119 AGENDA-SETTING : IS NOT A 1984 VIEW OR IS A 1984 VIEW JYOTIKA RAMAPRASAD Introduction ’ ’ Contradictory findings abound in agenda-setting research. After almost a decade of research in the area, there is little we can definitely say about the hypothesis other than that some studies have supported a broad, aggregate-level agenda-setting role of the media. Though there is much discussion, as we shall see later, about the conceptualization of agenda-setting, it can be broadly defined as &dquo;the ability (of the media) to effect cognitive change among individuals, to structure their thinking ... to mentally order and organize (their) world....&dquo;’ The media attach a certain weight to news stories by placement, size, and frequency of appearance of stories. Agenda-setting asserts that audiences learn these saliences from the news media, incorporating a similar set of weights into their personal agendas.’ Research findings indicate that this agenda-setting phenomenon may be facilitated by interpersonal communication or hampered by it, that need for orientation may enhance agenda-setting or low involvement may enhance it, that television may reinforce the agenda-setting by newspapers or that it may not, that there is a direct relationship be- tween mass media exposure and agenda-setting but there are excep- tions, that it takes four to six months for the media agenda to become the public agenda or it takes only four to six weeks, and so on. In 1960, Klapper said, ~ , Mass communication ordiiiarilj, does not serve as a necessary and sufficient cause of audience effects, but rather functions among . and through a nexus of mediating factors and influences.’ at SAGE Publications on December 6, 2012 gaz.sagepub.com Downloaded from