wrong. For example, the issue of terrorism and the association of the word

with a large group people; or a race being poor or slotted as inclined to destruction. Both are

incorrect, or at the least lack proper coverage and through investigation. To some degree,

scholars such as Susan Jacoby believe this to be a decline in the media’s integrity, and in

intelligence being produced and shared in society, “as an enemy of active intellectual endeavor

but that the media, while they may not actually be the message, inevitably reshape content to fit a

form that subordinates both the spoken and the written word to visual images.”19

Through this growth and change in tactics and tone comes tension. It began in the 60’s,

with the coverage of Civil Rights, and continued with President Nixon’s campaign and election.

The time of the Civil Rights movement spurred a lot of unrest across the nation. Something

17 Nugent Wedding, Advertising, Mass Communication, and Tax Deduction, (Journal of Marketing, Vol. 24, No. 4, 1960), 22. 18 Debra Spitulnik, Anthropology and Mass Media (Annual Reviews, 1993), 296. 19 Jacoby, The Age of Unreason, 11.

13

media could not ignore as they quickly latched onto the big events hitting the front page, like in

the southern cities of Birmingham, Ala. and Jackson, Miss. There are records of several images

documenting the strife, but it would not so much be the written word that promoted coverage, but

television. Broadcasting would be the instrument to allow the movement to reach beyond the

South, and expand into different groups that normally may have not heard it soon enough. As

such it is hard to say that the media failed to properly push the issues of the Civil Rights

Movement because the notes of failed coverage are subtle. Instead the attention was refocused

onto the growing conflict of the Vietnam war. The media did not engineer this shift of focus, but

were following what the leaders, Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcom X, were beginning to talk

about. Their discussion turned towards the disportionate amount of black men in service over

sea, and this allowed the topics of Civil Rights at home to gradually plateau. As a result the

plateau of mass media and the cycle gradually begin to center their attention more towards

sensual coverage and entertainment because everyone is over-saturated and tired of violence,

“Conventional journalism could no more reveal this war than conventional firepower could win

it.”20 A side effect to the plateau consequently leads to the lack of information the public finds

themselves rediscovering, in such as imperfect coverage of the statistical differences between

blacks and whites, the disproportionate amount of convicts in accordance to race, police brutality

in accordance to race, and just more human interest stories.

The campaign managers for Nixon were able to “sell” an unlikely candidate enough to

make him seem likable, “a genesis. We’re moving into a period where a man is going to be

merchandised on television more and more.”21 They were aware of how television was impacting

the public, and how to compose a shot and staging of the audience without absolutely

20 Marc Weingarten, The Gang Who Couldn’t Write Straight, (Crown, 2005), 163. 21 McGinniss, The Selling of the President, 115.

14

compromising media integrity. This marked a turning point for political campaigns and the way

media could project its subjects. Underlining this moment was the Vietnam War and Civil Rights

Movement that were stirring tension and energy, and mass media was therefore flourishing with

it. Out of this comes investigative journalism led by Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein,

photojournalism showing the human and horrific sides of war and protest, laws changing to

protect freedom of expression and other rights, and new journalism led by Wolfe, Thompson,

Didion, and Capote challenging the traditional forms of journalism to be more for the experience

and humanity of society. All of this led to, “Entertainment rather than information is the aim of

its producers, and the hope of its consumers.”22

With so much change happening, media platforms had to change their tactics and

language in which they spoke to the viewer and artist. As a result, the change has been a steady

shift away from objectivity to subjectivity. The majority of journalists are too focused on the

sensual or a particular viewpoint (or outcome) in which they lack the investigative drive to

explore both sides. Instead, media is focusing on the emotions, knee-jerk reactions, and

(presently) riots. The journalism by Woodward and Bernstein, documentations of the war by

photographers and new journalists would reestablish faith from the public into the media,

striking a balance between the two. The transition to please the viewer grows with the evolution

of mass media incorporating social media and the internet. The internet opens new gateways of

communication that is not only quicker, but universal. Then there was another tipping point: the

crisis of 9/11. Media and the audience became driven by subjectivity and emotions, which in turn

led to the collapse of faith in the media by journalists like Judith Miller. Violence rises with the

abstract concept of terrorism only paralleled by communism, and social injustices begin to

resurface. 22 Weingarten, The Gang Who Couldn’t Write Straight, 5.

15

An ironic note to observe is entertainers such as John Oliver or Steven Colbert are more

informed, or are attempting to inform the public more than your traditional journalist. That is to

say the traditional communicators, in theory, are so focused on pleasing their “chosen audiences”

that they forget to fulfill certain requirements. Entertainers of late hour new shows seemingly

have more freedom. They are not required to adhere to the same guidelines as the reporter

necessarily that effectively de-legitimizes them as factual news sources, thereby giving them the

freedom to spin the facts more creatively, “Style becomes substance. The medium is the massage

and the masseur gets the votes.”23 There are a lot of effects with no solutions.

The Artist:

The intriguing factor of art comes from how universal and paradoxical the medium can

be. The practice is purely a composition of experiences, cultural, expression, personal

perception, and the audience’s perception; and yet art retains this credibility that the

communicator can never have. To a degree, this credibility was established through the roots art

has dug into society since the beginning of mankind. Art has been around since the beginning, as

depicted in the cave paintings, and since then are to be commission-based. As a medium and

practice it has often been a method of documentation, promotion, and expression, “To sum up,

pictographic and hieroglyphic writing as used in Babylonian, Mayan, and Chinese cultures

represents an extension of the visual sense for storing and expediting access to human

experience.”24 As the mass media has evolved, art has also changed over the years. Such a

statement appears to be apparent given the collection of art movements there have been.

Although this is true, the main change has been accessibility. Art has been a luxury for royals,

patrons, and the upper class as a mark of sophistication and intelligence. It was credible under

23 McGinniss, The Selling of the President, 30. 24 McLuhan, Understanding the Media, 124.

16

the title of Fine Arts (with a capital “A”). For the purpose of this paper, Fine Arts defines the

more traditional forms of art, such as the Renaissance, Impressionist, etc. A section of the art

world that filters out artist with their requirements and demand for great skill 25 , and such a

judge of work and maker comes down to a matter of perception. Furthermore, when referring to

mass art, it includes art mass-produced and works of the Modern and Postmodern Art Era. With

all this said, it would be the dawn of the internet that permitted art to become more accessible,

“By contrast, American Pop’s contemporaneous merging of elite and mass culture.”26

Technology that expanded the realm of mass media and changed the tone of the communicator

allowed the social critic to become more noticeable. Therefore, artists play a critical role in the

contemporary cycle as the social critic.

The artist, as previously mentioned, provides an outlet and view the viewer may not be

accustomed to that will result in a reaction. Similar to the communicator, one of the tasks of the

artist is to communicate an idea or a story. They also have an awareness to the events and people

of society as the communicator does. How is the artist different from the communicator? Artists

see both the viewer and the communicator, and have more room as to what techniques and

subjects they will cover. The artist can be more bias than the journalist is permitted to be. As

Wyndham Lewis said, “The artists is always engaged in writing a detailed history of the future

because he is the only person aware of the nature of the present.”27 They can be more drastic and

crude, or more graceful and humorous. Through these lenses, the artist presents a mirroring

image to what is real with subtle (or not so subtle) differences.

25 This is also an inclusionary term because someone with great skill may still be considered a mass artist. 26 David Hopkins, After Modern Art: 1945-2000 (Oxford University Press, New York, 2000). 110. 27 McLuhan, Understanding the Media, 96.

17

“Since the 1950s art has moved steadily away from abstraction toward representation.”28

This begins to explain the move from Fine Arts demands to Contemporary Art.29 Representation

in a modern society (needless to say) is expansive, each group demanding some form of

recognition or attention. As a result, the art encompasses the subject matter in which they are

capturing and brings in the viewer. “In many works of art, the artists conveys a theme by

investing a subject with emotional significance or implying a moral value.”30 The artist and their

work begin to set a new tone in which art is representing people: the act of being active. As

previously mentioned, art has always been the critic and historian of the same coin, and yet in

Contemporary art, the artist and their work are more notably present in the cycle as critics. The

use of many different styles reflects the globalization of culture and overwhelming amount of

information available. So, rather than developing a new style, artists are reacting to the old ones

that the Information Age has brought back. For instance, Contemporary artists are developing

their own styles through responding to the technological changes, and mimicking styles from

several previous art movements, “...artists are opting to appropriate or recycle existing images

rather than compose their own.”31 Through the use of modern day technology, art was able to

move away from painting to installations, mass production, LED lights, and television. Their

voice becomes more integrated into how the public is speaking and absorbing their content.

As mass media developed, art became an influence by art. Advertisers realized what techniques

they could use that have been present in artistic compositions for centuries. In a sense, they

became more aware to aesthetics of the viewer, or the particular focus group they are appealing

28 Marc H. Miller, Television’s Impact of Contemporary Art, (Aperture Foundation Inc., Princeton University Art Museum, 1987), 67. 29 To clarify, Fine Arts is still a level and practice within the art world, but for this paper the focus resides on the work of Contemporary artist, whose works are often categorized under themes. 30 Christiane Weidemann, Petra Larass, Meanie Klier, 50 Women Artists: You Should Know, (Prestel Publishing, New York 2008), 3. 31 Miller, Television’s Impact of Contemporary Art, 68.

18

to, in addition to social issues or trends that might push their product forward. This form of the

communicator gained an attention to value; “Reason pushes the viewer back, it assaults him, it

demands that he agree or disagree, impression can envelop him, invite him in without making an

intellectual demand.”32 Therefore, a large connection between the artist and the communicator

tends to run through the exchanging of stylistic forms of communication between the two

practices. So while the communicator borrows from the artist, the artist in turn is aware of the

techniques of the communicator. Such a notion remains consistently noted in the use of

technology, stereotypes, social-political narratives, and the use of text. Language that has been

physically spelled out rather than merely depicted has developed into a trend in contemporary

works of art. In some instances, artists directly borrow for ads, such as Barbara Kruger’s I Shop,

therefore I am (Fig. 1). For some others the use of those kinds of techniques, specifically text, is

used as a backdrop to emphasize or clarify the narrative. Therefore, the art gains another layer of

complexity juxtaposed with simplicity that would be demonstrated by consumption. The viewer

can understand words more quickly than a visual depiction, while the image is rich in symbols

and cues to only magnify the narrative further. In some ways the message becomes more direct

and yet in others it becomes more complex.

Contemporary artist Jenny Holzer is another primary example to employing the use of

text as her primary style. The words she uses are formed in short sentences that are projected

onto surfaces (usually buildings), and they scroll by. In other exhibits, she shows the lines in

strips of LED lighting following a narrow screen around the room or on the ceiling. The lines of

text are often poetic, comprising into a message line by line. The visual effect of the words

scrolling by creates a moving narrative that shows how a story or concept can be lasting but

never permeant. Time affects everything including our own words, which have the reputation of 32 McGinniss, The Selling of the President, 38.

19

being solid and everlasting (Fig. 2). Although the physical words do not linger, the message and

stereotypes do. Holzer said in regards to her work, “I like my pieces to be very short, and other

times I want them to be sustained.”33 Additionally, this act of flow challenges our understanding

or perception of language. That language, especially the written word, stands to be one of our

main forms of communication; however, how the message is read and understood depends on the

viewer. The viewer’s own background, experiences, education, and so forth affect how much of

an impact the lines might have. As a result, the piece become dynamic and interactive beyond its

movement. Holzer’s work called “Inflammatory Essays” (Fig. 3) displays this dynamic. In an

episode of PBS’s Art 21 she says, “I want people to focus on the content of the writing, and not

who wrote it.” Holzer has been exhibited all around the world with pieces in New York to

Berlin.

American painter Kehinde Wiley, another contemporary artist, creates work that speaks

to the complexities of identity and representation. His work are large scale oil paintings done in

the old European style that royal patrons would have done for their own portraits, with flat print

juxtaposed over the composition, like the Fleur-de-lis. They are rich in color showing hyper-

realistic renderings of his subjects. In this case, it is the subject that produces the most interest.

His models are members of the African American community captured in modern day clothing,

which contrasts the traditional, Renaissance-like posing. Looking at Prince Tommaso Francesco

of Savoy-Carignano (Fig. 4), the viewer is confronted with a stoic figure upon a majestic white

horse, overlaid (like Napoleon or a prince of Venice) with an elegant gold design. The

representation and posing as strength, success and power has been a privilege saved for the white

male throughout history. Wiley’s work changes the dialog and presents the black community in

strength, giving a glimpse into their lives. The privileged view being only white and male has 33 PBS “Art 21”

20

been an issue for centuries, still saturating our media with the use of stereotypes and what lenses

the communicator chooses, “...the insertions of black men into the world of aristocratic portrait

serve to unmask the Eurocentrism and class privilege.”34 Wiley comments on this through his

series News Republic. Additionally, the positioning of the figure comments and bluntly addresses

the definition of masculinity presented in fashion and posing that the viewer is accustomed to..

While in other works where women are his models, Shantavia Beale II (Fig. 5) illustrates them in

beauty and grace, but also mystery.

In either case, these two artists speak to or critique a piece of society. Sometimes media

fails to properly address these pieces, but it also permits a group to be included or represented.

Art has constantly played the role to counterbalance the communicator critic, and presently, art’s

ability as the social critic becomes more apparent, “the creative artist himself may be a valuable

focus for the study of social and cultural change because he is often remarkably sensitive to

tensions in the social order.”35 The artist takes the dialog and tools of the contemporary media to

formulate a message the people may be more accustomed to. This plays a dual role within the

work, such as Holzer. By using LED lights, she is not only incorporating modern day

technology, but is also making the message clear and crisp for the viewer to perceive. There are

no hidden layers or meanings aside from how the viewer interprets it and the site. On the other

hand, the artist revives old techniques that break the everyday consumption of media and visual

images by bringing forth something old and new at the same time. Wiley presents this with his

work using old techniques to raise issues or concepts society has worked with for centuries. Both

are reaching out to the viewer to communicate or relate to, and also to inspire thought. Art has a

34 Jean Robertson, Craig McDaniel, Themes of contemporary art: third edition: visual art after 1980, (Oxford University Press, New York 2013), 57. 35 J.W Getzels, M. Csikszentmihalyi, On the Roles, Values, and Performance of Future Artists: A Conceptual and Empirical Exploration, 516.

21

unique quality to evoke thought and emotion, allowing it to be a conduit for beliefs and ideas,

“The human mind is endlessly and persistently creative. The pictures fade or combine, are

sharpened here, condensed there, as we make them more completely our own.”36 It’s a dynamic

that only the artist has seemed to master.

Methodology:

News, images, comments, social media, and art saturate every corner of daily life. The

news well-established as 24/7 broadcasting, reports on the incidents ranging from community to

the presidential election. Social media outlets, like Facebook, host information and opinions. All

the while artists are making pieces criticizing or representing what they see. There comes a point

where one has to wonder about how it all connects. This paper has answered this question

through the analysis of three roles within the circulation of communication in a media-rich

society. In order to understand the cycle of contemporary communication, the researcher must

step outside the roles as both the communicator and viewer. To be able to observe all the pieces

and tones of speech occurring, there must be an unbiased view, and incorporation of all factors.

Furthermore, the cycle being discussed works as one unit that dictates that all three roles cannot

function without the other. The viewer, communicator, and artist are wide-ranging positions in

which this paper has exhibited a glimpse into.

For this particular research paper, content analysis of mass communication theories and a

brief survey was taken. The primary theorists chosen were Walter Lippman, Marshall McLuhan,

and Susan Jacoby; however, other scholarly articles were analyzed as to create a more well-

rounded view. The questions they raise are: what effect does media have? Who are the parts? If

there is a circulation, how does it flow? What impact do they have on each other? By reading

books like Understanding Media, Public Opinion, Selling of the President, After Modern Art: 36 Lippman, Public Opinion, 87.

22

1945-2000, Anthropology and Mass Media, etc. there develops a theme. As result, there is a path

that can be tracked and mapped out, especially if the researcher remains aware to current events.

The unique quality of this topic is how current it is. As this paper is being written and read,

events of contemporary life keep circulating, in turn providing more data and trends to track.

During the same time period of content analysis, the survey was sent through different

social media sites, such as Facebook and Tumblr, for an anonymous pool. Through these sites

the survey was shared by the various members. There were only five questions on the survey

pertaining to the effects and trust in the media, and the role of the artists. The survey was created

through SurveyMonkey on October 26, 2016 and then shared on the same day. 67 participants

were documented with the last response on November 1, 2016. Hosting the survey in these social

media sites permitted a less exclusive audience due to the nature of the topic.

The questions from the survey contained the following:

1. Does the media impact your personal environment?

2. How much of an impact do you think media has on society?

3. Is the communicator an artist, and the artist a communicator?

4. Who speaks more truth: the journalist or the artist?

5. Which one do you value more: news or art?

Results:

As research progressed the circulation of media and information began to show a trend

that I have called “the tension”. This “tension” describes the steady changes within the media

since the 60’s. In the discussion of the communicator I mentioned it began with the Civil Rights

movement into Nixon’s election.

23

The Civil Rights movement in relation to the field of communication changed how a

movement might be seen and heard. This was done by broadcasting the speeches and protests to

every member of society with a television, in addition to the newspapers picking up headlines.

Art also steps into the circulation by documenting the events as publications in photojournalism,

“What do these people see? We don’t know. And it doesn’t matter. It is an Event: something

worth seeing-- and therefore worth photographing,”37 and activist artists. To further the cause

(and an example of the viewer becoming a communicator) leaders, like Martin Luther King Jr.,

began styling their speeches for broadcasting. Communicators, such as journalists, gradually

changed focus as the leaders of the movement pointed to another topic: the Vietnam War. This

redirection marks another moment of time when the viewer stepped up into the realm of the

communicator and the tone of the circulation shifted.

Following this would be Nixon’s election, and eventually, the Watergate scandal.

Nixon’s campaign strategy arguably changed the field of political campaigning. This was done

from their use of television, “He’ll be talking to the camera, not to Bud. He wants to go into the

living room.”38 There was an art and intentional timing as they made an unlikable candidate

likable. They knew how to use media as a tool until Woodward and Bernstein began asking

questions that led to them pursuing the story of the Watergate Scandal. These articles showed

another side of journalism bringing the ethical value for truth to the forefront once more.

Additionally, the styles of New Journalism bloomed forth, giving the public a stronger taste of

the experience and emotional facets of life. This kind of journalism would slowly bleed into

media as a whole as the communicator would try to keep up with the demands of their viewers.

Gradually news stories became more sensualized, and the viewer became more critical in

37 Susan Sontag, On Photography, (Picador, New York 1977), 11. 38 McGinniss, Selling of the President, 153.

24

consuming what fit their environment. It would not be until the crisis of 9/11 and declaration of

war that the tempo and tone changed. The nation was shaken by the events, and people

demanded answers that, at the time, the media may have not yet had; regardless, the tone

changes and the “tension” begins to climb. The viewer loses some of their faith in journalism due

to a failure to check their sources or spinning the truth, and the pseudo-environment becomes

more defined. All throughout Modern and Postmodern eras, artists step forward with pieces

mocking consumerism, noting the unresolved inequality, and asking what it means to be human.

Since then, there have been subtle evidence to this “tension” further building as the

environment contemporary societal members interact with or create. The effects of media and art

seem so obvious, but unfolding the results to a grander picture that we have drawn a path to

shows more complex routes.

The results of the survey are as followed:

1. Does the media impact your personal environment?

a. Yes: 59.70%

b. No: 5.97%

c. Some: 34.33%

2. How much of an impact do you think media has on society?

a. A lot: 85.07%

b. Relative: 13.43%

c. Very Little: 1.49%

3. Is the communicator an artist, and the artist a communicator?

a. Yes: 44.78%

b. No: 0.00%

25

c. Depends on the circumstances: 55.22%

4. Who speaks more truth: the journalist or the artist?

a. The journalist: 25.37%

b. The artist: 74.63%

5. Which one do you value more: news or art?

a. Art: 85.07%

b. News: 14.93%

Discussion:

Based on these results, there are two immediate points of interest that surface. First, there

is the percentage that believe media has a high impact on society because it illustrates the

viewer’s awareness to the impact as a whole. Yet there is lesser belief that media can have an

influence on the viewer’s own personal environment. In theory, this could be for various reasons,

like media literacy and/or the more precise ability to construct one’s pseudo-environment. If the

viewer is tailoring most everything to fit their view, then it can be assumed that the media would

have less of an impact because it is no longer challenging them or swaying them a different way.

Even though about 59% participants said “yes” and 34% said “some” to the effects of media on

their own environment, there stands an awkward gap between society as a whole and the viewer.

What stood out the most in the results was the difference in trust between the artist and

the journalist. The artist was calculated at 74.63% and the journalist at 25.37%. This contrast

supports the theory that members of society have lost their trust in contemporary media, as noted

after the events of 9/11. Granted, that is one reason for the distrust, but it has been 15 years since

the crisis, which gives rise to other factors to consider. For example, would the tailoring of news

into bias views (eg: Liberal and Conservative) and more fractured, sensualized presentation

26

cause viewers to trust the news less? To a degree, yes if the communicator is biased then they

jeopardize their responsibility to present the truth, which in turn creates a less informed public.

Furthermore, during a time of awareness, along with oversaturation, the public becomes more

critical in what they are hearing, and develops a distaste in the media’s presentation or lack

thereof. A contemporary example of this would be the Standing Rock pipeline protest by the

Native Americans. Then in addition to artists becoming more accessible and apparent in their

stances and belief, the viewer may gain some understanding and validation from the works they

produce. Playing the role of the societal critic or the entertainer grants the artist a degree of

expressive freedom and room to discuss issues media may not cover, or fail to do so.

All of this data, theories, and observations of contemporary media does not come to a

conclusion, but rather a need for awareness to the cycle. As repetitively mentioned, what is

presently happening is a steady growing of tension which is, in theory, leading to another tipping

point. Something that will change the tone and dialog of the public once more. It cannot be

stressed enough that this is where contemporary society has found itself. With the growing

conflicts in regards to gender and racial equality, legal protests, police brutality, and so forth,

there is a demand for choosing sides, resulting in a rise of “Us against Them” as a more apparent

concept. This division not only affects the viewer but spreads into the collection of data and

reporting in the media; and as a consequence the existence of unbiased reporting grows thin.

There is a disconnect between the viewer and the communicator in which the viewer demands

proper representation but rather the media does or does not does this demand justice the viewer

perceives falsity in the content. On the other hand, the media is balancing, keeping their viewers

and representing their groups or events of focus. However, this leads into a loss of objectivity

and viewers. It is important to note that not all viewers and media are this way, but the

27

highlighted or “loud” majority are becoming as such. In response to this, the artist steps forth,

attempting to illustrate a cause they believe in or a group they represent, but also a push for a

need to understand. The artist, in a sense, steps up to fill the role that the communicator has left

open while providing some form of validation and relief.

Further tracking and research into the works of these roles in relation to each other and

their impact on the grander picture is recommended. The downside to this approach was the

number of participants were not to the degree as hoped, which encourages a revision of this

angle and the survey to be sent out again.