Rethinking Mass Medium’s Definition: A Deeper Look into the Web as a New Addition to Mass Medium

There is no doubt that the Web, which is the newest and most current format of mass media, is driven by consumption. The number of Web users and consumption is ever-increasing each year, not only in the U.S., but in every country all over the world.  According to the Internet World Stats, 239,893,600 people in the United States used the Web in 2010; while, the number of Web users dramatically increased in 2011 as ExploreDIA reported that 1,966,514,816 people all around the world now used the Web.  

As computers and/or laptops open spaces and create demand for new communication technology and technology changes, the mass medium categories were required to become more flexible in accepting the widely consumed Web format as the newest addition to and influence on mass medium. The traditional formats of mass medium include newspapers, radio, books, recordings, television and movies; but, the Web is the newest, most modern format of mass medium.  It’s influence can be seen as changes in appearance, content and marketing of these traditional mass medium formats.  As of today, the Web has achieved a critical mass of the population who has adopted this media format and preference.

Why is the Web Viewed as Mass Medium?

The Web is not precisely defined, and this is part of its appeal.  Unlike the defined format and content of mass medium, the Web is a multifaceted, free-flowing and ever-changing format as there is endless, easy access available to anyone around the world who wishes to contribute to the Web (i.e. blogs, social media outlets); but, as the Web has developed over time since its creation it still is being recognized and conceptualized as a mass medium.  This is evident by the efforts to define the Web, such as Princeton’s WordNet attempt to precisely define the Web as “a collection of Internet sites that offer text and graphics and sound and animation resources through the hypertext transfer protocol” or other similarly ill-defined and incomplete definitions of the Web provided by sources like Wikipedia. 

This contrasts with the precise definition of mass medium, as stated by Merriam Webster, is “a medium of communication that is designed to reach the mass of the people.”  The requirements of mass medium include a source, message, receiver, feedback, and noise.  Notably, these requirements are all provided on the Web, but the difference is the sheer quantum of sources, messages, feedback and noise found on the web.  Further, when questioning what is considered a mass medium, one also needs to ask and answer the question, “What is considered a mass audience?”  One needs to consider the mass audience, especially when considering the Web, because the Web is so fast-paced and amorphous that it is continuously progressing based on the ever-changing needs, demands and preferences of the users of the Web.  As we see it today, the Web’s audience is ever changing as it is constantly reacting to seemingly infinite number of new media companies, other commercial companies, individuals who offer publications and content available only on the Web, and so forth.   

Older Mass Medium vs. Newer Mass Media 

Although mass medium have specific sets of requirements, there are still clearly defined differences between what is considered an older mass medium and newer mass medium. 

I believe the main difference between the two mass mediums are that the traditional formats of mass medium are more credible and take greater pains and process to ensure the veracity of information released by that specific format.  Contrarily, the Web’s nature of providing instanteous communicative content prevents it from being as credible because source credibility varies as anyone with access to the Web can provide their input and information digitally and freely into the mass medium at any exponential rate.  The Web has truly reached a critical mass of commonplace usage.

Another main difference is timeliness with respect to the output of information. That is, with so many independent sites and individual services that are components of the Web, more people have access to inform mass audiences through the Web at any time of the day, week, month or year.  It is as if the greater public as a whole serves as the Web’s informal staff members that report the latest information.  As a result of this effect, the Web’s staff is a lot larger and more omnipresent than any other traditional mass medium’s professional staff. As a result, there is a higher likelihood that the Web’s informal staff will gain access to newsworthy information faster than the other forms of mass medium’s professional staff members.  A recent example of this phenomenon was Whitney Houston’s news-breaking death being announced on the Web hours before it was announced via traditional mass mediums. As a result of these qualities, the Web has become so mainstream that some believe has replaced even television.

The Future of the Web

I believe that the Web’s biggest changes and influences on society and mass medium have already been seen in terms of a mapping and social media perspectives. Nevertheless, one way I think the Web is going to continue to change over the next three to five years is the adaption of 3D capabilities and use of other new digital technologies to improve the user’s visual, audio and interactive experience, while utilizing the Web.  I would expect to continue to see the tools and techniques provided on the Web fine-tuned to better users experiences.  We have already seen these techniques already incorporated into the traditional mass mediums, including, but not limited to, movies and television. While we may not see the exponential changes and developments that we have seen on the Web over the last two decades, we will see the Web continue to develop and evolve.