Talk:Mass media

Theorists

this article provided great information, I feel it could have been more informative if you included mass media theorists.Kendrabrule (talk) 20:09, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: CMN2160A

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 September 2022 and 15 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wenyao123 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Linxiao Pan.

— Assignment last updated by Zariagibson (talk) 20:13, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Digital Communication

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2023 and 17 March 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kayloryates (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Jamie.green-2 (talk) 18:17, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 13 July 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Interstellarity (talk) 23:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

---

• Mass media → Media
• Media → Media (disambiguation)

– This is the most common and important usage of the term media as it encompasses everything we do. Considering it’s a level 2 vital article shows how important it is. Interstellarity (talk) 20:20, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Oppose, suggest WP:SNOW close – this is not borne out on multiple levels: no academic work conflates "media" as a synonym for "mass media", a much newer term. Remsense诉 20:34, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose, no policy-based reason to move this one. 162 etc. (talk) 21:07, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Is "the seven mass media" really an expert consensus?

I followed the link associated with this statement "In the early 2000s, a classification called the "seven mass media" came into use," which is a very prominent point in the article, to this website, and am very confused. This paper does not read like a peer-reviewed paper; has only 13 citations on Google Scholar; says it was published in "International Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences Vol 1 (01) August 2013," but the search engine on the website for this journal finds no results for the paper; and the online archive for the journal (here) seems to indicate that volume one was published in 2015, i.e. two years after the date on the paper. In addition, the ISBN on the paper points to a somewhat different article, with different authors (here,) and a Google Scholar search for "the seven mass media" does not produce any relevant results. (The most promising one, here, a paper with 757 citations, is about something different.) I am not an expert, but the article seems to give undue prominence to an idea that is (a) not a consensus position in the field, and (b) has such a strange online presence that it may actually be original research, and not from a reliable source. I would be grateful if an experienced editor with expertise in the subject of mass media could take a look and decide if this section of the article should be deleted. At the very least, it seems the inline reference is not pointing to something with appropriate significance. Sorry for the ramble, and apologies if I have badly misunderstood something. Aisleway (talk) 23:39, 30 September 2024 (UTC)