n is followed by definitions of media content, or the "complete quantitative and qualitative range of verbal and visual information distributed by the mass media" (p. 4). They also discuss the approaches of past research and studies on the topic, from the one hypothesis theory to a variety of other theoretical perspectives including the work of H.J. Gans and T. Gitlin. The purpose of this examination of various theories is to enable to author to compare and contrast previous theories with their own theory of media content.
In Chapter 2 the authors focus on why previous researchers in mass communications preferred the individual or microlevel analysis rather than the wide variety of factors that make up the authors theory. The authors lay out a framework to help explain where traditional communication scholars have concentrated their attention, and why (p. 11).
The microlevel analysis examines communication as an activity affecting individuals, whereas the macrolevel analysis examines social structures such as social networks, organizations and cultures (pp. 11-12). The authors employ these two levels of analysis in their discussion of the traditional focus of communications research, and cite many research studies to show the effect of microlevel analysis, a form of analysis with which they disagree.
Another method of content analysis that the authors find problems with is the emphasis on the tradition of behaviorism รป the social scientists' concern with the effects produced by content, rather than the humanist tradition that looks backward from media content to try to identify what the content is actually saying about society and the culture that produces it. Their point is that the humanistic approach is less concerned with whether the media reflect reality, than with media content "as an integral part of a real culture, not as something divorced from that culture" (p. 31). This difference represents one of the major co...