Encoding/decoding model of communication: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:51, 3 February 2024

Revision as of 16:52, 3 February 2024

Line 59:

==The encoding/decoding model critique==

Hall's encoding/decoding model has left its proponents with three main problems to solve.<ref>{{cite journal|first1=Shangwei|last1=Wu|first2=Tabe|last2=Bergman|url=http://www.participations.org/Volume%2016/Issue%201/7.pdf|title=An active, resistant audience – but in whose interest? Online discussions on Chinese TV dramas as maintaining dominant ideology|journal=Participations: International Journal of Audience Research|volume=16|issue=1|date=May 2019|page=23}}</ref> The first problem concerns [[polysemy]]. The three positions of decoding proposed by Hall are based on the audience's conscious awareness of the intended meanings encoded into the text. In other words, these positions – agreement, negotiation, opposition – are in relation to the intended meaning. However, [[polysemy]] means that the audience may create new meanings out of the text. The audience's perceived meanings may not be intended by the producers. Therefore, ‘polysemy’ and ‘opposition’ should be seen as two analytically distinct processes, although they do interconnect in the overall reading process.<ref>Morley, D. (2006). Unanswered questions in audience research. ''The Communication Review 9''(2), 101–121.</ref><ref name="doi.org">Schrøder, K. C. (2000). Making sense of audience discourses: Towards a multidimensional model of mass media reception. ''European Journal of Cultural Studies 3''(2), 233–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/136754940000300205</ref> The second problem relates to aesthetics. TV viewers may take an aesthetically critical stance towards the text, commenting on the paradigmatic and syntagmatic aspects of textual production. Underlying this is the viewers’ awareness of the ‘constructedness’ of the text, which is a different dimension from meaning making in the decoding process.<ref name="doi.org"/><ref>Michelle, C. (2007). Modes of reception: A consolidated analytical framework. ''The Communication Review 10''(3), 181–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714420701528057

</ref> The third problem addresses the positions of encoding. Hall's model does not differentiate the various positions media producers may take in relation to the dominant ideology. Instead, it assumes that encoding always takes place within a dominant-hegemonic position.<ref name=":0">Ross, S. (2011, May 25th). The encoding/decoding model revisited: ''Annual Meeting of the International Communication Association''. Boston, MA.</ref>