The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Encoding and decoding in the television discourse
Open accessAbstract
Two themes have been cited for this Colloquy: the highly focussed theme concerning the nature of the ‘televisual language’, and the very general and diffused concern with ‘cultural policies and programmes’. At first sight, these concerns seem to lead in opposite directions: the first towards formal, the second towards societal and policy questions. My aim, however, is to try to hold both concerns within a single framework. My purpose is to suggest that, in the analysis of culture, the inter-connection between societal structures and processes and formal or symbolic structures is absolutely pivotal. I propose to organize my reflections around the question of the encoding/decoding moments in the communicative process: and, from this base, to argue that, in societies like ours, communication between the production elites in broadcasting and their audiences is necessarily a form of ‘systematically distorted communication’. This argument then has a direct bearing on ‘cultural policies’, especially those policies of education, etc which might be directed towards ‘helping the audience to receive the television communication better, more effectively’. I therefore want, for the moment, to retain a base in the semiotic/linguistic approach to ‘televisual language’: to suggest, however, that this perspective properly intersects, on one side, with social and economic structures, on the other side with what Umberto Eco has recently called ‘the logic of cultures’.1 This means that, though I shall adopt a semiotic perspective, I do not regard this as indexing a closed formal concern with the immanent organization of the television discourse alone. It must also include a concern with the ‘social relations’ of the communicative process, and especially with the various kinds of ‘competences’ (at the production and receiving end) in the use of that language.2
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Selections from the Prison Notebooks
(2020) · On Violence · doi:10.1515/9780822390169-020 · Cited by 1,447
Cited by
Entman, R. M. (1991) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1991.tb02328.x · Cited by 1,381
Baker, P., Gabrielatos, C., & McEnery, T. (2013) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/ams048 · Cited by 320
Spitulnik, D. (1993) · Annual Review of Anthropology · doi:10.1146/annurev.an.22.100193.001453 · Cited by 287
Baker, P., & Potts, A. (2013) · Critical Discourse Studies · doi:10.1080/17405904.2012.744320 · Cited by 135
“It’s Not Easy Being Green”: The Greenwashing of Environmental Discourses in Advertising
Budinsky, J., & Bryant, S. (2013) · Canadian Journal of Communication · doi:10.22230/cjc.2013v38n2a2628 · Cited by 53
Metadata
- Venue
- CCCS Selected Working Papers
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2007-11-07
- Pages
- 402-414
- OpenAlex
- W2617769828
- Cited by
- 710
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 594.10
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Encoding and decoding in the television discourse. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4324/9780203357071-35
- The paper
- Encoding and decoding in the television discourse. (2007). CCCS Selected Working Papers. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203357071-35
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.