Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Three important generalizations can be made about the collective entity known as “the audience.” First, in journalism, the audience is sine qua non: the audience is king. Second, despite its primacy, the defining characteristic of the mass media audience is its uncertainty, unpredictability, and “unknowability”; indeed, the very notion of “the audience” is elastic. Third, in contemporary journalism, the audience is changing at a pace surpassing that of any prior era, as the number of competitors for audience attention has proliferated.

To say that the audience is king begs an extraordinarily important question: In what sense is this true? Is it because democratic theory presumes that the rationale for a free press is informing the public so that it may make reasoned civic judgments? While journalists' sense of their relationship with their readers, viewers, and listeners most often conforms to a public service ideal of informing the audience and serving the “watchdog” function as a check on powerful institutions (most especially government), that sense of social responsibility increasingly is not shared by media owners and managers. For example, declines in audience size are used to justify the pruning of news staffs. Is the audience king because it directly or indirectly provides the economic support sustaining news media? In most of the world, the economic basis for news media is advertiser support, coupled, for print media, with subscription or circulation support. Thus news media attract audiences to collect revenue either directly from subscriptions or indirectly from advertisers' payments to reach the eyes and ears of that audience.

Origins

The concept of the audience is as old as theorizing about communication; indeed, Aristotle's rhetoric with its emphasis on the pathos or impact on the intended audience, was a first effort at establishing its primacy in the West. But the audience for mass media in general and journalism in particular is at great remove from the living, breathing, present and public audience of ancient Greece. For much of human history, “the audience” was aural, and the word itself derives from the Latin audire, to hear. Assembled audiences were necessarily ephemeral, active, and interactive.

While such audiences continue to exist, the dominant characterization of audience was shaped first by the technology of writing, amplified by that of printing, and then transformed by newer technologies of electronic communication. Writing and then printing fundamentally altered the nature of communication, from being spontaneous and transitory to being fixed; the nature of the communicative relationship from taking place solely between speakers and listeners to also involving writers and readers; and the nature of modes of reception from essentially public and social to primarily private and individual. As part of that process, the relationship between message producer and receiver changes fundamentally. The audience becomes separated in time and space from the producer; it is literally anonymous and unknown to that producer (and much of the time, elements of the audience are likewise unknown to each other), and whatever feedback is available to the producer is delayed, fragmentary, and, in the modern era, industrialized and institutionalized, through, for example, audience research.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading