Radio; War of the world

War of the Worlds: Blog tasks

Media Factsheet


1) What is the history and narrative behind War of the Worlds?

This history behind war of the worlds is that it was a radio from H.G wells in 1898.

2) When was it first broadcast and what is the popular myth regarding the reaction from the audience?

It was broadcasted first in October 1983. The popular myth about their audience was that they were new Yorkers fleeing their homes in fear of Martians.

3) How did the New York Times report the reaction the next day?

The New York times reported as the deadline "Radio listens in panic, take war drama as fact". 

4) How did author Brad Schwartz describe the broadcast and its reaction?

Schwartz described the broadcast as hysterical and his reaction suggested that it was a media phenomenon. 

5) Why did Orson Welles use hybrid genres and pastiche and what effect might it have had on the audience?

Welles at first was hesitate to adapt the war of the worlds as he described it as "boring". However, with recent developments in radio news meant that the hybrid-form could catch a wider audience. 

6) How did world events in 1938 affect the way audiences interpreted the show?

In 1938s the current affairs made audiences intercept a certain way as the Americans believed that a war was inevitable from the Germans.  

7) Which company broadcast War of the Worlds in 1938?

The company was CBS Radio Network.

8) Why might the newspaper industry have deliberately exaggerated the response to the broadcast?

To digitalise and capitalise on newer forms of news and radio as a form of attaching a wider audience.

9) Does War of the Worlds provide evidence to support the Frankfurt School's Hypodermic Needle theory?

Yes, that audiences are passive and won't question the media they consume. 

10) How might Gerbner's cultivation theory be applied to the broadcast?

Gerbner's theory can be applied to the broadcast because it relates to the long-term affects the media texts have on audiences through subminimal messages. 

11) Applying Hall's Reception Theory, what could be the preferred and oppositional readings of the original broadcast?

Hall's theory preferred and oppositional reading can be applied to the original broadcast. This means that the preferred reading can simply suggests that audiences are passive and understand that its a joke. However, the oppositional reading simply suggests that their audience don't know its fake and take the news literally which will cause panic. 

12) Do media products still retain the ability to fool audiences as it is suggested War of the Worlds did in 1938? Has the digital media landscape changed this?

No but yes, this is because nowadays audiences have more power over what media they consume so fooling audiences would be harder as they wouldn't accept everything that they media gives out.


Analysis and opinion

1) Why do you think the 1938 broadcast of War of the Worlds has become such a significant moment in media history?

The world of the war has been significant moment in media history because it showed how audiences are passive and can be controlled. 

2) War of the Worlds feels like a 1938 version of 'fake news'. But which is the greater example of fake news - Orson Welles's use of radio conventions to create realism or the newspapers exaggerating the audience reaction to discredit radio?

3) Do you agree with the Frankfurt School's Hypodermic Needle theory? If not, was there a point in history audiences were more susceptible to believing anything they saw or heard in the media?

Yes, but it merely depended on the history and media consumption at that specific time, this meant that audiences are passive to certain thins such as news because they believed news networks reported on important information whilst staying impartial however this as changed and audiences are becoming active with the media they consume. This is because we have learnt that big corporations have shares within news networks meaning they all channel the same news and with blunt biases.

4) Has the digital media age made the Hypodermic Needle model more or less relevant? Why?

The digital media age has made the Hypodermic needle model more relevant as consumers are starting to become more active with the media they consume which makes them susceptible to different opinions. 

5) Do you agree with George Gerbner's Cultivation theory - that suggests exposure to the media has a gradual but significant effect on audience's views and beliefs? Give examples to support your argument.

Yes, I do agree with Gerbner's cultivation theory because the media you consume gradually doe shave an effect n you and your overall state and opinion. This is evident from the frequency of the media you consume such as music having affects on the way you see the world and your current emotions. For example, if you listen to grime music or music which portrays a glorifies "gang lifestyle" to an extent you become desensitised to how corrupt and disgusting the "form of art" you are consuming and become at peace knowing that rapping about killing someone is a okay or emphasise with those doing it. Therefore, this may vary to what extent you listen to it and what the overall message is but listening to use some sort of frequency to lower your vibrations and change your mental state too. 

A reason why I would disagree with Gerbner's cultivation theory would be because audiences are now becoming independent and not blindly agreeing to everything they are giving which means they're becoming active and engaging. I was listening to a podcast 2 weeks ago on The Economist which talked about how your political stance affecting your vulnerability to believing certain news without any evidence. it had stated we are going through a 'infodepmic' especially with Covid-19 your political agenda could play a part in whether you believe it or not. It is not helping that president of the United States on live television stated that you could kill the virus by "injecting patients with disinfectant" wasn't really helping and made a lot healthcare professionals and many people rightfully angry. Therefore, this suggest that many people really knew that this was the last straw and we collectively knew that this statement was absolutely washed and stupid however some believed it. 

In conclusion, I firmly agree to disagree with this theory because on the one hand nowadays audience are active in what they consume however some remain passive which is dangerous but overall saying audiences are all blindly agreeing is wrong and is generalising. 

6) Is Gerbner's Cultivation theory more or less valid today than it would have been in 1938? Why?

The cultivation theory in my opinion would today have been less valid, this is because since 1938 the media has changed and they way we have consumed it has also been different meaning we have more control and are independent in what we want to watch and see on our networks. Therefore, we have more power for the media reply on our viewing to continue certain things especially with the BBC.