Určeno pouze pro studijní účely clech a rnoci. Nisili v mddiich, jakoito symbolickk nhsili, vypEstovalo v lidech v6dorni drivajici piednost hierarchickym hodnotam a vztahhrn zalo2enjm na sile, PiedvidEne konflikty, ve kterjch stat vZdycky vyhra- je, nAzorn6 ukazuji nebezpeEi pro ty, kte5 se od norem odchyli. NiSmeckd hadatelka v obom masov6 komunikace Elisabeth Noelle Neurnannovii ve svC teorii ,,spirily mlteni" rovnEi piedpoklAd8, Ze me- dia rnohou srrukturovat pfedstavu reality, Dornnivh se, tie hypodzy, po- klddajici masovi media za tdrnEi nebtinni, s nimiZ SI?argumentovalo a2 do konce ledesitfch let, byly chybnd. Tvrdi,Ze po desetileti byli lid6rnyl- n6 informoviei o sile, kterou masovd mCdia mohou ovliv~ovatlidi a kte- rd s prudkfm rozSif'ovrinirn televize podstatniS vzrostla,.HypotCza o spi- rale mlEeni je ,,navratern ke konceptu silnjch a mocnjch masovjch rncdii". Tato hypotkza vychdzi ze ziikladniho pfedpokladu, t e vetejnd mingnl vyvolivd podvCdornou snabu lidi Zijl~ichve skupinach o dosaZeni spo- leEnE zastrivanjch Osudkfi a konsensu. SpoleEnost odmEfiujepfizpfisobe- ni se a trestd prohielky proti spoleEnE sdilenCmu rninEhi. Ve vsech lid- skfch spoletnostech mohou bjt integratni tlaky zaloZeny na strachu jednotlivce z opovrieni, zesmiSlniSni a izolace, Strach 2 izolace je poklh- clan za antropologickou konstantu, stiilou velifinu. Tlak k pi'izplisobeni, ke sdileni spo1eEn)ich ndzoni, vytvAFi socidlni integraci. Podle Noelle- NcuniannovC (1986, 305) ,,2i\dn8 spoletnost nemdZe existovat bez tito spoledensk6 podstaty, beze strachu z izolace". VeTejnC rnineni definovala autorka takto (1983, 141): ,,Niizory s hod- notovfm nliboje~n,zvlBSt6 pak nizory s mordlnirn nabojem, a zpl'lsoby chovdni rlabyly podoby sidle spoletenskd dohody (napl. zvyky a dogma- tn), k nii sejedinec rnusf vefejn6 hliisit, nechce-li se dostat do izolace, ne- ho kterC mdie veiejnt! projevovat, aniZ by se izoloval, v obdobi. kdy jsou vtci ve stavu pie1n6n." Ta drulii zrninka se t9k6 kontroverznich nizorb. Spisdln mlCeni pak znnrneni (1983, 142): ,,Lid6 nechtEji b)it izolov8ni, ncustdle pozoruji, co se kolem nich dgje. a jsbu schopni vnimat i ty ne- jn1enZi vzestupy n poklesy v obsahu nbzorh. Ten, kdo vidi, Zejeho niizdr ziskrivri podl~oru.se citi bft silnEjSi, hovofi orevfenC a nemi i6dn6 zil- \~r;~ny.Kllicl?, kclo vicli, icjeho ndzor ztraci podporu, un~lkb.Ti, ktefi ho- 210 voH hlasitg a jsou veFejnE viditelni, se zdaji byt silnEjSinli, net skuteEnt! jsou, a ti ostatni se pak zdaji slabbirni, nef tomu ve skutetnostije, V z ~ s t B zde opticka a akustickh iluze o redlne pTevaze a sfle, cog vedejedny k to- mu, t e mluvi stale hlasitgji, a ty dmhd pak k tornu, i ejsou stale mlfenli- viSjli, a2 nakonec jeden z nhzofi zcela zanikne. Koncept spiraly mlteni obsahuje pohyb, kter)i kdyL se rozvine, sejil. nedl zastavit." Pf'edpoklddii se tudI2, Ze nizor, kterj se v tomto procesu zatde prosazovat, se zdh bpt silngjlim, net skutefng je, cof zstlafuje ostami nlizory hloub6ji do nitra lidl, kteH je zastavaji. Mltenf zkresluje piedstovl~o velikosti podpory kontroverznim tdmatbm. MySlenka, na ntEje spirfila mlEenl znlotena, naznatuje pf'ibuznost s na- zory dalgich autoni, Napfilclad ,,band-wagon efekt" popisujejev, kdy po- ptdvka po urEitdm zboZi stouph-pl'oto, Ze ostatni lid6 tento produkt take kupuji. (,,Band-wagon" v povodnim vyznamu znamenh ,,vdz s kapelou" pou%ivanj.pfi propagaci a volebnich shrorndZd6nich; v pienesndm vy- znarnu se po&ivh jako oznaEeni pro m6dni tendenci, pro tispiSSn6 hnuti, k nemul. se pkidlivaji lidd, ktefi chttjijit s vitEmym proudem. pozn. pie- kl.) Tgto poptavka je vyjadfenim pHnl lidi ziskavat vfrobek, ,,aby drleli ktok s Jonesov)srni odvedle", coZje tieba chapatjako piini lidi Einit to- tdf, co skupina, k nIZ ChtEji nhletet, pokladh za mbdni, stylovd neb0 za udrLovAni ,,kroku s dobou" (viz Leibenstein 1950 1950). (Existuje vlak takd .,snobsky efekt", pokles popthvky po vyrobku, protofe ho maji ostat- lii.Ten vyjadhje usilovdni o vpluEnost, snahu bjt odliSn);a nemit nic spo- lefntiho s masou.) Pojem ,,band-wagon" se uZival rovnifi ve spojeni s vo- lebnirni studiemi v USA. Byly zde obavy, Ze by informace o vjsledcich presidentskych voleb v EasnEjSich Easovjch pasmech (napt New York) pfenaSenC televizi a spojen6 s poEitafov~miprojekcemi mohly ovlivnit volebni chovani volitd v pozdEjSich Easovpch pismech (napi. Kalifornii), kteH dosud sv6 hlasy neodevzdali. Myslelo se, Ze takovd ko- munikace rndZe volife ovlivnit bud tak, Ze budou hlasova[ pro zjevneho vitEze (band-wagon effect), neb0 i e podpoii zaostivajicil~okandid6ta (underdog effect) (Weiss 1969, 167). Zdeje tfeba takd pfipomenout nlzor o rnlfici viStSin6, podle nEhoi vet- Sina lidi ve svdm soukroml sdili jeden nizor, ovlem sefejnou diskusi ovllida hluEn2 menlina. Pojem ,,pluralistickStignorance" se pouiivri k po- psdnf situace, v niZ se rnnozi lid6 vyhybaji v)'rnSni! soukromych ndzonj s jinjmi lidmi, a v dasledku toho ziskdvaji pocit, Zejsou v menSin6. Noelle-Neumannovfi (1980,61) napsala: ,,SpoleEenskiipovuha lidstva 211 Určeno pouze pro studijní účely zpfisobuje, i e se lid6 obdvaji sociilni segregace a Ze chtdejf bft ostatnimi lidnii uzndvdni a milov8ni." Strach z izolace nuti jednotlivce, aby neu. stile pozorov:ll a zkoumal, jaky postoj k danC othzce zaujimd vdetSina a mensina. ClovEk je schopen pozorovat toto rozdgleni nazonl s pomocf jakkhosi quasi-statistickiho orginu, tj.jedinec rn5schopnost vnimat zmE- ny v souboru vefcjnCho minEni, anii by by1 schopen odhadnout piesnj potet lidi, kteii se k nCjak6mu nazoru piikldn5ji. Vyjiidieny nizor rnSlie tudii vypadat rbznE v rbznych situaEnich souvislostech, zileii na tom, kde tento quasi-statisticky organ tuSi vEtSinu: ,,Pro jednotlivce je jeho vlastni nizor mink dfileiity nei nebjst izolovin!" Jednotlivci sv<~jodhha veiejneho minEni vytvifeji ze dvou zdrojfi: I. z osobniho pozorovdni lidi kolerv sebe ajejich signilb souhlasu a ne. souhlasu, 2, z masovj'ch rnedii, kde pozoruji signily,jimiZ sejedgotlivi m6dia na- vziijern potvrzuji. Noelle-Neumnnnovi (1979) zpracovala nlzne studie a statistick6 piehle- dy, kterC ukazuji, jak se vefejrli minEni v NErnecku pfibliiovalo a vzda- lovalo rnineni masovfch rn6dii. Byly zkoumany vjstupy m6dii a nizory Zurnalist13 na iadu otizek, nap?, na politiku SRN k Vychodni Evrop6 (,,Ostpolitik"), na volby do Bundestagu v roce 1976 a na zrngny hodnoto- viho systCrnu. A~itorkazjistila, i e vefejne mingni se mbie zmlnit ve smE- ru nBzorA vyj8dien)ich piedtim v mCdiich.Federilni volby v roce 1972by- , ly objasAovAny v pojrnech spirily mlEeni, protaZe stoupenci vlhdy byli mnohe~nvic slyset net jejich ddpQrci a - podle Noelle-Neumannov6 (1980a) -ndzorovC kljrna produkovane televizi rovnEZ vytviCelo silnou podporu pro tehdejSi vlidu. Ti, kteii se obivali izolace, volili spiSe vlidu nei opozici. Naproti tornu pii volbich v roce 1976 Noelle-Neumannovi (198Oa)diagnostikovala dvoji niizorov6 klima. Zjistila, Ze celkovd poli- ticks siluace hyla vyrovnand, ovSem rnezi televiznimi furnalisty pievafo- val nrizor, te nadgje sociAln2 demohatick6 vlddy na znovuzvoleni jsou vEtSi nei Sance konzervativni opozice dostat se do vlldy (na z a a d 8 sta- listickych vS,zkumb veiejnosti a novinm). RovnES divici, kteii sledova- li hodni! tcleviznich poiadC, hodnotili vlidni vyhlidky vySe nei lid6, kte- Fi se na televizi divali men&NizorovCklima rozSifovanCmCdii sevyraznde IiSilood redlnijrho nrizorov6hoklimatu u a n V vyslovilapo- Vile*&f g+dezieni, i e to mohlo ovli~nitv)isledel(. &b Noelle-NeumnnnovS (1979, 165) tvrdila: ,,CLrnobtifdji ddeli medium neb0 system mCdii selektivfli vqbgr, tim vEtSi bude dEinek v obou sml- tech; potvrzujicl, jestlite ptevi2nt podporuje jiZ existujici postoje, il n16- nicf, jestliZe je s existujicimi postoj'l pi$vhinE v rozporu." Tyro dva fak- tory dEinkfi-konsonanci (soulad -souhlas s obsahem) a kumulaci - po- klidB za nejvice charakteristicke pro rnasovou komunikaci. Urnotfiuji maiirn nejen posilovat jiZ existujici ndzory, ale take pfisobit zrnCny tim. i c vytviieji nizorov6 klima. Masovd media rnohou vykonhvat t l a ~na okoli. Ve znaEndrn rozsahu jsou to pr6v6 media, kteri vytvhieji ,,veiejnC? mindeni". Podle Noelle-Nelimannovd existuji rnySlenky, udalosti a osob- nosti ve veiejnem povEdomi prakticky ,,jedin5 tehdy, kdy't jim mssova rnddia poskytnou dostateEnou publicitu, a jedinC v podobich, kterC jlhl m6dia pFisoudiU, Noelle-Neurnannovi se nedomnivi, Ze by BornalistC manipuloval~ve- dorn6. Naopak tvrdi, Be iurnalisti poddvaji zpr6vy jenom o tom, co vidi, na vgci se vSak divaji z velice specifickiho dhlu pohledu. Poddvi zprivu o levicov6 politick6 soudrZnosti rnezi zipadon8meckYmi furnalisty, NaznaEuje, Ze zjevnf konsensus pi7 vfberu zpriv vede ke konsonanci, soulqlu celkovdho informovani mCdii. Vznikh tak rnedidlni kultura, kte- r i mbfe existovat nezfivislena reilnC kultufe. Dvoji nizorovd klirna vzni- k i tehdy, kdyB se nizory pieva'iujici rne~inovinifi ostie liSi od n8zo1i veFejnosti. Na z8kladEtEchtoskuteCnosti Noelle-Neumannovs i daISiautofi ZSdaji od iurnalisth, aby reprezentovali celkovd politick6 spektrum. Jedinti tak mSlfe Sirokd veiejnost pozeavat prostieednictvim mddii ,,celkovou reali- tu" (1986,321). Autorka uvadi: ,,Pokud v souEasn)ich vyzkurnech veiej- niho mlnPini nalizime lidi s chybnfmi vfchozirni pfedpoklady (pluralis- tickou ignoranci), lze je t6mgF vtdy vystopovat ve srnderu pfevaiujiciho t6nu rnbdii, k tomu, jak media na vEci pohllZeji." Teorie spirily rnlEeni tedy piipisuje rnCdiim a nfisledni! pak Zurnalis- tom rozhodujici vliv na politick6 procesy. Noelle-Neurnnnnovi (1980, 204) vSak poukazuje i na slabi mista tdto teorie: ,,Na otizku - jak zaEit znova' -nejsme schopni odpovEdEt." Teorie spiriily rnlEenipfiznitvi San- cina zmdenu spoleEnosti tEm, kteii neznajl strach zizolace. OvSem zrnde- na mhZe zaEit taki v pffpadd, jestliie ti, kteii zastivaji vEtSinovf nizor, postupem Easu ztrati schopnost jej obhajovat, protoie se u i nesetkiivaji s nikfm, kdo md nAzory odli3n.i a konfliktni (1980, 246). NicmCnC po- dle Noelle-Neurnannov6 inovace EastEji zatinaji z toho dbvodu, i e men- Sinyjsou pfipravendejsi obhajovat svd nazory neZ vEtSiny, kterC propadly piIliS velkCmu sebeuspokojeni. Určeno pouze pro studijní účely Vzhledem k jejim polilickJjrn dlisledklirnje tato hypotCza vysoce k o n ~ troverzni, zvldStE v Nzrnecku. Hodni! se o ni polemizuje a pouZivajI se proti ni fiznC subjektivni argurnenty. AniZ bych se zabfval vSerni pro 8. NBsili v televizi: NekoneEn6 diskuse a nova zjiititni a proti, uvddirn zde jedno z poslednich vyjfidfeni Noelle-Ne~rnannovt (1986, 312) k ttto hypoteze: ,,Nezapadd do pohodlneho zpdsobu myzle- 8.1. Pozn6mky ke livalit&diskuse ni a zaveden$ch kategorii a nabizi sejako cil fitokb, pr0t0Ze nenijeSt6 do- konfena,uzavfenh." Pro vykonne Zurnalistyvyplyvaji z teorie spirily r-1'11- Diskuse o pdsobenf rnediilniho zndzoriiovdni nisili je srovnatelnl Fen[ dv5 pouEeni. Doufejme, Ze jim velice dlfraznl! pfipomene jejich s pdbl!hem ekonornickych cykld, pfiEernZ prdvtS nyni zasejednou panu- odpovtidnost vlfEi spolefnosti. A za dhlh6 je v $ ~ o uk zastavenf ,,krve- je vysokd konjunktura, Mornendlnl! stoji v centru pozornosti soukrorni smilnCho" rozSifovlinindzorovChd klimatu mezi Zurnalisty,ktert5je vzdi- televize a ttrnatern dne je ,,Reality-TV" (viz 6,s).T h a uf inkli piedva- len6 sociilni realit& Rozmanitost rnin5fii v mtdiich vytaduje rozmani- dgni rldsili a s nim ljzce spojent debaty o pdsobeni pornografie je na ve- tost nbzorh a roztnahitost socidlniho plfvodu Zurnalistd. fejnosti i ve vgdeckbm zkoumhni velrni aktualni. Dokladem t o h ~je m ~ . titulni fldnek Easopisu DER SPIEGEL z ledna r, 1993 venovany tematu ,,NecudnAspoleEnost: Obchod se sexern a ndsilim". Do diskuse vstoupl- ly mezitim ijinC aspekty, a sice moinb Gfinky hrubt rockovt a populiir- nf hudby. BritskA heavymetalova skupina ,,Jest.& Priest" byla obvinena, Ze ddajrlg rozgifovala v)izvy k sebevraZd5. Podobnd problkmy jsou s ra- povymi skupinamijako napr, ,,PublicEnemy" a ,,N.W.A.",kterd ve sv)ich textech pozitivng hodnott gangsterstvi a ndsili (zejrnena zndsilngni). Ve Etyisvazkov6m dile ,,Analyzy a podnEty NezdvislC vlddni kornise pro za- mezovhni a potirdni nisili" (Schwind a Baurnann 1990-tzv, Kornise pro potirdni ridsili)je rnasovfrn rntdiim (a zvldSt5 zobrazovdnf nlrsili) pfipi- sovhna hlavnI role pfi zrodu nlsili. Komise rnirnojind poiaduje drastic- kou redukci pfedvidgniho ndsili i v zibavnych pofadech. Zkoumdni lifinkd mtdii stoji v podstatl! pied probl6rnern spoleEn)irn vSem sod3lnirn vl!ddm. Protoie vSak in6 kaidf s rnedii vlustni zkule- nosti, vystupuje tento problCrn velrni zietelnl! do popiedi: Na veiejnosti a v politice panuje vdEi socidlnirn vzd8m a vysledklfrn jejich zkournani ~Seobecniskepse. 0 dcincich rnasov)ich rn&dilexistuji velnli rozSiiene populirnl! vl!deckC pfedstavy,jeZ by se daly charakterizovat takto: J i sam jsern rozv82nJjI kriticky distancovani rnediblni konsument neb0 expert, ale ti ostatni (,,mass obyvatelstva") jsou extrCrnni5ohroZeni nbsilim roz- Siiovanym v rnasovych mtdiich. RozBifeni laickfch pfedstav o 6Eincich n~Cdii,jeZ Eastojii nabyly charakteru kulturni samoz?ejmosti, tvoii vy- sloven5 velkou piekdiku pro Sifeniv6deckych poznatkd. (Zdrojem pfed- vgdeckych Ei nev5deckfch tezi je literbrni studie Karl-Heinze Hochwalda: ,,Novd media -vliv na rodinu a v)ichovu" (vycla~liv roce 1953v Comenius Institut MUnster). 214 215 Určeno pouze pro studijní účely I -x-i IlllrOd~rctionto tire First Americark Editioll I The Hypotlzesis of Siletzce II I ~~i~~ in west Germany, with some adstance from the three stnfF memben of the English department of the InStitUtf%rD D ~ O ~ ~ Q P ~ ~ F o r the election eve of 1965. the second Allensbach-~olfgang Koschnick, head of the department; German television network (ZDF) came up with a new idea: an siwinski; and Maria Marzahl. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, professor election party in Bonn's Beethoven Hall. There was a stage review, of behavioral sciences at the University of Chicago, who is dinner, several dance orchestras, guests sitting at long bar~quct familiarwith German and English, thoroughly checked and edited tables-the house waspacked. TOthe right, up front,just below the the manuscript once more, and, lastly, he and I edited the stage, a small podium with a blackboard had been set up. There, p version togethqr. I do not know how to thank thew friends and notary public was scheduled to open two letters received two days colleagues, Whoare so busy with their own scholarly *ork, for,a11 before,one from the Allensbach Institute:and one from EMNID- they did to ensure the success of the translation. two competingsurvey research orgaqizations. The heads of the two organizations would then be invited to enter their predictions about Chicago, Spring 1983 E.N,Y. the outcome of the election in the grid already drawn on the blackboard. Over the hubbub, the noise of chairs scraping, the sounds of eating arld drinking, I wrote on the board: "Christian Democratic Union / Christian Social Union 49,$%, Social Demo- cratic Party 38.5% . . ." At that moment a cry broke uut from hundreds of people behind me and swelled to a thunderous roar. As if suddenly deafened, 5 completed my entries: "Free Democratic Party 8.0%, Other parties, 4.0%"* The hall seethed with outrage, and the publisher of the weekly DieZeit, Gerd ~ucerius~khoutedto I me: "Elisabeth, how can I defend you qow!" Had my Allensbach Institute been deliberately deceiving the public formonths, tellinggeopl~that the election was neck to neck? Jci'Jt'two days earlie;; bie Zeit had printdd an interview with me I uqder the headline "I would not be at all surprised if the Social Democrats won" (Leonhardt 1965).Later that same evening, as the officialelection results moved closer to the Allensbach predictions, a Christian Democratic politician gave television viewers to under- stand, chuckling as he did, that he, of course, had understood the actual situation all along but had been smart enough to keep it to himself-"All's fair in love and war. .," The quotation in Die Zeit was accurate; I had said that. The interview, however, had lain in the editor's filesfor more than two weeks. At the start of September it had looked like a dead heat. What the people assembled in the *The Christian Democratic Union is the more conscrvhtive of the mujor Germanparties. The ChristianSocial Union is the ChristianDemocrats' sisrcrparty in Bavaria. The Social Democratic Party of Germany represents thc left in the spectrum of German politics, The Free Democratic Party (or Liberals) is more middle-of-the-road compared to the two n~i~jorparties. I Určeno pouze pro studijní účely 2 Clrapter One Figure 1 Re Election Year Puzzle of 1965 Vo Inq intehtlons rema ned a1 ost uncha ed for man months 'ndicatiog a nsck- and-neck r ce between Ins COU~UUand tfi! SPO. At !he same'tlme, housve the notlo tha? the C U/CS was goin to vln sprsad a ong oker HOW d ~ dtEat cone about7 A t the nfl us Yind a bangwagon effect in The drractjbn of the ekpected winner of the e!ection. Voting ~ntention: COU/CSU 5 SPD Expectation: Who will wio the election? CDU/CSU u i l l win m SPO will wtn iss?~ 0;c 64 ~a'n65 ~ e b65 blab 65 65 May 65 Juo 65 Ju1 65 bug'65 sepi-65 :wrco: Allenr~urhArrhlvsr, Survo~r1095, lBl, lW, Xm,m0l, 2002, 2M3, SY)(, 2m5 ad m 13eethoven Hall got to see was what we, to our amazement, had 1 3een appear on our desks in Allensbach three days before the I election but had not been ableto publish, sinceto have done so thea I would have appeared as a massive attempt to influencethe outcome I of the election by starting a bandwagon effect in favor of the Christian Democrats. What had occurred had been recognized and named centuries earlier, but was still not understood: the power of j public opinion, Under its pressure, hundred's of thousands-nb, actuallymillionsof voters-had taken part in what Was later called fl I '.last minute swing," At the last midute they had gone alo@h i ihe crowd. swellingthe Christian ~ e m o z t i cranks from a posithp-- of_egalishare publicly id what i scems to be a .u~v-endlyscclajme_dconviction, you can at least--.- remain silent, as a second choice2so that otherscan put up with you, Thomas Hobbes (1969, see especially 69) wrote about the meaning of silence in his book, The Elements of Law, published in 1650, 1 Silence, he said, can be interpreted as an indication of agreement, for it is easy to say no when one disagrees. Mobbes is certainly wrong in saying that it is easy to say no, b ~ the is right in supposing that silence can be inte~retedas agreement; that is what makes it .----r-C- .L-_--.--.-. so teGPtlng. Drawing the phenomenon into the light of dny There are two po~sibleways of checking the reality, the vnlid- ity, of a process like that envisioned in the spiral-of-silence hypotn- esis. If something like this really exists, if this is truly the process by which ideologies and social movements prevail or are swept away, then many authors from earlier centuries must have noticed and commented on it. It is highly unlikely that phenomena such as these would have escaped the attention of sensitive and rctlective men who, as philosophers, students of law, and historians, hpve written about human beings and their warld. As I began my seaich through the writings of the great thinkers of the past, I was encourilged when I found a precise description of the dynamics of the spiral of silence- in Alexis de ~oc