(Mass) Communication and the distinction between interpersonal and mass communication Steinberg (2007) rightly makes the observation that the term ‘communication’ can be defined from a multiplicity of viewpoint – resulting in, according to Larson (1973) up to 126 different definitions. There is no single approach to the study of communication. Resultantly, definitions differ from the theoretical approach taken. There are TWO broad perceptions of communication in the scientific study of communication: a. The technical view b. The meaning-centred view.

The technical view of communication Concerned with how accurately and efficiently messages can be transferred from one person to the other along a channel (or medium). Focus/emphasis is put on increasing clarity and accuracy in transmission of messages. Therefore, concentrates on improving the tools and techniques that promote efficient communication. At MSU or between friends/family, for example? Communication, thus, viewed as linear – from person A to person B. One can, therefore, summarise the technical definition as “the transmission of messages from one person to another”. Criticism of the technical view Does not pay attention to: i. the complexity of communication (distinguish speaking and communication) ii. human aspect of communication (who, where, context, etc)

Meaning-centred (functional) view Considers communication as a human phenomenon and, crucially, the central aspect of human existence. Focus put on: i. What motivates people to communicate. ii. How they interpret to messages received. iii. What happens between people during interaction. iv. How language is used to create and exchange meaningful messages. Emphasis put on interaction between participants in the communication process. Therefore, defined as “a dynamic process of exchanging meaningful messages” Implications of defining communication as a process 1. Enhances the understanding of its complexity – i.e. It is not a fixed, static thing 2. Rather, it is dynamic in the sense that - it is never-ending and ever-changing, it has no beginning or end it does not follow a fixed/linear sequence of events. 3. entails a continuous evolution and change – we change others and are changed by them during communication.

Mass communication Three connotations of the notion of ‘mass’. Negative Associated with ‘mob’ or ‘unruly’ – perceived as inferior or corruptive. A derogatory view. Positive Associated with strength and solidarity of ordinary people. In this sense mass media construed of as instruments of enlightenment for the people. Neutral and descriptive multiple or mass production of messages large audience sizes reached by the mass media audience consists of an amorphous group whose individual components are difficult to distinguish. NB – Focus put on the last perspective.

Interpersonal and mass communication Interpersonal communication Mass communication a. A face-to-face encounter. b. Usually involves a single source (the communicator) and a single receiver (the recipient) known to one another. c. Purpose is to engage in meaningful exchange of messages. d. Continual provision of feedback. Feedback is immediate giving communication its dynamic nature – allowing participants to exchange roles while negotiating meaning to reach a mutual understanding. a. Mediated exchange involving use of complex technologies to multiply messages and transmit them to large numbers of recipients. b. Communicator not a single individual but a member of a team within an organisation involved in producing and distributing messages. Recipients consist of large audiences. Thus message not personally addressed to a particular individual: public-directed. d. Little or no feedback from audience back to communicator – audience members unable to (freely) use the same medium – restricted access or lack the specialised skills needed Feedback may be delayed and not face-to-face – not all of it is published/entertained. Delayed inferential feedback.