“The paradigm of a totality”Kaarle Nordenstreng in Cees Hamelink (ed.),Communication in the Eighties: A Reader on theMacBride Report. Rome: IDOC, 1980Critical essays on the Report by IAMCR scholarsincluding Alfred Opubor, Tamás Szecskö andHerbert Schiller, right after the MacBride Reportwas published, put together during the IAMCRconference in Caracas in July 1980Reprinted in Mass Comunication ReviewYearbook Vol 3, 1982 (Beverly Hills: Sage)

My points in 1980“Many voices, one world. Communication andsociety, today and tomorrow” – what is providedon (1) world, (2) society and (3) communication?•The “one world” shallow while the approach is-ahistorical-eclectic and incoherent-media-centred•The “society” and “communication” follow-bourgeois liberalism-functionalist-positivist paradigm

History of communicationsUnless we embrance what might be called “realworld history”, we are left with the history ofcommunications in isolation from fundamentalsocial and global developmentsSuch a picture of communication history is notonly incomplete: it amounts to a crucial choice ofmethodology carrying with it a particular conceptof communication, a paradigm wherecommunication is understood as a phenomenonrelated to a number of other social phenomenabut not organically linked with them

“One world”

The Report does not contain any coherent pictureof the world – neither the world of today not oftomorrow, or for that matter the world ofyesterdayThat is why a demand or a programme toward a“new order”, whatever attributes are attached toit, remains also a fairly empty slogan with morepolitical connotations than theoretical insight

Society and communicationNo adequate definition provided, no properelements for description of these two centralconceptsThe paradigm is not far from the mainstream ofbourgeois liberalism (ahistorical and abstractnotion of society, value pluralism, etc.)The model of communication is exchange withmany connections to othe social phenomenabut without really organic links with themMoreover the paradigm eliminates humanconsciousness in the communication process

Conclusion in 1980

The report is an excellent illustration of thedilemma of eclecticism: you try to becomprehensive but you loose the totalitywhich you are supposed to discoverIn this respect the Report could well becalled “Mission impossible”.

My points in 33 years later

Exactly the same!Even more serious given the field’s expansionSelf-criticism of not following up thatuncompromised line