A REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE NOMATIVE THEORY OF THE PRESS.
Normative theories stress on how journalism or media must relate to society in relation to both political and economic system and performance. These theories illustrate the press position and performance in relation to its political environment. These four theories proposed by Frederick S. Siebert, Peterson and Schramm in 1956 was an attempt to clarify the link between mass media and political society. Siebert’s four theories were Authoritarian, the Libertarian, Soviet communist and the Social responsibility and they are widely accepted by many mass media researchers as the most proper categories to describe how different media system operate in the world.
The authoritarian theory affirms how the media behaves in an authoritarian society. This theory was developed due to the system in the 16th and 17th century England. The media in this kind of political system are not allowed to publish and broadcast anything that could undermine the established authority. The main purpose of the press is to support and advance the policies of the government. The media is controlled by government patent and is an instrument for effecting governmental policies. In view, punishment is meted out to those who criticise state’s ideology. A state that comes close to this media system is Albania.
The libertarian theory also known as the free press theory is an opposition to the authoritarian theory. The rise of the libertarian idea was in the 17th century. The libertarian system asserts that the individual should be free to publish and broadcast what he or she wants. The media is an instrument for checking on government and meeting other needs of society. There are no restrictions to import and export of information across national frontiers. This system values individuals and media freedom and above all does not allow government control of media. The media is also a watchdog of society, protecting individuals’ rights and oversees the smooth function of the state apparatus. The weakness of this system is that it is excessively optimistic about individual’s ethics and rationality and the media’s willingness to meet responsibility. Another limitation is that because the system ignores the need for reasonable control of the media, there is the dilemma posed by conflicting freedom. There many who oppose this system because absolute freedom can lead to anarchy.
The social responsibility theory though almost similar to the libertarian theory, adds the notion of social responsibility. It was developed in the U.S in the 20th century when the media operates in capitalist society/economy. The media in this system has an obligation to fulfil in their social function which is to transmit information and create a forum for different viewpoints. The media is guarded by codes of ethics and are suppose to meet a certain standard. This is because they are accountable to both society and government. The media values diversity and pluralism and supports balance of public and private ownership. Despite all these, this system falls short in some aspects because journalism in capitalist society functions in the interest of a dominant class/ group not the whole society. It also underestimates the power of profit motivation and competition and is over optimistic about the willingness to meet responsibility.
The soviet communist press theory came into existence in the 19th century after the revolution that swept Russia. This kind of society is classless and the media is structured to reflect the aims of classless society which is the Marxist principle. This media was an instrument used to continue the success and maintain the soviet socialist system and therefore seen as crucial to the survival of the Soviet Union ideology. The theory principles were derived from Marxist thought with a mixture of Engel and 19 century thinking. The media in this system were not intended to be privately owned but to serve the interest of the working class and controlled by a communist government. The mass media in the soviet community are expected to be self regulatory in regards to their message content. Currently, this theory is only of historical interest because after the fall of Soviet Union, Russia has adopted a mass media model which is close to the social responsibility principle.
Scholars have pointed out that these theories were not based on hypothesis testing but on observation. This is because they do not intend to stipulate how social systems do operate but, but rather wit specifications on how they could or should work in pre-existing set of criteria. These theories have their roots from specific periods in time and are closely tied to the conditions of the political system in those times. They also ignored the communication perspective. Though most people would argue that these theories cannot be used in current societies, there are traces of the principles of these societies in the contemporary societies. Though the four theories seek to explain how the media behaves in a particular political system they fail be flexible enough to fit all parts of the world. Therefore two other theories have been introduced to depict the two normative theories that were not present in the first four. These two theories are the Democratic – Participant Media theory and the Development media theory. These new theories have been criticised though.
In all Siebert’s theories give a breakdown strictly given categories which open up for new ideas. Also it reveals who owns the media and who determines what message is sent. For me it remains normative because it gives an approach to understand how mass media and society interrelate.


REFERENCE:
www.anglefire.com/un/jr/lecture4ppt