There are 5 theories I would like to discuss today. Each theory, I believe each has its advantages and disadvantages.
The powerful effects theory, more commonly known as the magic bullet theory states that the media is the most influential and audiences are passive. By now, most of you guys would have guessed what the problem here is. It assumes that audiences are passive. However as we have learnt from the first chapter in communication itself, communication is never a one-way exchange. It is a process of mutual influence and stimultaneous exchange. Therefore, in that manner this theory might prove to be fruitless. In my opinion I feel that this theory still can be utilised in some situations. For example, certain subject matters involving crime and safety most definitely follow this theory as the general public do act like passive audiences to whatever the media provides them. In these cases, this magic bullet theory would prove to be quite useful and work magic wonders, hence the term “magic bullet”!
The second theory which became popular in the 1950s and 1960s is the limited effects theory. This theory states that audiences are active with the ability to resist the influential media messages. It adds on by saying that the audiences are able to sought out the media messages to suit their particular needs. I feel that this theory is too extreme in the sense that all audiences cannot be totally active with the media’s influence downgraded to a little bit only. It is possible that the audiences are not active 100% of the time. Think back to the times when we “critically evaluated” the information that was appearing on the media, lets say on the news. Most of us just accept most information provided by the media to be true. Hence, it would be wrong to say that our “alert” senses are active all the time. There are other factors that contribute to this as well. We tend to be not very active if we had a tiring day at work, we just had a heavy dinner/lunch or even because we just do not want to. Therefore, social, psychological and individual personalities play a big role in the ability of the audience to actively resist the influence of the media messages. Hence, one cannot totally accept this theory to be totally true.
The third is agenda setting function which talks about the ability of the media, through repeated news coverage, to raise the importance of an issue in the public’s mind. This is most evident in the extensive news coverage done here in Singapore every night. Recently, the escape of Mas Selamat has triggered interest among the public and almost worldwide. The media was able to make this a big issue by emphasising its importance over and over again. Telephone providers like Starhub and Singtel even sent out Multimedia Messages with a photo of him and asking for the public to be on a standby. Posters were put up almost in all places in Singapore signifying that it was really an important matter. However I feel that after a few days, the publicity raised about this issue is lost as the media did not repeatedly cover this issue. Hence, the public also will eventually lose interest in this issue as this theory states. See the problem here? This theory depicts the public as being conditioned to certain issues through priming which may not be the case during all the times. I mean when I first learnt about this theory, I tried to be objective during all the media messages that were being shown on TV and it is amazing how through this theory held as within a total of 5 hours, a particular advertisement was advertised 16 times!!! It is frightening to note that the public can be so easily manipulated into buying a particular product or thinking about a particular issue just like that.
The next theory would be media hegemony which states that the media represents the view of the powerful elite; those who hold strong economical and political power have the ability to influence the media. I do not quite agree with this view maybe because of the fact that I am living in Singapore. Singapore has an extensive and organised goverment system which does not allow the politically powerful to dominate totally. Although, some of the sectors are being dominated by the powerful elite, I doubt that whatever they say does get screened by the goverment and that the goverment does a wonderful job of not allowing the powerful elite to dominate. For example, Mediacorp is owned by goverment-linked corporations. Although these GLCs are not fully linked to the goverment, they still have some independency on how they can run their media. This is deemed as an important aspect for me.
The next theory will be media determinism. Media determinism suggests that the medium is more important and influential than the message itself. To a certain extent, I believe that this is avsolutely correct. How the message is represented reflects on how well the audience or the public are able to retain the information that is on that particular media message. Therefore, I believe that this theory is extremely important as the medium affects the crebility of the media message itself by appealing to the ethos, logos or pathos of the audience.
To end off, I believe these 3 are the ones that have created a riot of emotions in me when I first came across them. In the end, I strongly feel that a combination of all theories is needed to achieve a stronger appeal to the audience. 
