In his book Communication as Culture, specifically the chapter entitled “A
Cultural Approach to Communication,” James W. Carey discusses his theories
regarding two very different definitions of the word communication – the transmission
view and the ritual view. Although Carey claims the transmission view is the
predominant definition within our society, he discusses at length the ritual
view of communication and uses comparisons to the social sciences to describe
this very different idea of communication.
As a reader, what do you think the
author intended you to take from this passage? What was his purpose in writing
this, from what you could tell?
Carey argued that the transmission
view of communication can “no longer go forward without disastrous intellectual
and social consequences” and communications theorists must “escape the
treadmill we were running” regarding the theory. Do you think that the
transmission view is really outdated, as he argues?
Just given that this is a somewhat
revolutionary idea, were you convinced that this is a valid interpretation of
the word “communication,” especially considering that it differs so
dramatically from the transmission view and how we’ve studied communication
thus far?
Especially after two units in class on
journalism and strategic communication, do you think that the ritual view of
communication can be applied to communication today?
In “The Persuaders,” Mark Crispin
Miller from New York University argues that a culture saturated by strategic
communication and advertising is not a culture at all. However, Casey argues
that communication is exactly what comprises society, culture and even our own
reality. Which argument do you identify with the most? Do you think that
Casey’s argument applies to all kinds of communication we see today?
No comments:
Post a Comment