İletişim teorilerinde temel sorunu

İletişim teorilerini medyanın kendisine, içeriklerine, üretim biçimlerine odaklanan veya daha çok medyanın kendisinden ziyade algılayıcısını araştırma nesnesi olarak kabul eden yaklaşımlar olmak üzere iki ana kategori altında toplamak mümkündür. Ayrıca teorisini medya ve algılayıcısı arasında sistematik ilişkiler kurmak, her iki tarafı işlevsel yapılar olarak kavramak ve böylece bir üst-dile taşımak suretiyle inşa etmeye çalışan yaklaşımlar da mevcuttur. Söz konusu edilebilecek bütün bu çabaların yanında, mutlaka Frankfurt Okulu’ndan, çeşitli politik söylemlerden, dil felsefesinden ve hermenötik gelenekten beslenerek sosyo-kültürel analizler yapmaya çalışan teorik yaklaşımların da dikkate alınması gerekmektedir. Fakat bütün bu teorik yaklaşımların her biri kendine özgü aksiyomlardan hareket etmesi dolayısıyla diğerine göre farklılık arz etmektedir. Bu farklılık kendini, çeşitlilik olarak sunabildiği gibi, çelişki olarak da ifade edebilmektedir. Çalışma, iletişim teorilerinin tartışmalara kattığı zenginlik kadar çıkmazlarına da işaret eden bu durumu ve günümüzün teorik dil sınırlarını sorunsallaştırmakta, böylece eleştirelliğin önemine vurgu yapmaktadır.

The problem of basic in communication theories

Communication theories could be classified into two categories: the approach that focuses on the media itself, its contents and the fashions of production thereof or that that considers the perceiver thereof as the object of examination rather than the media itself. Besides, there exist some other approaches that attempt to build their theory through the establishment of systematic relations between the media and the perceiver thereof, considering both the sides as functional structures and thus conveying them to an upper tongue. Apart from all the aforesaid attempts that could be discussed, such theoretical approaches as attempt to carry out socio-cultural analyses by being inspired by Frankfurt School, various pieces of political discourse, linguistic philosophy and hermeneutic tradition are also to be taken into account. However, each of the mentioned theoretical approaches is suggestive of differences from others since they are based upon their particular axiom. This differentiation could either present itself as variegation or express itself as contradiction. This study problematizes this situation, which points out not only the richness the communication theories contribute to discussions but also the aporia thereof, as well as today’s theoretical linguistic limits, whereby highlighting the importance of criticism.

PDF

___

- Dilthey, W., (2008), Gesammelte Schriften I-X, Göttingen Zürich, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
- Foucoult, M., (1974), Die Ordnung der Dinge, Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp.
- Foucoult, M., (1978), Dispositive der Macht, Michel Foucault über Sexualität, Wissen und Wahrheit, Berlin, Merve.
- Foucoult, M., (1991), Die Ordnung des Diskurses, Frankfurt am Main, Fischer.
- Foucoult, M., (2003), Archäologie des Wissens, Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp.
- Gadamer, H., G. (1975), Wahrheit und Methode, Tübingen, J.C.B.Mohr.
- Giddens, A., (1991), Modernity and self-ıdentity, Self and society in the late modern age, Cambridge, Polity Pres.
- Goffman, E., (1961), Encounters. Two studies in the sociology of ınteraction, Indianapolis, in: Bobbs-Merrill, Interaktion, (1973): Spaß am Spiel. Rollendistanz, München, Piper.
- Goffman, E., (1974), Frame Analysis. An Essay on the Organization of Experience, New York, Harper & Row.
- Goffman, E., (1981a), Forms of talk, Oxford, Blackwell.
- Goffman, E., (1981b), Geschlecht und Werbung, Frankfurt a.M., Suhrkamp.
- Goffman, E., (1982), Das Individuum im öffentlichen Austausch. Mikrostudien zur öffentlichen Ordnung, Frankfurt, Suhrkamp.
- Goffman, E., (1983), The ınteraction order, American Sociological Review 48: 1–17.
- Goffman, E., (2003), Wir alle spielen Theater: Die Selbstdarstellung im Alltag, München, Piper.
- Harvey, D., (1989), The condition of postmodernity. An enquiry into the origins of cultural change, Oxford, Basil Blackwell.
- Harvey, D., (1993), Social Justice and the City, Oxford, Basil Blackwell.
- Harvey, D., (2001), Spaces of capital: towards a critical geography, New York, Routledge.
- Heidegger, M., (1993), Sein und Zeit, Tübingen, Max Niemeyer Verlag.
- Husserl, E., (1981), Philosophie als strenge Wissenschaft, Frankfurt am Main, Klostermann.
- Jäckel, M., (2005), Medienwirkungen. Ein Studienbuch zur Einführung, 3., überarb. und erweit. Wiesbaden, Westdeutscher Verlag.
- Luhmann, N., (1971), Sinn als Grundbegriff der Soziologie, In: Jürgen Habermas & Niklas Luhmann, Theorie der Gesellschaft oder Sozialtechnologie, Frankfurt a.M., Suhrkamp.
- Luhmann, N., (1984), Soziale Systeme. Grundriß einer allgemeinen Theorie, Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp.
- Luhmann, N., (2002), Einführung in die Systemtheorie, Heidelberg, Carl-Auer- Systeme-Verlag.
- Lyotard, J.-F., (1989), Das postmoderne Wissen, Wien, Passagen Verlag.
- Lyotard, J.-F., (2006), Der Widerstreit, München, Fink.
- Mead, H. G., (1934), Mind, self and society, Chicago, University Of Chicago Pres.
- Meyrowitz, J., (1987), Die Fernseh-Gesellschaft, Weinheim/Basel, Beltz Verlag.
- Pöggeler, O., (1994), Der Denkweg Martin Heideggers, Stuttgart, Neske.
- Robertson, R., (1992), Globalization: social theory and global culture, London, Sage.