Some years ago reception analysis and similar types of qualitative audience research had been welcomed as a new `paradigm' in the whole discussion on media meaning, functions and impact. A crucial case, on which several scholars focused, dealt with the issue of the impact of transnational media, emphasizing the active participation of the receiver in the consumption process. These studies have been reconceptualizing existing theories and arguments in international communication, media imperialism and cultural dominance. Recently the qualitative audience approaches have been labelled as `revisionist', `relativist' and even `postmodernist'. In this article we evaluate the contribution of the approach to the whole debate on the cross-cultural impact by transnational media. The central argument is that the (theoretical) debaters on both sides of the spectrum (defenders and opponents) have not adequately considered (1) the intrinsic information value of the approach and (2) the diversity and ambiguities of the concrete studies themselves.
Ang, I.
(1990) `Culture and Communication: Towards an Ethnographic Critique of Media Consumption in the Transnational Media System', European Journal of Communication5(2-3): 239-260.
3.
Barnett, G.A.
and T.L. McPhail (1980) `An Examination of the Relationship of United States and Canadian Identity', International Journal of Intercultural Relations4: 219-232.
4.
Billington, R.
, S. Strawbridge, L. Greensides and A. Fitzsimons (eds) (1991) Culture and Society. A Sociology of Culture. Houndsmills: Macmillan.
5.
Biltereyst, D.
(1991) `Resisting American Hegemony: A Comparative Analysis of the Reception of Domestic and US Fiction', European Journal of Communication6(4): 469-497.
6.
Biltereyst, D.
(1993) `Televisiekijkers tussen culturele identiteit en imperialisme. Een geïntegreerde receptie-analytische benadering van de cross-culturele impact van VS tv-fictie'. Brussels: VUB Press.
7.
Biltereyst, D.
(1994) `Tussen hegemonie en creolisering: Een geïntegreerd onderzoek naar de impact van Amerikaanse televisiefictie in Vlaanderen', in L. Van Poecke and H. Van den Bulck (eds) Culturele globalisering en lokale identiteit. Amerikanisering van de Europese media. Leuven: Garant.
8.
Biltereyst, D.
(1995) Hollywood in het Avondland. Een analyse van de Afhankelijkheid en de impact van Amerikaanse televisie in Europa. Brussels: VUB Press.
9.
Blumler, J.
, M. Gurevitch and E. Katz (1985) `Reaching Out: A Future for Gratifications Research', in K. Rosengren, L.A. Wenner and P. Palmgreen (eds) Media Gratifications Research: Current Perspectives. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
10.
Bryman, A.
(1984) `The Debate about Quantitative and Qualitative Research: A Question of Method or Epistemology', British Journal of Sociology35(1): 75-92.
11.
Burgelman, J.C.
(1990) `Politics and the Media. How Relative can the Autonomy Be?', in J. Hochheimer, K. Jakubovski and S. Splichal (eds) Democratization and Media, pp. 15-32. Ljubeljana: CCC.
12.
Carragee, K.M.
(1990) `Interpretative Media Study and Interpretative Social Science', Critical Studies in Mass Communication7(1): 81-96.
13.
Corner, J.
, K. Richardson and N. Fenton (1990) Nuclear Reactions. Form and Response in Public Issue Television. London: John Libbey.
14.
Curran, J.
(1990) `The New Revisionism in Mass Communication Research', European Journal of Communication5(2-3): 135-164.
15.
Fiske, J.
(1986) `Television: Polysemy and Popularity', Critical Studies in Mass Communication3(4): 392-408.
16.
Grossberg, L.
(1984) `Strategies in Marxist Cultural Interpretation', Critical Studies in Mass Communication1(4): 392-421.
17.
Gunter, B.
(1988) `The Perceptive Audience', in J.A. Anderson (ed.) Communication Yearbook, pp. 22-50. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
18.
Hall, S.
(1980) `Cultural Studies: Two Paradigms', Media, Culture and Society (2): 57-72.
19.
Hamelink, C.
(1977) The Corporate Village. Rome: IDOC.
20.
Hamelink, C.
(1983) Cultural Autonomy in Global Communication. New York: Longman.
21.
Herzog, H.
(1986) `Dallas in Deutschland. Eine Pilotstudie', Rundfunk und Fernsehen34(3): 351-367.
22.
Himmelweit, H.
, B. Swift and M.E. Jaeger (1980) `The Audience as a Critic', in P. Tannenbaum (ed.) Entertainment Functions of Television. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
23.
Hjort, A.
(1986) When Women Watch TV. Copenhagen: D.R.
24.
Höijer, B.
(1990) `Reliability, Validity and Generalizability', Nordicom Review1: 15-20.
25.
Hoskins, C.
and R. Mirus (1988) `Reasons for the US Dominance of the International Trade in Television Programmes', Media, Culture and Society10: 499-515.
26.
Hoskins, C.
and R. Mirus (1990) `Television Fiction Made in USA', in P. Larsen (ed.) Import/Export: International Flow of Television Fiction. Paris: UNESCO.
27.
Hoskins, C.
, R. Mirus and W. Rozeboom (1989) `U.S. Television Programs in the International Market: Unfair Pricing?', Journal of Communication39(2): 55-75.
28.
Hur, K.K.
(1982) `International Mass Communication Research: A Critical Review of Theory and Methods', in M. Burgoon (ed.) Communication Yearbook, pp. 531-554. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
29.
Hur, K.K.
and J.P. Robinson (1981) `A Uses and Gratifications Analysis of Viewing “Roots” in Britain', Journalism Quarterly58: 582-588.
30.
Jensen, K.B.
(1986) Making Sense of the News. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.
31.
Jensen, K.B.
(1988) `Answering the Question: What is Reception Analysis?', Nordicom Review9(1): 3-5.
32.
Jensen, K.B.
and K.E. Rosengren (1990) `Five Traditions in Search of an Audience', European Journal of Communication5(2-3): 207-238.
33.
Lee, C.C.
(1979) Media Imperialism Reconsidered. The Homogenizing of Television Culture. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
34.
Lee, M.
and C.H. Cho (1990) `Women Watching Together', Cultural Studies4(1): 19-29.
35.
Liebes, T.
(1984) `Ethnocriticism', Studies in Visual Communication10(3): 277-292.
36.
Liebes, T.
(1994) `In Defense of Negotiated Readings: How Moderates on Each Side of the Conflict Interpret Intifada News', Journal of Communication44(2): 108-124.
37.
Liebes, T.
and E. Katz (1988) `Dallas and Genesis', in J.W. Carey (ed.) Media, Myths, and Narratives, pp. 113-125. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
38.
Liebes, T.
and E. Katz (1990) The Export of Meaning: Cross-cultural Readings of `Dallas'. New York: Oxford University Press.
39.
Lindlof, T.
(1991) `The Qualitative Study of Media Audiences', Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 35: 23-42.
40.
Livingstone, S.
(1988) `Viewers' Interpretations of Soap Opera: The Role of Gender, Power and Morality', in P. Drummond and R. Paterson (eds) Television in Transition, pp. 83-107. London: BFI.
41.
Livingstone, S.
(1990) Making Sense of Television. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
42.
Lodziak, C.
(1986) The Power of Television: A Critical Appraisal. London: Frances Pinter.
43.
Lull, J.
(1988) `The Audience as Nuisance', Critical Studies in Mass Communication5: 239-243.
44.
McQuail, D.
(1984) `With the Benefit of Hindsight: Reflections on Uses and Gratifications Research', Critical Studies in Mass Communication1: 177-193.
45.
Mattelart, A.
(1974) Mass Media, idéologies et mouvements révolutionnaires. Paris: Anthropos.
46.
Mattelart, A.
(1976) Multinationales et systèmes de communication. Les Appareils idéologiques de l'impérialisme. Paris: INA, La Documentation Française.
47.
Mattelart, M.
and A. Mattelart (1987) Le Carnaval des images. Paris: Editions Anthropos.
48.
Morley, D.
(1980) The Nationwide Audience. Structure and Decoding. London: BFI.
49.
Morley, D.
(1991) `Where the Global Meets the Local: Notes from the Sitting Room', Screen32(1): 1-15.
50.
Morley, D.
and K. Robins (1990) `Spaces of Identity', Screen30(4): 10-34.
51.
Morris, M.
(1988) `Banality in Cultural Studies', Block14: 15-25.
52.
Mowlana, H.
(1986) Global Information and World Communication. New York: Longman.
53.
Murdoch, G.
(1989) `Critical Enquiry and Audience Activity', in B. Dervin (ed.) Rethinking Communication, pp. 436-440. London: Sage.
54.
Noam, E.
(1991) `La Déréglementation de la télévision va-t-elle renforcer la domination d'Hollywood? Une critique économique d'un raisonnement traditionele', Réseaux50: 159-172.
55.
Nordenstreng, K.
and T. Varis (1974) Television Traffic — A One-Way Street?Paris: UNESCO.
56.
O'Connor, B.
(1990) Soap and Sensibility. Audience Response to Dallas and Glenroe. Dublin: RTE.
57.
Oliveira, O.S.
(1986) `Satellite TV and Dependency: An Empirical Approach', Gazette38: 127-145.
58.
Oliveira, O.S.
(1988a) `Programs Ratings and Levels of TV Exposure in Belize', Journalism Quarterly65: 497-500.
59.
Oliveira, O.S.
(1988b) `Brazilian Media Usage as a Test of Dependency Theory', Canadian Journal of Communication13(3-4): 16-27.
60.
O'Sullivan, T.
, J. Hartley, D. Saunders, M. Montgomery and J. Fiske (1994) Key Concepts in Communication and Cultural Studies. London: Routledge.
61.
Pool, I. De Sola
(1974) Direct Broadcasting and the Integrity of National Cultures. New York: Aspen Institute.
62.
Ravault, R.J.
(1981) `Information Flow: Which Way is the Wrong Way?', Journal of Communication31(4): 129-134.
63.
Read, W.H.
(1976) America's Mass Media Merchants. Baltimore, MA: Johns Hopkins University Press.
64.
Reeves, G.
(1993) Communications and the `Third World'. London: Routledge.
65.
Rosengren, K.E.
(1993) `From Field to Frog Ponds', Journal of Communication43(3): 6-17.
66.
Salwen, M.B.
(1991) `Cultural Imperialism: A Media Effects Approach', Critical Studies in Mass Communication8(1): 29-38.
67.
Schement, J.R.
, I.N. Gonzalez, P. Lum and R. Velencia (1984) `The International Flow of Television Programmes', Communication Research11(2): 163-182.
68.
Schiller, H.I.
(1970) Mass Communication and American Empire. New York: Kelley.
69.
Schiller, H.I.
(1991) `Not Yet the Post-imperialist Era', Critical Studies in Mass Communication Research8: 13-23.
70.
Schlesinger, P.
(1991) `On National Identity (I): Cultural Politics and the Mediologists', in P. Schlesinger (ed.) Media, State and Nation. Political Violence and Collective Identities. London: Sage.
71.
Schroeder, K.
(1992) `Cultural Quality: Search for a Phantom? A Reception Perspective on Judgements of Cultural Value', in M. Skovmand and K. Schroeder (eds) Media Cultures. Reappraising Transnational Media. London: Sage.
72.
Seidman, S.
(1990) `Substantive Debates: Moral Order and Social Crisis Perspectives on Modern Culture', in J.C. Alexander and S. Seidman (eds) Culture and Society: Contemporary Debates, pp. 217-235. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
73.
Seiter, E.
, H. Borchers, G. Kreutzner and E.-M. Warth (eds) (1989) Remote Control. London: Routledge.
74.
Sepstrup, P.
(1990) Transnationalization of Television in Western Europe. London: John Libbey.
75.
Servaes, J.
(1991) `Toward a New Perspective for Communication and Development', in F. Casimir (ed.) Communication in Development. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
76.
Silj, A.
(1988) East of Dallas. The European Challenge to American Television. London: BFI.
77.
Skovmand, M.
and K.C. Schroeder (eds) (1992) Media Cultures. Reappraising Transnational Media. London: Sage.
78.
Slack, J.D.
(1984) Communication Technology and Society. Conceptions of Causality and the Politics of Technological Intervention. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Straubhaar, J.
(1983) `Estimating the Impact of Imported versus National Programming in Brazil', in S. Thomas (ed.) Studies in Mass Communication. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
81.
Tamborini, R.
and J. Choi, (1990) `The Role of Cultural Diversity in Cultivation Research', in N. Signorielli and M. Morgan (eds) Cultivation Analysis. New Directions in Media Effects Research, pp. 157-180. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
82.
Tan, A.S.
, S. Li and Ch. Simpson (1986) `American TV and Social Stereotypes of Americans in Taiwan and Mexico', Journalism Quarterly63(3): 537-541.
83.
Tate, E.
and S. Surlin (1976) `Agreement with Opiniated TV Characters Across Cultures', Journalism Quarterly53: 199-203.
84.
Thompson, K.
(1985) Exporting Entertainment. America in the World Film Market. 1907-34. London: BFI.
85.
Tracey, M.
(1985) `The Poisoned Chalice? International Television and the Idea of Dominance', Daedalus: 17-56.
86.
Varis, T.
(1986) La Circulation internationale des émissions de télévision. Paris: UNESCO.
87.
Weimann, G.
(1984) `Images of Life in America: The Impact of American TV in Israel', International Journal of Intercultural Relations8: 185-197.
88.
Wells, A.
(1972) Picture-Tube Imperialism? The Impact of U.S. Television on Latin America. New York: Orbis Books.
89.
Wildman, S.S.
(1991) `Explaining Trade in Films and Programs', Journal of Communication41: 190-192.
90.
Wildman, S.S.
and S.E. Siwek (1988) International Trade in Films and Television Programs. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
