Mass Communication and Social Change

Author(s): Melvin L. de Fleur

Source: Social Forces, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Mar., 1966), pp. 314-326
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2575832
Accessed: 14-09-2016 02:36 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2575832?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social
Forces

This content downloaded from 202.119.48.76 on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:36:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

314

SOCIAL

FORCES

MASS COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL CHANGE*

MELVIN L. DE FLEUR

University of Ketducky
ABSTRACT

Diffusion studies of the "adoption of innovation" can potentially provide a basis for a quan-

titative, empirically-based theory of social change. However, before significant advances can
be made in this direction, rigorous attention must be directed toward clarifying the meaning

of the principal concepts of diffusion studies and toward increasing consistency in the use of
standardized terms from one writer to another. Also, theoretical concepts from diffusion

research need to be linked to more general sociological theory, insofar as this is available. The
present paper suggests possible ways in which these tasks can be undertaken. It makes use

of mass communication data on the diffusion of the major media through the American society
to illustrate the advantages of the conceptual framework which it proposes.

E xcellent histories of each of our princi-

years, substantial advances have been made in

pal mass media have been available for

understanding the processes by which new

some time. These have extensively

items of culture spread through a social system

documented the dates, contributions of indi-

achieving widespread adoption by the members

viduals, invention of technical devices and other

of its population. Such "diffusion studies" of

details which have played significant parts in

the "adoption of innovation" promise to provide

the development of each major form of mass

the foundation for the eventual development

communication. Almost uniformly, these his-

of an analytical, quantitative and empirically-

tories have been prepared by writers specialized

based theory of social change.2 It is the intent

in the study of some particular medium (jour-

of the present paper to clarify a number of

nalists, students of the cinema, educators in

concepts which will enter such a theory, to

broa'dcasting, etc.).' Sociologists and other

suggest points where they can be linked to

social scientists have paid relatively little atten-

broader sociological theory, and then to pre-

tion to the patterns of growth of the media in

sent data which illustrate the potential utility

terms of their broader implications for the

of the conceptual framework.

study of social change. Although themselves

The illustrative sets of data are the diffusion

often intimately involved in the process by

curves which four major mass media of com-

which new cultural traits become accepted into

society, the mass media may be viewed in their

own right as cultural innovations. In recent

munication have followed during their respec-

tive periods of acceptance by American households. These curves are related to a background

* The present article is an outgrowth of a paper of classical studies of the adoption of innovapresented at the annual meeting of the American
tion, and are compared with each other in terms
Sociological Association, Montreal, Canada, 1964.

of similarities and differences from one me-

The writer is indebted to Elaine C. El-Assal for

dium to another. The major social, political

her many contributions to both works.

1 See, for example, Frank Luther Mott, Avnerican Joutrnalism (New York: The Macmillan Co.,
1941); Henry L. Smith and Edwin Emery, The
Press in Anmerica (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:

and economic events which appear to have in-

fluenced these quantitative growth patterns are

brought out for each medium. While most
studies of mass communication attempt to un-

Prentice-Hall, 1954); Lewis Jacobs, The Rise of

ravel ways in which the media influence so-

the American Film (New York: Harcourt, Brace

ciety, the present analysis tries to bring out

& Co., 1939); Benjamin Hampton, A History of

ways in which society has influenced the media.

the Mozies (New York: Corvici, Friede, 1931);

Llewellyn White, The Arnerican Radio (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1947); Meyer Weinberg, TV in Ameerica (New York: Ballantine
Books, 1962).

2 A number of such studies have been summa-

rized in Everett M. Rogers, Diffuision of Innovations (New York: The Free Press of Glencoe,
1962).

This content downloaded from 202.119.48.76 on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:36:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

MASS COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL CHANGE 315

TOWARD A CLARIFICATION OF BASIC' TERMS AND

For still others, it has meant the psychological

A C0ONVERGENCE WITH MORE GENERAL THEORY

and overt actions associated with the acqui-

The terminology of the growing body of

sition of some new procedure, belief, device,

literature reporting on the diffusion of items

etc., including the reaching of a decision to

through populations is characterized by a con-

adopt and also the overt act of adopting.7

siderable lack of uniformity in the use of terms.3

Other terms (invention, diffusion, etc.) used

For this reason, more rigorous efforts need to

widely in research related to the study of in-

be directed toward standardization of the mean-

novation have shown equal degrees of con-

ing of concepts, and toward consistency in their

fusion in definition and meaning.

use from one writer to another. Such stan-

The present discussion is not intended as a

dardization needs to be based upon definitional

suggestion that such heterogeneous classes of

principles which also underlie more general

events are unimportant objects of study. But

sociological theory so that an emerging empiri-

when such a variety of referents are all denoted

cal theory of social change which rests in part

by the same symbol, thought and communica-

upon contributions from the diffusion studies

tion are severely hampered. A standardized

can eventually converge with broader concep-

terminology has become an indispensable and

tual schemes. Two obvious requirements along

urgent prerequisite for the further development

these lines are (1) that the variables to be

of a systematic approach to social change via

included in an empirical theory of social change

the quantitative study of diffusion and related

must be measurable, and (2) that theoretical

phenomena.

concepts related to the diffusion process must

be defined in such a way that their social action
or behavioral referents are clear.
Elementary as they may seem, the two requirements noted above have not been adequately met in the past, and this has been a

source of substantial confusion. For example,

in the sociological literature, even the word
"innovation" itself is used in a bewildering
variety of ways. It sometimes means newlyinvented items of technology, such as hybrid

seed corn.4 It also means the act of working

out some new deviant form of behavior which

will aid the individual in achieving a culturally

approved goal (by illegitimate means).,5 For

A second urgent prerequisite is the linking

of theoretical concepts from diffusion studies
and the study of innovation to concepts from
more general sociological theory. One of the
reasons why this has not been done extensively
in the past is undoubtedly explainable by the

fact that sociologists have not yet developed

very much in the way of validated general theory about which widespread consensus exists.
The work of Talcott Parsons, among con-

temporary American sociologists, makes a claim

to being directed toward this goal. There is
no complete agreement as to how well this goal

is being reached by his particular efforts, but

there is at least one aspect of Parsons' "theories of systems" that seems to provide linkage

other writers, the term refers to a cultural

points for potential convergence with an em-

modification, such as the development within a

pirical and analytical theory of social change.8

group of a new code of approved conduct.6

tions in Social Change (Boston: Houghton Mifflin

3 For a summary of early diffusion studies in

Co., 1964), pp. 728-748. The "risk capital" concept

sociology see Melvin L. DeFleur and Otto N. Lar-

constitutes a new norm or code for philanthropic

sen, The Flow of Izformation (New York: Harper

foundations.

7 The use of adjectives, verbs and nouns, e.g.,

& Bros., 1958).

4 Bryce Ryan and Neal C. Gross, "The Diffusion

"innovation," "to innovate," and "innovators" as

of Hybrid Seed Corn in Two Iowa Communities,"

derivatives of "innovation" implies this usage. See

Rural Sociology, 8 (March 1943), pp. 15-24.

Herbert Menzel, "Innovation, Integration and

5 Robert K. Merton, Social Theory and Social

Marginality: A Survey of Physicians," American

Strutctutre (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press,

Sociological Review, 25 (October 1960), pp. 704713. See also Rogers, op. cit., pp. 193-195.

1959), pp. 141-149.

6 An excellent example of this usage is contained

8 By the term "analytical" is meant "based upon

in Richard Colvard, "Risk Capital Philanthropy:

the study of elementary units." If traits are con-

The Idealogical Defense of Innovation," in George

sidered as elementary units of culture, then a study

K. Zollschan and Walter Hirsch (eds.), Explora-

of the adoption of or diffusion of a particular trait,

This content downloaded from 202.119.48.76 on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:36:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

316

SOCIAL

FORCES

This key aspect is Parsons' approach to the

to interactional mechanisms within the social

conceptualization of social action by treating

system.12 According to this approach to con-

it within three broad systems:

ceptualizing the diffusion of innovation, actors

First, the orientation of action of any one given

actor and its attendant motivational processes be-

in a social system who have already adopted

a particular item "expose" or otherwise in-

comes a differentiated and integrated system. This

fluence those who have not. Adoption, under

system will be called the personality, and we will

this view, is role interaction between a user of

define it as the organized system of the orientation

the item and one or more non-users which re-

and motivation of action of one individual actor.

sults in alterations of the roles of the latter in

Secondly, the action of a plurality of actors in a

such a way that usage of the item becomes part

common situation is a process of interaction, the

properties of which are to a definite but limited

extent independent of any prior culture. This
interaction also becomes differentiated and inte-

of their roles. If one such actor influences

(say) two others, who in turn influence two
others, and so on, the curve of adoption will

grated and as such forms a social system. Per-

follow a cumulative binominal expansion, much

sonality and social system are very intimately re-

as is the case in an unchecked infectious epi-

lated, but they are neither identical with one an-

demic. Given sufficient time, the available

other nor explicable by one another; the social

roles in the system will be altered. That is,

system is not a plurality of personalities. Finally,

saturation will be approached and the curve

systems of culture have their own forms and prob-

will tend to level off. The end result of this

lems of integration which are not reducible to

those of either personality or social systems or both

together.9

interactional process, which we can call the

"epidemiological" theory of diffusion (and
which we have oversimplified here), is the

Even at the time the general theory of action

classic S-shaped diffusion curve, sometimes

was formulated, these divisions were neither

called the "logistic curve of adoption." This

new nor unique; they were simply introduced

approach to the study of social change, through

as focal points around which the details of the

the analysis of the adoption of particular new

theory were then elaborated. But for present

combinations of culture traits and through in-

purposes, it can be shown that certain explana-

teractional events within the social system,

tions and theories concerned with diffusion and

appears (when stated in the above terms) to

innovation have been formulated at one or the

be easily subsumable under the general theory

other of these levels, and thus fall within (or

are special cases of) one of the three systems
of action in the sense implied above.

of action as laid out by Parsons and his colleagues.

The data to be presented in the present paper

Illustrations are provided by the attempts of

have an important bearing upon the potential

diffusion theorists to explain diffusion curves.

validity of the epidemiological theory of diffu-

For example, an early study by Pemberton

showed that when plotted over time on a cumu-

lative basis, the typical diffusion curve usually

assumes an "S" shape. The finding that such
curves frequently assume this particular form

has been attributed by Rogers,10 Sheppard,11

and others to "interpersonal influence," that is
or a theory which approaches social change, within
such a framework, can be said to be "analytical"
in this sense.

sion as a general model of the adoption of

innovation. Such an explanation requires that

the actors in the relevant social system be avail-

able to each other through time so that the

required interactions can take place. If a

diffusion curve is found which stretches over

a century or so, so that early adopters are long
dead before the later adopters acquire the item,

then the observed process would not fit well

with required underlying assumptions concern-

9 Talcott Parsons et al., Toward a General The-

12 Many of the possible explanations behind such

ory of Action (New York: Harper & Row, Harper

"diffusion curves" have been discussed in mathe-

Torchbooks, 1962), p. 7.

matical as well as behavioral terms in pioneering

10 Rogers, op. cit., pp. 154.

work by Stuart C. Dodd. See, for example, "Dif-

11 David Sheppard, A Survey Among Grassland

fusion Is Predictable: Testing Probability Models

Farmers (London: Central Office of Information,

for Laws of Interaction," Americaiz Sociological

Social Survey Number 274).

Review, 20 (August 1955), pp. 392-401.

This content downloaded from 202.119.48.76 on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:36:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

MASS COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL CHANGE 317

ing stability in the system of action through

of the separate actions of individuals as they

time. Such a diffusion curve is in fact clearly

pass through their decision-making series. This

in evidence for one of the mass media under

approach also appears to be somewhat limited

study (newspapers).

This suggests that a more adequate explana-

as a geneiral model of the adoption process because it rests upon assumptions of systematic

tion of this pattern must be sought within the

rationality and deliberated decisions on the

cultural system of the society into which the

part of all adopters. Perhaps more important,

new item was introduced. New items are

it tends to ignore events which occur in the

adopted by members of groups, communities,

other systems mentioned. Its articulation with

or societies who have institutionalized ways of

such systems remains to be made clear.

relating themselves to each other. The tradi-

These varied approaches to understanding the

tions, group values, social norms, level of tech-

diffusion of innovations have resulted from the

nological accumulation and other variations in

broad interdisciplinary attacks which have been

cultural conditions can serve as prerequisites

made on this problem. The twin needs for

to (or barriers to) social change. The rate of

conceptual standardization and for providing

adoption or degree of penetration of a given

linkages with more general theory have be-

new item will be significantly influenced by

come more and more, urgent as the body of

such factors. A substantial literature has ac-

research reports has grown richer. It is toward

cumulated with respect to this problem.13

these needs that the following attempt at con-

Another widely used approach to the study

ceptual clarification of basic terms is addressed.

of diffusion has focused attention more heavily

The definitions given below do not purport to,

upon events within the personality system. This

be either new, sophisticated, or particularly

is well illustrated in the work of Rogers, who

unique; the concepts defined are elementary.

defines the "adoption process" as, "the mental

The definitions attempt, however, to provide

process through which an individual passes

clear action referents for these simple terms

from the first learning about an innovation to

(so as to permit convergence with theories of

final adoption."14 The adoption process is

action), and to provide a reasonably standard-

broken down into five stages: awareness, in-

ized framework for approaching data concern-

terest, evaluation, trial and (permanent) adop-

ing the spread of the mass media and for

tion. Insofar as such actions may be thought

diffusion studies in general.

of as contributing to the maintenance of the

personality system, or as aiding the system in

achieving some form of equilibrium, there appears to be no barrier whatever regarding con-

A nezw ite)n will refer to some combination of culture traits, mechanical, symbolic, normative or

other, which has not previously been widely incorporated into the cultural system of the relevant

vergence of this formulation with more general

group or society. Such new items can come to the

theory. In particular, the Parsons et al treatise

attention of the relevant group or society through

on "Personality as a System of Action" pro-

borrowing or through invention.

vides a sophisticated set of concepts and propo-

sitions which appear to be more than adequate

for handling the "adoption process" as a spe-

Invention will refer to the act of forming some new

combinations of culture traits, that is, some new
item. This definition makes invention a behavior

cial case of orientation, motivation and perfor-

pattern of an actor rather than an elemnent of me-

mance of a given actor.15 In any case, this

chanical or other technology.

conceptualization sees the new item moving

through a group or community as the result

Innovation will indicate some change in patterns of

condtct or action related to some culture trait or

13 For an excellent summary and broad inter-

item (combination of traits). Such a definition is

disciplinary overview of this literature, see Elihu

anchored in potentially observable events and fo-

Katz, Martin L. Levin, and Herbert Hamilton,

cuses upon patternied action rather than upon new

"Traditions of Research on the Diffusion of Inno-

devices, psychological processes, or stages in an

vation," Amnerican Sociological Review, 28 (April

individual's acquisition of. new habits. Innovation

1963), pp. 237-252.

14 Rogers, op. cit., p. 76.

through the adoption of new items brought to the

15 Parsons et al., op. cit., pp. 111-158.

(as change in patterns of action) nay take place

attention of the group or society, but it may also

This content downloaded from 202.119.48.76 on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:36:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

318

SOCIAL

FORCES

come about because of changing modes or conduct

of mass communication as they have appeared

toward items which already exist as part of the

in the American society.

established cultural system. Such a definition frees

the study of innovation from being simply the study

of the adoption of newly borrowed or invented

things and broadens it to include behavioral, that
is normative, reorientations toward items concerning which a group already has some action pattern.

Innovation is thus an event in the cultural system

of a group or society.

In the sections which follow, the diffusion

curves of each of the four major media (newspapers, movies, radio, and television) have been
charted and these have been related to temporal patterns and to concomitant variations in
social, economic or other cultural conditions in
the society. The ways in which the suggested
definitions given above can aid in understand-

Obsolescentce can be defined as the abandoning of

ing these quantitative patterns and can clarify

formerly institutionalized modes of conduct related

patterns of development in one medium as re-

to some established item. Defined thus, obsolescence is a special case of innovation, that is a spe-

lated to another, are brought out.

cial case of change in patterns of action related to

some culture trait or item (combination of traits).

TABLE 1. THE GROWTH OF DAILY NEWSPAPERS IN

THE UNITED STATES, 1850-1957

Diffutsion curve refers to a quantitative function

Total

describing the proportion or number of members

of a group or society who have acquired a given

new item or who have changed their action patterns with respect to it over some period of time.

Obsolescence should show a kind of "reverse" diffu-

sion curve. Its form should be opposite to the

familiar S-shaped curve describing adoption. There

should be a "curve of abandonment" for onceinstitutionalized behavior forms that are dropping

out of the social or cultural system of a given

group or society. Diffusion curves may or may
not be reliable indices to the patterns of action
which the members engage in with respect to the

item. An actor may possess an item but not use

it; use it but not possess it, etc. They do, however, reveal important data on the degree to which

an item has been accepted, rejected or abandoned

by a group or society.
Institutionalization will refer to the stabilizing of

widespread patterns of action related to some cultural trait or combination of traits. In this sense
institutionalization is the end product of innovation
and represents equilibriumG in a system rather than
change. If behavior patterns related to a particular
item have been institutionalized, it can be postulated that such an item fulfills some functional need

in the social system in question. The diffusion

curve for an item whose relevant behaviors have
become institutionalized should show a distinct
"leveling off" to a relatively long-term "plateau."

Circulation
of Daily
Newspapers Total Circulation
(Excluding Number of per
Year Sunday) Households Household

1850 ....... 758,000 3,598,240 .21

1860 ...... 1 1,478,000 5,210,934 .28

1870....... 2,602,000 7,579,363 .34

1880 ....... 3,566,000 9,945,916 .36

1890 ....... 8,387,000 12,690,152 .66

1900....... 15,102,000 15,992,000 .94
1904....... 19,633,000 17,521,000 1.12
1909 ...... 24,212,000 19,734,000 1.23

1914 ....... 28,777,000 22,110,000 1.30

1919 ....... 33,029,000 23,873,000 1.38
1920 ....... 27,790,656 24,467,000 1.13
1925....... 33,739,369 27,540,000 1.22

1930 ....... 39,589,172 29,997,000 1.32

1935 ...... 38,155,540 31,892,000 1.20
1940....... 41,131,611 35,153,000 1.17
1945 ....... 48,384,188 37,503,000 1.29
1950....... 53,829,072 43,554,000 1.23

1955 ....... 56,147,359 47,788,000 1.17

1957 ....... 57,805,445 49,543,000 1.17
Sources:

U.S. Bureau of Census, Historical Statistics of the United State

Times to 1957, Series R-176 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Governmen

ing Office, 1960), p. 500.

U.S. Bureau of Census, Historical Statistics of the United States. Colonial

Times to 1957, Series R-169 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govern-

ment Printing Office, 1960), p. 500.

U.S. Bureau of Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonlial

Times to 1957, Series 255 (Washiiigton, D.C.: U.S. Government

Printiing Office, 1960), p. 96.

NEWSPAPERS

Table 1 presents the basic data for news-

These six definitions (and the meanings

papers in terms of circulation figures for daily

given or implied for the several auxiliary terms

papers over approximately a century. Data are

contained within them), provide a simple con-

also presented on the number of households in

ceptual framework for the comparative analy-

the United States during the same period. The

sis of quantitative data on the patterns of in-

household is used as a meaningful unit of adop-

novation and obsolescence related to the media

tion within the social system of the American

This content downloaded from 202.119.48.76 on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:36:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

MASS COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL CHANGE 319

1.4 N EWSPAPERS
1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0 .
1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960
YEAR

FIGURE 1. THE DIFFUSION CURVE FOR NEWSPAPERS: NUMBER OF SUBSCRIPTIONS TO DAILY NEWSPAPERS PER
HOUSEHOLD

society. The diffusion curve of daily news-

terms of its overall pattern seems to have been

papers per household is shown graphically in

relatively unaffected by war, political change

Figure 1. Obviously, this curve can be only

or even economic fluctuation (although these

an approximation. Some newspapers are pur-

would undoubtedly be related to more minor

chased by adoption units other than households.

variations in the actual circulation figures

Nevertheless, the graph shows with some clarity

around the general pattern).

the general pattern of the spread of the news-

The period of most rapid growth was from

paper through the American population during

about 1880 to about 1905. This corresponds

more than a century. The most significant

very closely to the infamous episodes of "yel-

feature of this curve is that it resembles the

low journalism," when the great metropolitan

classic S-shaped temporal diffusion pattern very

newspaper empires of the late nineteenth cen-

well. (A smooth curve of logistic form has

tury were locked in bitter competition for in-

been drawn through the observed data.)

creased circulation. The spur which this vigor-

The history of journalism shows very clearly

ous promotion gave to circulation probably had

that the diffusion curve of the daily newspaper

a considerable influence on the adoption curve

is closely related to the occurrence of such

(although such an ex post facto interpretation

broad social and cultural changes as the spread

would be difficult to demonstrate conclusively).

of education, the development of press tech-

Interpersonal activities within the social sys-

nology, the growth of cooperative newsgather-

tem may have played some part in generating

ing, news-distributing agencies, and the in-

this diffusion curve. A given person perhaps

creasing urbanization of the American society.

influenced others to subscribe to a paper. But

These significant concomitant trends have un-

an explanatory theory based solely upon such

doubtedly been of substantial importance as

considerations would appear to have severe

major influences on the shape of the diffusion

limitations for this type of diffusion data. Fur-

curve for newspapers. The general curve in

thermore, while the diffusion curve shown in

This content downloaded from 202.119.48.76 on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:36:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

320

SOCIAL

FORCES

Figure 1 indicates that the daily newspaper

TABLE 2. THE GROWTH OF WEEKLY MOTION PICTURE

reached virtual saturation as a new item in the

ATTENDANCE IN THE UNITED STATES, 1922-1955

American society shortly after the turn of the

century, subscriptions per household have de-

clined somewhat since. It would be very difficult to account for this turn of events by
appealing to interactional mechanisms within
the social system, other than to suggest the
unlikely possibility that individuals were exerting personal influence on each other to stop
reading daily newspapers. A more likely interpretation is that the development of additional

media during the several decades of the 20th

century has provided functional alternatives

within the cultural system, which are making

modest inroads in the degree to which the society satisfies its collective needs for communication content through the "consumption" of
newspapers. However, the complex of various

institutionalized social processes related to the

use of the newspaper in our society have become

so deeply established that it will undoubtedly be
some time before these modest trends toward

obsolescence become accelerated. Additional research is needed to bring out the influences
responsible for this modest obsolescence.

The diffusion curve for newspapers actually

reveals very little of the behavioral alterations

which took place in our society because of their

introduction. Subscribing is obviously only
one of many forms of action that can be related

Average Total Weekly

Weekly Number Attendance
Movie of per

Year Attendancie Households Household

1922 ....... 40,000,000 25,687,000
1923 ....... 43,000,000 26,298,000
1924....... 46,000,000 26,941,000
1925 ....... 46,000,000 27,540,000
1926....... 50,000,000 28,101,000
1927....... 57,000,000 28,632,000
1928 ....... 65,000,000 29,124,000
1929 ....... 80,000,000 29,582,000

1.56
1.64
1.71
1.67
1.78
1.99
2.23
2.70

1930....... 90,000,000 29,997,000 3.00

1931 ....... 75,000,000 30,272,000

1932 ....... 60,000,000 30,439,000
1933....... 60,000,000 30,802,000
1934....... 70,000,000 31,306,000
1935....... 80,000,000 31,892,000
1936....... 88,000,000 32,454,000
1937 ....... 88,000,000 33,088,000
1938 ....... 85,000,000 33,683,000
1939 ....... 85,000,000 34,409,000
1940....... 80,000,000 35,153,000
1941....... 85,000,000 35,929,000
1942 ....... 85,000,000 36,445,000
1943 ....... 85,000,000 36,833,000

2.48
1.97
1.95
2.24
2.51
2.71
2.66
2.52
2.47
2.28
2.37
2.33
2.31

1944....... 85,000,000 37,115,000 2.29

1945 ....... 85,000,000 37,503,000 2.27

1946....... 90,000,000 38,370,000 2.35

1947 ....... 90,000,000 39,107,000 2.30
1948....... 90,000,000 40,532,000 2.22
1949 ....... 70,000,000 42,182,000 1.66
1950....... 60,000,000 43,554,000 1.38
1951 ....... 54,000,000 44,656,000 1.21
1952....... 51,000,000 45,504,000 1.12
1953 ....... 46,000,000 46,334,000 .99
1954....... 49,000,000 46,893,000 1.04
1955....... 46,000,000 47,788,000 .96

to this particular item. Newspaper readership

has been studied in considerable depth, and it

is known to vary markedly from one segment

of the population to another. Thus, the diffusion curve provides only a very inadequate
index to innovation (as defined earlier), re-

vealing only the fact that newspapers were purchased. Whether they were skimmed, read
with care, used as a basis for forming political
opinion, or merely used to wrap garbage cannot be determined from the curve. The de-

velopment of an adequate understanding of the

actual innovations in conduct related to such an

item requires increasing attention to empirical

research on every aspect of newspaper usage

and related forms of action among those who
consume them.16

Sources:
U.S. Bureau of Census, IHistorical Statistics of the United St

Times to 1957, Series E. 522 (Washingtoni, D.C.: U.S. G

Printing Office, 1960), p. 225.

U.S. Bureau of Census, Historical Statistics of the United

Times to 1957, Series A.242-244 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govern-

ment Printing Office, 1960), p. 15.

MOTION PICTURES

The motion picture had an early development

and subsequent growth, which, in terms of historical detail, showed little correspondence to
that of the newspaper. However, Table 2,
showing average weekly movie attendance per

household, indicates that motion pictures followed a rough S-shaped curve of growth during
at least for some tiine. See Bernard Berelson,
"What Missing the Newspaper Means," in Paul

Lazarsfeld and Frank Stanton (eds.), Comnunication Research, 1948-1949 (New York: Harper

16 Studies of the social and psychological func-

& Bros., 1949). Also see Penn Kimball, "People

tions of the newspaper indicate that the daily paper

Without Papers," Public Opinion Quarterly, 23

satisfies many needs and is probably here to stay,

(Fall 1959), pp. 389-398.

This content downloaded from 202.119.48.76 on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:36:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

M1ASS COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL CHANGE 321

FILMS
2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

1 900 1910 1 920 1 930 1 940 1950 1 960

YEAR

FIGURE 2. THE DIFFUSION CURVE FOR FILMS: WEEKLY ATTENDANCE AT MOTION PICTURES PER HOUSEHOLD
much of their adoption period. Figure 2 pre-

to have a reverse counterpart, namely a pat-

sents the same data graphically.

tern of obsolescence, by which certain forms

The data show both considerable variability

of social action associated with movies, once

and what may appear as a substantial depar-

deeply institutionalized, now are fading out of

ture from the classical S-shaped curve. The

the American society.17 If this trend continues,

latter is due primarily to the severe drop in

then periodic attendance at a motion picture

weekly movie attendance per household which

theater may join the buffalo hunt, barn-raising,

occurred in the postwar period. This drop had

and the bare-knuckle boxing match as extinct

become so pronounced by 1955 that weekly

forms of social activity. Such curves of obso-

attendance at motion picture theaters had been

lescence, and the factors associated with them

reduced to half of the peak which this medium

have received far less research attention than

had achieved before World War II. It should

adoption curves, although from a theoretical

be noted that "weekly attendance" at a motion

point of view they are equally important for

picture theater is a form of social action. For

the study of social change.

this reason, this diffusion curve reveals actual

While it is true that attendance at public

innovation (as defined) more accurately than

theaters is disappearing, the motion picture as

a curve based upon the possession or acquisition

a technical item is not. Probably more people

of the motion picture as a technical item-as

actually see movies now than ever before, but

might be the case for a curve based, say, upon

the number of motion picture theaters per
household over a given span of time.
Because of this closer correspondence be-

17 See Eliot Freidson's excellent discussion of

the way in which movie attendance is related to
social interaction within primary groups. "Communication Research and the Concept of the Mass,"

tween diffusion curve and innovation, the S-

Arnerican Sociological Review, 18 (June 1953),

shaped diffusion curve can be seen in this case

pp. 313-317.

This content downloaded from 202.119.48.76 on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:36:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

322

SOCIAL

FORCES

via their TV set. Thus, while the film and asso-

TABLE 3. THE GROWTH OF RADIO SET OWNERSHIP IN

ciated technical items (projector, screen, etc.)

THE UNITED STATES, 1922-1962

have not changed very much, there has been a

great modification in associated forms of action.
This situation provides an excellent example
of innovation and obsolescence with respect to
an item already established in the technological

culture, an item which in itself has changed but

little, but with respect to which substantial
alterations in social action have occurred. A

diffusion curve based upon social action data

more faithfully reveals actual patterns of innovation.

Total Total Sets

Number Number of per
Year of Sets Households Household
1922 ..... 400,000 25,687,000 .016

1925 ..... 4,000,000 27,540,000 .145

1930...... 13,000,000 29,997,000 .433
1935 ..... 30,500,000 31,892,000 .956
1940 ..... 51,000,000 35,153,000 1.451
1945...... 56,000,000 37,503,000 1.493

1950 ..... 98,000,000 43,554,000 2.250

1955 ..... 135,000,000 47,788,000 2.825

1960 ..... 166,000,000 52,610,000 3.155

1962 ..... 176,000,000 54,652,000 3.220

The major fluctuations around the general

pattern of per household movie attendance have

Sources:

been closely related to economic, political, and

1963), p. 761.

other cultural events within the larger society.

Such attendance plunged sharply downward

during the depression years (Figure 2) but
recovered as war approached. World War II,

which disrupted normal family activities in

The World Almaniac 1963 (New York: New York World-Telegram,

U.S. Bureau of Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial

Times to 1957, Series A 242-244 (Washingtoni, D.C.: U.S. Government
Priniting Office, 1960), p. 15.
U.S. Bureau of Cenisus, Currentt Populationt Reports: Poputlation
Characteristics, Series P-20, No. 106 (Washinigtoni, D.C.: U.S. Goverilment
Priniting Office, 1951), p. 11.

U.S. Bureau of Cenisus, Currenit Poputlation Reports: Population

Characteristics, Serics P-20, No. 119 (Washingtoni, D.C.: U.S. Governiment

Printing Office, 1962), p. 4.

many ways, had a decidedly limiting effect on

weekly movie attendance. The shape of this

sive of our mass media. Table 3 shows that

curve thus appears to be governed both by

there are now more than three radio sets per

interactional events in the social systems and

household on the average in the United States.

by trends in the cultural system.

This adds up to nearly 180 mtillion sets!

The overall declining trend in motion picture

Figure 3 shows graphically that radio in its

attendance is obviously inversely correlated with

brief life span achieved saturation adoption in

the growth of the electronic media. Radio and

a period of only about 40 years (1922-1%2),

television both appear to have made inroads on

as compared to about 75 years for newspapers.

motion pictures. While it may be true that

Movies also required about four decades to

"movies are better than ever," they appear to

reach their peak.

be losing ground sharply as their pattern of

An interesting feature of the S-shaped dif-

obsolescence has developed. This trend, of

fusion curve for radio is the plateau which

course, raises the issue as to why the forms of

occurred during the World War II period (see

action surrounding one medium remain as estab-

Figure 3). This, of course, was due to re-

lished institutions and those of another are

strictions on the manufacture of radio receivers

threatened by oblivion. The answer would

for the consumer market during the national

appear to lie in the social and psychological

emergency. However, the most striking fea-

needs (in the functional sense) to which the

ture of radio's adoption curve is the "recovery"

medium relates itself, and in the types of con-

that it made following the war years, even

comitant cultural and technological changes

when faced with competition from television.

which develop within the society. The Ameri-

Thus, radio's curve of diffusion was little in-

can society is apparently "gratifying its needs"

fluenced by either the Depression, which oc-

as a system in ways other than by going to the

curred shortly after it started to be adopted, or

movies, and the time formerly devoted to this

by the impact of wartime restrictions. But in

pastime is now being given over to other activi-

spite of its spectacular numbers, radio in many

ties which serve as functional alternatives.

ways has shown unmistakable patterns of obsolescence at least on the part of its mature adult

RADIO

audience. At one time, the behavior patterns

Radio's history has been brief, but in terms

of the American family with respect to their

of set ownership it has become the most mas-

livingroom radio were deeply institutionalized.

This content downloaded from 202.119.48.76 on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:36:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

MASS COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL CHANGE 323

PRADIO

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

0.5

1925

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

Y EAR

FIGURE 3. THE DIFFUSION CURVE FOR RADIO: NUMBER OF SETS OWNED PER HOUSEHOLD

Radio listening occupied the evening hours of

stood not only against a series of political and

millions of people. But with the arrival of

economic conditions which characterized the

television, radio was forced out of the living-

cultural system but against competitive func-

room and out of the attentions of most families

tional alternatives, a shift to new technology

during the important evening period. In the

(transistors), a successful shift to alternative

face of the functional alternative offered by

audiences with different needs to fulfill, and

TV, which took over the fulfillment of needs

broad changes in patterns of social action asso-

which radio formerly served, the latter resorted

ciated with receiving sets. Unlike movies, with

to alternative audiences and alternative needs

their cumbersome public theaters, radio emerged

which could be appealed to at the beach, in the

as a meclium capable of making far more flexi-

kitchen, or in the automobile. The current

ble adjustments in the face of these changing

affluence of the American society has placed

conditions in the social and cultural systems

millions of transistorized sets in the hands of

than was the case with films. Finally, the pat-

children and teenagers. Radio's programming

terns of innovation, institutionalization and

has increasingly been tailored to appeal to this

obsolescence as forms of observable action

immature audience. The diffusion curve of

which lie behind the diffusion curve of radio

radio, developed from set ownership, may be

cannot be fully understood through attempts to

an accurate record of the acquisition of sets.

explain such curves with "epidemiological"

However, such a curve provides no hint of the

reasoning, or with the "adoption process" con-

actual patterns of innovation and obsolescence

ceptualized solely in psychological termns. More

that have occurred as forms of social action

complex models are needed, which take into

with respect to this item (which itself has

account important variables from the person-

changed but little, other than to become smaller

ality and social systems, as well as the impact

and more portable).

of functional alternatives or other conditions

The growth of radio, then, must be under-

of the cultutraI system.

This content downloaded from 202.119.48.76 on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:36:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

324

SOCIAL

FORCES

TABLE 4. THE GROWTH OF TELEVISION SET OWNER-

postwar "freeze" on new station licenses im-

SHIP IN THE UNITED STATES, 1946-1961

posed by the F.C.C. for the purpose of achieving a workable frequency allotment plan. In

Total
Total Sets Number of Sets per
Year in Use Households Household

1946 8,000 38,370,000 .0002

1947 .250,000 39,107,000 .0064
1948. 1,000,000 40,523,000 .0247
1949 . 4,000,000 42,182,000 .0948
1950 . 10,500,000 43,554,000 .2411
1951. 15,750,000 44,656,000 .3527

1953. 28,000,000 46,334,000 .6043

1957 . 47,200,000 49,543,000 .9527

1960 . 54,000,000 52,610,000 1.0264

1961. 56,900,000 53,291,000 1.0677

spite of these setbacks, television's growth has

been extremely rapid. It can be contrasted
with that of newspapers, which required three-

quarters of a century to become a common

household item. Television required only a

decade to reach virtual saturation. Table 4

shows that there is now more than one TV

set per household in the United States. The

graph shown in Figure 4 indicates that TV's

growth followed a somewhat accelerated Sshaped diffusion curve of the general classi-

Sources:
cal pattern. It is little
U.S. Bureau of Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial

Times to 1957 Series 242-244 (Washinigton, D.C.: U.S. Government

Printing Office, 1960), p. 15.

U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Populationt Reports, Population

Characteristics, Series P-20, No. 106 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government

Printing Office, 1961), p. 11.

U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Population Reports, Population

Characteristics, Series P-20, No. 119 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government

Printing Office, 1962), p. 4.

wonder that social sci-

entists have not as yet been able to make

definitive statements concerning television's

impact on modern society or upon human personality.

The social and cultural conditions which

facilitated the growth of television were several.

TELEVISION

The society had achieved a level of technology

Television's introduction into the American

which permitted mass manufacture of receiv-

society was beset with difficulties. First, World

ing equipment at a price within the means

War II stopped its technical development com-

of the ordinary citizen. Established cultural

pletely for several years. Then there was the

practices concerning broadcasting, including

TELEVISION
1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

1946 1948 1950 1952 1954 1956 1958 1960

Y EAR

FIGURE 4. THE DIFFUSION CURVE FOR TELEVISION: NUMBER OF SETS OWNED PER HOUSEHOLD

This content downloaded from 202.119.48.76 on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:36:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

MASS COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL CHANGE 325

ALL FOUR MEDIA

newspapers

fillms radio t.v.

1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960
YEAR

FIGURE 5. THE DIFFUSION CURVES FOR ALL FOUR MEDIA WITH ORDINATE STANDARDIZED

the role of the federal government and the

still prefer the "horse opera" to the Metropoli-

relationship of news services to broadcasters,

tan Opera.18 A more sophisticated medium

had already been institutionalized. A huge

would be one which permitted an almost un-

pool of entertainment talent was available from

limited range in program selection (in the

films, radio and the stage. The profit goal and

form of tapes or records), an independent power

its financial base (from advertising revenue)

supply, natural color, complete portability and

was copied from radio. Network program-

higlh quality reproduction. Thus, a more sophis-

ming had already been widely used and awaited

ticated medium may combine the best qualities

only adequate electronic technology suitable

of stage, concert hall, movie theater, stereo

for TV. The population had for more than

records, books, and newspapers in a completely

two decades become accustomed to the moving

portable device. Our present television sets

picture image complete with sound. The set

will probably one day appear as obsolescent as

was also a natural baby sitter, aiding with a

the crystal set.

nagging problem in some families. Thus, tele-

By plotting the curves for each of the present

vision was a new item which "fit" remarkably

media on a single graph in Figure 5 (with the

well within the personality, social and cultural

units of each "standardized" so as to reach

systems of the society to which it was presented.

their peak at the same level on the ordinate

Finally, no political or economic upheaval pre-

axis), the general patterns of diffusion of each

vented its rapid acquisition.

We need not assume that television is the

final medium. It is still largely chained to the
A.C. outlet by its power supply cord; it is
chained to the transmitting station by its fre-

of these four cultural items can be compared.

The long slow growth of newspapers stands out
18 Paul F. Lazarsfeld and Robert K. Merton,
"Mass Communication, Popular Taste and Organized Social Action," in Lyman Bryson (ed.),

quency band; and it is in many ways chained

The Coinminnication of Ideas (New York: Harper

to the cultural tastes of its mass audience who

& Bros., 1948), pp. 95-118.

This content downloaded from 202.119.48.76 on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:36:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

326

SOCIAL

FORCES

against the quick rise of television. In spite

diffusion curves based upon item acquisition is

of these differences, each is a reasonable ap-

not wortlhwhile. Such data are important in

proximation of the classic S-shaped diffusion

their own right, but the relationship between

curve.

possession and usage may remain unclear.

CONCLUSIONS

The study of the media within this broad

perspective cannot reveal the nuances of inter-

action which occurred within individual households when decisions were made to adopt or
not to adopt each medium as part of the family's

routines. Such a perspective does show that

the spread of the media occurred according to

patterns followed by other invented items. The
S-shaped curves for the radio receiving set, the
daily newspaper, and household television appear to have followed the same general regu-

larities in their spread through the population

as such unrelated items as hybrid seed corn,
instant coffee, hair spray, and oral contraceptives. Motion picture theaters, on the other
hand, show signs that they are headed in the

same directions as the kerosene lamp, the

straight razor, and the buggy whip, and due
largely to the same theoretical principles of
social change.

The present discussion has suggested that the

study of social change based upon examination
of quantitative diffusion curves can have severe

limitations. Such curves provide a beginning

point for an analytic theory of social change.

The present discussion also suggests that the

development of a quantitative, analytical, and
empirical theory of social change based upon

diffusion data will require a great deal of prerequisite effort directed toward conceptual

clarification. Such clarification will depend in

large part upon the standardization of the meaning of terms through the use of behavioral or
action referents. Only by this means can stu-

dents of social change build the foundation for

the theoretical structures which will eventually

link their efforts at explanation with a more

general theory of social action. The definitions

of diffusion concepts presented earlier in this

paper have indicated some of the points where
such linkages are possible.

As for the mass media themselves, viewing

them within the perspectives of the present

paper has perhaps revealed few startling or
new insights into the factors which "caused"

them to emerge and spread through society;

nor does it permit new generalizations concerning their "effect" on the population which
has altered their daily lives around them. It

does, however, place them within a context of

more general processes of social change and

But when diffusion concepts are not defined in

social action. This should aid in the formula-

social action terms (as they need to be), it

tion of hypotheses concerning their growth,

becomes clear that they can obscure drastic

saturatioil or decline. While such theoretical

changes in behavior, revealing only the num-

explorations tell us little of the ways in which

ber of some technical item which has passed

the mass media influence society, they do help

into the hands of a population. This by no

reveal some of the complex ways in which so-

means implies that the quantitative study of

ciety has influenced the mass media.

This content downloaded from 202.119.48.76 on Wed, 14 Sep 2016 02:36:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms