Stuart Hall's "Encoding and Decoding in the Television Discourse"

In this episode, I present Stuart Hall's "Encoding and Decoding in the Television Discourse."
If you want to support me, you can do that with these links:
Patreon: / theoryandphilosophy
paypal.me/theoryphilosophy
Twitter: @DavidGuignion
IG: @theory_and_philosophy
Podbean: theoretician.p...
Thumbnail: henryjenkins.or...

[@cindimarrero8525]

This really helped to understand this essay, a required reading in my SOC class on Pop Culture. Thanks!

[@tonyyy3415]

Hi David, your videos really help with my studies. Could you do another video on Stuart Hall's concept of cultural identity or on Jacques Derrida's theory of deconstruction, please? That would be awesome. :)

[@user-kd7ku6ys6y]

It terms of the connotation of the encoded message, Stuart hall says: 1) Either the audience will take a hegemonic stand and agree with the message, 2) Oppositional stance and disagree, or 3) Negotiated stance and agree with part of the message

[@cheyenneodonnell]

so helpful!! Thank you for this

[@SK-le1gm]

“Television, the drug of the nation. Breeding ignorance and feeding radiation.” - disposable heroes of hiphoprisy

[@khwaac]

Tombstone is a good example. The good guys get their revenge with violence.

[@paulafrasercrosatto809]

Thanks!

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

Thank YOU!

[@ceesjanmol]

Very small note: he does not use the word *incode*. He uses the word 'encode'.

[@ceesjanmol]

'encoding' and 'decoding' go back to Shannon and Weaver, beginning of information theory and, basically, the Mother of All Channel Models.

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

And Jakobsen and Baudrillard too. It's interesting Hall is credited with it more so than anyone else

[@ceesjanmol]

@@TheoryPhilosophy, I think that's not because of the concepts of encoding and decoding. I think that's because this article and Stuart Hall in quite a few other contributions propelled Cultural Studies into a turbulent disciplinary birth process...

[@ceesjanmol]

In what way did you actually explain the article? Except for reusing terms from the article and (mis-applying them t to examples from today iso relating then to the theoretical issues Hall was trying to address?