1. Critical Perspectives: Section A, Question 1(b) - Audience
Introduction to audience theory:
Historically, media theorists viewed the audience as a mass that were directly
affected by the media, this links in with a history of the media generating
moral panics surrounding the effects of things like videogames.
Contemporary thinking surrounding audience theory believes that the
audience is not a mass with one response to a media text, it is vital that we
consider the social and cultural experiences that affect audience’s responses
to a range of texts.
It is important to move away from the idea that the meaning within texts is
already embedded and fixed and that all audiences respond to messages
encoded in the text in the same way. Audiences are made up of individuals
who are very capable of filtering out what they do and don’t want from media
texts.
Stuart Hall - Encoding and Decoding
Stuart Hall, in his research (1973), suggested that texts were ‘encoded’ by the
producers of the texts to contain certain meanings related to the social and
cultural background of the creator of the text. However, once the reader
‘decoded’ that text then the meanings intended by the producer may change.
Hall suggested three main perspectives on the way an audience responds to
a particular text.
This involves how the audience is positioned by the text and their subsequent
response.
1. Preferred or dominant readings – the audience interprets the text as
closely to the way in which the producer of the text intended.
2. Negotiated readings – the audience will go through some sort of
negotiation with themselves to allow them to accept the way in which
the text is presented. The audience may agree with some elements of
the text and disagree with others.
3. Oppositional or resistant readings – the user of the text will be in
conflict with the text itself due to their culture, beliefs or experiences.
1

2. Blumler & Katz – Uses and Gratifications Theory
This theory assumes the audience is active rather than passive and it
emphasises what the audiences of media texts do with them rather than what
the media does to the audience. The Uses and Gratifications theory suggests
that individuals and social groups use texts in different ways and the audience
are no longer viewed as passive receivers.
The identified needs of the audience we later refined as:
• Entertainment & Diversion – as a form of escapism
• Personal relationships/ social interaction – identification with characters
and being able to discuss media texts with others
• Personal identity – the ability to compare your life with that of
characters and situations presented in media texts
• Information/Education – to find out and learn about what is going on in
the world
2

3. David Gauntlett and the Pick ‘n’ Mix Reader
The internet and web pages offer good examples of Gauntlett’s idea of the
‘pick and mix’ audience. Here the audience uses texts – it ignores some
aspects of them and chooses the aspects that suit them at that time. The next
time people play or search they may ‘pick and mix’ a different menu – the
flexibility is there to enable the user of these formats to do this.
Quote: (‘Media, Gender and Identity’ (2002) Routledge: London) Pg 206.
To conclude, Gauntlett talks about a highly sophisticated media user that is
aware of what they want and don’t want from media texts and is also aware of
themselves as a consumer.
3

4. David Buckingham – The Creative Audience
David Buckingham conducted a number of research studies into audiences.
His work demonstrated that young people use the media to help make sense
of their experiences, of relating to others and in organising their daily lives.
“The media offer material for experimentation with alternative social identities,
if only at the level of fantasy or aspiration” (Reading Audiences: Young
People and the Media” Manchester University Press: 1993: P13). Buckingham
believes it is essential to situate young peoples media use within the context
of their other social activities and experiences due to the fact that many young
people are using the media as a wallpaper, a wall of noise to fill up ‘down
time’ or just to pass the time due to boredom. That many of their interactions
with the media are not contrived, commited or concentrated but fleeting,
visceral and meaningless.
These ideas point to a blurring of the lines between consumer and producer,
caused by the rise in digital technologies.
Digital technology and the rise of the Internet has changed the nature of
spectatorship through interactivity and the playback possibilities inherent in
these technologies, thus allowing for infinite revisits to the scene of particular
interest.
4