ABRIDGED RESEARCH PROPOSAL (CONTINUES)

SEVENTH BLOG ENTRY

From the blogger’s desk

The journey of the research proposal continues on in this blog post. It is here whereby the researcher will look at the methodology, literature review, research assumptions, findings, conclusions, limitations, and possible future studies. These will be looked at as they relate to the proposed research topic (see discussion on the sixth blog entry).

1 METHODOLOGY

In researching about the transformation of media audiences, the researcher would make use of a qualitative research perspective. Such a research perspective would allow the researcher to know about, and adequately contextualise the research phenomena. By definition, a qualitative research perspective or methodology is one that is concerned with the interpretation and exploration of a particular phenomenon. This is done through the use of very descriptive terms that will outline the scope of, and the cause of the phenomenon under investigation. Qualitative researchers, in the same vein, attempt to make sense of, and provide interpretation of certain phenomena through the viewpoints of the subjects of research. In this sense, qualitative research is concerned with the interpretations of the individuals (or in this case of the audience) about a certain state of affairs. Further, such perspective is geared towards describing a phenomenon (in this case audience evolution in South Africa) in comprehensive educational manner. My point of view with a qualitative research method is that it is a sure enough method that one can use to be well acquainted and engage purposefully with the subject matter. Qualitative research can be done over longitudinal and cross-sectional time frames.

It is first worth mentioning that qualitative research methods are effective in identifying intangible factors. These include underlying hidden factors that can be related to, and be inclusive of social norms, socioeconomic status, gender roles, and, as is the topic here, differences in media use. In the said research project (see blog entry six), the researcher could employ, as a research methodology, participant observation, in depth interviews, and focus group interviews.

Participant observation is a type of research technique that can be used in an overall audience research undertaking. In this sense, participant observation can be used to observe the behaviour of people (audiences) as they interact with different forms of communication. The said methodology is further appropriate for collecting data in its naturally occurring behaviour that is ‘in context’.  An occurring behaviour (as is postulated by the research topic) is the use of new forms of communication that have resulted to an evolved and changed audience. The said behaviour can be observed by a researcher (passively and/or actively) through participating in an environment that consists of media users. Media users can be found anywhere so the researcher can choose places ranging from internet cafes to libraries and media institutions themselves. By so doing the researcher is able to note who uses which form of communication, for what reason (this can also be found out through the use of in depth interviewing), and as a way of meeting what need.

By virtue of its (participant observation) definition and scope it has the potential to be an appropriate method to be used in the proposed study. This is because, through participation, audiences can be observed in their own environment. As already mentioned, this environment can include people’s homes, workplace and the like. This is a feasible method because it would only require the researcher to search for, and observe the most accessible audience. Coupled with this is that the researcher would have to gain consent from the participants for purposes of participation observation. What could qualify as a downside is that participation observation can be timeous and may require of lot of dedication especially on the part of the observer.

In depth interview is another research methodology that is commonly used in audience research. It is a method part of a qualitative research perspective. It is in depth interviews that individual audience members are asked to reflect on, and place into perspective their use of the media. It is here also that media researchers get to know both the ‘why’ and ‘how’ part of certain media use by individuals. Audience members are encouraged in interviews to disclose exactly the type of needs that certain media fulfill in their lives. In depth interviewing is an appropriate technique because it potentially points to not only audience (as a whole, that meaning, the sum total of individuals being interviewed at the time) evolution but to evolution at individual level as well.

On issues of feasibility, a media researcher can gather together, through predetermined sampling procedures, a set number of individuals to interview on a one to one basis. Consent will obviously have to be obtained for ethical reasons. The researcher can then in a position to enter the individual’s world, so to speak. To find out what hidden perceptions are there about the media and how are these contextualised. Another benefit of in depth interviewing is that the media researcher gets to interact with the individual on a fairly personal level. This, in turn, makes the interviewee to be relaxed and cooperate towards a meaningful and eye opening interaction.

Focus group interview is yet another methodology that can possibly be used in finding out more about the proposed topic. This technique can be viewed as an extension on the just discussed technique of in depth interviewing above. In other words, where in depth interviewing focused on questioning at individual level, focus group, as the term suggest, focused on the group. Focus group research, as it is sometimes dubbed, involves an ‘organised’ discussion with a group of individuals. Such a discussion is done in order to gain information about group participants’ views and perceptions about a certain topic. Focus group research can be used and is particularly suited for obtaining several perspectives about the same topic. The latter point makes group research appropriate as a way of determining how and to what extent the audience has been transformed through new forms of communication.

Out of the three research methods mentioned above, a careful and well administered use of focus group research would be most viable. Reason for this is that focus group research, as was just mentioned, allows for different and broader perspectives on the same topic. This will not only allow for diversity in responses but it will indeed make up for a balanced study. I touched on this very point in my earlier (see blog entry one) blog posts that dealt with ethical conduct in research. In focus group research, the process of research can prove to be collaborative and engaged. Further, as a final reason, such a research method will enable the researcher to get a larger amount of information in a shorter (often pre-specified) period of time.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

Studies of journalism, mass communication studies, audience research studies, and cultural and media studies seem to be welcoming of the notion of a changed and evolved audience. The most recently developed literature in these disciplines now advocates for an audience space that is experiencing dramatic change in very significant ways. One at this point can begin to briefly describe these studies and put them in context to the proposed topic above.

Journalism is the activity of gathering, assessing, creating and presenting news and information. It is also the product of these activities. Now, the people responsible for all these activities, that is, the journalists, have now become aware that they have to cater to a diverse and far-reaching range of audiences. These audiences may have different tastes in terms of which information will they allow themselves to be exposed to. Further, the same set of audiences might have different opinions in terms of the presentation of information. These issues and more are indicative of the fact that journalists nowadays have to be cognisant of the changed nature of the media, or rather in this case, the information ‘users’.  

Mass communication studies are concerned with the process in which a person, group of people, or an organisation sends a message through a channel of communication to a large group. This large group is sometimes, but not usually, anonymous and heterogeneous. Heterogeneity touches on the fact that the receivers of mass communication are not the ones that were known to have existed before. Mass communication studies are now more welcoming of a ‘new’ type of receivers with ‘new’ technological needs. So much so that even the very use of the word ‘mass’ is now being questioned as it can no longer be taken to be appropriate for the kind of receivers that now exist.

Cultural and media studies emphasises the study of media in their historical, economic, social, and political context. It is here whereby the researcher examines the cultural forms created and disseminated by media industries. As people (audiences) change and find new find ways of living, the same change is felt in a cultural sense. In other ways, the culture of media use by the audience has been redefined and is changing. As a result, cultural and media researchers now argue for a type of society that has readapted and remolded itself in terms of its media use and cultural identity.

Audience research studies encompass research into the make-up and habits of the audience of a particular television or radio programme. There is now been reached a point where (media) researchers speak of ‘new’ audience research studies. The advent of a new audience research is due to the fact that there now exists a new breed of audiences. Even the research techniques used in this sort of research have to be tailor made for them to coincide with this new breed of media users. Audience research now views the audience member as an evolved active participant who is responsible and engaged in his/her use of the media.

A well-known theory or model that can be said to have not been accepting of the notion of a changed audience is Lasswell’s model of communication. This model can be summed up in the sequence of communication that says” who, says what, in which channel, to whom”. Communication here is therefore seen as a one way, one dimensional transaction. As can be deduced, the model offered no room for feedback let alone the negotiation of meaning between sender and receiver. The model further portrayed audiences as passive and unengaged parts in the communication process. All of this is to point out that Lasswell’s model theory of communication, as it is explained here, is not advocating for the possibility of an evolving audience. In fact, the very term of an evolved audience that is capable of participating in mutual feedback is regarded as taboo in this model and in the studies based on it.

To reiterate, the proposed study has been set up to argue that audience evolution is due to the usage of new forms of communication. An alternative approach to this is that audience evolution is due to, and also determined by new forms of digital audience measurement(s). In this sense, an evolved audience, nowadays, propels media producers and advertisers alsike to employ modern age measuring instruments. This approach was embarked on and published by a group of audience researchers based in San Francisco. In their approach, they used Qauntcast’s unique methodology which employs direct measurement to capture traffic and other measurable attributes. These included audience demographics and the like.

Other approaches argue that audience evolution is due to changing economic conditions. This marks the overall stance taken by Phillip M. Napoli in his book Audience Economies. This book, in a nutshell, emphasises the link between a fluid and uncertain economic sector and how this causes audiences to change in terms of their media use. In other words, audiences sometimes look for (or even create) media based opportunities in order to better their current and often unsatisfactory economic state.

3 RESEARCH ASSUMPTIONS

The proposed study is expected to reveal that (1) there now exists a more active and engaged audience, (2) individual audience members know more and as a result they are able to keep media effects at bay, (3) ‘new’ definitions and a ‘new’ type of relationship now exists between media and society, (4) audience categorisation is now more complex and new ways of audience measurement have emerged because of this, and (5) viewer perspective on issues around media usage and application have changed and become more complex.

The proposed study seeks to shed more light on these assumptions so as to reveal the type of society (audience) that exists in this information age. As a rule, this is a society ruled by, and reliant on the production and dissemination of information. A research of this kind is further geared at revealing the true nature of ‘the audience’ as these exist in present day circumstances and context.

4 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

The outcome of the findings can proportionally go both ways. This means that it is envisaged that a considerable amount of the participants in the focus group can be in support of new media. And they can be in support of how new media has changed the very outlook and grouping of ‘the audience’. Change in this sense means one that comes with a different outlook on social and media use issues and the like. Conversely, other participants in the group research, it can be found are still advocate for, and make use of a linear process of communication that comes with ‘old’ (traditional) media. But, if the proposed study is to be of any success it will prove that a bulk of the group research participants is in agreement with the notion of a changed audience. With that said, the outcome of the research will show the impact of new communication forms on audience interpretation and behaviour. The research will also reveal the opposite of this-the opposite being that audience interpretation also has an impact of new communication forms that have emerged.

The studies discussed and contextualised in the literature review namely cultural and media studies and new media studies all welcome the notion of an evolved audience. The proposed study and its anticipated findings fit in well with the new audience perspective that the above studies are now employing. In this way, the findings and the literature review will complement and be in agreement with each other.

As form of evidence, the researcher will include the questions that participants were asked to answer and their responses.

5 CONCLUSIONS

It can be concluded from the findings that new forms of communication, especially as these relate to, and practiced in South Africa have brought about a changed audience. This overall finding supported the initial assumptions that the researcher had put together earlier on in the proposal. These assumptions (see topic 3 above) came about because a number of respondents attested to the notion of a changed audience. The respondents made mention this due to their own usage of the media and that of others that are close to them. From this they inferred that the notion of changed audience is not as far-fetched as one might think it is. In fact, the very age that we are living in is indicative of an emergence of a ‘new’ type of media users who are more engaged and inquisitive.

6 LIMITATIONS

The proposed study only made use of a qualitative research perspective. In this perspective, focus group research was conducted as research methodology. Now, a focus group research can only covered a maximum of twenty (20) participants. This represents a small number as compared to a large number that South Africa alone has in terms of its media users. Therefore this represented a limitation in the research in that the findings cannot be necessarily be generalised to the rest of the (South African) population. Although the methodology revealed diverse interpretations of the same topic, these interpretations were nor diverse and far-reaching enough to warrant an irrefutable conclusion. Further, the research methodology, by definition, ran the risk of respondents being subjective about the topic at hand. By this it is meant that respondents may comment on the topic in a way that makes them look good and be seen as ‘keeping with the times’. The research methodology was again limited in that it was not able to present the results in numerical form. This would make the study to be more broad and comprehensive and its results taken to be more conclusive and systematic. It can be mentioned though that these limitations are however not absolute, that is, that they cannot be bypassed. In fact, by an adjustment of the research methodology in terms of selection criteria and mode of questioning I believe these limitations can be overcome. Failing which, the research methodology would have to be coupled with a quantitative element (possibly surveys) in order to minimise any recurrence of limitations.  

7 POSSIBLE FUTURE STUDIES

After the conclusion of this study perhaps other studies that would follow will look at the notion of a changed audience as it relates to young people. Young people here mean those individuals that fall between the age groups of 10-18 years. Other studies can broaden their horizons by looking at audience evolution in other African countries aside from South Africa. These might look at how and what extent has new media technologies brought about change in audience behaviour (and vice versa) in an African context. Not only studies of audience evolution can come about after this one, but studies on the overall present day communication landscape can also emerge. Communication landscape can touch on a number of issues namely policy making, economic implications, and perhaps, representation of disease-awareness campaigns. All the issues, needless to say, will come back to, and find some root on the audience and how it has changed.

As just mentioned in the previous section, perhaps as a research methodology surveys can be used in this research project. Surveys will cover a lot of ground in terms of the number of participants and the diversity in responses and/or interpretations. Surveys will also be useful as it is easier to generalise the findings that the research will come with. Surveys will see to it that the spirit of the research is intact only just that terrain for research, that is, the respondents will now be broadened.