What is communication?
It is impossible not to communicate – you don’t need words, grammar or syntax.
Humans communicate before and after they can use language by using sounds and
gestures. Babies yell at different frequencies depending on whether they are hungry,
frustrated or have a full nappy. Usually their carer can tell the difference. Later, on
holidays, people point and smile and nod at strangers and, usually, find the beach, bank
or souvenir shop.
All you need to communicate is someone else. ‘It takes two to speak’, said Thoreau,
‘one to speak and another to hear.’
Communication seems so simple until we begin to examine it. Then all sorts of terms
and concepts creep into the conversation. Even the definitions add to the confusion:
Windahl and Signitzer (1992) point out that there are two main traditions in defining
communication –the one-way transmission model and the two-way exchange concept.
They quote Theodorsen and Theodorsen (1992: 6) who define communication as ‘the
transmission of information, ideas, attitudes, or emotion from one person or group to
another (or others) primarily through symbols’. The Shannon–eaver model of communication
illustrates this approach (see p. 16). In contrast, Rogers and Kincaid define
communication as ‘a process in which the participants create and share information
with one another in order to reach a mutual understanding’ (Windahl and Signitzer
1992: 6). This is quite close to Grunig’s two-way symmetric model examined in the
last chapter. Before looking at more models it’s worth clarifying a few terms.
Levels of communication
Berger (1995) identifies four levels of communication: intrapersonal (thoughts); interpersonal
(conversations); small group communication (like a lecture) and mass communication.
He points out that ‘talking to oneself’ uses the neurological/chemical apparatus
of the brain as the channel of communication; talking to another or others uses the
airwaves to carry the verbal message, as well as non-verbal communication, like body
language, facial expression and so on. Mass media communication uses print, broadcast
or phone wires to communicate with a wide range of geographically scattered
People.
Core concepts of communication
Burgoon et al. (1994) suggest that intent is a key concept – where both source and
receiver know that communication is occurring. This excludes all the accidents of overhearing
or instances where the television is on, but the room is empty.
Meaning is also crucial: without a shared understanding of the meaning of words
and symbols, communication is at best limited, at worst impossible. Imagine driving
in a country where a red traffic light meant ‘go’. The discussion on semiotics (pp. 19f.)
and Chapter 7 on corporate identity help explain these issues.
Anther issue is noise, which is interference between elements in a communication,
and can mean technical interference (like static on the line), semantic interference (where
the meaning is unclear) and psychological interference (where the receiver is unable to
understand the message because of their own state of mind or personality). Shannon
and Weaver’s model looks at noise.
Feedback is also an important concept. It is what makes the difference between oneway
communication, where the sender has no knowledge – or possibly interest – in the
receiver’s response, and two-way communication, where the receiver can comment or
even alter events by responding to a message. Berlo (1960), writing about feedback,
said, ‘How can anyone know that a communication has taken place unless there is a
response from the receiver?’
Finally we must consider the concept of mediation – the means by which the communication
is transmitted, whether in person, by language or gesture, or via another
medium, print or broadcast.
Unmediated communication means any two-way contact that does not pass through
a channel or medium. This can be one-to-one (a conversation), one-to-many (a speech),
or even many-to-one (a protest). It’s worth pointing out that even direct communication
between individuals contains a number of variables such as: voice, body language,
proximity and facial expression.
Mediated communication adds a channel – a means of transmitting the message. This
could still be one-to-one, like a telephone conversation. Or it could be one-to-many,
like a radio broadcast. The kind of channel used and its technical efficiency will affect
the message (see the section on ‘noise’ on p. 16), for example talking on your mobile
as you enter a railway tunnel will reduce the efficacy of the message. The internet and
the World Wide Web provide a wholly new possibility –many-to-many communication
using newsgroups to talk to newsgroups.
Fiske (1990) distinguishes between presentational and representational media. The
presentational media are those which are not mediated, such as voice, body language
and facial expressions. They require the presence of both the communicator and the receiver to create acts of communication. Representational media may include these
elements but the communicator does not need to be actually present. This would include
television interviews for example, but could also include paintings, photographs, books,
even gardens and buildings – anything, in fact, that makes a statement or ‘text’ but
does not require its creator to be present for a ‘reading’ to be taken. Fiske calls these
works of communication. He also examines the ‘mechanical’ media of television, radio
and telephone and points out the extra technical requirements of these media. Other
theorists would describe technical issues as relating to channels not media, but they are
often used to mean the same thing.
The media most relevant to public relations are the mass media – newspapers and
magazines, radio and television and, increasingly, the internet (but see p. 18). These
media allow communicators to reach at low cost (compared to contacting them individually)
large numbers of people who have already chosen to purchase or consume
that paper or magazine or programme. The audience may be vast, like the readership
of a national newspaper, or quite small, like a magazine’s subscribers.
To reach these audiences via the mass media involves having your message selected
for inclusion by journalists according to formal or informal ideas of what they think
the reader or viewer wants, sometimes called news values. The journalist takes on a
‘gatekeeper’ role, deciding what does and does not get forwarded to the medium’s
users. Of course, advertisers can reach the same audiences without going through this
‘gate’, but they lose credibility or third-party endorsement in the process.
Most public relations communication is mediated, though it is worth remembering
that public relations also uses direct media, such as exhibitions, leaflets or corporate
videos, where the content is wholly controlled by the sender. Interestingly, the internet
allows both kinds of communication. Some sites are run by media organisations where
inclusion is controlled by journalists, such as the Guardian’s newsunlimited sites or
BBC Online. But websites, chatrooms and newsgroups allow direct communication with
interested parties –and, of course, between them.
The communication models discussed below help explain these developments.
A brief history of communication models
Aristotle (384–322 BC) is often cited as the first authority on communication. His works
on rhetoric – the art of influencing others through the spoken word – developed with
the growth of democracy in Ancient Greece and are still highly influential. Many political
speeches depend on the techniques he advocated, such as the use of repetition in
Tony Blair’s ‘education, education, education’ speech. Aristotle believed communication
consisted of three elements:
•ethos – the nature or qualities of the communicator
• logos – the nature, structure and content of the message
• pathos – the nature, feelings and thoughts of the receiver or audience.
More recently, in 1948, political scientist Harold Laswell created a formula to describe
the communication process:
• who says
• what
• to whom
• with what
• effect?
This has been very influential, and reflects interest at that time in the power of propaganda.
But it assumes that communication will always have an effect and suggests that
communication is always persuasive. In this model, the communicator or sender decides
what and how to communicate and the receiver just waits to be affected – an approach
that is now considered very limited (McQuail and Windahl 1993).
Claude Shannon, a mathematician, created a representation of Laswell’s formula as a
linear, mathematical equation in 1949. He and his partner Warren Weaver worked for
Bell Telephones and their interest was driven by the technical requirements of a medium.
They introduced the crucial concept of interference in communication, which they called
‘noise’. Interference might occur in the handset of the speaker or receiver, or in the lines
connecting them. As a result the message could be distorted and misunderstood. The
same principle could be translated to different media, for example radio static, poor TV
reception, small print, blurred photographs. Noise was later expanded to include daydreaming,
physical discomfort or other kinds of distraction. It was an important reminder
that communication sent is not always –if ever –the same as communication received.
A simple communication model will include a source or sender who selects information
(encodes) to create a message that will be transmitted by a channel to a receiver
who selects a meaning from the message (decodes) and responds with action or no
action (feedback). Harrison’s adaptation of the Shannon and Weaver model demonstrates
this clearly (Figure 2.1). This model has some useful elements for public relations,
particularly regarding the role of feedback. When two people are in conversation,
the speaker is free to adjust his or her tone, speed, language, emphasis and so on,
according to questions, nods, smiles and other responses from the listener. Indeed, if
something is not understood, it can quickly be made clear. The source and receiver are
in a constant feedback and adjustment loop. This feedback element is crucial to effective
public relations –we need to know if the message was received, how it was understood
and what actions or changes in attitude or behaviour have followed receipt of
the message. Feedback is what tells the practitioner that his or her sense of humour or
wit has backfired or, more simply, that the language is too complex for a particular
audience.
However, this still presents two problems. First, it is linear: feedback is not the same
thing as equal participation in the communication, and second, it is hard to place the
mass media comfortably in this model. The Osgood–chramm model (Figure 2.2)
suggests a more equal model of communication while the Westley–clean model
describes the role of the mass media in communication.
Osgood and Schramm were central to the development of the second approach
suggested by Rogers and Kincaid, which was discussed earlier in the chapter when we
looked at contrasting concepts of communication. In 1954, they created a circular model,
which showed that the receiver as well as the sender is engaged in a continuous and
active act of communication. Each party has to interpret the message and shape a
response before sending it out or back. Schramm added,
In fact it is misleading to think of the communication process as starting somewhere
and ending somewhere. It is really endless. We are really switchboard centres
handling and rerouting the great endless current of information.
(quoted in McQuail and Windahl)
This more equal communication relationship was continued in the work of McLeod
and Chaffee whose co-orientation models (1973) influenced much of Grunig’s thinking
on two-way communication.
The second problem with the linear models, which also applies to Osgood and
Schramms, is that they do not include a mass media role. Feedback in mass media
communications is quite different from personal or group communications. There may
be letters to the editor, of course, but often the effect of a communication is very hard
to measure. By far the most useful model from this period is the Westley–cLean
model of 1957 (Figure 2.3) because it is the first to address the role of the mass media
in communication. Westley and McLean introduce the role of the gatekeeper or channel (C) into the communication flow between (A) which is similar to a source and (B) which is similar to a receiver. However, they elaborate these roles so that (A) becomes the advocate, the ‘purposive role’, and (B), the individual or group public, is deemed to have a ‘behavioural role’. This model also shows events in the environment (X) and the response of
all the players to those events. It is the first to describe the role of the public relations
professional so clearly. (A) has to gather relevant information from the internal and
external environment and create an appropriate message (X') to pass through the channel
(C) or gatekeeper who may alter it (X'') before it can reach the public (individual or
group) over whose behaviour (B) influence is sought. The model reminds the PR that
the journalist or gatekeeper has access to more information (X3c) than their press
releases. The model also describes the complexity of feedback in mass media communication
with feedback loops running between the PR and the journalist, the PR and
the public and the public and the journalist, though the feedback via mass media is
delayed.
It is worth noting that the internet is reducing the gatekeeper role of the journalist,
as organisations can post whatever materials they choose on their own website, and
create direct links with their key audiences. Likewise, the behaviour group (B) is no
longer dependent on the mass media for information and can access the events in the
environment directly. (B) can also contact other members of the audience and exchange
communication without contact with (A) or (C).
The Westley–McLean model has proved a valuable starting point for examining the
process of communication, but the emphasis is still on how the sender constructs the
message. There are other theorists who see the process and the actions of the sender
as quite irrelevant. They emphasise the role of the audience or receiver in constructing
meaning.
Doro Jatun Kuncoro Jati
