The Theory of the Spiral of Silence - Essay Example

NOELLE-NEUMANN AND APOSS THEORY OF SPIRAL OF SILENCE Introduction Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann proposed the theory of Spiral of silence in the year 1974. The theory attempts to expound on the tendency of individuals to remain silent regarding an issue that has the support of the majority in the society (Noelle-Neumann, 1993). The theory further identifies various possible reasons that contribute to individuals failure to hire their opinions in the community. First, the isolation phobia is a contributing factor in the theory of spiral of silence. In this case, the persons fear that the members of a particular group due to their opposing concepts might isolate them (Noelle-Neumann, 1993). In addition, the people experiencing the circumstance of the theory often fear to lose their position in the society because of their divergent views (Donsbach, Salmon and Tsfati, 2013). Secondly, persons fear of adverse isolation or reprisal in a particular group. The individuals fear that their contribution to the group might lead to a negative impact on the operations of the group. The theory further expounds that individuals have a "quasi-statistical organ" which enable them to what characters and contributions will lead to their isolation by the majority people in the group. According the theory, the closer an individual perceives the opinion held agrees to the prevailing opinion of the public, the more the likelihood of the person disclosing their opinion regarding the topic (Mutz, 1998). In this case, people in a particular group tend to embrace the opinion of the majority in the society regardless of their personal opinions about the issue. Additionally, if the opinion of the public changes regarding a particular concept, the individual realizes that their opinion does not agree with the overall opinion of the public. Consequently, they tend to minimize their contribution in various public forums in the society. The interpretations of the Theory of Spiral of Silence focus on various aspects of the society such as political, economic and religious contexts. People in the various social contexts fail to contribute to the affairs of the society because of the effects of spiral of silence (Donsbach, Salmon and Tsfati, 2013). The spiral of silence starts with an in the initial contribution by the affected person top various issues in the society. According to the principles of the Spiral of Silence, an individual experiences the effects of the concept after their first opinion fails to concur with the overall opinion of the public (Daschmann, 2000). On religious context, people fail to criticize certain aspects of their religion because of the fear of being isolated from the religious group. In addition, most individuals in the society fail to correct different practices of the religious leaders because of the fear of contradicting with the group’s opinion. On the political context, various political leaders in the society hesitate from presenting their views regarding a particular event or practice by the leaders because of the fear of isolation by their political parties or the society. In addition, the theory reflects on various aspects of the economic concepts such as failure by an employee to contribute to various aspects of an organization (Comstock and Scharrer, 2005). The paper presents various arguments to criticize and challenge the concept of Spiral of silence based on various aspects of interaction between different people in the society Critical Analysis Challenging the Theory Political Situation The theory of Spiral of silence reflects on various media platforms such as social media and television. The media has the authority of delivering information to the society regarding various aspects of the society. The media, therefore, can control the perception and opinion of individuals in the society regarding a particular issue. The concept of spiral of silence relies on various cognitive aspects of persons in order to establish long-term effects on the respective individuals (Donsbach, Salmon and Tsfati, 2013). The critics of the theory tend to examine its applicability in different social contexts such as political and environmental concerns. Individuals tend to embrace the opinion of the public regarding a particular political concept. The theory of spiral of silence applies in specific political situations in the world. For example, a leader might decide to uphold policies that limit the freedom of the citizens. In this case, the theory fails to apply because majority of the individuals in the particular society appreciates the importance of freedom. In addition, the supporters of a particular leader fail to support them in cases where freedom is being infringed (Shapiro, 2011). The concept of the spiral of silence does not reflect the communication channels of the modern society such as social media and mobile communication. The use of technological approaches in communication has enabled various individuals in the society to uphold their views regarding a particular social or political issue. The internet provides a virtual platform where different members of the society discuss certain aspects of a particular issue. In addition, it enables the minorities in a group to expound their opinion in order to acquire adequate understanding from other members of the group (Daschmann, 2000). The internet limits direct confrontations among the members of a particular group, which prevents the occurrence of isolation of individuals with different opinions. For example, various members of the society can illustrate their concern about a particular concept in the community or country. For example, the case of the participation of Russia in the crisis in Ukraine indicates how the theory of spiral of silence does not apply in the society (Lisosky and Henrichsen, 2011). Most of the Russians supported their authorities in their denial for participation of the country in the crises initially. However, majority of the young Russians are posting videos on various social media platform to highlight their concern about the involvement of the government in Ukraine. This example of Russia indicates that the concept of the spiral of silence is limited by technological advancement in communication. In addition, indicates how the theory fails to apply to certain controversial issues in the society. The modern society comprises of individuals with diversified perceptions and opinions regarding certain aspects of the political authorities (Marsh, 1985). The diverse composition of the society limits the applicability of the theory. In addition, the modern political environment provides individuals with adequate freedom of expression, which limits the effectiveness of the theory of spiral of silence. The theory of spiral of silence fails to elaborate on its application and reactions of individuals regarding a particular event in the society. The theory fails to illustrate the reaction of individuals in war or election situation. Some supporters of the American government supported the participation of the United States in the Gulf War (Eveland, McLeod and Signorielli, 1995). Majority of the citizens viewed it as an initiative of promoting peace between the United States and various Arab countries. However, several human rights activists initiated a campaign to oppose the war because of the high levels of human rights violations, which were involved in the war. The opinion of the few activists opposes the opinion of the public regarding the idea of the participation of U.S in the Gulf War. The human rights activists were not isolated by the American society, but rather several American citizens joined their group. In this case, the concept of spiral of silence fails to apply because of various reasons (Marsh, 1985). First, the issue of concern is controversial provided the number of civilians who died in the war. People in various societies worldwide regard war as an avenue by different authorities to undermine the sovereignty and freedom of the citizens. In addition, the occurrence of a war leads to property destruction and death of various persons in the affected country (Wyatt et al., 1996). The perception of different people about a war situation facilitates the controversial nature of the situation. The theory by Neumann, therefore, fails to apply in war situations. However, the critics of the theory indicate that, the theory tends to apply in limited war situations due to the varying opinions of the populace regarding the consequences of the war. The case of the Gulf War and the American Society reflects on the limitations of the theory of Neumann regarding the various aspects of the society (Scheufle, 2000). The citizens of various countries have enough freedom of expression regarding different issues in the society. The freedom provided by the laws of the respective country enables individuals to appreciate the opinions of others in a group regardless of the sensitive nature of a particular subject. This freedom further limits the applicability of the Neumann’s theory in the modern society. The aspect of isolation presented in the theory is inadequate to present the treatment of an individual because of their opinion in the society (Moy, Domke and Stamm, 2001). The concept of the fear of isolation illustrated by Neumann in the theory is limited by factors of unity, peaceful coexistences and integration of the society. The concept of isolation is applicable in religious and political extremism situations, which are rare in post-cold war democracies. Cases of isolation resulting from an individual’s opinion regarding a particular social, economic or political issue were prevalent during the cold war. Isolation of individuals occurred in societies that embraced nationalism in order to support respective governments in the war (Glynn, Hayes and Shanahan, 1997). This situation faces various hindrances because of the social integration brought about by globalization. Another political aspect of the theory is the time and circumstances that led to its formation. The theory of spiral of silence was conceptualized in Germany during a period when individual’s opinion depended on the perspectives of the authorities. The period of conceptualizing the theory was characterized by various aspects authoritative approach, which limited personal opinions regarding different political activities. In this case, the applicability of the theory is limited to situations where authoritative form of governance is practiced. For example, the citizens of Germany embraced the ideologies the government during the 1970s regardless of the social impact it had on the population. Opposition to the government’s opinions translated to isolation of the concerned parties in the society. Majority of the governments in the world provide adequate freedom to their citizens, which enables them to hire their views regardless of the direction of the public. In addition, the modern society appreciates differences in various opinions in order to establish a reliable solution of a particular issue in the society. This challenge of the theory is evident in the desire by various countries to uphold democracy in their electoral systems, which promotes the occurrence of divergent opinions in the societies. In addition, opposition leaders and their followers always differ with the opinion of the government and they do not face isolation from the society. The theory of spiral silence by Neumann faces various challenges political arenas such as globalization, internet, democracy and liberalization. The challenges hinder the theory from being applied in the modern society. In addition, the factors promote effective and free communication in the society, which enables individuals to hire their opinions regarding various issues in the society despite the perspective of the publicview of the majority (Gunther and Christen, 2002). Neumann’s theory was essential in the classic political scenes, which promoted dictatorship and authoritative governance in the society. The modern political scene provides various persons in the society with adequate space to hire their views about a particular issue without the fear of isolation. In addition, the internet provides a reliable platform for minorities to justify their opinions effectively which promotes effective analysis of a particular situation. The Media Situation The media is the central distributor of information in the society. According to Neumann, the media can be used to change the public opinion regarding particular issues in the society. Neumann argues that, the media can use its avenues to disseminate information that contradicts the opinion of the majority in the society. Political and business leaders have occasionally used the media to influence the decisions of individuals in the society on a particular issue. The media also provides a platform for the persons with a minority view to gathering support from some of the people with a majority view. The theory of Spiral of silence is applicable in various aspects of the media such as dissemination of educative information and spreading of propaganda in the society (Gunther and Christen, 2002). Various leaders use the media to justify their policies to the public in order to obtain a tangible number of supporters. For example, the facilitators of the cold and the Gulf war used the media to justify their actions in the war. The United States at one point used the international and local media to justify the peaceful intention of their participation in the Gulf war. The initiative of using the media is essential in obtaining adequate support from the public, which limits the minorities from hiring their opposing opinions. In this case, the public opinion is upheld, and individuals with a minority view might face isolation in the society. The concept of the media and Gulf War concurs with the arguments of Neumann in the theory of Spiral of silence (Comstock and Scharrer, 2005). The spiral of silence, in this case, functions effectively by hindering the minorities in the society from countering the opinion of the public because of the fear of isolation. In addition, individuals can sense the atmosphere of the public, which enable to avoid contradicting the opinion of the majority. For example, most of the American citizens who opposed the operation of the United States in Iraq were isolated in various social group based on the perception that they were traitors to their country. Similarly, Germans who opposed the actions of the Nazis were excommunicated or jailed which are forms of isolation (Glynn, Hayes and Shanahan, 1997). The theory is applicable to certain situations in the society based on the information provided by the media to the public. However, the authority of the media in controlling the view of the public faces various limitations currently, which hinders the relevance of Neumann’s theory. First, globalization enables individuals to obtain alternative information regarding a particular issue from different locations worldwide. For example, if a country controls its media outlets in order to control the opinion of the public on a particular issue, individuals travelling to and from other parts of the world acquire detailed information about the issue (Lipschultz, 2014). Globalization hinders effective control of the media by authorities, which limits the relevance of the theory of spiral of silence theory in the modern society (Daschmann, 2000). Secondly, the technological advancement in the media and social interaction avenues promotes communication among various members of the society, which limits the control of media on information. The internet provides various communication platforms such as social media and personalized blogs for dissemination of information (Oliver et al., 2008). The social media is among the largest source of information in the modern society. The young members of the society utilize the social media platform for communication and information dissemination. In addition, it offers the users an uncontrolled avenue to illustrate their views on a particular issue in the society (Gunther and Christen, 2002). The attempts by the traditional media platforms to change the opinion of the public regarding a particular issue face criticism on various social avenues such as Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube. Additionally, the users of the social media platform discuss various aspects of the issue and share their opinion, which limits the control of the classic media on the public opinion. The limitations provided by the social media on the traditional media avenues hinder effective application of the theory of the modern society. The platforms also provide individuals with contradicting opinion to justify their views on the issue in order to convince the majority to embrace their perceptions (Perloff, 1999). Moreover, the social media platforms limit the chances of social isolation among the persons of opposing opinion to that of the public opinion entails interaction of people from diverse cultures in the world (Lipschultz, 2014). Thirdly, the current media atmosphere promotes competition among different houses in the world. The modern media environment comprises of various operators, which limits individuals from controlling the information provided by the media (Jeffres, Neuendorf and Atkin, 1999). Some media houses are established to criticize certain issues and activities in the society, which limits the authority’s control over the media. In addition, some media houses tend to critics other media avenues for taking a particular position regarding a very sensitive issue in the society. The classic media platforms promote the concept of Neumann because of the control of information and public opinion (Lee et al., 2004). However, the control of public opinion is currently limited development of the internet and many media avenues, which promotes diversity of the information in the society. Business Context The business environment is characterized by various factors such as dissemination of information, communication among employees and management-employee communication. The theory of Spiral of Silence is applicable in the business environment in the situation that involves communication between managers and their subordinates. The subordinates fail to contradict the opinion of the manager regarding a particular business strategy because of the fear of isolation by the management. In addition, employees fear to contribute in making the business decisions because of the fear of proposing an approach that affects their colleagues at the workplace. In this case, the employee fears to be isolated by other workers based on their contribution to the policies of the organization. However, the theory faces various challenges in the business environment (Wilkinson, 2014). First, the current management approaches provide employees with an appropriate avenue to present their views regarding a particular issue in the company. The approach enables all the employees to deliver anonymous messages at various designated points in the company to express themselves or provide suggestions on a particular business approach. Secondly, the modern business environment encourages the participation of the employees in various operations of an organization, which promotes a wide range of opinions from the workers (Jeffres, Neuendorf and Atkin, 1999). The concept of the overall contribution of the employees in the operations and decisions of the business hinders the occurrence of fear of isolation among the employees. In addition, the environment limits individuals from forecasting the public opinion, which hinders the applicability of the theory of Spiral of Silence. Conclusion Neumann developed the theory of Spiral of Silence in 1974. The scholar conducted various studies to explore the reaction of individuals in the society regarding a particular issue. In addition, the studies focused on establishing the factors that limits individuals from providing an opinion that contradicts that of the majority. According to the theory, various individuals in the society fail to contribute on various issues in the society because of the fear of contradicting the opinion of the majority. In addition, the persons of minority opinion fear being isolated in the society because of contradicting the opinion of the public. The theory of Spiral of silence faces various challenges in the modern society, which limits its application. Globalization promotes the concept of information sharing among various members of the society, which limits media control over public opinion. Additionally, the internet provides appropriate avenues for sharing information virtually, which enables individuals with the minority opinion to justify their views effectively. Neumanns theory is not applicable in the modern society because of the limitations of freedom, globalization, and internet. In addition, the assumptions of the law are limited by the ability of individuals to appreciate varied opinions regarding a particular issue in the society. References Comstock, G. and Scharrer, E. 2005. The psychology of media and politics. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Academic Press. Daschmann, G. 2000. VOX POP & POLLS: THE IMPACT OF POLL RESULTS AND VOTER STATEMENTS IN THE MEDIA ON THE PERCEPTION OF A CLIMATE OF OPINION. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 12(2), pp.160-181. Donsbach, W., Salmon, C. and Tsfati, Y. 2013. The spiral of silence. Eveland, W., McLeod, D. and Signorielli, N. 1995. ACTUAL AND PERCEIVED U.S. PUBLIC OPINION: THE SPIRAL OF SILENCE DURING THE PERSIAN GULF WAR. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 7(2), pp.91-109. Glynn, C., Hayes, A. and Shanahan, J. 1997. Perceived Support for Ones Opinions and Willingness to Speak Out: A Meta-Analysis of Survey Studies on the "Spiral of Silence". Public Opinion Quarterly, 61(3), p.452. Gunther, A. and Christen, C. 2002. Projection or Persuasive Press? Contrary Effects of Personal Opinion and Perceived News Coverage on Estimates of Public Opinion. J Communication, 52(1), pp.177-195. Jeffres, L., Neuendorf, K. and Atkin, D. 1999. Spirals of Silence: Expressing Opinions When the Climate of Opinion Is Unambiguous. Political Communication, 16(2), pp.115-131. Lee, W., Detenber, B., Willnat, L., Aday, S. and Graf, J. 2004. A Cross-cultural Test of the Spiral of Silence Theory in Singapore and the United States1. Asian Journal of Communication, 14(2), pp.205-226. Lipschultz, J. 2014. Social Media Communication. New York: Routledge. Lisosky, J. and Henrichsen, J. 2011. War on words. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Praeger. Marsh, C. 1985. Back on the Bandwagon: The Effect of Opinion Polls on Public Opinion. Brit. J. Polit. Sci., 15(01), p.51. Moy, P., Domke, D. and Stamm, K. 2001. The Spiral of Silence and Public Opinion on Affirmative Action. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78(1), pp.7-25. Mutz, D. 1998. Impersonal influence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Noelle-Neumann, E. 1993. The spiral of silence. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Oliver, M., Yang, H., Ramasubramanian, S., Kim, J. and Lee, S. 2008. Exploring Implications of Perceived Media Reinforcement on Third-Person Perceptions. Communication Research, 35(6), pp.745-769. Perloff, R. 1999. The Third Person Effect: A Critical Review and Synthesis. Media Psychology, 1(4), pp.353-378. Scheufle, D. 2000. TWENTY-FIVE YEARS OF THE SPIRAL OF SILENCE: A CONCEPTUAL REVIEW AND EMPIRICAL OUTLOOK. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 12(1), pp.3-28. Shapiro, R. 2011. Public Opinion and American Democracy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(5), pp.982-1017. Wilkinson, A. 2014. Handbook of research on employee voice. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. Wyatt, R., Katz, E., Levinsohn, H. and Al-Haj, M. 1996. THE DIMENSIONS OF EXPRESSION INHIBITION: PERCEPTIONS OF OBSTACLES TO FREE SPEECH IN THREE CULTURES. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8(3), pp.229-247. Read More