Josie Arnold


Visual media presents us with an opportunity to enter into the written scholarly discussions about an understanding of the paradox that what is seen and what is written are different representation. In this paper I investigate the importance of audience today; I discuss how global communications via new media challenges traditional views of the concept of an audience. I look at how communication is now from one to many, from many to many and from one to one, and how this challenges the term ‘audience’ with ‘users’.  This paper enters into the scholarly debate about how interactivity in new media places singular interpretive actions by individuals at its center rather than as the more traditionally peripheral audience. In doing so it suggests that existing audience theory can and should be extended in regard to new media audiences, players or users. This paper also discusses how audience theory remains apposite when it adapts and changes.

Keywords: visual media, audience, new media, audience theory

Full Text:



Bartch, S. & Elsner, J. (2007). Introduction: Eight ways of looking at an ekphrasis (eds). Classical Philology, 102(1), i-vi.

Barthes, R. (1977). Image, Music, Text. London: Fontana.

Buell, L. (2009). Writing for an endangered world: Literature, culture, and environment in the US and beyond. Harvard: Harvard University Press.

Carpentier, N. (2011). Contextualizing author-audience convergences. Cultural Studies, 25(4-5), 517-533.

Cho, C.H., Phillips, J.R., Hageman, A.M., & Patten, D.M. (2009). Media richness, user trust, and perceptions of corporate social responsibility: An experimental investigation of visual web site disclosures. Accounting, Auditing, & Accountability Journal, 22(6), 933-952.

Cixous, H. (1988). Readings from the seminar of Helene Cixous. Writing Differences (Ed.). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Cover, R. (2004). New media theory: Electronic games, democracy and reconfiguring the author–audience relationship. Social Semiotics, 14(2), 173-191.

Cunningham, V. (2007). Why ekphrasis? Classical Philology, 102(1), 57-67.

Elsner, J. (2002). Introduction: The genres of ekphrasis. Ramus, 31(1-2), 1-18.

Elsner, J. (2010). Art History as Ekphrasis. Art History, 10-27.

Fivush, R. (2010). Speaking silence: The social construction of silence in autobiographical and cultural narratives. Memory, 18(2), 88-98.

Francis, J.A. (2009). Metal Maidens, Achilles' Shield, and Pandora: The beginnings of ekphrasis. American Journal of Philology, 130(1), 1-23.

Goldhill, S. (2007). What is ekphrasis for? Classical Philology, 102(1), 1-19.

Harrow, S. (2010). New ekphrastic poetics. French studies, 64(3), 255-264.

Heffernan, J. A. (2004). Museum of words: The poetics of ekphrasis from

Homer to Ashbery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Hobbs, R. (2004). A review of school-based initiatives in media literacy education. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(1), 42-59.

Hollingworth, A. (2005). The relationship between online visual representation of a scene and long-term scene memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(3), 396.

Kavoori, A., & Chadha, K. (2009). The cultural turn in international communication. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53(2), 336-346.

McGilchrist, I. (2001). The master and his emissary. Yale University Press.

Mitchell, W. (1994). Ekphrasis and the other: Picture theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Livingstone, S. (2015). From mass to social media? Advancing accounts of social change. Social Media + Society, 1-3.

Lowenstein, D. (2003). The Sydney Morning Herald. May 22 News Review, p.2.

Pauly, N. (2003). Interpreting visual culture as cultural narratives in teacher education. Studies in Art Education, 44(3), 264-284.

Pop, D. (2010). Introduction: Representation and its relationships to reality and illusion. Ekphrasis, (1), 5-8.

Postman, N. (2005). Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show business. New York: Penguin Books.

Turner, B.S. (2010). The new Blackwell companion to the sociology of religion (ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Ulmer, G. (1985). Applied Grammatology. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.25134/erjee.v5i1.384


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2016 English Review: Journal of English Education