Theory of Communication

Hendra Manurung, M.A

Faculty of Communication
President University at Cikarang Bekasi 17550
INDONESIA
www.scribd.com; h_manurung2002@yahoo.com

Cikarang, 12 January 2008

Introduction
Although it draws on ancient
tradition, as well as modern
intellectual traditions, theory of
communication has only recently
become a distinct field of study.
In the 20th century, term of
“communication” became an
important category in society :
z The growing power of mass
communication and
propaganda raised many
questions.
z New professions and industries
(media, advertising, public
relations, creative design,
marketing communication) has
developed.
z Better communication
approaches became the
answer to social problems and
the key to personal success
and happiness.
 Introduction
By mid-century, theory of communication was a topic
of interest in many academic disciplines.
z Communication research was an interdisciplinary field of
social science ;
z The term “theory of communication” originated in the 1940s
in electrical engineering, especially improvement of
information system and cybernetics technology ;
z Social scientists soon expanded theory of communication to
include ideas from cybernetics, social psychology,
psychiatry, anthropology, semantics, etc.
Now, communication has been established as an
academic discipline in many courses, textbooks,
journals, but theory of communication remains largely
as it was as,”a collection of ideas without unity”.
 Introduction
There are a number of
basic differences
between personal &
non personal
communication
channels.
Information received
from personal influence
channels is generally
more persuasive than
information received via
the mass media.
 Introduction
From the standpoint of persuassion, a sales
message is far more flexible, personal &
powerful than an advertisement ;
An advertisement is normally prepared by
persons having minimal personal contact with
customers ;
The message is designed to appeal to a large
number of persons ;
By contrast, the message in a good sales
presentation is not determined in advance.
 Introduction
The salesman has a tremendous store of
knowledge about his/her products or service
and selects appropriate items as the interview
progresses.
The salesman is able to adapt this to the
thinking and needs of the customer or
prospect at the time of the sales call.
Furthermore, as objections arise and are
voiced by the buyer, the salesman is able to
treat the objections in an appropriate manner.
This is not possible in advertising
Theory of Communication
Communication theory can and should become “a
coherent field of metadiscursive practice, a field of
discourse about discourse with implications for the
practice of communication”
The goal is “dialogical-dialectical coherence”: not a
unified theory, but rather a debate about the
practical implications of different theories.
The field should be based on two principles:
1. The constitutive metamodel: Theories of
communication constitute “communication” as an
object of study.
2. Theory as metadiscursive practice: Theories of
communication are ways of communicating
about communication for practical purposes.
 Principle 1: The
Constitutive Metamodel
The constitutive model of communication:
Communication is not only the transmission of
information. It is the process by which we constitute
a common reality (factual truths, moral norms, group
and personal identities, etc.)
The reflexive paradox: “Communication” therefore
exists as an element of our common reality only as it
is constituted in communication.
The constitutive metamodel: Theories of
communication are specific ways of communicating
about communication, thereby constituting the
reality of communication.
 Principle 2:
Theory As Metadiscourse
Practical metadiscourse (communication about
communication) is a necessary element of
communication. For example: saying “please explain”
or “I understand” influences a conversation differently.
Theoretical metadiscourse: Communication theory
is a technical practice of metadiscourse.
z Theory is communication about communication, but more
technically systematic than practical metadiscourse.
z For example, theories of hermeneutics (interpretation) are
systematic, technical extensions of metadiscourse like
“please explain” and “I understand”
z Theories are useful for reflecting on practical problems—that
is, they are useful in practical metadiscourse—but only as
they are relevant to practice.
 Theory As Meta-discourse
A theory is “relevant” to practice if:
1. Plausible: conforms to common beliefs about communication
2. Interesting: challenges common beliefs about communication
For example, the theory of rhetoric is:
1. Plausible because it conforms to common beliefs like
“communication is an art that can be learned,” and
2. Interesting because it challenges common beliefs like “the
best communication is natural, sincere, and artless”
Theories differ practically when they are plausible and
interesting in different (possibly contradictory) ways.
z For example: Buber’s theory of “dialogue” assumes, in
contrast to rhetoric, that the best communication is artless.
 Traditions of Theory
Communication
There are several traditions of communication theory
Table 1: Traditions of theory are distinguished by:
z Specific ways of defining communication and problems
z Specific vocabulary for metadiscourse
z Plausibility: popular beliefs confirmed
z Interestingness: popular beliefs challenged
Table 2: Topoi (issues) for theoretical debate: How
each tradition criticizes each tradition (including self-
criticism from within the tradition)
 Seven Traditions
1. Rhetorical: Communication is the practical art of
discourse.
2. Semiotic: Communication is mediation by signs.
3. Phenomenological: Communication is the
experience of dialogue with others.
4. Cybernetic: Communication is the flow of
information.
5. Socio-psychological: Communication is the
interaction of individuals.
6. Socio-cultural: Communication is the production
and re-production of the social order.
7. Critical: Communication is a process in which all
assumptions can be challenged.
 Further Thoughts
Myers (2001) argued that this concept of theory is
relativistic.
z I replied that theories can be evaluated
practically (Craig 2001).
Russill (2005) proposed pragmatism as an 8th
tradition, and argued that my model of the field is
essentially pragmatist.
z I replied that I largely agree! (Craig 2006)
My current work investigates:
z The interaction of theoretical and practical
metadiscourse, for example in public arguments
about “dialogue.”
z Other traditions of communication theory that I
failed to include, such as Asian traditions.
 References
Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication theory as a field.
Communication Theory, 9, 119-161.
Craig, R. T. (2001). Minding my metamodel, mending Myers.
Communication Theory, 11, 133-142.
Craig, R. T. (2006). Pragmatism in the field of communication
theory. Paper presented to the International Communication
Association, Dresden.
Myers, D. (2001). A pox on all compromises: Reply to Craig
(1999). Communication Theory, 11, 231-240.
Russill, C. (2005). The Road Not Taken: William James's
Radical Empiricism and Communication Theory. The
Communication Review, 8(3), 277-305.
ANCOL - JAKARTA
public relations students batch 2007
on “batik day”