Hypodermic Needle/Bullet Theory - Are We Easily Influenced?

Introduction

Mass communication, as a discipline, has a relatively short history. Its theories and ideas, however, can be traced back to its roots in psychology and sociology. In psychology, the principles of behaviorism explains that the actions of most individuals are influenced by external stimuli (e.g., media messages). Whereas on the sociological side, the principle of functionalism explains that the dominant social structures and societal norms determine how a society operates. So, per the functionalist principle, mass media instituions are a part of the overall social structure, and they can either maintain the status quo or alter it. These underlying principles led scholars at the time to conclude that mass media institutions have the potential to influence their audience in ways that are powerful, direct, and uniform. This pervasive view eventually led to the development of the Hypodermic Needle/Bullet Theory.

Hypodermic Needle/Magic Bullet Theory

Penned in the 1920s and 30s, the Hypodermic Needle/Bullet Theory states that mass media has the power to insert messages into the minds of their audience, like a syringe or bullet, causing them to adopt new ideas and change their behaviors. This theory not only gives power to media institutions, but it also assumes that the consumers are vulnerable and passive. The most well-known example of this theory in action is the 1938 radio adaptation of the H.G. Wells novel The War of the Worlds directed by Orson Welles. This radio play allegedly caused mass panic to the point that people were fleeing their homes and going on ‘rescue’ missions. The problem with this theory is that it simplifies how people receive and process information. It automatically assumes that people are that easily influenced, when this is often not the case. Going back to the War of the Worlds broadcast example, it turns out that the reports of mass hysteria were greatly exaggerated by the newspaper companies (who were competing with radio at the time). In reality, few people tuned in to the Welles production, and even fewer panicked. Does this mean that the Hypodermic Needle/Bullet Theory should be dismissed completely? Well, it’s complicated. While events of the past few years may fit the Hypodermic Needle/Bullet theory, there are two other theories that explain how consumers can be influenced by mass media sources.

Two-Step Flow and Uses and Gratification Theory

A 2023 Pew Research study reports that a growing number of U.S. adults are getting their news from TikTok. Since TikTok is a short-form video sharing app, it can be deduced that with reports of decreasing attention spans on the rise, people are increasingly turning to short-form media for their information and entertainment. However, this trend can also illustrate the Two-Step Flow Theory, which states that people will often turn to opinion leaders or influencers for information because they trust them more than journalists or other subject area experts. This trend can also reflect the Uses and Gratification Theory. This theory proposes that people intentionally consume certain media because it aligns with their views and/or interests. The video below, produced by the PBS Idea Channel, breaks down all three of these mass communication theories. When all three are taken into consideration, one can assume two things. Either one theory fits a certain situation more than another or all three can work in tandem. In recent events it seems to be the latter.

The COVID-19 Pandemic (2020-2021) and the January 6th, 2021 Insurrection are both well-known examples how various media sources played a role in creating extreme divisions in viewpoints. During the COVID-19 Pandemic, misinformation spread by politicians and other opinion leaders ran rampant. This caused massive rifts among populations dividing those who followed the CDC guidelines and those that vehemently dismissed them. It got to the point where the World Health Organization considered the spread of misinformation as a global health risk, coining the term infodemic.

With the 2021 Insurrection, we saw a massive group of people buy into the message that the 2020 election was stolen from then President Donald Trump. Although, this claim was debunked repeatedly, because people opted to get their information from ultra-conservative media sources or online conspiracy theorists, they were driven to attack the Capitol. This is still an issue; according to a January Washington Post article 25% of U.S. adults believe that the FBI probably or definitely encouraged the January 6th attack. Both of these events are applicable to the above mentioned mass communication theories. The Hypodermic Needle/Bullet Theory illustrates that right-wing media companies often feed inaccurate information to vulnerable demographic groups. The Two-Step Flow Theory shows that people will rely on opinion leaders for information even if their claims are false. Lastly, the Uses and Gratification Theory explains that people will seek out any media source that aligns with their beliefs whether it's a traditional news media outlet or an online conspiracy theorist.

Conclusion

Does this make all media consumers susceptible to the Hypodermic Needle/Bullet Theory or the other two theories? Am I in just as much risk of being influenced by mass media as the people who bought into pandemic and election conspiracy theories? Short answer is no, I don't think I'm susceptible to media influence; I think I'm pretty good at determining what information sources are credible. The long answer, though, is a bit complicated, because I know I have my biases. For instance, I tend to stick to the same news sources to get my information (National Public Radio, CNN, and MSNBC). These sources generally range from center left to liberal. I may dismiss certain viewpoints as ill-informed without considering why that individal came to that conclusion in the first place. Generally, I think we should take steps in reducing our suspectibility to media influence. This means studying up on media literacy strategies. We also need to get out of our own heads, and accept the fact people have differing opinions. Perhaps if we consider the factors that formed their viewpoints we can become a more informed society.