Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.544496
Title: The explanatory value of Herman & Chomsky's 'propaganda model' : 2004-2010
Author: Robertson, John W.
ISNI:       0000 0001 2451 3693
Awarding Body: University of the West of Scotland
Current Institution: University of the West of Scotland
Date of Award: 2011
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Abstract:
Introduction and Rationale ‘The propaganda model explains the elite-mass gaps, and elite and mainstream media hostility to this mode of analysis, and refusal to allow it entry into the debate, is understandable given that the gaps are embarrassing and suggest that the media do serve a narrow elite interest.’ (Hermann, 2000: 1) This critical review is based upon four peer-reviewed research papers, published since 2004. which have made a contribution to knowledge in the field of media and communications theory by providing, in particular, new evidence in support of a relatively neglected theory - Hermann & Chomsky’s Propaganda Model (PM) (1988). Hermann’s assertion (above) that the mainstream media refuse to allow the PM entry into the debate is also evident, for this writer, of mainstream media theory in Higher Education. The PM is recognised as a very useful starting point and analytical tool for the evaluation of data in this field by a minority of published researchers (Klaehn, 2002, 2009; Jhally, 2007; Robertson 2010). However, it is widely disregarded by many other UK media researchers and, for that matter, educationists (Mullen, 2008: 2). In addition to demonstrating retrospectively work worthy of the award of PhD by Publication, this critical review revisits and re-assesses the value of the PM using new evidence, in areas such as the reporting of economic theory, the coverage of autism and the relative coverage of different topics across TV news, from the author’s published work submitted in the attached portfolio.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.544496  DOI: Not available
Share: