INFLUENCE OF MASS MEDIA ON SOCIETY

A Project Submitted to

ARMY INSTITUTE OF LAW, MOHALI

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of degree of
B.A. LL.B

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

Dr. AMITA SHARMA VIBHUTI DEVGAN
(Assistant Prof. SOCIOLOGY) (1980)

PUNJABI UNIVERSITY PATIALA (PUNJAB)

JULY 2019 to DECEMBER 2019
 DECLARATION

It is certified that the project work presented in this report entitled “INFLUENCE OF MASS
MEDIA ON SOCIETY” embodies the results of original works carried out by me. All ideas and
references have been duly acknowledged.

Vibhuti Devgan
(1980)

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to our Principal- Dr.TEJINDER KAUR
as well as my Sociology Teacher- Dr. AMITA SHARMA under whose guidance I have got this
golden opportunity to work on this wonderful project on the topic- INFLUENCE OF MASS
MEDIA on SOCIETY. This has also helped me in doing a lot of research and I have come
across many new ideas and concepts. I would also like to extend a sincere thanks to my Parents
who have provided me with every kind of support required in the completion of this project. Last
but not the least; I would also like to thank the Almighty for giving me enough strength to finish
this project. I am really thankful to all of them.
THANKS AGAIN TO ALL THOSE WHO HELPED ME.

3
 INDEX

S.No. TOPIC PAGE No.

1 Introduction 6-7

2 History of Mass Media 7-10

3 Objectives 11

4 Analysis 12-15

5 Solutions 16

6 Conclusion 17

7 Bibliography 18

8 Questionnaire 19

4
MASS MEDIA AND SOCIETY

5
 INTRODUCTION

Human beings express their nature by creating and recreating an organization which guides and
controls their behaviour in many ways. This organization liberates and limits the activities of
humans, sets up standards for them to follow and maintain. Whatever the imperfections and
tyrannies it has exhibited in human history, it is necessary condition of fulfillment of life. This
organization which is responsible for fulfillment of life of every individual is called society.
Humans in every society have suffered from one or the other problems. Humans in modern
societies are also experiencing various problems and their behaviour gets affected by many
things, media is one of them. Media is the plural of the word medium. Media are the vehicles or
channels which are used to convey information, entertainment, news, education, or promotional
messages are disseminated. Media includes every broadcasting and narrowcasting medium such
as television, radio, newspapers, billboards, mails, telephone, fax, internet etc. (the main means
of mass communication). The mass media occupy a high proportion of our leisure time: people
spend, on average, 25 hours per week watching television, and they also find time for radio,
cinema, magazines and newspapers. For children, watching television takes up a similar amount
of time to that spent at school or with family and friends. While school, home and friends are all
acknowledged as major socializing influences on children, a huge debate surrounds the possible
effects of the mass media and findings both in favour and against effects are controversial. The
question of effects is typically raised with an urgency deriving from a public rather than an
academic agenda and with a simplicity which is inappropriate to the complexity of the issue (we
do not ask of other social influences, what is the effect of parents on children or do schools have
an effect which generalizes to the home or do friends have positive or negative effects).

Think about it for a second: whenever you want to watch your favourite show, tune into your
favourite song or see the latest current events, where do you go? You more than likely turn on
your televisions, laptops or smartphones. These sources that the majority of the general public
uses to get their news and information from are considered mass media.
Mass Media means technology that is intended to reach a mass audience. It is the primary means
of communication used to reach the vast majority of the general public. The most common
platforms for mass media are NEWSPAPERS, MAGAZINES, RADIO, TELEVISION and
INTERNET. The general public typically relies on the mass media for the information regarding
political issues, social issues, entertainment and news.
Before we proceed further, we need to understand the basic difference between the two terms
often used interchangeably. These two terms are MASS MEDIA and SOCIAL MEDIA. The
major difference between mass media and social media is this; the mass media puts the audience
in a passive position. Social media puts the audience at the center. People are both the audience
and the content creator; it provides a unique experience of social collaboration and social
interaction.

The past century was dominated by mass media; it became the voice of individuals and
organizations. It also was a significant force in modern culture; this is often referred as mediated
culture by sociologists. This is why the mass media is also known as mainstream media. It
produces content based on what majority wants to see and hear. Mass Media is one-way “one-to-
many” communication; Social Media is two-way “one-to-one” communication.

6
The fact cannot be denied that in the present age, mass media proves to one of the greatest source
of information providing us with national as well as international news and keeping us informed
about all the events happening on this globe with a blink of an eye. Not only this, spending time
in the company of mass media not only keeps us up to date but also provides a perfect remedy
for our solace. Watching these heated debates not only force us to think from the both the
perspectives but also expand our mental horizons and yes, transform us into knowledgeable
fellows.
Take the example the recent Jammu and Kashmir case. People were so enthusiastic to know what
was going to happen because of the hype created by the news channels that anyone who did not
have an access to the mass media or any other source felt as if they were really missing an
important part of their life. Not only this, mass media has come out to be a solid solution towards
tackling fake news.
But at the same time we should not forget that although, benefits of mass media are endless the
repercussions of irresponsible reporting are also sometimes adversely felt. Reporting of incidents
without verifying the true facts sometimes cause a lot of chaos in the country.
Therefore, the focus of our research would be to study impact of mass media on our society and
the hypothesis that we draw for of this study is: “Role of Mass Media Is Observed in Promoting
Negative Behaviour Pattern Amongst the Masses.”

HISTORY OF MASS MEDIA

Media effects studies have undergone several phases, often corresponding to the development of
mass media technologies.
Powerful media effects phase
During the early 20th century, developing mass media technologies, such as radio and film, were
credited with an almost irresistible power to mold an audience's beliefs, cognition and behaviors
according to the communicators' will. 1 The basic assumption of strong media effects theory was
that audiences were passive and homogeneous. This assumption was not based on empirical
evidence but on assumptions of human nature. There were two main explanations for this
perception of mass media effects. First, mass broadcasting technologies were acquiring a
widespread audience, even among average households. People were astonished by the speed of
information dissemination, which may have clouded audience perception of any media effects.
Secondly, propaganda techniques were implemented during the war time by several governments
as a powerful tool for uniting their people. This propaganda exemplified strong-effect
communication. Early media effects research often focused on the power of this propaganda
(e.g., Lasswell, 1927). Combing through the technological and social environment, early media
effects theories stated that the mass media were all-powerful.
Representative theories:

1
McQuail, Denis (12 March 2010). McQuail's Mass Communication Theory. SAGE Publications. pp. 456–
460. ISBN 9781849202923.

7
 • Hypodermic needle model, or magic bullet theory: Considers the audience to be targets of
an injection or bullet of information fired from the pistol of mass media. The audiences
are unable to avoid or resist the injection or bullets.

Limited media effects phase

Starting in the 1930s, the second phase of media effects studies instituted the importance of
empirical research, while introducing the complex nature of media effects due to the
idiosyncratic nature of audience individuals. The Payne Fund studies, conducted in the United
States during this period, focused on the effect of media upon young people. Many other separate
studies focused on persuasion effects studies, or the possibilities and usage of planned persuasion
in film and other media. Hovland et al. (1949) conducted a series of experimental studies to
evaluate the effects of using films to indoctrinate American military recruits. 2 Paul
Lazarsfeld (1944) and his colleagues' effectiveness studies of democratic election campaigns
launched political campaign effect studies.

Researchers uncovered mounting empirical evidence of the idiosyncratic nature of media effects
on individuals and audiences, identifying numerous intervening variables, such as demographic
attributes, social psychological factors, and different media use behaviors. With these new
variables added to research, it was difficult to isolate media influence that resulted in any media
effects to an audience's cognition, attitude and behavior. As Berelson (1959) summed up in a
widely quoted conclusion: "Some kinds of communication on some kinds of issues have brought
to the attention of some kinds of people under some kinds of conditions have some kinds of
effect." Though the concept of an all-powerful mass media was diluted, this did not determine
that the media lacked influence or effect. Instead, the pre-existing structure of social
relationships and cultural contexts were believed to primarily shape or change people's opinions,
attitudes and behaviors, and media merely function within these established processes. This
complexity had a dampening effect upon media effects studies.
Representative theories:
• Two-step flow of communication: Discusses the indirect effects of media, stating that
people are affected by media through the interpersonal influence of opinion leaders.
• Klapper's selective exposure theory: Joseph T. Klapper asserts in his book, The Effects Of
Mass Communication, that audiences are not passive targets of any communication
contents. Instead, audiences selectively choose content that is aligned with previously
held convictions.
Chomsky Filters
Noam Chomsky has named five filters through which mass media operate:

• Ownership: At the end of the day mass media firms are big corporations trying to make
profit so most of their articles are going to be whatever makes them the most money.

2
Hovland, Carl; et al. (1949). Experiments on Mass Communication. Studies in Social Psychology in World War II.
Volume III. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

8
 • Advertising: Since mass media cost a lot more than what most consumers are willing to
pay, media corporations are in a deficit. In order to fill this gap advertisers come in.
Beyond popular beliefs the media did not sell themselves out, but, they are selling the
advertisers their consumers.
• The Media Elite: Since journalism in nature cannot be completely regulated it allows for
corruption from governments, corporations and big institution that knows how to "play
the system".
• Flak: To stray away from the consensus is difficult because the journalist will get "flak".
When a story does not align with that of a power, the power will try discrediting sources,
trash stories and try to distract the readers.
• The Common Enemy: The final filter is used to gain consent. Something that everyone
can come together or to boost propaganda like; communism, terrorists, immigrants.
Rediscovered powerful media effects phase

Limited media effect theory was challenged by new evidence supporting that mass media
messages could indeed lead to measurable social effects.[6] Lang and Lang (1981) argued that the
widespread acceptance of limited media effect theory was unwarranted, and that "the evidence
available by the end of the 1950s, even when balanced against some of the negative findings,
gives no justification for an overall verdict of 'media importance.'"

In the 1950s and 1960s, widespread use of television indicated its unprecedented power on social
lives. Meanwhile, researchers also realized that early investigations, relying heavily on
psychological models, were narrowly focused on only short-term and immediate effects. The
"stimuli-reaction" model introduced the possibility of profound long-term media effects. The
shift from short-term to long-term effect studies marked the renewal of media effects research.
More attention was paid to collective cultural patterns, definitions of social reality, ideology and
institutional behavior. Though audiences were still considered in control of the selection of
media messages they consumed, "the way media select, process and shape content for their own
purposes can have a strong influence on how it is received and interpreted and thus on longer-
term consequences" (Mcquail, 2010).
Representative theories:

• Agenda-setting theory: Describes how topics selection and the frequencies of reporting
by the mass media affected the perceived salience of those topics within the public
audience.
• Framing: Identifies the media's ability to manipulate audience interpretation of a media
message through careful control of angles, facts, opinions, amount of coverage.

• Knowledge-gap theory: States the long-term influence of mass media on people's

socioeconomic status with the hypothesis that "as the infusion of mass media information
into a social system increases, higher socioeconomic status segments tend to acquire this
information faster than lower socioeconomic status population segments causing the gap
in knowledge between the two to increase rather than decrease".

9
 • Cultivation theory: As an audience engages in media messages, particularly on television,
they infer the portrayed world upon the real world.

New media environment phase

As early as the 1970s, research emerged on the effects of individual or group behavior in
computer-mediated environments. The focus was on the effect of computer-mediated
communication (CMC) in interpersonal and group interaction. Early research examined the
social interactions and impressions that CMC partners formed of each other, given the restrictive
characteristics of CMC—such as the anonymity or lack of nonverbal (auditory or visual)
cues. The first generation of CMC researches simply compared existing "text-only" internet
content (e.g. emails) to face-to-face communication (Culnan & Markus,1987). For example, Daft
and Lengel (1986) developed the media richness theory to assess the media's ability of
reproducing information.
The internet was widely adopted for personal use in the 1990s, further expanding CMC studies.
Theories such as social information processing (Walther, 1992) and social
identification/deindividuation (SIDE) model (Postmes et al. 2000) studied CMC effects on users'
behavior, comparing these effects to face-to-face communication effects. With the emergence of
dynamic user-generated content on websites and social media platforms, research results are
even more conducive to CMC studies. For instance, Valkenburg & Peter (2009) developed the
internet-enhanced self-disclosure hypothesis among adolescents, stating that social media
platforms are primarily used to maintain real-life friendships among young people. Therefore,
this media use may enhance the friendships. New CMC technologies are evolving at a rapid
pace, calling for new media effects theories.

10
 OBJECTIVES
The following three objectives can be drawn out of this research to study the impact of mass
media on the masses:

1. To understand the effect of mass media on the audience.

2. To analyze the impact of mass media on political influence.
3. To study the influence of mass media on behaviour of the masses.

Due to paucity of time, secondary sources of information have been used and the information has
been obtained from already published articles and journals.

11
 ANALYSIS
1. Understanding the effect of mass media on the audience:
The influence of mass media has an effect on many aspects of the human life, this can include:
voting a certain way, individual views and beliefs, or even false information that can skew a
person's knowledge of a specific topic. Media is an ever-changing field and is being critiqued
now more than ever by the general public. The overall influence of mass media has increased
drastically over the years, and will continue to do so as the media improves itself. Media
influence is the actual force exerted by a media message, resulting in either a change or
reinforcement in audience or individual beliefs. Media effects are measurable effects that result
from media influence or a media message. Whether that media message has an effect on any of
its audience members is contingent on many factors, including audience demographics and
psychological characteristics. These effects can be positive or negative, abrupt or gradual, short-
term or long-lasting. Not all effects result in change: some media messages reinforce an existing
belief. Researchers examine an audience after media exposure for changes in cognition, belief
systems, and attitudes, as well as emotional, physiological and behavioral effects.
There are several scholarly definitions of media. Bryant and Zillmann defined media effects as
"the social, cultural, and psychological impact of communicating via the mass media". Perse
stated that media effects researchers study "how to control, enhance, or mitigate the impact of the
mass media on individuals and society". Lang stated media effects researchers study "what types
of content, in what type of medium, affect which people, in what situations".
Media, in general, can be described in simple terms, like a movie was good, the book was sad, or
the Internet is informative, and how did we ever live without it! Sociologists and Psychologists,
on the other hand, look at media from a theoretical perspective by bringing social cognitive
theories to media (which suggests that individuals are proactively involved in their development,
and can, therefore, exercise control over their feelings, thoughts, and actions).3
In other words, Media studies focuses on the relationship between human behavior and the
media. It studies the interaction between individuals, groups, and technology, and tries to make
sense out of this synergy. As recently as 1950, when television was becoming a popular form of
entertainment, media psychologists became concerned about children and their enthusiasm of
television viewing and the impact, if any, on their reading skills. Later psychologists began
studying the impact of violent television viewing on children’s behavior, and if they were more
likely to exhibit asocial behavior.
With 24-hour news channels, phones, the Internet, and television, young people are simply trying
to figure out how they fit into this world, and they look to media for the answer. This, however,
is the new normal. Young people grew up with all of this, and parents are trying to catch up.
Even so, we need to limit screen-time, especially if it is filling a void for the child or interfering
with face-to-face conversations.
It’s also important to consider how the expansion of new technologies influences different
markets. It’s not surprising that tech-savvy markets, such as Seattle, San Jose, and San Francisco

3
Mass Media and Its influence on society, M.A. Mughal, The Daily Journalist

12
top the list for many new technologies. However, in the past 18 months, cities like Pittsburgh,
Miami, and Detroit, saw double-digit gains in smartphone, subscription video-on-demand, and
tablet penetration.

Still, media isn’t just about video games, blogs, YouTube, Twitter, television, printed media, or
radio. In fact, over the past ten years, advertising by professionals has jumped nearly 63-percent,
and continues to gain acceptance among psychologists, doctors, dentists and other professionals
who use social media as a means to advertise, gain referrals and feedback. Many maintain a
Facebook page or a blog. They may tweet, or make use of an app for scheduling
appointments. And, as nearly 95-percent of clients look online first (trumping referrals by family
or close friends) for a psychologist, having a presence can energize, or reenergize a private
practice.
As a society, on average, we spend nearly seven hours a day as ‘couch potatoes’ planted
comfortably in front of the television, or in front of our computers downloading the latest movie
on Amazon. A study by Think Box explains that television satisfies our emotional needs: for
comfort, to unwind, to escape, indulge, or simply for the experience. Companies advertising their
wares spend millions of dollars a year to promote their message(s), and advertising companies
spend many months deciphering data about what people want or need in order to keep us
hooked.

But there is no arguing that TV shapes how we view people and view the world as a whole. It
influences what we buy, how we feel, why we make the choices we do, and even shapes what we
believe. Case in point, years ago it was uncommon to show African Americans on TV. Not
showing this demographic on television, in essence, made them invisible and led to apathy
towards this race. Thankfully, we can learn from our mistakes.
2. To study the influence of mass media on behaviour of the masses:

Newspapers, radio, and television programs broadcast the news 24-hours a day, 365 days a year.
Therefore, it is nearly impossible to avoid bad news and the negative influence it has on our
lives. School shootings, terrorist attacks and airplane crashes, as well as the incessant onslaught
of violence from all forms of media, can have long-lasting psychological repercussions and
ultimately lead to thoughts of our world falling apart, stress and anxiety. It’s frightening to note
that nearly two-thirds of all TV programs contain some physical violence.
Our brains are hardwired to focus on the shocking and horrific. And much like our obsession
with traffic accidents and chasing ambulances, negativity on television is difficult to ignore, and
it can significantly influence how we view our lives and the world. Negative TV can lead to
negative thoughts, leading us to view our lives as more distressing than they actually are. Some
research has even shown that viewing traumatic images on the news can cause PTSD-like (post-
traumatic stress) symptoms. In 2001, people were glued to their TV sets when terrorists took
down the Twin Towers in New York City. Studies later showed that viewing these images of
9/11 triggered fear and reduced confidence in our nation’s security. Interestingly, the research
also showed that the degree of our fear was directly correlated with the amount of time spent
watching the news.

13
Psychologists have also noted that this exposure to graphic violence, and to negative media can
either cause an over-sensitization, where we become more sensitive and pessimistic or can lead
to desensitization, in which we are actually numb to the effects of violence. (As mentioned, this
has also been observed in those who have been repeatedly exposed to violent video games).
In the 1950’s when black and white images flashed over very small television screens,
psychologists began noticing how a simple television show could impact and influence the
behavior of viewers. For instance, the way actors and actresses were portrayed on the tvs,
generally was thin figures and this lead to the psychological disorders such as bulimia and
anorexia.

Unfortunately, this pessimism can lead us to ignore the many things that are positive in the
media, and in the world. We only have to look at the many upbeat posts from friends and family
on Facebook, despite what the headlines suggest.
3. To analyze the impact of mass media on political influence:
The images that media creates, carry the weight of social responsibility and the right side of
social value. Audiences learn and conduct their political sights of view from reading, listening to
the political analysis and evaluation. The mass media are powerful guardians of proper political
behavior because audience tends to trust the press who should inform them about government
wrongdoing and providing proper suggestions. All of the mass media are politically important
because of their potential to reach large groups of audiences. However, the influence of each
media varies depending on their characteristics, ease of access and the quantity of the audience
reached. Print media, including newspaper, article and news on internet webpage usually reach to
those readers who are literate at appropriate levels and understand the factual political
environment. Electronic media especially television broadcasts provide a greater sense of reality
which sometimes provide more credibility than others and stronger influence to the audiences.
Moreover, large segments of the U.S. population have limited reading skills; they usually find
better understanding from conveying physical images, conversation and interviews between
people from electronic media. They are especially well suited to attract viewers’ attention and
arouse their emotions.
Since now it is the era of the Internet, the effect of Internet has extended every area. Politics is no
exception, the relationship between organization and public opinion has been influenced by new
media. New media includes online newspaper, blogs, and social media and so on. More and
more people prefer new media than traditional media because of the less limitation of new
media, such as time limitation and space limitation. Most people have a cell phone or a
computer. They can catch the news anytime in anyplace. As a result, new media has a greater
impact on people. Politicians also notice new media is a more effective way to convey their
message, and they use it to attract supporters. For example, both Barack Obama and The White
House have Facebook page and Twitter. They can easily communicate with the public and gather
them together by "share" and "like it", which will benefit their political activities especially for
presidential campaigns, because social media can help the candidate get their vote. One study
concluded that mass media is allowing politicians to be perceived as more authentic with a key
finding that shows voters feel politicians to be more honest on social media, compared to

14
interviews or TV shows. This is the case especially among young voters, who predominantly use
these type of mediums, this opens up a new voter base for politicians to appeal to directly. Public
opinion also affect politics through the new media. New media provides a two-way
communication, which achieves an interactive role. People can directly send message to
government and politicians can comment online. If people are dissatisfied with the government,
they can express their thought through social media and discuss with other people online. When
those comments gather together, it will draw public opinion to focus on the wrongdoings of
government. Since new media has a large user base, the political activity is followed by more
people than before. New media lets people better supervise government behaviour. Also,
governments can know public opinion through new media as reference for decision making.
Although new media has both positive and negative effect on politics, it narrows the relationship
between the public and politics. Public is not only an information receiver anymore. People also
can give their advice and opinion to the government. Governments also have a chance to get to
know the thought of citizens.
The media play an indispensable role in the proper functioning of a democracy. Without mass
media, openness and accountability are very tough to reach in contemporary democracies. The
media can inform the public of how effectively the current government or candidates have
performed in the past and help them to account. Nevertheless, mass media can also hinder
political transparency as well as help it. Firstly, the very benefits that new media platforms
provide, like efficiency, ease of access and wide outreach are often advantageous to those who
misuse these platforms for the output of fake and unsubstantiated information for the masses to
consume. Though new media allows for direct voter-politician interaction and transparency in
politics this potential to subvert information on a wide scale is particularly malicious to the
political landscape. According to a 2018 report from Ofcom, 64% of adults got their news from
the internet and 44% from social media. With so many people reliant on the internet and social
media, manipulation of information and mass spread of fake news becomes easy, maintaining a
power to perpetuate misinformation and alter political agendas in the process. Not only this but
the features distinct to social media such as likes, retweets and shares builds an ideological echo
chamber with the same piece of fake news recirculating. The anxiety of fake news has
surrounded elections as of late, in particular the 2016 EU referendum with a general concern that
the leave campaign and Brexit supporters may have been misled by erroneous information
regarding the vote. This contention was further fuelled by a whistle blower coming forward in
2018 claiming that political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica ‘cheated a Brexit result
through the misuse of date and subsequent targeted ads, something not unique to this election.
Politicians and political operatives can simulate the political virtues of transparency through
rhetorical and media manipulation.

15
 SOLUTIONS

“Misinformation is a weapon of mass destruction.”

Thus, it is the need of the hour that the media becomes educative and not erosive. The onus for
making the effects of media on society a positive one also lies upon us because it is we the
citizens of our country also hold some or the other responsibility toward making our world a
better place to live in. We need to understand what a sensible reporting of various incidents is
and should not blindly believe in any of the news without even verifying it properly. The concept
of the “world as a global village” has been possible because of mass media only. Also, we really
need to put in some efforts in order to train ourselves so that we do not easily get influenced by
whatever we come across on various media platforms and help ourselves in battling the negative
effects of media on our minds our well-being. The way we consume information is going to
impact the manner in which information is served to us. Therefore, we need to change ourselves
only then we will be able to change the system.

In the end we can quote Mother Teresa when she said:

“I cannot change the whole world but I can surely throw stones in water and create ripples of
change”.

16
 CONCLUSION

Thus, in conclusion we can clearly see that our hypothesis has been accepted because according
to various study reports it has been proved that “Role of Mass Media Is Observed in Promoting
Negative Behaviour Pattern Amongst the Masses.”

17
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

• Experiments on Mass Communication. Studies in Social Psychology in World War II. Volume
III. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press
• https://careersinpsychology.org/impact-media
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influence_of_mass_media
• https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php
• Mass Media and Its influence on society, M.A. Mughal, The Daily Journalist
http://thedailyjournalist.com/pen-and-pad/mass-media-and-its-influence-on-society/
• McQuail's Mass Communication Theory. SAGE Publications. pp. 456–460,
ISBN 9781849202923.

18
 QUESTIONNAIRE

1. What is your name?

2. What is your age?
3. Do you get easily influenced by whatever you read/watch on newspaper/television?
4. Do you think mass media has a POSITIVE or a NEGATIVE impact on shaping
views of the society?
5. Do you think that the general public also has an equal role to play in preventing the
spread of misinformation?

The above questions were asked to a group of people. The following were the observations:

1. Almost 70% of the people stated that they usually get easily influenced by whatever
they watch or read on mass media.
2. 50% of the people voted for a positive role and the other 50% voted for the negative
role of the mass media on society.
3. Almost 80% believed that the general public also has an equal role to play in
preventing the spread of misinformation.

19