Blog #9 EOTO 2 KEY POST

 Agenda Setting

The “ability to influence the importance placed on the topics of the public agenda.”
The way the media attempts to influence viewers, and establish a hierarchy of news prevalence. 

Maxwell E. McCombs is an American journalism scholar known for his work on political communication. He is the Jesse H. Jones Centennial Chair in Communication Emeritus at the University of Texas at Austin. He is particularly known for developing the agenda setting theory of mass media with Donald Lewis Shaw. Below is a great interview and description of the agenda setting theory from the very man who created it. 

(Skip to 2:33) 

How Agenda Setting Theory Effects Society as a Whole  

    Agenda setting fits in the Hierarchy of Effects theory, at the knowledge phase. To simplify this idea; any manipulation of media affects what we think, how we feel, and finally, what we do. When the media is able to filter our information in what we think, it eventually effects what we do with that information

Pay attention to the right side; where it says think, do, and feel. A great example of this effect, as it relates to agenda setting in the real world, is whether or not people should wear masks (or be mandated to wear masks). Depending on where you get your information, determined your reaction to the Coronavirus Pandemic. For example, if you watched CNN, or other left-leaning news sources, you probably wore a mask everywhere you went. Why? Because they mongered fear into the people about how deadly and contagious the illness is. Whereas if you watched Fox News, you lived your life as normal, having faith in your bodies’ ability to fight off disease and infection, and not living your life in fear.  

The Good and the Bad

    While it is hard to see the good in the filtering of our media, before we can even consume it, I will try to play devil’s advocate. The good in agenda setting could be that it may save us viewers some time in our media consumption. For the most part, we are given only what’s “important” and “relavent” for that day’s news. We get less silly information, like what baseball team won last night, and more pressing concerns that affect all of us. With that comes some bad though. Who is deciding what we need to know, and are they trustworthy people? Is what is important to them important to us? Do their views rub off into the way they present the information to the people? These are all questions to consider as we think about the pros and cons of agenda setting. Personally, I think it is mostly bad. I want my media raw, tue, unfiltered, and unbiased, so that I can decide for myself. I tend to question authority figures, and in that way I am a bit of a contrarian. With most media today, everything has been touched by someone. This isn’t fair in my eyes, because it allows people of power to influence the public and what they think to be true. 

Media Today Separates the People 

    Do you worries the people in power? The general public agreeing that they are corrupt and change should take place. 333 million people absolutely have the power to create change in government and the mainstream media knows that. How do they combat this? They break up that 300+ million into groups. Separating Americans between two+ groups of people that, for lack of better term, despise the other side(s). As a separated people, we won’t be able to come together to stop the corrupt people in power. This effects every segment of our diverse American population. The rich won’t be fond of the poor and vice versa. Same goes for the old/young, male/female, gay/straight, and the majority/minority. Continue to do your research on agenda setting, and try your best to match articles from multiple news sources, to see the lean each side possesses to influence your opinions.