What prompted this page is really a combination of
things - first- is the thought that in man's struggle
for meaning, we struggle to communicate ideas that are
valid. We do that so that people will agree with us,
but also so that we may get across to folks, what we're
thinking and feeling- that is communication.
If we stop there- if that's all we do- that is,
as one person recently jumped all over me about,
"one way communication," and they said that
as if to say it was worse than a sin. One way
communication in a two way communication age. What would
you do if during the evening telecast of the news on
your favorite channel, you said to the T.V. "well I
think you people are stupid for broadcasting that,
and frankly I'm nearly through with watching your channel
as is." And the newscast stopped, they looked at you,
center screen, and said "well we've got some input
here from one of our viewers who says they are fed up
with us, in fact, they said they think we are stupid
for broadcasting this, so, here's the quick telepoll-
push one if you agree with them, two if you don't."
What would you do- were that possible?
How would you feel about the process?
Text Referenced is:
EM Griffin "A First Look At Communication Theory"
Chapter cited: Chapter Five "Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM)
W. Barnett Pearce & Vernon Cronen
PR: 
LD: 
I: 
Rank: 
C: 
No comments:
Post a Comment