Reaching audiences in a world of New Media: Setting the ...€¦ · Web viewAmazon definitely has...

REACHING AUDIENCES IN A WORLD OF NEW MEDIA 1

Reaching audiences in a world of New Media: Setting the consumer's agenda through

compliance-gaining techniques and branding self-expression

Kenneth Rosenberg

University of South Florida

Intro. to Mass Comm. Theory

MMC 6401-901

Dr. Miller


Abstract

This paper attempts to define and explore “new media” by framing it within medium theory. In

this new medium, where audiences are not even remotely captive anymore, marketers need to

adjust their mass communications to consumers and utilize compliance-gaining techniques that

will enable them to set the personal, social, and consumer agendas of new media users. Social

networking is the premiere format for branding and agenda-setting, because the companies that

created networking sites have managed to forgo the hassle of selling a tangible product and

simply brand communication itself. This is a historic movement, as it is the first time someone

has seized exclusive private ownership of a potentially dominant medium.


Reaching audiences in a world of New Media: Setting the consumer's agenda through

compliance-gaining techniques and branding self-expression

New Media: The Next Medium

“There is no consumption of space without a corresponding and prior production of

space” (Gottdiener, 2000, p. 265). The production of the Internet took place over thirty years

ago, and so the time for consuming this relatively new space is nigh. Unlike the content-based

consumerism of the early days of online shopping, the hot new commodity is the medium itself.

Well, Marshall McLuhan would describe it as more of a “cool” medium—one that requires high

levels of participation and completion by the audience (McLuhan, 1964, p. 36). The static web

pages of yore have been replaced with personalized home pages, customizable shopping lists and

recommendations, and so many user reviews and other feedback systems that everything online

has a sense of community to it (Oh & Arditi, 2000, p. 84-85).

This sense of community is one of the key characteristics of what is being called “new

media.” The definitions for the concept of new media are plentiful, varied, and often

overlapping. Some comment on the synergistic qualities of new media and its combination of

multiple platforms of “older” media, while some definitions focus on the aspects and methods of

distribution, and some simply stress the newness of the technology (Wardrip-Fruin & Montfort,

2003, p. 16-23). For the purposes of this paper, the term “new media” shall encompass—but not

necessarily be limited to—any device, system, or technology that incorporates more than one

traditional medium and has implemented feedback systems between users and also between users

and the managing institutional forces of that specific medium.


Initially, communication scholars thought of the media as having direct control over

people’s thoughts and opinions, and a one-step flow was the extent of all mass communication: a

media institution says it, the individual thinks or does it. Then, in The People’s Choice,

Lazarsfeld and his colleagues hypothesized about a model of opinion leaders and followers, and

the two-step flow was born (Lazarsfeld, Berelson, & Gaudet, 1948, p. 151). Eventually, the

whole concept started to cave in on itself. Society as a system of communication has become,

like the Internet itself, an interconnected web of knowledge and opinions. An increase in media

choices and, subsequently, selective exposure gave birth to a multi-step flow of information and

messages (Troldahl, 1966-1967), in which almost limitless pathways exist for dissemination and

feedback.

It is this limitless feedback system that frees individuals and stymies organizations. For

the first time since the advent of the printing press, every person in the modern world can market

their voice with ease and with levels of dissemination greater than or, at the very least, equal to

that of the old-fashioned town square. Now, marketers have to compete with dissenting voices

and community-based dialogues that move faster than was ever possible before and “it is

difficult under conditions of speeded information flow for anybody to exercise delegated

authority” (McLuhan, 1960, p. 566). Though the notion might be a bit cliché at this point, the

Internet truly is a tool for democratization and community.

As all reactionary institutional forces do when faced with a potential loss of power,

businesses are constantly looking for ways to convert the new paradigm back into the hegemonic

old one. However, “new technical media…, when used for the older ends established by older

media, result in utter confusion and disorganization” (McLuhan, 1960, p. 568). When connection

speeds were just barely fast enough to transmit video from a server to a personal computer, they


were also too slow for companies to burden consumers with an additional 30-second

commercial. The moment that changed, the old media surfaced within the new, and the clutter

began. Recently, companies like Hulu have been attempting to maintain a balance between the

need for revenue and the potential onslaught of advertising, giving users the option to watch an

extended commercial at the beginning of their selected show. Sadly, this open and upfront model

is quickly waning—Hulu is currently working on a pricing model, and will likely be charging for

portions of its content and services before the end of 2010 (Associated Press, 2009).

The old advertising model is overly intrusive and ineffective in this new space, and

companies that try to keep their customers happy do not turn enough of a profit. A new direction

must be sought by those looking to market their product in the world of new media. Instead of

overtly shoving a barrage of canned advertisements at consumers, businesses need to find subtle

ways to inject their message or brand into the minds of consumers. People need to know about

products without feeling the pressure of control.

Jean Baudrillard wrote about the sense of empowerment that shoppers feel in the

traditional marketplace, and how retailers use perception techniques in ways that make a glut of

supply and branding seem desirable (1998). To accomplish the same task online is problematic.

“From very early on in the history of department stores, managers mobilized shoppers’

imaginations by attempting to recreate a sense of community and excitement” (Oh & Arditi,

2000, p. 83; Williams, 1982). Increasingly, marketers are attempting to simulate the public space

and create “environments of social communication adjacent to merchandise” (Oh & Arditi, 2000,

p. 84). In terms of communication theory, this is essentially an agenda-setting tactic. Consumers

are given free rein to communicate with others, form their own opinions, and go elsewhere. Still,

they are in an environment where the brand is constantly on every participant’s agenda, and each


person cannot help but be influenced by the contact. Sophisticated agenda-setting techniques in

online social settings could provide an effective methodology for businesses in new media.

Agenda-setting and consumerism

Agenda-setting is one of the most substantial and oft-cited theories in the entirety of mass

communication research (McCombs & Shaw, 1993, p. 59). Its basic tenants explore how

institutional forces with media access and the power of dissemination seek to influence people’s

perceptions, goals, and desires. The media can tell us what to think about without ever explicitly

doing so; simply controlling the distribution of time and space within the sphere of mass

communication means that media institutions have the power to dictate what deserves coverage

and, subsequently, audience attention (McCombs & Shaw, 1972, p. 177). Modern American

society has entered an age where “most of what people know comes to them ‘second’ or ‘third’

hand from the mass media or from other people” (McCombs & Shaw, 1972, p. 176; Lang &

Lang, 1966, p. 466).

An agenda is the mental list of subjects—people, things, issues, values, etc.—that an

individual thinks of as important, either to society and its cultural discourse (McCombs & Shaw,

1972, p. 177) or to the individual themselves and the different aspects of their identity and

societal role. People have many different agendas that they construct, maintain, and act in

reference to (McCombs & Shaw, 1993, p. 59). Weaver et al. (1981) introduced the concept of an

agenda of personal concerns, which is applied in many settings and incorporates elements from

the individual’s various other agendas. The agenda-setting function of mass media is already

potent enough in the context of civics and politics, the lens through which much of the original

theory development was focused, but the power of media in influencing our thoughts, behaviors,


and actions is even more apparent when applied to the more personal agendas that shape

people’s daily lives.

One of the reasons that the media can so easily shape people’s terministic screens is

because of the inherent need for orientation that most people possess (McCombs & Weaver,

1985, p. 95-96). People may not directly adopt the beliefs and values that media present, but they

can use these talking points as a list of things to consider and a way to figure out their own place

in society. As Glasser explained, American society is now more “role-oriented” than “goal-

oriented” (1972, p. 27-28), and people have adopted consumerism as their outlet of expression;

people use mass-produced products and messages to create, display, and perform their cultural,

social, and personal identities. In the spirit of the model of uses and gratifications, they can use

the media’s agenda as a tool to shape their own identity and world views (Blumler, 1979, p. 10).

“While it may be the case that consumption will remain limited in its effect because it is caught

in the hegemony of the market (capitalism) even now, consumers are able to use consumption to

construct themselves” (Mearnber, 2000, p. 82). As active audience members, people look to all

sorts of media outlets, especially in the realm of consumerism, in order to pick and choose which

elements of popular culture and media discourse they will pay attention to and potentially adopt

and internalize.

Marketers are keen to identify and target this exact psychographic: that of the “Desire

State Type,” the type of shopper which perpetually identifies problems that can be solved

through the purchase and collection or consumption of commercial goods and services (Bruner,

II, 1989, p. 168). These are people who have already internalized the desire for and the perceived

necessity of shopping; all the savvy marketer needs to do is place their product or message on

their consumer agenda, and this is something that advertisers and other promotion entities do


effectively and consistently. Consumer agendas are manipulated by advertisers through mass

communications that utilize various compliance-gaining techniques.

Compliance-gaining and attitude change

In most of the articles that attempt to extend and connect theories, agenda-setting has

commonly been associated with framing and priming (Weaver, 2007, p. 142-145; Scheufele,

2000, p. 297). These associations are logical, prudent, and important to the field of mass

communication research. However, scholars have stuck to that limited paradigm and have

avoided looking at agenda-setting as a potential tool for gaining compliance. Framing the

intentional agenda-setting efforts of the media as compliance-gaining strategies only makes

sense—they are both forms of persuasion that attempt to convince others that a certain opinion,

framework, or set of behaviors is valid; they both shape audiences’ understanding of what should

be thought or accomplished.

Compliance-gaining occurs when an external influencing force—whether it is an

individual, an institution, or anything between—actively seeks to sublimate a person’s thoughts,

attitudes, or behaviors in order to replace them with those desired by the influencing party. “This

is a form of symbolic behavior designed to shape or regulate the behavior of others” (Schenck-

Hamlin, Wiseman, & Georgacarakos, 1982). The process is complicated, and can be

accomplished on different levels and for varying durations (Kelman, 1958). Some approaches are

more effective (Cialdini et al., 1975), some more ethical (Freedman & Fraser, 1966), and each

approach can be applied to a wide variety of situations (Carducci, Deuser, Bauer, Large, &

Ramaekers, 1989).

Compliance may be sought for a singular event or a temporary situation, but most

persuaders have loftier goals. As Marwell and Schmitt explained, obtaining the desired response


with the minimum amount of effort is always ideal for the persuading party (1967, p. 319).

Persuasion can elicit different levels of attitude change which, in turn, yield different levels and

durations of compliance. Herbert Kelman describes the three levels of attitude change in the face

of compliance-gaining techniques. The deeper the change in attitude, the more likely the subject

will continue to perform the desired action without supervision or a system of rewards and

punishments. In other words, it is more efficient to gain compliance than to force the matter.

Compliance

Compliance, the first level of change, is “derived from… the social effect of accepting

influence” (Kelman, 1958, p. 53). When only compliance is achieved, an individual does not

believe in the content of the induced behavior; that person only seeks to receive a favorable

reaction from others or to avoid an undesirable punishment, like disapproval (Kelman, 1958, p.

53). This is a very superficial level of acceptance, and any of the desired behaviors often

dissipate the moment the subject is not being observed by the influencing party or its affiliates.

This type of attitude change is difficult for marketers to profit from.

Obviously, businesses are not in a societal position to implement the rewards and

punishments necessary for this level of compliance—the “social effect” is just that; it comes

from the members of society who exert peer pressure over others, and the rewards and

punishments stem from social norms and not the corporation. The only possible way for

businesses to influence social pressures it to utilize advertising campaigns to make people

internalize their values and pass them on, to breed followers of branding who return to their

social groups as opinion leaders and spread the message as if it were their own—more on that in

a couple of sections.

Identification


Identification occurs when the target person cares primarily about the relationship

between themselves and the influencing party. “The individual actually believes in the responses

which he adopts through identification, but their specific content is more or less irrelevant”

(Kelman, 1958, p. 53). The subject gives the response because of a desire to associate with the

source of the influence; this relationship is both satisfying and self-defining (Kelman, 1958, p.

53).

Sometimes, the value is already present; the influencing agent needs simply to identify

and call upon it. Schmitt conducted a study that tested the invocation of moral obligation as a

means toward compliance (1964, p. 299). He found that subjects who were able to accomplish

the requested task but were not initially willing were positively affected by appeals to moral

obligation through phrases like “should” and “ought to” (Schmitt, 1964, p. 300, 305). While

moral obligations are likely the most persuasive set of values to call upon, it is also likely that

appeals to other internalized values will yield positive results, as well—though, perhaps, not to

the same degree.

For the compliance-gaining goals of advertisers, identification with a brand has a lot to

do with image. People become comfortable in associating themselves with a particular brand,

despite the quality of the actual product. Blind taste tests have shown that people do not simply

judge products on just the information at hand; often, the name, packaging, status, or social

impressions of a brand can influence consumers’ choices more than the product itself (Allison &

Uhl, 1964, p. 38-39). People choose to identify with certain brands for individualistic and social

reasons; products are used for expression just as much as they are used for consumption.

Though blind conformity is often frowned upon, especially in American society, using

products to define a social identity is a commonly accepted practice (Harwood, 2006, p. 84).


“When operating at the level of social identity, individuals act as group members” and

“understand and judge the behavior of self and others in terms of group memberships”

(Harwood, 2006, p. 85). As Rob Gordon, played by John Cusack, said in High Fidelity: “What

really matters is what you like, not what you are like. Books, records, films—these things matter.

Call me shallow, but it's the fuckin' truth” (Touchstone Pictures, 2000). Malcom Gladwell

attributes this behavior to the adaptive unconscious, the state of mind that quickly categorizes

and filters based on first impressions and surface-level information. People use their

identification with products and other brands in popular culture in order to quickly establish

themselves in social situations, and they have little problem with judging others by the same

criteria (Gladwell, 2005, p. 25).

Ultimately, identification is all about relationships, and relationships are all about people.

This is why Bill Cosby was brought in to peddle his sweater-loving style and paternal demeanor

for Jell-O commercials. Since 1973 (“Cosby“, n.d.), this actor and comedian—who is no more a

fan of or expert on the gelatinous dessert than anyone else—has been the face of that brand.

Marketers need people to associate themselves with their product, and when the product has

nothing to identify with, they will often supplement the product’s image with a celebrity, public

figure, or other cultural personality. Law and Order’s Sam Waterston capitalizes on the

transference of the personality traits of his character on the show when speaking for the

brokerage firm TD Waterhouse. Their target demographic overlaps considerably with the Law

and Order crowd and, for some reason, people not only like him, they identify with him. They

trust his words, are familiarized with his voice, and generally perceive him as someone worth

listening to. Agrawal and Kamakura studied celebrity endorsements and found a significant


correlation between press release announcements of an endorsement deal and a rise in stock

prices (1995, p. 56).

Sometimes, the product being sold has nothing to do with the tangible goods changing

hands. In fact, those scenarios are perhaps the purest form of compliance for reasons of

identification. High-end automobiles are often marketed through image promotion and a prestige

factor. Early adopters of technology want to experience the latest fads and gadgets, but “because

a certain amount of prestige is known to be extended to organizations and individuals who are

among the first to adopt new innovations, we might hypothesize that the desire for prestige will

be a more powerful predictor” (Downs, Jr. & Mohr, 1976, p. 710).

Savvy entrepreneurs can circumvent the product-making and selling entirely and just sell

image and prestige itself. This happened in August of 2008, when Armin Heinrich created an

application for the iPhone called “I Am Rich.” The app cost $999.99 and doid nothing except

display a small gem on a fairly plain background—when touched, the gem revealed a “secret

mantra” about wealth, health, and happiness. Eight people bought it in the two days before it was

taken down from the iTunes store and, though two claimed to have purchased it accidentally, a

couple of the remaining six even e-mailed Heinrich to thank him for creating it (Milian, 2008).

Heinrich astutely realized that what these people wanted had very little to do with tangible goods

—they wanted to achieve status through consumerism and identification, and he was more than

happy to oblige.

Regardless of the approach used, compliance through identification is a solid level of

attitude change in terms of compliance-gaining. It is not infallible, but any entity with authority

has a chance to utilize this method. Social roles are powerful predictors of influence, and people

will go to great lengths to continue playing their part (Brown, Clasen, & Eicher, 1986, p. 522).


Normative social influence can induce conformity and compliance, and even the mere presence

of others leads individuals to “be influenced by the others in the sense that the judgments of

others are taken to be a more or less trustworthy source of information about the objective reality

with which he and the others are confronted” (Deutsch & Gerard, 1955, p. 635). Deutsch and

Gerard controlled for normative social influence—their conclusion that simply existing in a

social setting leaves the individual prone to influence is accurate, if not a bit disconcerting. If

some people already identify with a product, movement, or belief, all the influencing party has to

do is achieve a critical mass, and the message will begin to carry itself through a given culture

because of this natural effect.

Internalization

The deepest, longest-lasting level of attitude change occurs when “an individual accepts

influence because the content of the induced behavior—the ideas and actions of which it is

composed—is intrinsically rewarding” (Kelman, 1958, p. 53). The content of the new behavior is

agreeable with the individual’s value system. This has interesting implications for potential

persuaders. When a subject adopts the behavior desired by the influencing party, performance of

the behavior is not contingent on surveillance or salience (Kelman, 1958, p. 54). Getting a person

or group to internalize a value instead of complying with a behaviorally-focused directive can

provide significantly better results.

McLuhan would have defined this type of internalization as a sort of externalization. He

refers to medical researchers like Selye and Jonas and ties their concept of “autoamputation”—

the externalization of human parts, perceptions, and processes—to media innovations and

technology. Increased paces and loads demand more abilities from people, and so they innovate

and create machinations that serve as virtual extensions of the human body (McLuhan, 1964, p.


53). Telescopes become the extension of the eyes, wheels are extensions of feet, and the Internet

an extension of awareness, memory, and thought.

“As an extension and expediter of the sense life, any medium at once affects the entire

field of the senses,” (McLuhan, 1964, p. 54) and yet “self-amputation forbids self-recognition”

(McLuhan, 1964, p. 53). Though this sounds like a contradiction, the logic is actually sound. A

perfect example of autoamputation and denial of the self can be found in romance. “Our

language has many expressions that indicate this self-amputation that is imposed by various

pressures” (McLuhan, 1964, p. 53). He lists such classic examples as “wanting to jump out of my

skin” and “going out of my mind” (McLuhan, 1964, p. 53), however, people also speak of

“falling in love” and “giving your heart” to someone—we imbue everything around us with a

sense of ourselves, and yet we do not think of this process as such. This is because “the principle

of self-amputation” is “an immediate relief of strain” (McLuhan, 1964, p. 53). To acknowledge

this displacement would defeat the purpose—dispersal of our abilities and awareness is

necessary to function in modern society.

For both tension-relieving and identity-expanding reasons, people incorporate pieces of

culture and technology into their being. While they are taking the creations of others and

supplementing themselves, they are also giving up a part of themselves and investing it into the

external object. It is a reciprocal relationship that knows no equal—nothing can be closer than a

truly internalized message or device. In mass communication, these types of symbiotic dynamics

of identity abound. When a marketing team has done their job correctly and achieved a state of

internalization in their target group, it is difficult for observers to tell where individuals’ opinions

and beliefs end and where the influence of branding begins. The best products are the ones that

people feel they cannot live without or would, at the very least, cause physical or emotional


suffering if severed from that individual’s life. Scion commercials wittily quip, “be one of us by

being none of us,” and their slogan, “United by Individuality,” is fairly explicit about the whole

matter. Macintosh users swear by their computers and iPods and cannot help but drink the

proverbial Kool-Aid, taking every available opportunity to laud the merits of their user-friendly

devices. These products pervade every aspect of consumers’ lives, making them easier, giving

them meaning, and also costing them something intangible in return—though it can manifest

itself in tangible ways.

Saturn used to have yearly reunions for the owners of its cars in an attempt at creating a

sense of community. The company wanted new owners to feel like they were not simply buying

a car, they were entering a select and caring group of fellow enthusiasts. They preyed upon a

need for association with people and identification with a group, and hoped that new owners

would eventually internalize their ownership which would, ironically, make Saturn owners of

them. These new converts were then expected to return home with stories of the Saturn

Homecomings and, if not, a commercial showcasing some highlights of the event always

sufficed. Because the loyal Saturn customers internalized their affiliation with the brand and

product, the company had people travel from all over the country just to commune with their

consuming brethren. That is certainly an example of setting consumers’ personal, shopping, and

travel agendas through the compliance-gaining attitude change of internalization.

Owning communication: Brand communities

In this post-industrial era, “the sense of community in the United States shifted away

from the tight interpersonal bonds of geographically bounded collectives and into the direction of

common but tenuous bonds of brand use and affiliation” (McAlexander, Schouten, & Koenig,

2002, p. 38). These brand communities are an interesting breed. They completely shift the focus


of the traditional business model. “Brand community is customer-centric… the existence and

meaningfulness of the community inhere in customer experience rather than in the brand around

which that experience revolves” (McAlexander et al., 2002, p. 39). New media have given rise to

a plethora of virtual brand communities that create bonds between the customer, the brand, the

product, the marketer, and other customers (McAlexander et al., 2002, p. 39). Like McLuhan

said, the old model shoved into the new medium simply does not work (McLuhan, 1960, p. 568).

The real opportunity on the Internet is not just doing what you have always done cheaper

and faster, but instead the real opportunity is to rethink at a fundamental level the

business models that you employ on this new platform, both in terms of what kind of

value you can deliver to your customers and also the kinds of relationships that you can

build with customers (Hagel, 1999, p. 56).

One of the first things to go in the new world of consumer-centric marketing is the

archaic model of denying or simply competing with the competition. The other companies in a

particular field are not friends, precisely, but they should at least be acknowledged. Most car

insurance sites follow this new model, which

brings(s) a large range of relevant vendors together to enable the customer to easily

compare offerings, choose among the vendors, and to switch from one vendor to another

if they are not satisfied with the service of the first. This serves to create a situation where

vendors are bidding for that customer’s business, as opposed to trying to target customers

(Hagel, 1999, p. 57).

The advent of user-created content in branded spheres has also caused a shift. Before the turn of

the century, Hagel successfully predicted that “integrating published content with discussion

forums in this environment” would be vital and that “over time, an increasing amount of the


value in participating in these virtual communities will be concentrated in those discussion

areas” (Hagel, 1999, p. 58). In understanding the potential of mass amounts of expert user-

created content collected over time, he predicted the formation of wikis:

If you could bring together a group of people who have experience and expertise in an

area, and provide environments where they can be accessed on demand with targeted

questions, that is an infinitely deeper information environment than simply bringing

together published content (Hagel, 1999, p. 58).

This emphasis on a “bringing together” of people to create, collect, compile, and share

knowledge, information, and narrative is nothing new—it is what human beings have been doing

for the entire span of the species’ existence. The only difference is that, in the virtual space,

someone needs to start it, and that someone will often be an organization with an agenda.

Wikipedia is a non-profit site, but most other online communities and knowledge repositories are

not as benevolent. Functionally, they aspire to similar goals, but their intentions are less benign.

Amazon definitely has an agenda. Its thorough cataloguing of every click and keystroke

both acknowledges and incorporates other vendors, and profits from the absorption of user-

created information. Most searches handily auto-complete before the user can finish typing in the

first few characters of what they want, and this pseudo-telepathy is the result of a carefully-

monitored shopping community. E-mails are sent before and after purchases, laden with friendly

greetings and additional buying suggestions. Ratings systems and user reviews provide sufficient

levels of feedback, and there is almost always a picture or even a video clip of products—the

community-driven, technology-using website is truly a “new media” marketplace. However, this

only takes the concept of new media so far because the site is still, in essence, just a hyper-

realized version of what came before. Newer media eschew the need to sell products all together


and focus on selling communication itself. What a business really sells is its brand and, in the

world of new media, there is no need to sell a product to go with it.

Virtualization of the Self: Narcissism for the 21st Century

Social networking is the logical extension of all of the concepts discussed so far. It

incorporates multiple forms of older media—video, text, pictures, e-mail, instant messaging—

and plays host to plenty of user participation and feedback. It sells itself through the most

insidious approach possible: an appeal to the self. There is no level of internalization that is

paramount to the concept of the self; it is inherently the most internalized thing people have.

McLuhan references the myth of Narcissus to explain how people become numbingly entranced

by extensions of themselves. They “at once become fascinated by any extension of themselves in

any material other than themselves” (McLuhan, 1964, p. 51). Xbox Live has Avatars, the Wii has

the cutesy Mii, and Facebook simply lets people upload pictures of themselves. Compliance-

gaining can’t get much easier than selling someone the virtual equivalent of themselves.

The message is the medium and the message… and another message

New media’s social networking sites also turn medium theory on its head, or at least

throw an ironic gesture its way. There are no social networking sites that are free of branding;

they all have a distinct identity and name, and they all wish to promote them. In this way, it

transforms the medium into an actual message: the brand of the site. Traditional medium theory

would suggest that the medium of social networking is its own cultural message but (McLuhan,

1964, p. 23), in this case, it also carries a secondary and more obvious one. Attaching a brand

name to communication itself is an incredibly novel idea. Never before has an entire medium

been branded to this extent—it is the equivalent of someone trade marking print or the Internet.

All mediums have been free to a certain extent, until now. Of course, people had to pay for


publishing, and home Internet access is not free, but those are superficial monetary concerns.

The freedom people have lost in this new medium is that of being able to transmit a message

without transmitting the message of a brand.

Messages have always transmitted at least two messages: the content-based message and

the message of the medium (McLuhan, 1964, p. 23-35)—the entrepreneurs behind these sites

have added another one, that of their own mark. Every tweet or status update comes at a price:

the inadvertent and unavoidable marketing of someone else’s message, hidden beneath our own.

Because we have always internalized communication, and we have become enthralled by the

virtualization of ourselves, social networking sites have gained our compliance in unimaginable

ways. Names like “Facebook” and “Twitter” are synonymous with a whole new mode of

communication—expression itself has been branded. Through this branding, these companies are

constantly setting the agendas of their users. Every time a post goes up from another networking

device, like an Xbox 360 or an iPhone, the status update reflects this, too. The medium is not

only branded, it is also subject to simultaneous cross-branding. Some might ask what a simple

“yesterday at 4:13 p.m. via Facebook for iPhone” can actually do. It is only a few extra

characters, after all, and they can only be so malignant to the user’s message and only so

effective, anyway—and yet, sometimes, all you need as a marketer is to get your foot through

that door.

The journey of a thousand miles…

Freedman and Fraser suggest that it is possible to internalize a new agenda into subjects,

a new role for them to fit in and live up to (1966, p. 201). Their study on the foot-in-the-door

technique, in which a small request was proven to increase compliance with a larger secondary


request, concluded with the possibility of succeeding in persuasive tactics by accomplishing a

larger task—motivating an individual to

become, in his own eyes, the kind of person who does this sort of thing, who agrees to

requests made by strangers, who takes action on things he believes in, who cooperates

with good causes. The change in attitude could be toward any aspect of the situation or

toward the whole business of saying ‘yes.’ The basic idea is that the change in attitude

need not be toward any particular issue or person or activity, but may be toward activity

or compliance in general (Freedman & Fraser, 1966, p. 201).

Because the effect worked independently of the type of tasks requested, and with two different

topics for each of the requests, it is possible that a fundamental attitude shift takes place with

proper application of the foot-in-the-door technique.

Whether or not such a dramatic change takes place is, for many instances where this

technique is applied, fairly irrelevant. Studies of the effect have shown it to hold true even when

different requests are made by two different people concerning two different topics, several

weeks apart from each other (Freedman & Fraser, 1966, p. 201). “Once conformity is elicited at

all it is more likely to occur in the future” (Freedman & Fraser, 1966, p. 196).

Carducci et al. applied the psychology of business to the world of medicine in an

experiment that tested the practical application of the foot-in-the-door technique in gaining

compliance for organ donation (1984, 1989). Initially, a 20-question survey was shown to elicit a

greater response rate for consent in becoming an organ donor (Carducci & Deuser, 1984, p. 80)

but, as Marwell and Schmitt explained, obtaining the desired response with the minimum amount

of effort is always ideal for the persuading party (1967, p. 319). A second experiment showed

that it was possible to achieve the same attitude change about organ donation through a survey as


small as five questions (1989, p. 247), which suggests that this is another example of altering a

subject’s agenda of personal issues through the foot-in-the-door technique to rekindle already-

internalized values.

One foot in the door, the other poised for entry

Social networking sites have put their foot in millions of users’ doorways. Facebook and

Twitter are free right now, but both have been open about looking to shift to a pricing model—

especially Twitter. The co-founders of Twitter have gone on the record, saying that they do

eventually plan to charge fees for their social networking services (ABC News, 2009). The foot

in the doorway to people’s social and consumer agendas is the simple and free registration

process. With an email address and a few minutes, anyone can create an account on these sites.

Then, after a year or more of being used to the connections, games, and overall terministic screen

that comes with joining up and associating with the product, the large request finally surfaces—

subscription fees. These sites make enough from traffic and advertising to hold off on rates for

now. Those in charge wisely realize that social networking is an “increasing returns business,” in

which the product increases in value in sync with its install base (Hagel, 1999, p. 60).

Paying rent in the Global Village

New media, like any medium, will shape—and has already begun to shape—our society.

Its content is the format of the old medium, the Internet, which, in turn, is an amalgamation of

the numerous media that came before it. Not all new media are as involved in the cultural shift as

social networking, but these few examples indicate several interesting trends. For the online

sphere, marketers have had to discard the hard-sell model and opt for a subtler approach in which

their brand, through a complex weave of identification and internalization, is placed on people’s

personal, social, and consumer agendas through association with the new medium. They have


found a way to sponsor emerging culture and communication itself. If this “new media” becomes

the dominant medium, then those who set up the foundations for it communication networks will

have an unprecedented advantage. Copyright certainly didn’t exist when speech was created, nor

with the written word— and the Internet is a government-spawned behemoth that will remain

free in some form for quite some time. Creatively, these innovators did not invent an entirely

new medium. Instead, they “piggybacked” on the current dominant medium, the Internet, and

attached their brand to every piece of one of the oldest mediums, text. Soon, if these moguls are

true to their words, we will be paying financial homage to their genius. Where we, as a society,

go from here is difficult to predict.

If adjustment (economic, social, or personal) to information movement at electronic

speeds is quite impossible, we can always change our models and metaphors of

organization, and escape into sheer understanding. Sequential analysis and adjustment

natural to low speed information movement becomes irrelevant and useless even at

telegraph speed. But as speed increases, the understanding of process in all kinds of

structures and situations becomes relatively simple. We can literally escape into

understanding when the patterns of process become manifest (McLuhan, 1960, p. 575).

“New media” could very well be the next significant step in that process. The Internet has been

criticized as being a dump for information instead of a repository for knowledge (Bellinger,

2004). Perhaps McLuhan’s “global village” will finally be realized and knowledge will follow. If

not, at least we can know what all of our social contacts are doing at all times of the day—in 120

characters or less, of course.


Bibliography

ABC News (Producer). (2009, May 27, 2009). Tech bytes [Television broadcast]. : American

Broadcasting Company.

Agrawal, J., & Kamakura, W. A. (1995, July). The economic worth of celebrity endorsers: An

event study analysis. The Journal of Marketing, 59(3), 56-62. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1252119

Allison, R. I., & Uhl, K. P. (1964, August). Influence of beer brand identification on taste

perception. Journal of Marketing Research, 1(3), 36-39. Retrieved from


Associated Press. (2009). News Corp. COO sees Hulu charging fees for access. Retrieved

December 8, 2009, from http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2009-10-22-hulu-

fees_N.htm

Baudrillard, J. (1998). The consumer society: Myths and structures. London: Sage.

Bellinger, G. (2004). Knowledge management: Emerging perspectives. Retrieved December 9,

2009, from http://www.systems-thinking.org/kmgmt/kmgmt.htm

Blumler, J. G. (1979). The role of theory in uses and gratifications studies. Communication

Research, 6(9), 9-36. doi: 10.1177/009365027900600102

Brown, B. B., Clasen, D. R., & Eicher, S. A. (1986, July). Perceptions of peer pressure, peer

conformity dispositions, and self-reported behavior among adolescents. Developmental

Psychology, 22(4), 521-530. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.22.4.521

Bruner, G. C., II (1989, December). Profiling desired state type problem recognizers. Journal of

Business and Psychology, 4(2), 167-182. Retrieved from



Carducci, B. J., & Deuser, P. S. (1984). The foot-in-the-donor technique: Initial request and

organ donation. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 5, 75-81.

Cialdini, R. B., Vincent, J. E., Lewis, S. K., Catalan, J., Wheeler, D., & Darby, B. L. (1975).

Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: The door-in-the-face

technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(2), 206-215. Retrieved from

http://www.psychwiki.com/dms/other/Psy522Fall2008/Cialdini1975.pdf

Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences

upon individual judgement. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 629-636.

doi: 10.1037/h0046408

Downs, G. W., Jr., & Mohr, L. B. (1976, December). Conceptual issues in the study of

innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(4), 700-714. Retrieved from


Francik, E. P., & Clark, H. H. (1985). How to make requests that overcome obstacles to

compliance. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 560-568. doi: 10.1016/0749-

596X(85)90046-4

Freedman, J. L., & Fraser, S. C. (1966). Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door

technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4(2), 195-202. Retrieved from

http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.usf.edu/ehost

Gladwell, M. (2005). Blink: The power of thinking without thinking. New York: Little & Brown.

Glasser, W. (1972). The Identity Society. New York: Harper & Row.

Gottdiener, M. (2000). The consumption of space and the spaces of consumption. In M.

Gottdiener (Ed.), New forms of consumption: Consumers, culture, and commodification

(pp. 265-285). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.


Hagel, J. (1999, Winter). Net gain: Expanding markets through virtual communities. Journal of

Interactive Marketing, 13(1), 55-65. Retrieved from

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/70002566/abstract

Harwood, J. (2006). Communication as social identity. In G. J. Shepherd, J. St. John, & T.

Striphas (Eds.), Communication as... Perspectives on theory (pp. 84-90). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and internalization: Three processes of

attitude change. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2(1), 51-60. Retrieved from

http://jcr.sagepub.com/cgi/pdf_extract/2/1/51

Lang, K., & Lang, G. E. (1966). The mass media and voting. In B. Berelson & M. Janowitz

(Eds.), Reader in public opinion and communication (pp. 466-). New York: Free Press.

Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1948). The people’s choice (2 ed.). New York:

Columbia University Press.

McAlexander, J. H., Schouten, J. W., & Koenig, H. F. (2002, January). Building brand

community. The Journal of Marketing, 66(1), 38-54. Retrieved from


McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972, Summer). The agenda-setting function of mass media.

The Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176-187. Retrieved from


McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1993, Spring). The evolution of agenda-setting research:

Twenty-five years in the marketplace of ideas. Journal of Communication, 43(2), 58-67.


McCombs, M., & Weaver, D. (1985). Towards a merger of gratifications and agenda setting

research. In K. E. Rosengren, L. A. Wenner, & P. Palmgreen (Eds.), Handbook of

political communication (pp. 95-108). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

McLuhan, M. (1960, December). Effects of the improvements of communication media. The

Journal of Economic History, 20(4), 566-575. Retrieved from


McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man (2nd ed.). New York:

McGraw-Hill.

Mearnber, L. A. (2000). Commentary: “The last stop of desire--covent garden and the spatial text

of consumerism”. Consumption, Markets and Culture, 1(1), 80-90. Retrieved from

http://www.crito.uci.edu/noah/CMC%20Website/CMC%20PDFs/CMC1_1.pdf#page=85

Milian, M. (2008). Apple removes $1,000 featureless iPhone application. Retrieved December 9,

2009, from http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2008/08/iphone-i-am-ric.html

Oh, M., & Arditi, J. (2000). Shopping and postmodernism: Consumption, production, identity,

and the Internet. In M. Gottdiener (Ed.), New forms of consumption: Consumers, culture,

and commodification (pp. 71-89). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Other works for Bill Cosby. (n.d.). Retrieved December 8, 2009, from

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001070/otherworks

Raven, B. H., & French, J. R., Jr. (1958, June). Legitimate power, coercive power, and

observability in social influence. Sociometry, 21(2), 83-97. Retrieved from



Schenck-Hamlin, W. J., Wiseman, R. L., & Georgacarakos, G. N. (1982, Spring). A model of

properties of compliance-gaining strategies. Communication Quarterly, 30(2), 92-100.

doi: 10.1080/01463378209369434

Scheufele, D. A. (2000). Agenda-setting, priming, and framing revisited: Another look at

cognitive effects of political communication. Mass Communication & Society, 3(2 & 3),

297-316. Retrieved from http://blog.roodo.com/research_information/cb7d84a5.pdf

Touchstone Pictures (Producer), & Frears, S. (Director). (2000). High fidelity [Motion picture].

USA: Touchstone Pictures.

Troldahl, V. C. (1966-1967, Winter). A field test of a modified “two-step flow of

communication” model. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 30(4), 609-623. Retrieved from


Wardrip-Fruin, N., & Montfort, N. (2003). The new media reader. London: MIT Press.

Weaver, D. H. (2007). Thoughts on agenda setting, framing, and priming. Journal of

Communication, 57, 142-147. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00333.x

Weaver, D., Graber, D., McCombs, M., & Eyal, C. (1981). Media agenda-setting in a

presidential election: Issues, images and interest. New York: Praeger.

Williams, R. H. (1982). Dream worlds: Mass consumption in late Nineteenth-Century France.

Berkeley: University of California Press.

Reaching audiences in a world of New Media: Setting the ...€¦ · Web viewAmazon definitely has...

Documents

Transcript of Reaching audiences in a world of New Media: Setting the ...€¦ · Web viewAmazon definitely has...