Talk:Influence of mass media

=

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Aharp36.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jnapier22. Peer reviewers: Mahleawidner, Jonahx11!, MatheusMSP.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 February 2019 and 4 April 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Reedemmi, Caleb Osborn, QuincyWalker.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 April 2020 and 20 June 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): QIUJING ZHU. Peer reviewers: Lihao Pan.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 September 2020 and 18 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kenziehofmann.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 September 2020 and 4 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tsweeney617. Peer reviewers: Amb8675, BryanC194.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rebeccashumway.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Editing for Clarity
In the second paragraph, the following quote should be deleted because it does not really say anything: "Connecting the world to individuals and reproducing the self-image of society,". The criticism section needs heavy adjusting both in terms of paragraph positions, and concepts within each paragraph. I think Chomsky should be the first reference mentioned under criticism. A mini bio of Professor Gauntlett is provided at the outset of the criticism section, yet with all due respect, Gauntlett is lesser known than Chomsky. I propose adding a brief few lines about Chomsky's "filter" concepts, which is found in the Durham article. In this case, I would move this from the further reading into the references section. The mass media and a free enterprise society section is first of all not an intuitive sub-title. It touches on how television networks need to cover their production costs, but one concept that I feel should be mentioned in this article is capitalism and it's effects on mass media content. Namely, television networks and in turn media producers must answer to advertisers. For example, a television network would not publish a scathing interview that is detrimental to the image of its advertising client. One of Chomsky's "filters" accounts for this media bias, and would be a valuable addition to media influence/effect. --Austenten (talk) 06:02, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No objections to this? My note about the criticism section has been up for over a month now, so I will implement a few edits to said section.
 * --Austenten (talk) 19:57, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I have suggested transferring the "Media Influenced Violence" section of this article (previously just titled "Criticism"), under a different article, Media Violence. Here is a link to my discussion topic on that article.
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Media_violence_research#Transfer_Content

An editor has added the "essay" template to the article. WP:NOTESSAY and WP:OR are applicable to material that is not reliably sourced. Specific tags or discussion here may help clarify what the editor was referencing when he placed that tag. Specific "clarify" or "fact" tags may help. Student7 (talk) 21:13, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Overall, the entire thing is written as an essay, not as an encyclopedia entry. Most of it is written in a "literature review" style. Since no relevant changes have been made, I've replaced the tag. Hairhorn (talk) 23:54, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * --Austenten (talk) 20:47, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

This page has declined into an unreadable mass of nonsensical, unsourced nonsense. I'm no Wiki editor, but this page looks and reads awefully. For such an important topic, it seems terribly neglected. 76.78.120.59 (talk) 08:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed, this is pretty bad. I'm not sure where to start.  The media and violence section is damn near gibberish.  I suggest perhaps that section should get truncated to a bare minimum and direct readers to the media violence page.  That would take care of that at least.  I'll wait to see if there are any objections before making such a drastic change.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.91.76.238 (talk) 01:50, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Should cite Barack Obama's presidency (2008-2016) and/or update the current (2016-2020) president of the US, between citations 59 and 60 Jchristensen4 (talk) 06:23, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Editing for Bias
I think the articles needs to be referenced more with proper references etc. Some of the links don't work and up to date more as well. Kateemontyy (talk) 05:23, 27 January 2022 (UTC) Kate-Lynn Montgomery

This article basically calls Nixon ugly, by saying that Kennedy was considered handsome, ESPECIALLY compared to Nixon. 149.4.115.3 (talk) 21:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Is anyone aware of the obvious political leaning in this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.56.227.71 (talk) 18:40, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Answer: There is no political leaning in the definition of democracy. The same applies here, profiling and providing cited sources on the ideas and theoretical models of media influence and media effects does not entail that that long definition is biased or has a "political lean". --Austenten (talk) Yes, this is definitely biased article. It should be renamed to "media influence according to left-wing intelectuals". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.136.48.98 (talk) 22:07, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Guys, I am interested in the topic and I started translating the page in Bulgarian, but it looks like the personal opinion of the authors. There are no sources specified. For example I would like sources about these: --Zearendil (talk) 12:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * critiques in the early-to-mid 20th century suggested that media would destroy the individual's capacity to act autonomously
 * Mid 20th-century empirical studies, however

Paid spokesmen and researchers, like the proverbial printing-press owner, enjoy an advantage over ordinary citizens in open discourse. What is the term for sabotage of media diversity and reliability, by drowning out legitimate information with prodigious quantities of partisan content created by subsidised propaganda hacks, puppets, or shills for interests with deep pockets? This strategy of disinformation swamping/flooding/drowning/whitewash/flacks/spin doctoring seems to be missing from this article. Examples: --Egmonster (talk) 02:24, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * smokescreen/greenwashing by influenced content creation (e.g. Big Oil, China's human rights record)
 * subsidised experts or others who create a semblance of controversy (e.g. tobacco, climate change)
 * regulation/research/publishing/reporting biased against people who question whoever pays the bills (e.g. Big Pharma, consolidation of media ownership)
 * columnists and influential social media presences receiving products and services as long as they keep producing positive reviews and stories about product or brand (e.g. corporate-influenced mommy bloggers, Wikipedia meat puppets)
 * Finally found the word: it's Astroturfing. I still think it needs a section in this article.Egmonster (talk) 05:53, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Stephanie It would help if the article had references to support the facts which are provided. I've noticed that the majority of the article is based on personal opinion than citing experts. Perhaps citing references from experts to support your opinions. The article seems biased by limiting the opinion of just the writer without actually having the opinion of other experts. It is mainly to provide references from other experts, other than that the article relates to the topic which is being presented. Stephavila21 (talk) 17:12, 9 November 2015 (UTC)]


 * Hi, Stephanie. Welcome to Wikipedia. Can you suggest any particular reliable sources we can use for this article? Either for points that are already in the article, or points that should be included to make it more thorough and neutral? Please go ahead and add what's missing if you feel confident enough, but even if you don't have time or skill for that at the moment, we'd appreciate any specific suggestions you have about where to find references to support the facts. --Egmonster (talk) 18:30, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

It would help if the article had references to support the facts which are provided. I've noticed that the majority of the article is based on personal opinion than citing experts. Perhaps citing references from experts to support your opinions. The article seems biased by limiting the opinion of just the writer without actually having the opinion of other experts. It is mainly to provide references from other experts, other than that the article relates to the topic which is being presented. Furthermore, in the section of media effects of self image, I noticed that it does not elaborate much on how media effects the self image. Perhaps having further evidence and examples how it effects the self- image. Even talking about a specific site, such as Facebook, how it effects the self-image.Stephavila21 (talk) 16:30, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

New Subsections
Social Media: There should be a section on how social media has become a game changer in terms of media and journalism. Today, anyone can be a journalist (in a sense) because of their abilities to report events and spread information about events as soon as they happen. An event such as the Arab Spring Revolution shows how influential and important social media has become so it would be an interesting topic to cover in this page titled "Media Influence". Seasaltpitachips (talk) 22:26, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Mergers, Renames and Redirects
This article is just a less-good version of the media effects article, and includes some material - such as the paragraph on the 'uses and gratifications' model (wrongly attributed to Denis McQuail) which is not actually on media influences as such anyway. Suggest delete this article and redirect to media effects. Sophie1975 00:18, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Whatever the problems with the article in its current state, it is plain wrong to merge it with 'Media Effects'. While 'Media Effects' traces recurring ideas about the effects (especially negative) of the media on individual behaviour, 'Media Influence' is a far more general concept of social, economic, political and historical relevance. It may take a while to develop the article, but a genuinely encyclopaedic look at 'Media Influence' would be far more informative, interesting and generally relevant than the 'Media Effects' Idea. They are not the same thing at all.

It seems like an oversimplification to merge media theory into this article, since it only covers mass media. Oicumayberight 16:43, 19 April 2007 (UTC)


 * That page was quite confusing, I considered having sent to AfD. If someone feels that it should be re-instated I don't have an issue with that, but I would likely reccommend it be deleted. Grumpyyoungman01 01:30, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Based on the Talk:Media theory page, it appears that a merge with media studies was considered. If a merge is necessary, media theory seems closer to media studies than media influence.  If media theory remains redirected to this article, then the media influence article should cover a broader scope than mass media. Oicumayberight 03:18, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok, that makes sense. As these merge tags are placed and then not acted upon for months on end (whether that is a merge or remove the tags), I will redirect media theory to media studies and notify Talk:media studies. Someone from there can take what they see fit from the last version of the page. I don't ever see this article as covering more than the mass media. Grumpyyoungman01 07:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

therefore one can really rely on that/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.215.86.234 (talk) 12:48, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

All external links except the first one are no longer valid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.175.119.62 (talk) 19:19, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Also suggesting the "Canadian media effects" be merged into this. Much of the material overlaps, and I'm dubious we need a separate page for Canada (no offense to my Canadian friends). 69.91.76.238 (talk) 01:58, 25 February 2012 (UTC)MVGuy
 * Gave it a couple months. Merger now done.  MVGuy  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.91.76.251 (talk) 01:16, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Other
External Links: I'm writing on behalf of the Tufts University Child and Family Webguide to ask that our website be considered for an external link on this Wikipedia page. Our website is maintained and developed by a staff of evaluators who search the web for articles and sites that contain valuable information for children and their parents regarding various medical/developmental topics. This link leads to our "TV/Media" site, which contains information on the effects that media (specifically television, video games, and the Internet) has on child development. Offers information particular on how violence in media affects children.

http://www.cfw.tufts.edu/topic/2/30.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.64.134.143 (talk) 03:34, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The introductory paragraph is very clear in painting a picture of what exactly the influence of mass media may or may not be. I think the hypodermic needle model was a clever way of simplifying the way we take in information. There is a good variety of information on the subject, from the history of mass media to how something may affect one individual person. One thing I wish the article had would be specific examples. I would suggest a small section in the article contain a few well-known examples. It would help to clarify the information further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.41.197.222 (talk) 15:15, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Information Literacy and Scholarly Discourse
— Assignment last updated by Mlclark1 (talk) 13:22, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

==Wiki Education assignment::Hi! I was taking a look at the content and I think it would be worth while adding a section on how Covid-19 and lockdown influenced and effected mass media. -Mroge062 (talk) 23:36, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: JMC 440 Research Methods in Public Relations
— Assignment last updated by M. S. L. 01 (talk) 17:33, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: CMN2160B
— Assignment last updated by Xinyue Hu (talk) 13:28, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

give one popular mass media in your community 103.14.89.162 (talk) 12:19, 21 November 2023 (UTC)


 * give one popular mass media in your community 103.14.89.162 (talk) 12:20, 21 November 2023 (UTC)