Audience negotiation - Stuart Hall

There are many ways in which a producer can attempt to anchor an audience in to a certain way of thinking. Earlier Media theorists really focussed on this idea; that Media texts can manipulate us, and the audience were passive, having very little say in the matter.

However, now we know there are many ways in which an audience can respond to a Media text. They can agree with what what's being said, they can completely reject the text's dominant ideology, or (and this is probably most common) an audience can come to a mixed or negotiated conclusion, agreeing with some parts, but disagreeing with others.

One of the best examples of audience negotiation is in response to comedy texts. You and your circle of friends probably have completely different senses of humour. You'll know people with a 'sick' sense of humour, or maybe someone with a more 'silly' sense of humour. This is one way in which we negotiate discourse in everyday life, and we can tell a lot about someone from their sense of humour.

Have a look at this clip from I'm Alan Partridge, a long running series about a particularly inept radio DJ and his gradual spiral into obscurity. In this scene, Partridge invents a new character called 'Camp David', who talks like a particularly outdated and politically incorrect stereotype of a gay man. There are many, many ways in which an audience can negotiate this scene, and here are just a few:

Preferred reading (the audience agrees with the ideology of the text

• The audience realises the joke criticises homophobia, and makes Partridge look like an idiot
• The audience realises the joke criticises the awfulness of late night radio, and makes Partridge look like an idiot
• The audience agrees how the joke emphasises how much Partridge loves himself, making him look like an idiot
• The audience remembers a particularly terrible DJ that reminds them of Partridge, making them find the joke particularly funny
• The audience takes pleasure in the fact the joke doesn't actually work. No one eats 'mince' for breakfast!
• The audience realises 'Camp David' is the US president's holiday retreat, which makes a terrible joke even more confusing, and therefore funnier
• The audience finds Alan's stupid voice funny
• The audience appreciates the use of canned laughter, as it reinforces exactly what bit is supposed to be funny
• The audience may have seen this clip many times before, and can't wait to show a new friend their favourite bit
• A gay audience member may find the joke particularly funny, as they can laugh as the ridiculous representation of someone they identify with

Oppositional reading (the audience disagrees with the ideology of the text)

• The audience finds the joke homophobic and hates Partridge
• The audience finds the joke unfunny, and doesn't know enough about late night radio to 'get' it
• The audience hates Partridge, and doesn't understand why someone would watch a show about a man who loves himself that much
• The audience really enjoys local radio for non-ironic reasons, and doesn't get why we're supposed to be laughing
• The audience finds it stupid and unfunny that Partridge thinks people eat 'mince' for breakfast
• The audience is too confused by the reference to 'Camp David' (the place) to enjoy the joke
• The audience finds Alan's voice annoying and even offensive
• The audience hates canned laughter, and finds it overly suggestive and old-fashioned
• The audience has seen the episode so many times they hate this joke now
• A gay audience member may find this joke stereotyped and judgemental, and may take particular offense at a straight actor making homophobic jokes

Negotiated reading (the audience agrees with some aspects, but disagrees with others)

• There are potentially millions of negotiated responses, so here are just a few!
• The audience enjoys the more slapstick comedy of Alan Partridge, but isn't too in to the verbal humour
• The audience finds it funny that the joke criticises homophobia, but the weirdness of eating 'mince' for breakfast completely ruins the joke for them
• The audience completely doesn't get the joke for some reason (perhaps being unfamiliar with stereotypical representation of gay men, or maybe the double meaning of the word 'mince'), but finds the awfulness of the joke makes them laugh anyway
• The audience doesn't really find the joke too funny, but knows a friend who's a local radio DJ, so sends them a link to the YouTube link
• The audience may be a little offended by the homophobia (perhaps they have a friend who has been mocked in a similar way) but they end up laughing at the stupidness of the 'joke' anyway
• The audience may not speak or understand english, but still finds Alan's face/voice funny anyway

Aberrant reading (the audience completely misunderstands a vital part of the text)

• An example of an aberrant reading here might involve the audience being homophobic themselves, and finding that the joke supports their own world view.

Conclusions

As you probably see, there is no better way to ruin a joke than to analyse it! However, we've proven that there are millions of potential ways in which an audience can negotiate a text. In an exam, it's essential that you discuss that audiences are active readers, who have considerable power. This also has implications for the producer. If the audience can come up with whatever response they like, then surely it really doesn't matter what the producer thinks!