Media Selection 1:
O’Sullivan’s model predicted my media decision in this first scenario. This morning, a friend of mine who attends Syracuse University purchased 4 tickets for a Bruce Springsteen concert in October. Another friend already committed to attending the concert with us, leaving the 4th ticket available. So, in person I invited a common friend of from Cornell, only to hear my friend from Syracuse invited a common friend of ours from Syracuse about an hour early. So, now I was faced with the task of telling the person I invited that we do not actually have a ticket for him to go to the sold-out concert with us. O’Sullivan’s model predicts that when the valence is expected to be negative, we prefer to use mediated communication because it detaches us a little bit from the situation, creating a buffer. I decided to briefly explain myself and apologize in a text message so I would not have to deal with the initial disappointment and possible anger of my friend who I will have to speak with face-to-face soon enough.
Media Selection 2:
On Friday, I received a gift in the mail from my Dad, a Joba Chamberlain t-shirt (Yankee fans will understand how excited I was). Since this shirt is not obtainable outside of the Bronx for the time being, I was unbelievably happy to have it. I therefore wanted to choose the media that would that would help me express my elation. I’m sure my Dad knew I would be excited, but I did not think a text message or email would be satisfactory for a thank-you, so I decided to call even though I knew my Dad was at work. This somewhat agrees and somewhat disagrees with Media Richness Theory. My communication was not ambiguous, so MRT would predict I used a lean media. However I wanted to use a richer media so that my Dad would be able to pick up on my excitement through cues such as my tone of voice. Still, I picked a form of communication that in my opinion most efficiently expressed the message I wanted to get across, which is why I say my media selection is still somewhat consistent with the theory.
Links to my comments:
Comm 245 Blue: 3- Message selection
Comm 245 Blue: Assignment 3: Roommate Love
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Lucky you! You're going to a Bruce Springsteen concert and you have a Joba Chamberlain jersey. While not a Yankees fan - the lack of Phillies games on TV has left me watching YES - I understand your excitement.
Although I agree with your interpretation of the first scenario, it seems that another possible interpretation is provided by the Media Richness Theory. The task you had to do (uninvite your friend) can be seen as unequivocal. There seemed to be no conclusion to the conversation other than your friend could not join you. Therefore, the Media Richness Theory would predict it would be most efficient to choose a lean medium (like a text message) for such a task.
Hi Daniel,
I enjoy your first example, of denying your friends tickets to the concert. Although I can see how one might think Media Richness Theory should be applicable, I'm not so sure. Because telling your friend that he would not be able to come to the concert is somewhat ambiguous. According to the cues filtered out perspective, your message will seem more negative than it truly is. For example, the friend might think that since you did not have the courtesty to call, that you were perhaps mad at him or had some alterior motive for not inviting him. According to the Media Richness Theory, you probably should have given your friend a call to make sure that the situation was understood. He didn't get a ticket because of some miscommunication, not because he was not welcome. I believe that you were right in using O'Sullivan's model to explain your behavior.
Thea, I agree that the friend might be upset in the end. I also agree that Daniel's behavior corroborates O'Sullivan's model. However, I feel that the message "Sorry, another friend gave the ticket away first" is not subject to an ambiguous or uncertain interpretation anymore than declining a hypothetical invitation to lunch with a valid excuse. Remember, MRT does not deal with the valance of the episode. To include valance in an interpretation would be to think about it in terms of O'Sullivan, not MRT. Since the (truthful) explanation of miscommunication turns the equivocal "you can not join us" into an unequivocal statement, I believe it is valid to conclude the Media Richness Theory would suggest that lean media would be most efficient.
You are correct in saying that CFO claims impressions formed through mediated communication are neutral at best. However, it is in that very way that it differs from the Media Richness Theory: the MRT states that lean media are sometimes best. This unequivocal task would be an example of such a situation.
Post a Comment