Communication Theory
What are the problems and the pitfalls in describing situation in terms of its information exchange?
According to Shannon-Weaver Model of communication, ‘success’ of communication is based on the effectiveness and accuracy of a message. The major pitfall of describing situation in terms of its information exchange based on the model of Shannon-Weaver Model is that it is overly simplified, and that other important components of communication such as context and purpose are omitted from the diagram. Also, the aim of communication is not only in efficient and accurate exchange of message, but in building meaningful relationships using communication as a vehicle.
As opposed to Shannon-Weaver Model, the boundary between ‘sender’ and ‘receiver’ is more blurry than ever. In the realm of mass media, unlike old system, where people were only ‘receiving’ the information through newspapers, televisions, and books, anyone can distribute informations utilizing digital platforms nowadays. Even without creating own contents, people can engage in conversations regarding specific topics via comments, blogs, and SNS. The problem with the linearity in the model is more clear in everyday conversation. For example, in interactions involving two or more people do not always draw a clear distinction between ‘sender’ and ‘receiver’ — one does not always take a passive role of listening to another person. Conversation happens in two-ways or multi-ways, not one-way.
Moreover, context and purpose of communication are not represented in the model. Without the context of conversation, one can never fully understand the meaning of received messages. The interpretation of the messages can change drastically when put in a different social, situational, and cultural contexts. Also, the purpose of conversation is also important to identify the meaning of the message. Why are you having this conversation? What is the goal of this exchange? Without comprehending the meaning of the message with help of context and purpose, you cannot say that you have communicated.
More importantly, communication is about the process of finding and building relationships with your society. As Wiener wrote, “the process of receiving and of using information is the process of our adjusting to the contingencies of the outer environment, and of our living effectively within that environment” (Wiener 17–18). Cybernetics utilizes control of information to self-correct itself and, eventually, reach a goal. When you are engaged in a conversation, you are using the principles of cybernetics. You are listening to one another, respond in a way that is appropriate in the conversation, you are taking in body languages, etc — with a goal of building social relationships. Naturally, it applies to human-machine communication as well. “Cyberneticians argued that we were now at an historical conjuncture where machines were becoming sufficiently complex and the relationship between people and machines sufficiently intense that a new language was needed to span both: the language of cybernetics” (Bowker 118).
In The Human Use of Human Beings, Wiener wrote that society can only be understood by an examination of the informations that are being exchanged. Such exchange can happen between human and human, human and environment, human and machine, and machine and machine. The Shannon-Weaver Model of communication theory was not sufficient to show all interactions taking place. Using the principle of cybernetics that aims to better society by means of controlling system through facilitating communication, we build meaningful relationship between human and human, and human and technology.
— John Fiske, “Communication Theory,” in Introduction to Communication Studies (London: Routledge, 1990).
— Norbert Wiener, “Cybernetics in History” and other excerpts, The Human Use of Human Beings (London: Free Association Books, 1950)
— Geof Bowker, “How to Be Universal: Some Cybernetic Strategies, 1943–70,” Social Studies of Science 23(1993): 113.
