'Mass communication\r'

'In a scene-to-face confabulation, the book of facts or the person who started talking to you articulatees himself through and through with(predicate) the message in Aramaic. The encoding butt on withdraws his motor skills. These atomic number 18 his vocal mechanisms, the hunting expedition of his lip and tongue, his lungs, his vocal stack and the face muscles.  But what if the start had his vocal cords removed because of throat dopecer? He whitethorn be able to encode his message verbally through unlife ilk aid. But he may accept difficulty doing so, nonverbally with the use of intonation, obstetrical delivery and volume. That may cause the message to be encoded inappropriately or insufficiently.\r\nThe transmit through which you, as the receiver, receive his message are your five senses. The problem is you cannot understand the Aramaic language. Though in that respect are channels through which people send information, there could be a possibility that it canâ⠂¬â„¢t be decoded. We cannot assure that you go away be able to decode what the get-go send, the same way he sent it.  This difference between your use of codes is an congresswoman of noise. (www.cultsock.ndirect.co.uk, 2003)\r\nAn example of a withdrawnness communion is through the telephone. For instance, you lose a occupation from a faraway place. But ascribable to a lot of work and the variant(a) people waiting in delimit to use the pay phone, you only have a few minutes to cite a friend, the receiver. You are the source here. You express your message through the mouthpiece of the telephone, â€Å"which transmits the suggest through the telephone-wire channel”. The steer acquires still noise as it goes.\r\nThis distorted signal is once again converted so it can be received at the destination or at the other end, to the receiver. Loss of information may occur, causation the message to be quite different from what you sent. The possible problem in distan ce communication, like in this example is, whether or not the telephone system will work properly. (Griffin,1997)\r\nIn public communication, the source utilizes machines, which transmits public messages that sent to large audiences, who may be at different places at the same time. The channels are media like TV and movies. The audiences are the receivers. (University of South Florida, 2005)\r\nThe Shannon-Weaver, though offering an efficient analysis, does not involve much consideration of the traces of the emotional and mental drive of humans behind the messages they send. (Buddenhagen, 1994)\r\n for the most part speaking, the model is helpful in sagacity the interrelatedness of the elements in a communication process.\r\nWorks Cited: Buddenhagen, E.  (1994). discourse. Retrieved rarified 31, 2006, from http://www.explorit.org/science/bytes/communication.html Griffin, E. (1997) culture Theory of Claude Shannon & Warren Weaver.[Electronic version] A First Look at tal k Theory.  Retrieved August 31, 2006, from http://www.afirstlook.com/archive/information.cfm?source=archther\r\nCommunication: Mass, Interpersonal, and Machine-Assisted (2005). Retrieved August 31, 2006, from University of South Florida, College of arts and sciences Website: http://www.cas.usf.edu/lis/lis6260/lectures/shannon.htm\r\nThe Shannon-Weaver Model. (2003). Retrieved August 31, 2006, from http://www.cultsock.ndirect.co.uk/MUHome/cshtml/introductory/sw.html\r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n'