industry+audience theory evaluation (copy)

Media  ​Modelling ​Effects – ​Albert ​Bandura 

Strengths

• Highlights the influence media can have on audiences, through their ability to take in messages and learn specific social and cultural views from images. ​

• Bandura’s Bobo Doll Experiment (1961) showed clear evidence that children who observed aggressive behavior were more likely to imitate it, giving strong experimental support for the theory.​

• Helps explain real-world phenomena like copycat violence​

• His work influenced debates around censorship, content ratings, and guidelines for children's programming

Weaknesses

• The Bobo Doll experiment was conducted in an artificial environment​

• Early versions portrayed audiences as passive, easily influenced observers, but later media research (like active audience theories) shows people can critique and resist media messages. (Hall & U&G)​

• It’s out of date​

• Critics say it overstates the role of imitation — not everyone who watches violence becomes violent; many other factors (e.g., personality, upbringing) matter.

Cultivation Theory – ​George ​Gerbner

strengths

• Highlights the influence media can have on audiences, through their ability to take in messages and learn specific social and cultural views from images. ​

• Unlike many media theories that focus on immediate effects (like persuasion or shock), Cultivation Theory looks at gradual, cumulative influence over time​

• Highlights that audiences tend to think the world is more dangerous than it really is

weaknesses

• Developed in the 1960s–70s, it focuses heavily on traditional TV and doesn’t fully account for diverse media (social media, YouTube, interactive media) where users have more choice and control. (Gauntlett)​

• Treats audiences as relatively passive and homogeneous, when in reality, people interpret and critique media differently based on their background, education, and personality.(Hall)

Reception ​Theory – Stuart Hall

strengths

• Recognises Active Audiences -Hall challenged the older view of audiences as passive; instead, he showed that people are active interpreters of media, making their own meanings.​

• Helps audiences consider the original message of the media product and the goals of the encoder. ​

• Helps audiences consider the variety of polysemic meanings that can be taken ​

• highlights how race, gender, class, and social position affect how media is understood - diversity​

weaknesses

• How do we know what the preferred reading is meant to be unless be are told by the creator​

• P/N/O can be too broad – real responses are more complex?​

• It assumes that audience interpretation is heavily based on cultural and social background, but sometimes people from very different backgrounds interpret texts similarly.​

• It assumes we are always active when sometimes we consume media through passive viewing or listening over a period of time (Gerbner)

Fandom ​Theory – Henry Jenkins

strengths

• Jenkins’ theory emphasises that fans are not passive consumers, but active producers and creators of content, showing how they can interpret and contribute to media.​

• His theory highlights how fandoms create communities where fans can share ideas​

• Jenkins argues that fandoms can disrupt traditional media power, where fans influence the direction of TV shows, movies etc​

• recognizes that fandoms can empower marginalized voices

weaknesses

• Critics argue that while Jenkins emphasizes fan empowerment, the structure of the media industry (eg. studios, corporations) still holds most of the power (Curran and Seaton)​

• mostly focused on mainstream media fandoms, particularly TV shows, movies, and video games, and doesn't fully account for smaller, niche fandoms or subcultures​

• As fan culture grows, it can often become commercialized​

• Jenkins’ theory primarily focuses on the positive side of fandoms, like creativity and empowerment, but doesn't delve enough into the darker side (eg. toxic fandoms, harassment,). Fans can be mean!

The end of​ audience – Clay Shirky

strengths

• perfectly explains how ordinary people now create, share, and distribute media themselves (YouTube, TikTok, blogs, etc.), not just consume it passively.​

• audiences are now participants, not just receivers. They can influence, challenge, and shape media​

• Supports Democratic Media​

• Suggests that power is more distributed

weaknesses

• The industry continues to be dominated by larger commercial companies (Curran and Seaton) so the theory is a little too positive​

• Most people are still mainly consumers, not creators.​

• Some users may feel empowered but are often exploited for profit.

Media ​Ownership – James Curran ​& Jean Seaton

strengths

• Real-world evidence supports it: The dominance of big companies like Disney, Comcast, and News Corp shows how a few corporations control much of what we consume.​

• Highlights issues of power and bias​

• Fits with a wide range of industries​

• Encourages people to consider ‘who’ owns the media​

• Emphasises the changing nature of media production in a globalised and digitalised world where conglomerates can exist across multiple platforms.

weaknesses

• The rise of platforms like YouTube, and independent creators challenges the idea that only large companies dominate​

• It sometimes implies all large companies necessarily produce the same, profit-driven, risk-averse content — but some big companies still fund diverse or experimental projects​

• Simplifies complex economic forces: Not all industry behaviour can be explained by a simple "profit and power" motive — some are influenced by culture, trends, or even internal values.

Regulation – Sonia ​Livingstone ​& Peter Lunt

strengths

• Realistic about modern media challenges: The theory captures the real-world struggle regulators face​

• Highlights issues with online content​

• Reflects debates about censorship vs freedom: Their model is useful for understanding arguments around political speech, violence, or adult content.

weaknesses

• Does not offer solutions​

• Assumes regulation is always necessary: Some critics argue that audiences (especially adults) can self-regulate better now, questioning the need for strong external controls. (Gauntlett)​

• Can oversimplify audience needs: Audiences are diverse — what's "harmful" or "offensive" varies by culture, age, and individual — and their model can make it sound like there's one-size-fits-all regulation needed.

The Cultural Industry – David Hesmondhalgh

strengths

• Real-world evidence supports it: Media is full of repetitive content (e.g., endless superhero movies, franchise reboots) that reflects risk-avoidance and profit-seeking.​

• Highlights how capitalism shapes culture​

• Explores the benefits of vertical and horizontal integration​

• Enables us to consider the impact on audience - It highlights how companies manage audience tastes, reinforcing predictable consumption patterns.

weaknesses

• Are all products a repetition of content and Formulaic​

• Modern audiences aren’t passive — they can seek out niche, diverse, or radical content more easily now, thanks to streaming and global internet access. (Hall/Gauntlett)​

• Media products are always (and always have been) adapting and refining recognisable tropes based on a genre-driven model and genres that are enjoyed will be repeated as people want them (Neale) ​

• Are all companies wanting to just minimize risk and maximise audiences to generate a profit? Are some producers interested other things such as social change and being the voice for marginalized groups?