Uses and Gratification:  Problems

   "The nature of the theory underlying Uses and Gratificaitons research is not totally clear," (Blumler, 1979).

    "Practitioners of Uses and Gratifications research have been criticized for a formidable array of shortcomings in their outlook -- they are taxed for being crassly atheoretical, perversely eclectic, ensnared in the pitfalls of functionalism and for flirting with the positions at odds with their functionalist origins," (Blumler, 1979).

    The biggest issue for the Uses and Gratifications Theory is its being non-theoretical, being vague in key concepts, and being nothing more than a data-collecting strategy (Severin and Tankard, 1997).

    It seems that using this sociologically-based theory has little to no link to the benefit of psychology due to its weakness in operational definitions and weak analytical mode.  Also, it is focused too narrowly on the individual and neglects the social structure and place of the media in that structure (Severin and Tankard, 1997).

    This theory has also been blasted by media hegemony advocates who say it goes too far in claiming that people are free to choose the media fare and the interpretations they want (Severin and Tankard, 1997).

    Other motives that may drive people to consume media may involve low level attention, a habit or a mildly pleasant stimulation.  Uniform effects are not the kind of factor the Uses and Gratifications approach would predict (Severin and Tankard, 1997).

Uses and Gratifications: 

Elements (back)   Current relevance (next) Home