Communication

CommChpater2.pdf

Home >Education homework help >Communication

CHAPTER 2

PAST AND PRESENT

In this chapter, you will learn about: • Communication is one of the oldest yet newest disciplines. • Early Greeks saw communication theory and practice as critical. • The popularity of communication is a mixed blessing. • Communication is an activity, a social science, a liberal art, and a

profession.

ANCIENT ROOTS OF COMMUNICATION STUDY • Rhetoric and Speech • Origins of Communication Th eory: Early Greece

17TH–19TH CENTURIES

JOURNALISM

EARLY 20TH CENTURY: DEVELOPMENT OF SPEECH AND JOURNALISM

COMMUNICATION

24 CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

THE 1940S–1960S: INTERDISCIPLINARITY • Lasswell’s View of Communication • Shannon and Weaver’s Model • Katz and Lazarsfeld’s Model • Westley and MacLean’s Model

THE 1970S–1980S: GROWTH AND SPECIALIZATION

THE LATE 1980’S–2000: THE INFORMATION AGE • Information as a Commodity • Converging Media

THE 21ST CENTURY: COMMUNICATION STUDY TODAY • Ancient and Newly Emergent • Discipline and Interdisciplinary Link • Personal and Professional Applicability • Old and New Technology • Problem and Solution • Practical Skill and Fundamental Life Process

THE EVOLUTION OF THEORY • Communication Theory Today

CONCLUSION

CHECK YOUR KNOWLEDGE

ANCIENT ROOTS OF COMMUNICATION STUDY It is difficult to determine precisely when and how communication first came to be regarded as a significant factor in human life. According to historians, interest in communication and its role in human affairs was expressed prior to the 5th century BCE, in classical Babylonian and Egyptian writings and in Homer’s Iliad. An essay written in about 3000 BCE offers advice on how to speak effectively, while The Precepts, composed in Egypt about 2675 BCE, provides guidance on effective

25CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

communication including the importance of listening as well as speaking the truth. If you are interested in more information about the early history of speech and rhetorical communication, see Harper (1980).

The beginning of systematic theory development in communication can be traced to the Greeks. Their initial interest sprang from the practical concerns of day-to-day life. Greece had a democratic form of government, and virtually all aspects of business, government, law, and education were carried on orally. Greek citizens also had to be their own lawyers. Since lawsuits were common in Athens, effective public speaking was very important.

Rhetoric and Speech What might be considered the first theory of communication was developed in Greece by Corax and later refined by his student Tisias. The theory dealt with courtroom speaking, which was considered a form of persuasion. Tisias was convinced that persuasion could be taught, and he trained teachers of what was called rhetoric. Corax and Tisias developed the concept of message organization, suggesting that a message should have three parts corresponding to contemporary concepts of introduction, body, and conclusion.

The sophists were a group of itinerant teachers in Athens in the 5th century BCE who set up small schools and charged their pupils for tutoring. Protagoras of Abdera (490–420 BCE) taught concepts that are embodied in the modern idea of debate. He taught that a good speaker should be able to argue both sides of a proposition. In addition, he encouraged students to write short messages that did not refer to a particular occasion to be used whenever they were called to speak in public.

Gorgias of Leontini (485–380 BCE), a contemporary of Protagoras, was one of the first teachers to advocate the use of emotional appeals in persuasive speeches. Gorgias was especially concerned about style and the use of appropriate figures of speech.

Isocrates (436–338 BCE), another famous Greek sophist, wrote speeches for others to deliver and was very influential in his time. He is known for his belief that an orator should be trained in the liberal arts and should be a good person.

The writings of two other scholars—Cicero (106–43 BCE) and Quintilian (35–100 CE)—also contributed to the expanding theory of communication at that time. Cicero saw communication as both an academic and a practical matter. His view of communication was so comprehensive that it included all of what is now considered the domain of the social sciences. Quintilian is remembered primarily as a teacher who synthesized the previous 500 years’ thinking about communication (Harper, 1980). His practical guidelines show how a good communicator should be educated.

26 CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

Th e view that communication was critical to virtually all aspects of human life was widely held during the Classical period—4th and 5th centuries BCE (for a more detailed discussion, see Peters, 1999). However, the comprehensive perspective that characterized communication during this era was largely reversed in the medieval (5th to 15th centuries) and Renaissance (14th to 17th centuries) periods. With the decline of the oral tradition and democracy, much of the interest in communication also waned, and the study of rhetoric was dispersed among several diff erent academic fi elds.

Origins of Communication Th eory: Early Greece Aristotle (384–322 BCE) and his teacher Plato (428–347 BCE) were the most central fi gures in early communication study. Both regarded communication as an art or craft to be practiced and as an area of study. As Aristotle noted in the opening paragraph of his classic work on rhetoric:

[T]o a certain extent all men attempt to discuss statements and to maintain them, to defend themselves, and to attack others. Ordinary people do this either at random or through practice and from acquired habit. Both ways being possible, the subject can plainly be handled systematically, for it is possible to inquire the reason why some speakers succeed through practice and others spontaneously; and everyone will at once agree that such an inquiry is the function of art. (Aristotle, Rhetoric, Roberts trans. published 1954, p. 19)

ar l A

lle n

Lu gm

ay er

/S hu

tt er

st oc

k. co

FIGURE 2.1 In Greek mythology, Athena was considered to be the goddess of wisdom, courage, mathematics, and war strategy.

27CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

Not surprisingly, given this, most of the earliest ideas about communication focused on public settings in which a person spoke to a listener or group of listeners with the goal of persuading them of the correctness of a particular point of view (Peters, 1999).

Aristotle (see Figure 2.2) saw communication as the means through which citizens participated in democracy. He described communication in terms of an orator or speaker constructing an argument to be presented in a speech to hearers—an audience as depicted in Figure 2.3. Speakers tried to inspire a positive image of themselves and to encourage members of an audience to be receptive to their message. As Aristotle (see Roberts trans., 1954) wrote:

[R]hetoric exists to aff ect the giving of decisions…the orator must not only try to make the argument of his speech demonstrative and worthy of belief; he must also make his own character look right and put his hearers, who are to decide, in the right frame of mind. (p. 90) (Emphasis added.)

For Aristotle, communication was primarily a verbal activity through which speakers tried to persuade their listeners through skillful construction of an argument and delivery of a speech.

Eventually, the work of Augustine (354–430 BCE) led to a rediscovery of classical Greek theory. His writings applied communication theories to the interpretation of the Bible and other religious writings and to the art of preaching. In so doing, Augustine united the practical and theoretical aspects of communication study.

el eft

y /S

hu tt

er st

oc k.

co m

FIGURE 2.2 Aristotle

Aristotelian theory viewed communi- cation as a one-way process in which a speaker’s message directly affects a receiver.

28 CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

17TH–19TH CENTURIES Early in the 17th century, Sir Francis Bacon (1561–1626) developed communication theories for practical purposes like speech making and writing (see Figure 2.4). He proposed an ethical basis for communication and argued that the function of true rhetoric was the furtherance of good, ideas that had a major infl uence on later writers.

During the 18th and 19th centuries, emphasis in communication study was placed on written argument and literature.

George Campbell (1719–1796), a Scottish philosopher and professor of divinity, wrote on the philosophical aspects of rhetoric. He maintained that rhetoric had four purposes:

• to enlighten, • to please the imagination, • to move the passions, • to infl uence the will.

Another 18th century Scottish writer, Hugh Blair, proposed theories that could be applied either to writing or to speaking. His infl uential book, Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres, was a guide to composition.

FIGURE 2.3 Aristotelian View

J C oc

kb ur

n/ Sh

ut te

rs to

ck .c

FIGURE 2.4 Sir Francis Bacon

Speaker Argument Speech Listener(s)

29CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

At this time, there was great interest in speaking style, articulation, and gesture, leading to the formation of the National Association of Elocutionists in 1892. Th e elocutionists advocated a very stylized mode of delivery that included vocal manipulation and lots of physical gestures.

By the end of the 19th century, most colleges and universities were organized into departments, and rhetoric and speech were oft en taught within departments of English.

JOURNALISM Journalism is a fi eld that contributed signifi cantly to the heritage of communication study. Like rhetoric and speech, journalism also dates back several thousand years. Th e practice of journalism began some 3,700 years ago in Egypt, when a record of the events of the time was transcribed on the tomb of an Egyptian king. Years later, Julius Caesar (100–4 BCE) had an offi cial record of the news of the day posted in a public place, and copies of it were made and sold (Frank, 1961, p. 2)

Early newspapers were a mixture of newsletters, ballads, proclamations, political tracts, and pamphlets describing various events. Like speech and rhetoric, they were forms of public communication aimed at informing and infl uence audiences. Th e mid-17th century saw the emergence of the newspaper in its modern form; and the fi rst paper published in the United States, Publick Occurrences Both Foreign and Domestick, appeared in 1690 in Boston, but only lasted for one issue. Th e second newspaper, Th e Boston News-letter, wasn’t published until 1704 (Brown, 2015).

ve re

tt H

is to

ri ca

l/S hu

tt er

st oc

k. co

FIGURE 2.5 Elizabeth Jane Cochran (1862–1922) was a journalist who wrote investigative articles about the plight of women factory workers, the lives and customs of people in Mexico, and the mistreatment of women in a mental hospital, as well as chronicling her adventurous round-the-world trip. At a time when women did not use their own names as bylines, she adopted the pen name Nellie Bly.

30 CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

EARLY 20TH CENTURY: DEVELOPMENT OF SPEECH AND JOURNALISM In the early 20th century, speech emerged as a discipline in its own right. In 1909, the Eastern States Speech Association—now the Eastern Communication Association—was formed and, in 1910, held its first annual conference. The National Association of Academic Teachers of Public Speaking, which became the Speech Association of America and the Speech Communication Association— now, the National Communication Association—was formed in 1914 (Cohen, 1994). In 1915, the Quarterly Journal of Public Speaking was first published, followed soon after by the Quarterly Journal of Speech. Communication Monographs began publication in 1934. Unlike previous publications, which emphasized speech practices, the new journal stressed research. Most of the studies published in the early volumes dealt with speech phonetics and phonology, physiology, and pathology (Bormann, 1965). By 1935, the speech association had 1,700 members, and speech was well established as a field.

Although the practice of journalism dates back many years, formalized study in the area did not progress rapidly until the early 1900s. In 1905, the University of Wisconsin offered what were perhaps the first courses in journalism, at a time when there were few, if any, books on the topic. By 1910, there were half a dozen volumes available, and between 1910 and 1920 some 25 works on journalism and newspaper work were compiled, beginning a pattern of continued growth (Hyde, 1937).

The advent of radio in the 1920s and television in the early 1940s resulted in the wider application of journalistic concepts to news and information dissemination. These new (at the time) media contributed to the development of an expanding view of the nature and communicative impact of journalism.

Interest in communication was not limited to speech and journalism. In philosophy, scholars wrote about the nature of communication and its role in human life. Anthropologists, psychologists, and sociologists focused on communication and its role in individual and social processes; and writers in the area of language also contributed to the advancement of communication study.

THE 1940S–1960S: INTERDISCIPLINARITY In the 1940s and early 1950s, the scope of the study of communication broadened substantially. A number of scholars from the various behavioral and social science disciplines began to develop theories of communication that extended beyond the boundaries of their own fields. In anthropology, for example, research concerned with body positioning and gestures in particular cultures laid the groundwork for more general studies of nonverbal communication. In psychology, interest focused on persuasion, social influence, and, specifically, attitudes—how they form, how they change, their impact on behavior, and the role of communication in these dynamics. Researchers were especially

31CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

concerned with issues of persuasion, including how propaganda could be used to persuade people, how public opinion was created, and how the developing media contributed to persuasive efforts (Delia, 1987). Kurt Lewin (1890–1947) and his colleagues conducted a major research program on group dynamics. Carl Hovland (1912–1961) and Paul Lazarsfeld (1901–1976) conducted early research on mass communication.

Sociologists and political scientists studied the nature of mass media in political and social activities such as voting behavior. In zoology, communication among animals began to receive considerable attention among researchers. During this time, scholars in linguistics, general semantics, and semiotics—fields that focused on the nature of language and its role in human activity—also contributed to the advancement of communication study.

By the end of the 1950s a number of writings had appeared that paved the way for the development of more integrated views of communication. It was during these years that the National Society for the Study of Communication (now the International Communication Association) was established with the goal of bringing greater unity to the study of communication by exploring the relationships among speech, language, and media (Weaver, 1977).

These developments set the stage for the rapid growth of communication as an independent discipline. In the 1960s, scholars synthesized thinking from rhetoric and speech, journalism and mass media, and the other social science disciplines. The term communication became linked to speech and rhetoric in basic books on the field during these years.

Communication was of interest in many disciplines during the 1960s, including sociology, psychology, political science, anthropology, linguistics, and organizational behavior.

During this period, a number of very influential models of communication were published by scholars. Among the most influential were those of Harold Lasswell, Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver, Elihu Katz and Paul Lazarsfeld, and Bruce Westley and Malcolm MacLean. Each of these scholars offered perspectives on the nature of communication that built on the earliest concepts of the phenomenon and began to bring together ways of thinking about communication that were initially developed in different fields.

Lasswell’s View of Communication An often cited theory of communication was advanced by political scientist Harold Lasswell (1902–1978) in 1948 based on his study of political propaganda. Lasswell provided a general view of communication that extended well beyond the boundaries of political science. He said that an act of communication could best be explained by the answers to the following questions (Lasswell, 1960, p. 117):

32 CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

Who? Says What? In Which Context? To Whom? With What Eff ect?

Just like Artistotle’s theory some 2,000 years earlier, Lasswell’s view of communication emphasized the elements of speaker, message, and audience (see Figure 2.6). Although they used diff erent terms, both scholars viewed communication as a one-way process in which a person infl uenced others through messages. Lasswell off ered an expanded defi nition of channel that included mass media along with speech as part of the communication process. His approach also provided a more generalized view of the goal or eff ect of communication than did the Aristotelian perspective, and more explicitly brought together ideas that had emerged in journalism and speech. Lasswell’s work suggested that there could be a variety of outcomes or eff ects of communication, such as to inform, to entertain, and to aggravate, as well as to persuade.

FIGURE 2.6 Lasswell’s Model

Who (Speaker)

What (Message)

Channel (or Medium)

Whom (Audience

or Listener)

= Effect

Shannon and Weaver’s Model Th e model developed by Claude Shannon (1916–2001) and Warren Weaver (1894–1978) described the communication process in this more generalized way:

Communication include[s] all the procedures by which one mind may aff ect another. Th is, of course, involves not only written and oral speech, but also music, the pictorial arts, the theatre, the ballet, and in fact all human behavior. (Shannon & Weaver, 1949, p. 3)

Like Lasswell, Shannon and Weaver saw communication as a one-way process in which a message was sent from a source through a channel to a receiver. Th eir model (see Figure 2.7) was both more generalized than Laswell’s and also somewhat more detailed, because they made several distinctions

33CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

that the other models had not. Specifi cally, they diff erentiated between a signal and a message, an information source and a transmitter, and a receiver and destination. Th ey described the workings of the model as follows:

Th e information source selects a desired message out of a set of possible messages… Th e selected message may consist of written or spoken words, or of pictures, music, etc…Th e transmitter changes the message into the signal which is actually sent over the communication channel from the transmitter to the receiver. (Shannon & Weaver, 1949, p. 7)

FIGURE 2.7 Shannon and Weaver’s Model

Information source

Transmitter

Message

Signal Received signal

Message

Channel

Noise source

Receiver Destination

For example, if we are watching a dramatic series carried on “cable television,” the channel is the cable; the signal is the varying electrical current carried by the cable; the information source is the performers, their backdrop, and so on; the transmitter is the set of devices (camera, audio and video amplifi cation system, and so on) that converts the visual and vocal messages created by the performers into electrical current. In this example, the receiver is the television set and cable converter equipment. Th e receiver’s purpose is to change the signal back into a message that can be received and interpreted at the destination (a viewer, in this case).

Shannon and Weaver introduced the term noise as the label for any distortion that interferes with the transmission of a signal from the source to the destination. In this example, an illustration of noise would be electrical interference, leading to audio or video distortion, in the cable line. Th ey also advanced the concept of correction channel, which they regarded as a means of overcoming problems created by noise. Th e correction channel was operated by an observer who compared the initial signal that was sent with that received; when the two didn’t match, additional signals would

From Th e Mathematical Th eory of Communication by Claude E. Shannon and Warren Weaver. Copyright 1949, 1998 by Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois. Used with permission of the University of Illinois Press.

34 CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

be transmitted to correct the error. Th eir idea of correction channel provided the foundation for what is now widely referred to as feedback.

Katz and Lazarsfeld’s Model In 1955, political scientists Elihu Katz (1926–) and Paul Lazarsfeld (1901–1976) presented a two- step fl ow concept of communication in their book Personal Infl uence (Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1955). Th e model was based on earlier research in which they found that information presented in the mass media did not reach and have an impact on individuals as previous views of communication seemed to suggest it would. Specifi cally, their research found that political radio and print messages had a negligible eff ect on individuals’ voting decisions.

In searching for an explanation for this lack of eff ect, they developed a view that linked interpersonal dynamics to mass communication. Th ey determined that undecided voters were infl uenced more by people around them than by information provided by the mass media; married people were infl uenced by their spouses, club members by other club members, workers by their colleagues, children by their parents, and so on. Th eir research also indicated that some people were consistently more infl uential than others, leading them to conclude that “ideas oft en seem to fl ow from radio and print to opinion leaders and from them to the less active sections of the population”—in a two- step fl ow (see Figure 2.8).

Although research has since suggested that the two-step concept only applies in some situations, this theory has been very infl uential because it linked face-to-face and mass communication and also introduced the idea of opinion leaders. It served as the basis for the development of diff usion theory, which describes the process by which new ideas and technological innovations are introduced and adopted within a group, organization, or community (Rogers, 2003).

FIGURE 2.8 Katz and Lazarsfeld’s Model

Mass Media

Message

Step 1 Step 2

Source Opinion Leaders

Public

Katz and Lazarfeld’s model introduced the idea that opinion leaders may have more infl uence on the outcome of a message than the original source.

35CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

Westley and MacLean’s Model A somewhat diff erent approach to communication was developed by Bruce Westley (1915–1990) and Malcolm S. MacLean, Jr. (1913–2001). Th ey suggested that the communication process begins with receiving messages, rather than sending them. To be more precise, Westley and MacLean’s view indicates that the process begins with a series of signals or potential messages. As depicted in Figure 2.9, there are a large number of signals—potential messages—in a communicator’s environment, which are referred to as “Xs” in their model.

Signals may involve a single sense modality such as sight or sound (X) or they may involve a combination of several modalities, for instance, sight, sound, and touch. Th e designation for such a signal would be X₃m—the “3m” indicating that three modalities are involved.

Th e model indicates that in a given situation only some of the many signals (Xs) in the environment at any point in time are attended to by a person (A). A next message (XI) results when a person A processes these signals and interprets them. Th is new message—A’s personal representation of the sum of all the Xs—is passed along when A describes what he or she saw or heard to a second person (C). Th is model was useful for describing the ways in which reporters and editors process and convey news and information to audiences. It also provides a helpful and highly infl uential view of the way communication operates in a wide range of situations.

THE 1970S–1980S: GROWTH AND SPECIALIZATION Th e expansion and specialization that began in the late 1960s reached new heights in the 1970s. Interpersonal communication became an increasingly popular area of study, as did the study of nonverbal interaction. Information science, information theory, and information and communication systems were other topics of increasing interest. During these same years, group, organizational, political, international, and intercultural communication emerged as distinct areas of study.

FIGURE 2.9 Westley and MacLean’s Model

X 1 X 2 X 3 X 4

X ∞

X I X IIX2

X3m

fbBA

fbBC

fbCA

A C B

Source: Bruce Westley and Malcolm S. MacLean, Jr., “A Con- ceptual Model for Communication Research,” Audio-Visual Communication Review (Winter, 1955). Reprinted by permis- sion of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Copyright (c) 1955 by AECT.

36 CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

Interest in communication was apparent in the popular, as well as the academic, realm. In 1975, the Harper Dictionary of Contemporary Usage listed communication as a “vogue word—a word . . . that suddenly or inexplicably crops up . . . in speeches of bureaucrats, comments of columnists . . . and in radio and television broadcasts.”

One factor that contributed to the widespread usage of the term communication, but also some confusion, was the use of a single term to refer to a field of study, a set of activities, and a profession. People study communication, people communicate (or, more accurately, engage in communication), and people earn their livelihood creating communication products and services. The use of a single term in these three ways was, and is, fairly unique among disciplines.

Another factor that led to confusion was the use of communication and communications. Traditionally, communications had been used to refer to media or to specific messages being transmitted through these media. Communication has historically been used to refer to the activity of sending and receiving messages (through media or face-to-face) and to the discipline as a whole. With the increasing interest in communication technology, the term communications began to be used interchangeably with communication in popular—and sometimes academic—contexts, blurring what had originally been a useful technical distinction.

THE 1990S–THE PRESENT PERIOD: DIGITAL MEDIA AND THE INFORMATION-EVERYWHERE AGE The Information Age was a phrase used to refer to the period beginning in the late 1990s. The phrase signaled the emergence of when communication and information technology played an increasingly important role in our society. Digital media and communication and information services were so pervasive that almost 30 years later it is difficult to find an aspect of our personal and professional lives that was not in some way been affected (see Figure 2.10).

The now infamous “Information Age” brought new labels, new and hybrid media, extended concepts of communication and information, changing economic realities, and new jobs for an increasing number of communication and information workers. During these years our perspective broadened to include newer media and the nature and function of communication technology. The Information Age greatly heightened attention to the pervasive role of technology in our lives and its impact on human behavior, to the point where the contemporary period might be accurately referred to as “the Information-Everywhere Age.”

37CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

Information as a Commodity During this period, there was an increasing interest in information communicated via messages as an economic good or commodity— something that can be bought and sold—and in the technologies by which this commodity is created, distributed, stored, retrieved, and used. In the United States communication and information companies have emerged as some of our largest businesses.

Communication and information became central in the telecommunication, publishing, Internet, and computer industries, as well as in banking, insurance, leisure and travel, and research. People in these fi elds spent an increasing amount of their time packaging information into products and services that could be sold in domestic and foreign markets. In the United States, Japan, Sweden, England, and a number of other countries, at least half of the society’s labor force was engaged in communication and information-related work.

Converging Media New and converging media were a fundamental feature of the landscape at this time. Certainly the most obvious change during this period was the growth of digital media, the Internet, and other information storage, transmission, and retrieval systems using computers.

During these years, media were brought together to form hybrid technologies that permitted communication sources and receivers to carry out functions that were once diffi cult, time-consuming, or even impossible. In earlier periods, specifi c technologies had more or less specifi c uses. Television emerged as a medium for viewing mass-produced and mass-distributed news and entertainment programs that reached a “television set” via the airwaves. During the Information Age, television became not only a medium for the mass distribution of standardized programs but also a device for use with the Internet, DVDs, video games, cable systems, and a display for streaming content. Th e

FIGURE 2.10 Grace Hopper (1906–1992) , one of the earliest computer programmers, popular- ized the term “debugging” to refer to fi xing computer code.

et tm

an n/

C O

R BI

38 CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

telephone underwent a similar transformation. Designed for one-to-one conversation, telephones and telephone lines were used not only in this way but also in conjunction with computers and fax machines for the transmission of text and graphics as well as voice. Typewriters, once used exclusively for print correspondence and report preparation, were combined with the telephone and television screen to form new, hybrid telecommunication systems.

COMMUNICATION STUDY TODAY The preceding sections of this chapter have traced the development of the communication discipline from its early beginnings through periods marked by interdisciplinary development and finally growth and expansion as a discipline through the end of the 20th century. From this overview, we can draw a number of conclusions that are helpful in understanding communication study as it exists today.

Ancient and Newly Emergent As we have noted, the core of modern communication study has its origins in the work of the early Greek philosophers who focused on what they called rhetoric. The 1900s, however, brought a number of changes to the discipline, including a new name. Within the last 75 years, the scope of the field has increased, its structure has changed, and every facet of it has grown substantially. In this respect, communication can be viewed as a newly emergent field, the newest of the disciplines concerned with the study of human behavior.

Discipline and Interdisciplinary Link As has been the case for at least the past half century, communication in the present period is a strong discipline in its own right. At the same time, interest in communication extends well beyond the boundaries of the field, enabling communication to serve as an important intellectual link among scholars with varying disciplinary points of view.

In communication studies, we approach issues such as these from the perspective of the creation, transmission, interpretation, and use of information by people in relationships, groups, organizations, cultures, and societies. The value of integrating our efforts with the works of scholars in other disciplines has become increasingly apparent in recent years.

39CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

Personal and Professional Applicability Th e importance attached to communication in contemporary life can also be seen in the extent to which the phenomenon is regarded as essential to our personal as well as our workplace roles. Th e shelves of libraries and bookstores are fi lled with writings emphasizing the importance of communication to the establishment and maintenance of meaningful interpersonal and family relationships. And, a few rows away, are an equal number of books describing the importance of communication to successful professional and organizational functioning. Such publications address the importance of communication for individual leaders, team collaboration, organizational eff ectiveness, and marketplace competitiveness, among other topics.

Old and New Technology In the present period, speaking and listening are as basic to communication and human behavior as they were at the time of the ancient Greeks. And yet, today, we benefi t from any number of technologically enhanced forms of communication, which give permanence and portability to the messages of face- to-face communication. Beyond taken-for-granted media such as newspapers, radio, television, and magazines are a broad array of new technologies that appear every year. Whether we think of smartphones, tablets, wireless local networks, global positioning systems, high defi nition televisions, virtual reality, or the many other emerging tools, toys, and technologies, the possibilities for new forms of communication are remarkable. And yet as we shall discuss in greater detail later, for all the new forms of communication, many if not most of the basic communication challenges and functions remain.

Do all the new communication forms that fi ll our pockets, briefcases, homes, and offi ces improve the quality of our lives? Are we better informed than we were 50 years ago? Are we better entertained? Is global understanding improving? Are our personal and family relationships better or more meaningful? Th ese are good questions, and are precisely the kind of questions that should be asked by students in communication study in the 21st century and beyond.

Today’s communication technology enriches our lives but may lead to communication challenges.

40 CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

Problem and Solution Communication is one of the most pervasive topics today. We have become so accustomed to hearing and reading commentaries on the challenges we face in crossing social, demographic, political, gender, cultural, lifestyle, religious, or occupational boundaries that it is easy to overlook the central role communication plays in these matters. Too much communication or, often, the lack of communication is seen as a fundamental problem. And yet, as Peters (1999) has pointed out, communication is also seen as the solution. Paradoxically, communication is seen as both a cause of many the barriers and divisions that exist today, but also a bridge to overcome these differences. The significance given to communication processes today is remarkable and a factor that contributes to the vitality and importance of communication study and communication practice.

Practical Skill and Fundamental Life Process Today, the study of communication includes a vast array of topics. Many communication courses see communication as a skill and teach students techniques associated with creating and disseminating messages, orally or in written form, in face-to-face or technologically mediated settings. Other courses approach communication theoretically (like we do in this book), and view it as a fundamental life process: one that is basic to our physical, personal, social, political, and cultural existence. The fact that communication study includes such a broad range of interests is a source of some confusion and requires us to clarify our definition of communication when we discuss it. At the same time, this breadth creates a useful tension for the field—a tension between the search for practical technique and the quest for theoretical understanding. These are useful and complementary contributions to the field as we seek to advance human knowledge and capability.

THE EVOLUTION OF THEORY The earliest theories of communication focused on public speaking and improving individuals’ ability to persuade others. Theories then expanded to add communication in private as well as public settings; nonverbal and technologically mediated as well as verbal messages; multiple as well as single sources and receivers; and a broad array of purposes, functions, and outcomes.

Nevertheless, certain underlying themes have remained relatively constant for most of the 2,500- year history of the study of communication. The most fundamental of these themes is the view that communication consists of a source constructing and transmitting a message to one or more

41CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

receivers in order to bring about a particular effect. In this way of thinking, as depicted in Figure 2.11, communication is a one-way event consisting of a one-way transfer of information from source to receiver(s). This S → M → R = E characterization of communication has been so pervasive in the thinking of the field that it represents what philosopher Thomas Kuhn (1922–1996) and others refer to as a paradigm. Paradigms are broad theoretical orientations that guide the work of scholars in a field over a substantial period of time. They are pervasive and highly influential, and shape and are reflected in scholars’ theories, research, and practice.

Eventually, the paradigms of a field change. Although there is no simple explanation as to how and why this happens, often change occurs when new observations and evidence don’t fit the prevailing paradigm. Research findings, observations, or events that cannot be explained by, or are inconsistent with, existing paradigms are called anomalies. Anomalies often encourage scholars to discard one paradigm and search for an alternative (Kuhn, 1970).

Our review of the recent history of communication shows that this kind of change has been occurring in the study of communication. Specifically, the anomaly that prompted the transition is relatively simple: message sent is not equal to message received: MS ≠ MR.

Even as Aristotle advanced his orator-to-listener view of communication, he and his contemporaries acknowledged that the persuasive efforts of the speaker were not always able to persuade the audience. These scholars believed the match between the message sent and the message received could be made more predictable if sources (speakers) learned more about how to construct and deliver their messages effectively.

The idea of opinion leaders and the two-step flow, first suggested in the work of Katz and Lazarsfeld (1955), reflected an awareness of the fundamental anomaly. Their two-step concept helped explain why the classical paradigm was not effective in predicting the outcome of a speech.

The work of Westley and MacLean dealt with the MS ≠ MR anomaly by creating a model that did not begin with the sending of messages, but rather with a person surrounded by Xs—information sources—some of which were intentionally provided by other people and some which were not. This way of thinking provided a logical and expanded explanation about why the message as interpreted by a receiver often had little in common with the message as intended by a particular source.

In the present period, challenges to the accuracy of communication, and the relationship between messages sent and messages received, have become a focal point of scholarly and professional impact—perhaps nowhere more so than in discussions of politics. This dialogue serves to underscore the importance of these enduring questions about how communication does and should work.

42 CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

Communication Th eory Today Although the S → M → R = E paradigm was popular during much of the history of the fi eld, this perspective has changed greatly in the past 50 years. As you can see from Table 2.1, the evolution of the concept of communication has been:

• From source–and message–centered to receiver–and meaning-centered • From one-way to interactive and transactional • From event–to process–oriented • From an exclusive emphasis on information transmission to an emphasis on interpretation

and relationships, as well as information transmission • From public speaking to a framework that examines communication in a variety of contexts

including the individual, relationships, families, groups, organizations, and societies • From a focus on face–to–face communication to a view that includes personal, social, mass,

and public media

FIGURE 2.11 One-Way Transfer of Information

EffectReceiver =Message

Paradigm

Source

S M R = E

43CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

CONCLUSION Communication has a rich and lengthy history, which can be traced back to Babylonian and Egyptian writings before the 5th century BCE. Th e initial contributions to communication study came from scholars of what was called rhetoric. Th ey viewed communication as the practical art of persuasion. Aristotle and Plato, who were particularly signifi cant to early communication study, saw rhetoric and the practice of public speaking as an art and an area of study.

Along with rhetoric and speech, journalism also contributed to the heritage of communication study. As with rhetoric, journalism initially was concerned primarily with practical rather than theoretical matters. By the beginning of the 20th century, rhetoric and speech were clearly established as disciplines in their own right, and journalism began to take shape as a fi eld of study as well.

TABLE 2.1 Models of Communication: An Overview

Model How Communication Works Major Factors Stressed in Explaining Communication Outcomes

Direction Flow

Aristotle Speaker constructs messages that bring about persuasive effects among listeners

Source and message One-way

Lasswell Speaker constructs messages, selects a channel, and thereby brings about a range of effects among listeners

Source, message, and channel

One-way

Shannon and Weaver

Source encodes message and transmits through channel to receiver

Source, message, noise

One-way with feedback

Katz and Lazarsfeld

Source encodes messages and transmits information through mass media to opinion leaders who relay it to public

Channel, message, receiver, opinion leader

One-way (mediated)

Westley and MacLean

Source selectively encodes messages and transmits information in modifi ed form to receiver who decodes, encodes, and transmits information in modifi ed form to other individual(s) with feedback at every step

Receiver, meaning, feedback

Circular (through feedback)

44 CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

During the early 20th century, interest in communication continued in rhetoric and speech, and the advent of radio and later television led to the wider application of journalistic concepts and the development of more theories of the overall process of communication. The 1940s and 1950s were years of interdisciplinary growth, as scholars from various disciplines developed theories of communication that extended beyond the boundaries of their own fields.

The 1960s were a period of integration. A good deal was done to synthesize the writings of rhetoric and speech, journalism, and mass media, as well as other disciplines. A number of landmark books appeared within the discipline.

During this time, additional models of the communication process were advanced, extending the work of earlier scholars.

The 1970s and early 1980s were a time of unprecedented growth within the field. It was also a period in which much specialization occurred, giving rise to progress in our understanding of interpersonal, group, organizational, political, international, and intercultural communication.

Continuing growth and interdisciplinary advancement distinguished the communication field in the 1990s, and developments in the Information Age transformed the forms of communication and information technology available to us. The emergence of digitalization and converging media, along with economic and marketplace developments, demonstrated the pervasive impact of communication and communication media on our lives, creating what might be called the “Age of Information Everywhere.”

As we move through the 21st century, the discipline of communication and the phenomena it studies are center stage in human affairs. The subject is at once ancient and newly emergent, a discipline in its own right and an interdisciplinary crossroad for scholars from a wide variety of fields. Communication is as relevant to personal as it is to professional life, and the role of new and old technology continues to be a focus of the times and the discipline. As Peters (1999) has noted, communication study is concerned with both the major problems and most hopeful solutions in contemporary life, and the field of communication focuses on practical skills and fundamental life processes.

This overview of the history of communication reveals a number of changes during the 2,500-year heritage of the field—changes both in the theory of the communication process and in the discipline in which it is studied. We have seen that the communication field is both ancient as well as a product of the 20th century, interdisciplinary in heritage, the home of scholars and professionals, a discipline which benefits from the approaches of both the humanities and behavioral sciences, and an area in which media are of continuing concern.

45CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

CHECK YOUR KNOWLEDGE Aft er reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Describe the ways that communication has long been regarded as important to the practice and understanding of human aff airs and, in the past half century, an increasingly popular academic subject

• Explain the development and evolution of the key communication models • Identify how the communication discipline is the basis for linkages between scholars and

practitioners from many other fi elds • Articulate the paradox of communication and how it is both the basis for many of the

REFERENCES Aristotle. Rhetoric. (1954). Published in Aristotle: Rhetoric and Poetics (W. R. Roberts, Trans.). New

York: Th e Modern Library. Bormann, E. G. (1965). Th eory and research in the communicative arts. New York: Holt. Brown, R. J. (Ed.). (2015). HistoryBuff .com. Retrieved June 14, 2015, from http://www.historybuff .

com/library/reffi rstten.html. Cohen, H. (1994). Th e history of speech communication: Th e emergence of a discipline, 1914-1945.

Annandale, VA: National Communication Association. Delia, J. G. (1987). Communication research: A history. In C. R. Berger & S. H. Chaff ee (Eds.),

Handbook of communication science (pp. 25-30). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Frank, J. F. (1961). Th e beginnings of the English newspaper 1620-1660. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press. Harper, N. L. (1980). Human communication theory: History of a paradigm. Rochelle Park, NJ:

Hayden. Hyde, G. M. (1937). Foreword. In G. F. Mott (Ed.), Survey of journalism (p. vii-viii). New York:

Barnes & Noble, Inc. Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal infl uence: Th e part played by people in the fl ow of mass

communications. New York: Th e Free Press. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). Th e structure of scientifi c revolutions (2ⁿd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago

Press. Lasswell, H. D. (1960). Th e structure and function of communication in society. In W. Schramm

(Ed.), Mass communications (pp. 117-130). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

46 CHAPTER 2: Communication Past and Present

Peters, J. D. (1999). Speaking into air: A history of the idea of communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations, 5th ed. NY: Free Press. Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, IL:

University of Illinois Press. Weaver, C. H. (1977). A history of the International Communication Association. In B. D. Ruben

(Ed.), Communication Yearbook I (pp. 607-609). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.