Media Miscommunications

Hjarvard (2008) suitably likens media to languages in a sense that attention is manipulated in different ways between the three integral components of transmission, the sender, content and the receiver. Should the reporting somehow become ‘mistranslated’ by either the sender, contextually or in the receiver, what is projected outwardly to all observers becomes far removed from its initial context (Hjarvard, 2008). In the relationship between media and religion, such a miscommunication can ultimately be detrimental to public perception, similarly in the means that mistranslation of dialogue can cause offence when taken out of context. It is stated that media adjusts and moulds religious representations at will to suit the desired genre and audience requirements (Hjarvard, 2008). Hjarlvard (2008) takes this three-tiered approach in that distortions in any of the three stages of transmission can result in media misrepresentation and bias. Such distortions of this type are not uncommon and readily seen throughout all main media sources. Unfortunately it is arguable that without bias-free reporting, almost all sources of media, reporting not just on issues surrounding religions, will contain a degree of contextual, situational or individual mistranslation. In saying that, without understanding the context surrounding the issues, for which viewers seek out sources of media, transmissions within the media can never truly be comprehended to their fullest extent. 

References:

Hjarvard, S, 2008, The Mediatization of Religion: A Theory of the Media as Agents of Religious Change, Northern Lights, 6, 1, 9-26.