I really don't know which concept to pick up, because there are so many interesting ones and all of those require some further discussion. Each chapter has one part that is common, that part is called "Becoming more responsible communicator". I believe that it is the only most important concept that requires further discussion. The main purpose of our study is to become more successful in communication. Even though we learn new concept we still will be facing the same dilemma which is how to become 100% successful...

The MOST INTERESTING CONCEPT

The most interesting concept was concept of nonverbal communication, especially the nonverbal codes. Why it was interesting?   So simple! It's like someone lives by something amazing and never turns his or her attention to that amazing thing. The same way it was for me with nonverbal communication. I mean each of us observes and uses nonverbal codes every day. My question is what would happen if exclude nonverbal codes from communication process itself? I think we would lose more than 50% potential of communication just by eliminating nonverbal part of communication. I think in some way we underestimate importance of nonverbal communication. We say too much without words to eliminate this part of process. I had never paid attention to what people say without words, but since going through this part of material I started what people say with codes and if it changes the meaning. I find how different can be meaning with and without words. 

Polysemy

An idea that caught my attention in this chapter was idea of polysemy or multiple meanings in TV message. As author states “media exposure is a process negotiating between what lies in the text itself and what lies in the social and cultural context in which the text is experienced” (p. 294). I do agree that each of us can watch the same TV show and had different outcomes. I believe that it happens because each person lives in his or her own small world. Every day every person experiences influence from different events, meetings, outside factors, like weather, and many others. Multiple meaning within one message always was attractive subject for discussion. One of the brightest examples is movie called “Code Davinci”. Even process of this selection was influenced by who am I, what do I believe in, and what my preferences are. When someone watches TV show or read a book, each person has a right to interpret it in the way he or she likes. But there is such science like hermeneutics that intent to identify what was an original author’s intent in regard to the text. I think that the same approach can be applied to any process of interpretation of any messages. As a conclusion, I do agree that every message has one meaning that author intended to deliver, but there are other meanings that are relatively true …

Research Method

From variety of research methods I prefer rhetorical criticism. There are few reasons why? The very first reason is the way how does this method work. At the beginning purpose of communication act should be studied, then audience and context where message was sent, and then rhetorical strategies should be studied and analyzed. I believe that communication can be an art. Some people just use communication, the other improve it and make it something special. For example, people use varies thought development pattern in order to make communication pleasurable. When I observe those kinds of communication I see how everyday thing can be turned in something special. This approach is widely used in Bible study, as long as its major purpose is to find out who, where and for how something was told or written.  

Medium or Content?

I do agree with Marshall McLuhan that the medium is the message and that format or logic of a medium is as important as its contents. Here is simple example. Question for those who have kids, how long do you children spend in front of TV every day? Other question, what do scientists say in regard of children and time they should spend in front of TV? As a parent I’ve experienced that as much my kids spend in front of TV as harder for them to study. Scientists say that time in front of screen kills imagination. So if everything up to this moment was correct, then what is better for kids, to watch TV or to read books? I prefer the second option. Another example, if you are going to LISTEN to movie with a lot of nature scenes and or where view is meaningful. Will you be able to catch all ideas? I don’t think so. Or if you are going to watch radio show, those more talking things, will you be pleased with what you will see? I really doubt. That’s why medium is as important as its content.

I agree that television is cool medium because it fills us with details. Nowadays people's life is highly influenced by TV. People talk, dress, and behave like their favorite personage.  In other words, our society is formed by television. The key in this process plays fact that TV brings more details. People get more involved with TV as if they would receive the same message by radio or so. For example, there was a horrible crime that took place in Rancho Cordova in Slavic community. Husband’s brother killed a young mom and two kids. I heard it when I was out of the town, someone told me. I was shocked by what I had heard. However, when I got back and checked the Internet (in this case I refer to the Internet as equivalent of TV, because most News channels can be watched through the Internet too), I was shocked even more, because I saw faces of small innocent kids and young mom on pictures, I also saw faces of husband… It is incomparable to watch something or just listen about it.