ron bishop, drexel university. don’t really have an elegant definition of communication. we talk...

COM 101: Human Communication

Ron Bishop, Drexel University

Don’t really have an elegant definition of communication.

We talk about it in utilitarian, matter-of-fact, pragmatic terms.

It’s so much more than a tool, a skill. More than just developing “good communication

skills.” It impacts, defines so much human activity. Studying it is sometimes like foraging in a

junkyard. Studying it is to embrace the interrelatedness of

ideas – from a variety of fields (“Consilience”).

60 percent of our time on earth…

Linear Without purpose (Usually…unless you’re talking

in your sleep). ◦ Manifest v. latent functions of communication.

(Merton)◦ A visit to the land of polysemy.

Perfect Mechanistic

◦ Consider the frames of reference.◦ Acknowledge your gatekeeping.

Intermittent◦ Can one not not communicate?

What communication isn’t…

Just a transaction◦ Less un-sponsored activity these days.

As private as before◦ Would you accept a Jumbotron marriage proposal?

Easy Always the right call

◦ The importance and impact of silence.

What communication isn’t

“….of all things communication is the most wonderful.”◦ Experience and Nature, 1939, p. 385.

“Society exists not only by transmission, by communication, but it may fairly be said to exist in transmission, in communication.”◦ Democracy and Education, 1916, p. 5.

Dewey knew, Radar…

Saw the contradiction in our use of the word “communication.”

Two dominant views of communication that are still hanging around: ◦ Transmission view of communication◦ Ritual view of communication

Dewey knew, Radar…

Comes from a metaphor of transportation, geography.

We “impart,” “send,” “transmit” messages. At its core: the transmission of messages

over distance, often for the purpose of control.

Still very much alive today in most ads for smartphones.

Information as commodity, as competitive advantage.

The transmission view

Communication linked to ideas like “sharing,” “participation,” “association,” “fellowship.”

Shares roots with “commonness,” “communion,” “community.”

Not focused on extension of messages in space, but toward maintenance of society in time.

Not the act of transmitting information, but the representation of shared beliefs.

See it in the ceremony that draws us together in fellowship and commonality.

The ritual view

Consider the newspaper…

Transmission view: it’s an instrument for disseminating news and knowledge.

Ritual view: nothing new is learned, but a particular view of the world is confirmed. News is drama.

Consider the newspaper…

Communication is a “symbolic process where reality is produced, maintained, repaired, and transformed.”

“Contemplate the particular miracles of social life that have become for us just there, plain and unproblematic for the eye to see.”

Develop a sense of awe, of wonder, about this seemingly “commonplace activity.”◦ James Carey, Communication as Culture

Toward a cultural model then…

“Reality is brought into existence, is produced, by communication…by the construction, apprehension, and utilization of symbolic forms.”◦ James Carey, Communication as Culture

Toward a cultural model…

Intrapersonal Interpersonal Group Public Mass

Types (levels?) of communication

“The transmission and reception of information.”

“The management of messages for the purposes of creating meaning.”

“The process of human beings responding to the symbolic behavior of other persons…”

Some definitions…

“The mechanism through which human relations exist and develop – all the symbols of the mind, together with the means of conveying them…through space and preserving them through time.” ◦ Charles Cooley, sociologist

Some more definitions…

“A process involving the selection, production, and transmission of signs in such a way as to help a receiver perceive a meaning similar to that in the mind of the communicator.”

“A systemic process in which people interact with and through symbols to create and interpret meanings.”

Some more definitions…

“Communication is an ‘effort after meaning,’ a creative act initiated by man in which he seeks to discriminate and organize cues so as to orient himself in his environment and satisfy his changing needs.” ◦ Dean Barnlund, 1968

Still more definitions…

“Who says what in which channel to whom with what effect?”◦ Harold Lasswell, 1948

The one that’s stuck with me…

On Berger! On Benjamin!

Relationship between what we see and what we know or learn is fluid, never settled.

We don’t just react to stimuli. You choose to attend to something, to

situate yourself in relation to it. We’re all making sense of the “visible

world.” We make active choices – we are

gatekeepers! What you see depends on where you are

when…

Thoughts on Berger…

Consider the photo…

How you see – how an artist sees, a photographer sees, a writer sees – is all there in the subject.

What’s the impact of figuring out that a photo outlasts its subject?

Do you need an audience to have art? Publicity becomes ideology; we want legacies! Images mystify, blur the past. Deprived of history; left to navel-gaze. Reclaim the history! Ditch the experts! And

overuse of exclamation points!


Reproduction destroys the uniqueness of the subject.

It comes to us, rather than us going to it. You experience art – communication of all

types – differently than anyone else. Don’t force your perceptions into the boxes

provided by experts. Does damage to uniqueness.


Anyone Been Here?

Or here?

We don’t observe, we take pictures. The original preserves its authority. Reproductions more independent of the

original. The aura of the work withers, detached

from tradition. We reactivate the product, but at the same

time chip away at its traditional value.

Thoughts on Benjamin…

Everything comes to seem equal, universal. Nothing’s special, nothing’s an event. The importance of formula…the illusion of

audience…the importance of technique. Copies become more valuable than originals

to us.

Thoughts on Benjamin…

Let’s not forget signs…

For example…

Or for example…

Something “which can be taken as significantly substituting for something else” (Eco).

The “something else” doesn’t have to exist. “Something which stands to somebody for

something in some respect or capacity” (Peirce).

Relationship is arbitrary, caused by social convention; no logical connection.

We, the interpreters, bring the meaning.

Signs

Ferdinand de Saussure

His Take on Signs

So for example…

Signifier = the word “open” Signified = the concept/idea that the store

is open for business.

Is it a sign?

Then came Peirce…

Peirce’s model

Representamen: the form the sign takes. Object: what the sign refers to. Interpretant: the sense we make of the

sign.

What’s the new idea?

The word “dog” isn’t a dog, of course. But…it’s a sign that represents a dog. So…

◦ Representamen: the word “dog” ◦ Object: the actual dog◦ Interpretant: the fact we understand the sign as

meaning “dog.”

Who let the dogs out?

Representamen: the light facing the traffic. Object: the stopped vehicles. Interpretant: the indication that you

understand that you have to stop.

Peirce would say…

Likeness: it resembles the object, but there’s no connection.

Index: a physical connection with the object. It exists, then we talk about it.

Symbol: “connected with its object by virtue of the symbol-using mind” (Peirce).

Orders of signs…

Something that stands for something else that is often hidden.

Used to represent things, processes, ideas, wishes, events.

We create our own interpretations. We create our own “core images” – symbols

that represent how we understand our lives.

A symbol is a type of sign…

Ambivalent; interpretation depends on one’s experience.

Three types: conventional, accidental, and universal.

Enable us to unlock the doors shielding our unconscious feelings from scrutiny.

A symbol is like a sign…

Symbols grow out of signs. Symbols spread. As we use them, the meaning grows,

changes, evolves. Can mean different things to different

generations. Never entirely arbitrary, says de Saussure.

The difference?

With symbols, there seems to be a “natural bond” between the signifier and signified.

Couldn’t just replace the symbol of justice with another symbol.

The difference?

How does a signifier take on its meaning? How do we come to learn the meanings? Where do we find the instructions to learn?

So always be asking…

A collection of signs…

OK, but what happens when signifiers start to “float?”

Set of principles or expectations that guide the actions of a group.

A practice or procedure a group follows to make interaction easier.

They agree that the convention works for them.

Would you be brave enough to violate one?

On to conventions

On to conventions…

“Every work is the work of many things besides an author…”

What seems “natural” to us. It makes what we think and do seem

“right.” Shared beliefs and values held

unquestioningly. Structure of beliefs, principles, practices

that define, organize, and help us interpret reality.

Ideology

Always consider the dominant and oppositional ideologies when looking at messages.

We experience mix of dominant, residual, emergent forms of consciousness.

Ideology

System of assumptions, meanings, and value. A web of ideologies that shapes the way things

look, what they mean, and what reality is for the majority of people within a given culture.

We’re not just “the doped glazed telly viewers,” though.

Consider dominant and oppositional ideologies. Experience mix of dominant, residual,

emergent forms of consciousness.

Hegemony

Intertextuality

Comprehension/understanding of a media text is enhanced by your knowledge of others.

Intertextuality

The tendency of message creators to talk about themselves, to inject that into their texts.

When you hear “media feeding frenzy,” for example.

Or when you hear a song by someone about writing a song.

Or a work of fiction about a writer who writes fiction.

Self-Reflexivity

From Family Guy…

The enemy of communication. Anything that interrupts or prevents or

damages communication.◦ Physical (mechanical)◦ Semantic ◦ Psychological

Noise! Noise! NOISE!

Every message provokes a reaction. We can either accept it or disregard it. It would be best if we would learn from it.

I welcome your feedback, Steve.

We argue about highbrow vs. lowbrow forms of communication.

Do we celebrate the “vulgar?” Should we hope that the classy will eclipse

the vulgar? Doesn’t anyone have taste anymore? Or just accept that predictability in a

message can be a strength. Repetition and copying are signs of success. It’s sort of our common language.

On Twitchell…

“Alternative to what,” as my brother-in-law asked once.

We want to be dazzled, entertained. Give us more “big grid” stuff…make Vegas

even glitzier! Makes it risky for an artist to try something

new, innovative – “little grid.” We want “intimacy and massiveness” at the

same time! Nirvana gave it to us!

On Seabrook…

We expect to experience life as “an immense accumulation of spectacles.”

We used to just live – now we represent! Challenges how we used to see reality. They’re all we want to see. Is human life “mere appearance?” Even our down time is meant to be spent

sustaining our love of spectacle.

And finally, on Debord

The Super Bowl…

The Oscars

Can language shape thought? Control thought as it happens?

Does language suggest how you think, interpret the world, explain things?

Can’t think a thought that can’t be expressed in language.

Sapir and Whorf

Erving Goffman: we’re constantly managing the impression we show to the public.

We hide anything we think might tarnish that image.

We show a little more of the “dirty work” that goes into sustaining the image.

Front stage: the “right place” for the performance.

Back stage: where all the image repair takes place.

Do we live in a “confessional culture?”

The Self and Communication

We strive for cohesion in setting, appearance, manner.

We try to avoid mishaps. Is there a danger in being so back stage-

happy? Is shame a lost art? We seem to be in a constant state of fixing –

the perpetual makeover.


Too Much Back Stage?

We act and communicate based on how we think others see us.

Reflected appraisal and social comparison – it’s what we do.

We’re sense-makers! Frame of reference provides the

“templates.” We can be self-directed and other-directed. We are both object and subject…I and me.


By staying:◦ Unique◦ Integrated◦ Consistent◦ Active

How Do We Do It?

Despite all the sameness, we remain unique.

Despite living in a “confessional culture,” we don’t share everything.

A lot of the meaning we make stays internal.

Self-Directed: Unique

Feel the need to organize the thoughts, the sensations, the responses.

The stuff has to go somewhere. We incorporate new stuff into larger

patterns of thought. Not just a matter of how much we can

process. We love us the structure, the balance, the

order. All done on the way to…cue Maslow!

Self-Directed: Integrated

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

We integrate in the name of consistency. When change occurs, we actually push

back. We want, need, seek, long for consistency.

Self-Directed: Consistency

Cognitive Dissonance Selective Exposure Selective Retention (or Forgetting) Inoculation

Consistency-Seeking Tools

The Mind’s Bouncers

Always a risk when you communicate. The results shape the self. We keep at it, despite the unpredictability. We don’t just react.

Finally, We’re Active

Looking Out Johari’s Window!

We’ve become credibility hounds, always worried about image.

Comes at expense of real ideas. We research, focus group, test drive

everything. Always a gap between real and perceived

credibility.

Other-Directed: Credibility

Is this guy credible?

“The interaction between source-related attributes and the perceived attributes of a source held by the receiver.”

Or try this…◦ “The degree to which the receiver regards a

source as trustworthy and a message as truthful.” Or this…

◦ “A perceived characteristic of a source based on a combination of beliefs about the source’s competence, trustworthiness, extroversion, composure, and sociability.”

Time for a definition

So who’s credible?

Who isn’t?

Competence Trustworthiness Extroversion Composure Sociability

The five dimensions…

Confidence is shared and tied to social processes.

Status conferral: boosting the standing of ideas, institutions, and people that we see in media content.

Before we became so media-saturated, we looked to wealth, education, legacy, occupation to gain confidence in someone.

Being recognized is enough today, some say.

Visibility = Status?

Lazarsfeld and Merton

The media giveth confidence, and the media taketh away confidence.

The “taketh away” happens through status degradation – public shaming or marginalization of a person.

But is that just the media blowing their own horn – or horns?

Lazarsfeld and Merton

Let’s try a definition: non-verbal communication is/are messages expressed by other than linguistic means.

By the deliberate or intentional use of objects, sounds, actions, time, space…

With the intent of arousing meaning in others.

You can stop talking, but you can’t stop behaving non-verbally.

Or in short: one cannot not communicate.

The Power of the “Earnest Nod”

NV interaction is reciprocal – one person’s posture, gesture, or touch causes the other to react, perhaps in the same way.

To detect the meaning of a NV cue, you have to know the sender’s frame of reference, situation (of the non-Jersey Shore variety), and cultural background.


Culture operates on three levels, as Hall indicates: ◦ Technical: where we all know the rules.◦ Formal: we know the rules, not the reasons for the

rules.◦ Informal: We’ve learned the rules by imitation,

and now the behavior is pretty much a reflex.


Emblems: gestures with direct verbal translations.

Illustrators: movements that demonstrate and reinforce verbal messages.

Adapters: unintentional movements done to relieve tension.

Regulators: Manage the flow of an interaction.

Labels: Something outside the body created and placed or affixed or displayed to communicate status


Affective Displays: of emotion, feeling. Offensive Displays: Balling up your fists,

flipping the bird. Markers: Deployed to mark one’s turf. Tenure: Hey – I was here first! The land of

chronemics.


Emblems…

Illustrators…

Adapters…

Regulators…

Labels…

Intent Awareness Shared Meaning Meaningful Unit of Analysis

Four key N-V issues…

Kinesics◦ No body movement is without meaning.◦ Communication is a multichannel thing. ◦ Posture, movement, expression are patterned. ◦ A function of our social system. ◦ Movement can influence behavior of others.

Birdwhistell and Hall

Proxemics◦ Study of how space is used in communication.◦ A culturally determined thing. ◦ Different senses assume importance depending

on where you find yourself. Where does your personal space end?

◦ Intimate (touching to 18 inches)◦ Casual (18 inches to 4 feet)◦ Social-Consultative (4 to 12 feet)◦ Public (12 feet +)


We react to our physical environment with either approach or avoidance.

If you’re in a bad or ugly space, monotony and fatigue set in.

Attractive spaces? Comfort, energy


Cathedrals of Consumption

We are more often communication receivers than we are producers.

We get more information by listening than by reading.

Listening is a reputation-shaper. And we generally stink at it. We think technology can fill the gap – “she

can just leave me a voice mail.” A critical communication skill – and it’s just

nice.

People Hearing Without Listening…

What’s the status of your relationship? Do you have working knowledge of the

topic? Where are you trying to communicate? What is the speaker trying to convey? Why? Remember to always offer feedback. Let the whole message wash over you… Wait your damned turn! Have a reason to listen – a purpose. It’s a two-sided thing, this listening.


1. I keep an open mind while listening even if I don’t agree with someone.

2. I use my extra thought time while listening – I think ahead about where the speaker is going.

3. I ignore distractions while listening. 4. I practice listening by trying to listen to

new material or to a difficult talk. 5. I adjust my note-taking style to suit the

speaker’s style.


6. I work at listening; I make the effort. 7. I don’t judge the speaker’s verbal and

non-verbal communication styles until I’ve heard what he or she has to say.

8. I don’t jump to conclusions until I grasp the speaker’s point of view.

9. I listen for ideas, not details. 10. I hold out for interesting ideas, even if

the material is dry.


A process, actually…◦ Motivation◦ Reception◦ Attention◦ Interpretation◦ Response


Three levels to listening…◦ Nonhearing◦ Hearing◦ Thinking


What are your favorite blocks? ◦ Comparing◦ Mind-reading◦ Rehearsing◦ Filtering◦ Judging◦ Dreaming◦ Identifying◦ Advising◦ Sparring◦ Self-Effacement◦ Being Right◦ Derailing


We listen (600 words/minute) faster than most folks can talk (100-200 words/minute).

Our minds wander; attention spans are shorter. We might bring a negative self-concept to the

party. You may have heard that you’re a bad listener. We do love our buzzwords – that’s for sure. Pretty fond of inciting words, too. It’s too noisy. I’ve heard it all before (the “jaded” listener). What’s in it for me?


Discriminative Comprehensive

◦ Comprehension is the goal… Therapeutic

◦ Non-directive (No judgments! No solutions!)◦ Directive (Solutions offered; active involvement)

OK, that’s how – now tell me why

“The greatest danger to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”

- Olmsted v. U.S. (1928).

Brandeis had it right…

ron bishop, drexel university. don’t really have an elegant definition of communication. we talk...

Documents

culture slide

word communication

things communication

drexel university slide

good communication skills

transmission of messages

particular view

human activity