Talk:Mass media

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)

Either digital, or mobile, or maybe both, or none ?

In the introductive summary, I take exception of the following sentence:

Digital media comprises both Internet and mobile mass communication.

Some mass media are digital and do not travel on the Internet: DVDs, DAT, DAB, and then there are local, proprietarty computer networks that are not part of the internet.

Some mass media are mobile and are not digital: the good old car radio still exists, for one, or even a printed newspaper on a train …

And then, of course, in 2025 a big part of the Internet is mobile.

Also the article should maybe align with the Wiktionary and others which consider the latin word media as the plural of medium. Noliscient (talk) 12:55, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Merge proposal

I propose merging Media (communication) into Mass media. The contents of the article on media seems to overlap with mass media, which seems to strengthen the case for a merge. Interstellarity (talk) 21:00, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

I would probably look at the overlap between Media (communication) and Means of communication instead, perhaps overlapping much less with Mass media or Media studies as a result. (In any case, all of these articles are pretty dreadful to read, which seems an even higher priority.) Remsense ‥ 论 21:20, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Remsense and thanks for your input. I think you made a good point there. There does seem to be Wikipedia articles for similar subjects that could be potential candidates for merging. If you were the person deciding what articles to merge, which ones would you choose? Interstellarity (talk) 21:03, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm not certain yet, but per above I'm pretty sure we have not paid adequate attention onwiki to the study of media at-large, partially due to the present confusion and overlap. So, I'm still considering merging Media (communication) and Means of communication, while splitting off content more appropriate in Mass media. Remsense ‥ 论 21:22, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Political Communication

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 January 2025 and 17 March 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Reesepratt (article contribs). Peer reviewers: TalithakBoyd.

— Assignment last updated by Deparkozee (talk) 20:14, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

First example image and explanation

The text explaining the inclusion of a picture of Dwayne Johnson does not communicate where the image comes from or why it is an example of mass media being used. Unless a clarification can be made about what his likeness is on the cover of it doesn't add to the article and substantially confuses the actual format of mass media with the content that it might express. G. H. Beers (Fancy name) (talk) 15:08, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

"Economy of mass media" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Economy of mass media has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 January 4#Remaining redirects created by User:Anti gozo|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 January 4 § Remaining redirects created by User:Anti gozo]] until a consensus is reached. I₂Overcome ^talk 02:30, 4 January 2026 (UTC)