Hall’s encoding-decoding model rejected both positivist and information-theory communication traditions

Evidence

In this path-clearing exercise (as he conceived his original intervention) he explains that his polemical intent was to “blow out of the water” not only the positivist tradition of conventional mass communications (representing “low flying forms of behaviorism”) but also the abstracted systems theory of Shannon and Weaver, and Norbert Wiener—all of which were quite innocent of the central issue that this paper raises, of how meanings are made on both sides of the communicative chain. — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 759

Categorization

• QUESTION: Why did information theory’s Shannon-Weaver model specifically ignore the meaning-making side? Worth chasing the actual critique.
• XREF: connects to: Most communication ‘misunderstandings’ stem from negotiated decodings at the local level — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 811; Communication succeeds only through shared contextual beliefs that cannot be fully formalized; The real divide in communication studies is objectivist versus expressivist worldview — James W. Carey, Communication as Culture- Essays on…, 348 (+4 more)
• yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: Most communication ‘misunderstandings’ stem from negotiated decodings at the local level — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 811; Communication succeeds only through shared contextual beliefs that cannot be fully formalized; The real divide in communication studies is objectivist versus expressivist worldview — James W. Carey, Communication as Culture- Essays on…, 348 (+4 more)