Analysis of Blog and Super Girl with Communication Theory

When Hunan Satellite TV's Super Girl program swept the country last year, many people paid attention to the mixture of mass communication and interpersonal communication. For example, the square of singer supporters in TV studios and the voting method of short messages are all regarded as the introduction of interpersonal communication by mass communication.

The problem is that mass communication seems to add a lot of emotion when it introduces interpersonal communication. Super girl is a typical example. In the studio, the interaction between singer supporters and participating girls is very strong, which will certainly affect the audience in front of the TV. This is different from the live audience we usually see on TV. In many programs, the live audience we see seems to be all visitors and curious people of TV stations, and they are basically the foil of hosts and guests, which is relatively dull.

It also increased the audience. Why are CCTV's "Tell the Truth" and "Dialogue" programs so calm? One explanation is that the role played by the live audience of these two programs is more symbolic. Therefore, this kind of program has higher requirements for the host, and Cui Yongyuan is excellent in mobilizing the audience's emotions.

Is mass communication more objective than interpersonal communication?

Mass communication is both institutional communication and organizational communication, and interpersonal communication is personal communication. Theoretically speaking, group communication is more objective than individual communication. Because group communication needs consistency and unified will, while individual communication is more casual, undisciplined and subjective. For example, when spreading information, the audience usually believes the news spread by the media more than the personal rumors. Objectivity plays a great role in this respect.

Relatively speaking, there are fewer intermediate links in mass communication than interpersonal communication, so the degree of distortion in mass communication is also smaller than interpersonal communication. At the same time, mass communication has powerful technical means and hardware facilities, which can ensure that the speed of mass communication is better than interpersonal communication. In today's rapidly changing world, the speed of information dissemination often represents the objectivity and impartiality of the media.

From here, it is not difficult to understand why the news media particularly emphasize the principle of objectivity. If the news media is full of subjectivity and grandstanding, it will inevitably divide or even reduce its audience. Subjectivity and emotion are like twin sisters. One of their characteristics is that some people like it very much, while others don't. Therefore, mass communication is somewhat risky when choosing subjective or perceptual communication methods. CCTV's "Art Life" can be said to have taken the road of emotional communication, and its host, Zhu Jun, is regarded as a master of sensationalism. Many years ago, Ni Ping, another host of CCTV, was also a representative in this respect.

Interestingly, comments in the news media can be regarded as a kind of subjective communication, but the strategy they adopt is a balanced view, that is, relying on the self-correction of the opinion market, a single view is subjective, while the overall or balanced view can tend to be objective. It is in this sense that online comments have given us many surprises. When people keep discussing whether the Internet is a kind of media, what we see is not online editorials or commentator articles, but more popular opinions. We can't even say that they reflect the opinions of grassroots organizations, because the unorganized characteristics of the network are very obvious, which reflects the characteristics of interpersonal communication to some extent.

In interpersonal communication, subjectivity and emotion are usually insoluble factors, and even in a sense, they have become powerful weapons. Therefore, the spread of rumors and gossip is often paranoid, and its conflict with mass communication is obvious. Of course, this not only includes embellishment, but more importantly, I am afraid that in interpersonal communication, everyone often has two jobs, both as a referee and an athlete, as well as a communicator and a receiver.

What is the difference between mass communication and interpersonal communication?

The original information dissemination should be one-to-one, which is a typical interpersonal communication. In the era of book communication, there has been one-to-many communication, which is the clue of mass communication. Newspapers, radio and television have only developed one-to-many communication to the extreme. In the era of mass communication, once the status of communicators has changed from individuals to institutions, it has been confirmed. In the bullet and injection theory, the audience becomes a passive terminal. In the concept of opinion leader, the initiative of the audience began to be initially recognized. When we talk about secondary communication or multi-level communication, to some extent, interpersonal communication has been incorporated into the whole process of mass communication.

When mass communication turns one-to-one interpersonal communication into one-to-many, we have already begun to ask whether there are many-to-one and many-to-many communication. From the left side of the formula, we can see that the communicator has undergone an imaginary change. Is it possible for communicators to become more? In fact, in the mode of opinion dissemination, we can still be sensitive to this point, and the diversified viewpoint confrontation makes us feel the complexity of the communicator from a certain angle. However, can this alone constitute more communicators? Because there is a great difference between fact communication and viewpoint communication, the former tends to be consistent, while the latter pays attention to balance. This is also the reason why many people want to buy two newspapers, because in terms of information, the difference between big newspapers and tabloids is not as big as imagined, and it is more important to obtain a cognitive balance of views.

Then, can the increase of TV channels and the huge number of newspapers and periodicals be regarded as more communicators? According to the concept of cultural consumerism, the richness of the market is the premise of consumption. To some extent, only by changing from the seller's market to the buyer's market can we appreciate the weight of the audience. But from another point of view, the segmentation of the media market is just a clarification of the audience, in short, it is to change the audience from general to more refined.

We usually understand that mass communication is based on a vague audience, because the purpose of mass communication is to spread information to as many audiences as possible. Everyone is equal before information, and there is no difference between audiences. Therefore, what happens is that the audience has a clear understanding of the communicator, while the communicator has a vague understanding of the audience. However, traditional interpersonal communication is more clear about its own communication targets, and there are usually differences between them. So we can say that the circle of interpersonal communication is similar to the community, excluding strangers, a bit like the coffee shop in the community. Mass communication, like a downtown cafe, always welcomes new audiences to join. As a result, its social circle expands faster than interpersonal communication.

With the development of mass communication today, I am afraid it is the first time that we are faced with such a problem, that is, the communicator's understanding of the audience has entered a precise stage. Our ratings survey and the detailed reader information obtained through self-run newspapers and periodicals have enabled communicators to master more audience data than before. The question is, why do we need to do this? Is it for commercial purposes or for the needs of public services? Even if we need to know as much as possible, where is the limit of our understanding? Just as the TV ratings data is not equal to the audience appreciation index, the audience is not a bunch of numbers. So, do we need to grasp this awareness?

If we use more vivid language, can we say that mass communication embodies the desire of human communication, is the expression of romanticism and reflects the idealistic thought? Of course, the premise is that it reflects the intention and imagination of the communicator more. Interpersonal communication embodies the concealment of human communication and is a portrayal of realism. It expresses the idea of the target audience more.

Rapid change is a major feature of mass communication. Whether it is the translation and column division of newspapers or the serial list of TV news programs, it is speeding up our reading speed. Modern science and technology make mass communication even more powerful in the speed of communication. Therefore, speed has become the primary factor for the success of news media. In this case, it is difficult for readers to read through today's thick newspapers, and viewers can only use the remote control to search a large number of TV programs. Comparatively speaking, interpersonal communication is slow. However, at present, the way of mass communication is affecting interpersonal communication. For example, the group sending function of short messages speeds up interpersonal communication.

From the point of view of feedback, interpersonal communication has more advantages. The presence and directness of interpersonal communication provide a face-to-face communication field for them. Mass communication is an instrumental communication, which is indirect and impersonal. The status of the disseminator and the object of communication is not equal enough, which leads to a result. The feedback of mass communication is to increase the effectiveness of communication, and the feedback of interpersonal communication itself is a kind of communication, or this feedback has become a part of communication. CCTV's Face to Face program can be regarded as an organic combination of mass communication and interpersonal communication. The communication between Wang Zhi, the reporter and the host, and the interviewee includes questions and feedback, all of which have outstanding interpersonal communication characteristics. The difference is that it is broadcast to a large audience through mass media TV.

Who changed who?

A traditional view is that TV hosts use more elements of interpersonal communication to do mass communication. In the studio, the host communicates with the audience and guests. Off-site, the host communicates with a large audience through the TV screen. Today, this method is called quasi-interpersonal communication.

So, what we need to ask is, is there mass communication? For example, is the current SMS a quasi-mass communication? It seems that one-on-one communication by SMS is very personal and should be regarded as interpersonal communication. However, its forwarding and mass sending functions form one-to-many communication, which expands the scale and speeds up the communication and makes it have certain characteristics of mass communication. During the SARS period in 2003, SMS was extremely active. In normal times, SMS also encourages the spread of political jokes and pornographic jokes. Even we can find a rule, that is, when mass communication appears what we call collective aphasia, mobile phone short messages are particularly active. From this perspective, interpersonal communication seems to be an effective supplement to mass communication. When mass communication shows weak links, interpersonal communication will keep up in time to fill the gap left by mass communication.

Today, what we see more is the integration and interaction between mass communication and interpersonal communication. You have me and I have you. For example, according to the conventional understanding, mass communication is relatively transparent and open, while interpersonal communication is relatively hidden and private. However, when we watch the popular TV reality show, we will naturally realize that mass communication is arrogantly stealing interpersonal communication to amplify personal privacy, which directly encourages the collective voyeurism of society. In fact, not only TV, but also newspapers and periodicals are not to be outdone. Judging from the book Absolute Privacy written by Ding An, a reporter from Beijing Youth Daily, there is also a wind of revealing privacy in the publishing industry.

The crux of the problem is, who changed who in mass communication and interpersonal communication? In other words, what kind of new things have been produced by the integration and interaction of the two? Is mass communication getting more and more perfect? Or did interpersonal communication catch the express train of mass communication? Or, the inherent form of mass communication has changed imperceptibly? If there is such a change, what kind of change?

The discussion of many issues often leads us back to the original point and look at the original motivation. Why do people need to spread news? Or what is the basic state and original motivation of news communication? Compared with the current media types, which media is more in line with the original meaning of news communication? Is it the way of books or the mode of newspapers and periodicals? Today, the interpersonal communication characteristics of books are the most obvious. Its communication speed is slow and its communication cost is relatively high. So it has been eliminated from the ranks of mass communication. In communication, the scale is directly proportional to the openness under the same conditions, that is, the larger the scale, the stronger the openness.

Internet is the fastest in mass communication. But its interpersonal characteristics are also the most obvious. It may be that its interpersonal communication status has prevented its mass communication status from growing, so online comments have developed rapidly. It can even be said that the network is a mass communication formatted by interpersonal communication. Its mass communication is based on interpersonal communication. At the same time, there are also community-based minority exchanges, such as discussion groups, which reflect the original state of more humanized communication.

The same is the spread of information. What is the difference between individual communication and group communication? What's the difference between official communication and non-governmental communication? Is it the privilege of mass communication to spread news? In fact, since the birth of the Internet, such doubts have never stopped. For example, should the network have the right to interview news? Is the right to interview a civil right or an institutional privilege?

Compared with radio and television, newspapers and periodicals still retain some characteristics of interpersonal communication, and we can vaguely see such traces from the dazzling comments in newspapers and periodicals. Broadcasting, as its name implies, has the most obvious characteristics of mass communication, especially the uncertainty of the listening place. This may be an important reason why it can be perfectly combined with SMS. Even a simple medium like broadcasting, when it is combined with the hotline in the air, we can clearly see the powerful influence of interpersonal communication on mass communication. We used to stubbornly believe that mass communication was definitely stronger than interpersonal communication, so when it comes to change, most people think that mass communication has squeezed or transformed interpersonal communication. However, today, interpersonal communication may also quietly change mass communication. For example, the concept of mass communication and minority communication, the objective existence of specialized channels, not only the simple reduction of the number of people, but also shows the subtle changes in the way of mass communication to some extent.

Recently, crosstalk performer Degang Guo has become very popular. The internet said that he was very picky about cross talk on TV. It seems that TV has had a negative impact on cross talk. Interestingly, theater crosstalk should be said to be a typical interpersonal communication, which is somewhat contradictory to the mass communication mode of TV. Therefore, we can see that in the development process of CCTV Spring Festival Evening, the sketch has obviously surpassed the cross talk and gained the upper hand. Although many crosstalk performers are famous by TV, crosstalk itself does not seem to be developed by TV, which may be one of the reasons why Degang Guo people insist on letting theaters revitalize traditional crosstalk. The same thing happened in TV storytelling programs. Many TV people have been busy with programs for half a day, and the ratings seem to be worse than that of Dan Tianfang standing in front of the screen and saying storytelling. Li Ao of Phoenix TV has something to say that is similar to the lecture hall of CCTV. Did mass communication change interpersonal communication, or did the geese keep silent or pluck their hair?

Television communication has always been the pursuit of many TV people, but what can they say when faced with such a program in Li Ao? These programs are basically the framework of interpersonal communication, and they seem to simplify the form of mass communication to the extreme. In a sense, can we say that mass communication is sometimes the complication of interpersonal communication? Or conversely, interpersonal communication is sometimes a simplification of mass communication? From the perspective of communication acceptance, we are more like using interpersonal communication to accept the information of mass media.

conclusion

The conclusion of this paper is that there is an interactive relationship between mass communication and interpersonal communication. Today's mass communication is not what it used to be. Similarly, today's interpersonal communication is no longer the past interpersonal communication. They are inseparable, contradictory, integrated and even combined with each other. How to explain this combination? That is, mass communication can be combined with interpersonal communication to set off a wave of communication. For example, mass media are very willing to make what they spread into the topic of interpersonal communication, and as a result, some news reported by newspapers and periodicals can easily become gossip, which is actually what the media, especially tabloids, hope. For another example, many mass media like to do topic interviews, which is to collect the wishes of the audience. This is a typical manifestation of interpersonal communication continuing to mass communication.

In the report of SARS, we can even see such a propagation curve. When some sign language appeared in mass communication, interpersonal communication quickly followed to fill the gap, and when mass communication later woke up, it became mass communication again. In this special communication case, mass communication and interpersonal communication combine into a tortuous communication route. They learn from each other, compensate each other, oppose each other and transform each other, forming a communication chain of our social communication ecology. After mass communication, interpersonal communication usually magnifies and distorts the content of mass communication, and this function of interpersonal communication is likely to prompt the audience to return to mass communication for verification.

What is the difference between fake news in mass communication and rumors in interpersonal communication? Is the combination of mass communication and interpersonal communication an ideal form of communication in our society? When mass communication has established hegemony and dominance, do we still need to use interpersonal communication to counter it in order to maintain the balance of social communication ecology? Even if we need to do this, what can we do? On the one hand, the disseminator camp is becoming more and more collectivized and large-scale; On the other hand, the way the audience accepts communication is more and more personalized and hidden. Is this polarization of communication what we expect? In this case, is it possible for us to make mass communication more like interpersonal communication? Or on the other hand, let interpersonal communication have more colors of mass communication?

In the monopoly period when people subscribed to newspapers and periodicals in the past, reading newspapers was similar to reading documents, and the once popular group reading newspapers seemed to have some coercive factors. Obviously, we are unlikely to take the same road today. This may be the reason why we have to admire the cinema. Film is one of the few collective viewing projects in today's society. When the smallest cell family in our society has a dispute over the selection of channels, the group gold medal of the film is particularly precious, and group viewing can leave us with a collective memory to some extent. In the early days of TV, it was hard for anyone to forget the excitement of collective watching, and the pleasure could not be explained by compulsion. Such problems and phenomena deserve our consideration. (Author: Professor Liu Hong/Communication University of China This article was published in the 7th issue of Young Reporter in 2006)