Based on the fact that it relates to the hypothesis of Incidental Effects by Aldous Huxley, who indicates that the repercussions of the media have a huge relationship with bootlegging of style and mannerisms among persons in the public (Kumar, 2000). This can be applied in the contemporary society today. The mobile phones have experienced a lot of transformations from the telephones, to larger phones and now internet-enabled smartphones. In response, a lot of individuals have gone an extra mile to move with the trendy styles especially the young generation who want to be at par with the sassy trends. Conclusively, the society has been reduced to a generation of calls and texts; thus, an advent of a new short form language that makes it easier to communicate.Turtiainen & Oksman (2004) indicate that the use of mobile phones is not only a device for making calls but has advanced to be more of a chum to the general public. As indicated earlier, the revolution of the mobile phones has developed in an incredible manner allowing individuals to make a lot of contacts, through their internet-enabled iPhones. Since human beings are interactive creatures, the blackberry phones have been of great assistance to improving this form of interactions. Sharing of pictures and chatting with online friends is possible through the click of a button. The limitless possibilities have created a situation whereby individuals are able to develop a social life on their mobile phones as their pass time activity. This kind of life provides a form of relief especially when individuals have been through tough times in their lives. This concurs with the Catharsis theory by Semyour Feshbatch, who carried experiments that concluded that components of the media that were less violent have been useful in reducing the anger and frustrations of individuals in the society (Patnaik, 2008). In the case of the social media, a lot of individuals have been indicated to be contented with the kind of relationship with the link of friends they developed online; others term their friends as their online family.
Campbell, D., & Regent University, 2009. Theoretical Assessments of Pretrial Publicity Effects: A Pioneering Attempt at Measuring the Tendency of Agenda-setting Statements and Framing Interpretations to Produce Assumptions of Guilt. New York: ProQuest.
Davenport, L., LaRose, R., & Straubhaar, J., 2009. Media Now: Understanding Media, Culture, and Technology. London: Cengage Learning.
Hanson, J., 2007. Twenty-four Seven. New York: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Harris, R., & Harris, J., 2009. A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Kumar, K., 2000. Mass communication in India. Mumbai: Jaico Publishing House.
Lasen, A., & Hamill, L., 2005. Mobile World: Past, Present And Future. London: Springer.
Lilleker, D., 2006. Key Concepts in Political Communication. London: SAGE.
Ling, R., 2010. New Tech, New Ties: How Mobile Communication Is Reshaping Social Cohesion. Cambridge, MA: Mit Press.
Papathanassopoulos, S., 2011. Media Perspectives for the 21st Century. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Patnaik, S., 2008. Communication Concepts, Theories And Models1. Available at: http://www.slideshare.net/suchi9/communication-concepts-theories-and-models1-presentation
Sturnquist, D., 2006. Mobile Phones And Driving. Hauppauge: Nova Publishers.
Turtiainen, J., & Oksman, V., 2004. Mobile communication as a social stage: Meanings of mobile communication in everyday life among teenagers in Finland. New Media and Society, 6, 319–339.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples