FILSAFAT DAN ETIKA KOMUNIKASI

OLEH

INDRASWARI ANGGRAINI (201510040311308)

NADIA CHOIRUNISSYAH (201510040311302)

FAKULTAS ILMU SOSIAL DAN ILMU POLITIK

JURUSAN ILMU KOMUNIKASI
UNIVERSITAS MUHAMMADIYAH MALANG
2018
What is communication?

Communication is sending and receiving messages, sharing information, interacting

with others face to face or via any number of old and newly emerging technologies. However,
like many concepts used in the social sciences, its simplicity is deceptive. A deeper
understanding of the thing itself is needed in order to clearly understand the construct and thus
study its many functioning parts. Communication as a discipline is obviously connected to
communication as a construct but the two are distinct and an understanding of each is needed,
one to inform the other

Communication and Interdisciplinarity

Peters (1986) asked the question: “Why has the field of communication failed to define
itself, its intellectual focus and its mission in a coherent way?” He then went on to compare the
discipline to a nation state. Indeed, communication as a discipline emerged from scholars in
many disciplines such as rhetoric, sociology, journalism. Psychology, literary criticism,
education, engineering and mathematics. Thus, many modern fields and modern disciplines
have some interdisciplinary history. As far as the current interdisciplinary nature of
communication is concerned, it is good science to cross-reference, investigate and use the
research in other field. However, moving beyond mere citation tracking, we can gain a better
understanding of what communication is not only by exploring its current research trends but
by looking backward and gaining an understanding of its philosophical roots.

Philosopical Roots of Communication

Communication is, we are forced to recognize its inherent interdisciplarity in terms of

how the reasearch is conducted and how the findings are applied. However, really, the inherent
interdisciplinarity of communication is the surface of it. In communication, specifically,
various subfields take a stand, consciously, less consciously, or self- consciously, on how they
answer each of these question. Anderson and Baym (2004) provide a template for
understanding various subfields within communication as they relate to these four primary
questions of ontology, episcemology, praxeology and axiology. Basically, they suggest that
within comunication’s many subfields each one answers the four questions somewhat
differently and thus these subfields can be understood differently at some very basic level. In
fact, they go on to say that answers to these questions can be presented on a continuum, one
continuum for each question.
Communication Starting with Phenomena

A very basic definition is offered by Trenholna (1986): "Communication is a process

by which a source transmits a message to a receiver through some channel.” This basic
definition specifies the need for a sender, a receiver, a message and a channel in order for
communication to be achieved. This definition arose out of the particular pragmatic needs
present in World War II, around which social scientific aspects of the discipline were built. In
it simplicity, the definition may seem overly basic but it does identify the main parts of a
communicative event and, in this way, is useful in simply offering defining characteristic of
the thing. In fact, colloquially, we often use the term communication in just that way: to indicate
the transmission of a message or ideas from a source to a receiver.

We can see, therefore, that communication has been defined in many ways and that, at
least from an epistemological perspective, we might argue that communication as a construct
is defused in so many ways precisely because it existed as a colloquial term and an oft-used
one at that, long before it emerged as a potentially meaningful academic term. Unlike
sociology, for example, or economics, whose academic emergence colonized sparsely
populated terms, comunication had to wrestle the academic term from very crowded
territory. In short, no, everything is not communication. Rather, we address here the idea that
communication is indeed a broad phenomenon, one that occurs throughout much of our days.
But communication as a construct of study within the field of communication requires a
communication perspective that typically has several characteristics. Earlier, we claimed that
communication scholars were united by their focus on a common phenomenon. However, we
can go beyond that and claim that communication as a phenomenon becomes a discipline
because of the common elements in communication theory and research.

Characteristics of Communication Study

1. Communication Has, as Its Focus, a Communication Phenomenon or Incident

A speech, a persuasive public service announcement (PSA), a supportive message
delivered face to face, a television program. From that starting point, these studies may
diverge in terms of what else the researchers are exploring: the influence of the
message, the cultural context in which it was produced, the use of various strategies in
the message. Furthermore, the phenomenon might be studied by means of an
experiment, a textual analysis, a survey, a content analysis. But the commonality is the
focus on, or inclusion of the communication message.
2. Communication Has, as Its Focus, Communication as a Process
Many studies in communication fonts on consummation as a single event. However, an
important some would argue crucial, aspect of communication as a field of study is the
recognition of communication as a process. In other words, communication as a
process does produce messages but communication as an area of study most often
considers communication as a process and attempts to measure relevant aspects of the
process.
3. Assessment of Likely or Actual Outcomes of Communication
Many studies in communication are interested in the effects or outcomes of messages.
For example, the effects of violent video games on players. Importantly, examination
of message effects and outcomes assumes that communication is a process and thus, is
linked to characteristic #2 above, but also implies a particular way of understanding the
process that sees the message itself as crucial.
4. An Understanding of the Interlocutors
The communication research extends the focus beyond the text to the people creating
or making sense of it. In the other words and again referring back to #2 above, if
communication is a process then the individuals involved in that process are understood
to bring with them social, psychological, cognitive, developmental, and other factors
that play role in message.
5. Communication Searches for Regularities, Measured or Theoretically Described
Berger et al. (2010) state that: “For communication scientists, the problem to be solved
is one of identifying and then explaining regularities by constructing and testing
theories". A theory that applied to only one instance of an event, communicative or
otherwise, would be useless. Regularities in communication processes allow the field
to exist and cohere. Without them, we could derive no generalizations whatsoever and
the field would truly not exist as a field. Regularities, seeking them out, describing
them, theorizing about them, and in some cases statistically measuring them are what
allows social science to progress.
6. A Consideration of the Context of a Communication
in most cases, communication is understood to occur in a particular context and that
context is seen as, once again, important to the process of communication. Whereas
communication research does not always consider context by measuring it or
mentioning it theoretically, it is typically understood to be relevant and thus part of a
communication interaction.
 7. An Understanding of the Channels of Communication, Organizationally or
Socially Defined
Communication scholars also understand that channels, be they interpersonal, face to
face exchanges, or internet websites or television news networks are relevant to the
communication process. Thus, communication research assumes, channel to play an
important role in the communicative process.

Communication in the Academy

In an academic world devoid of politics and turf wars, budgets and budget cuts, grants
and ego-driven debates, researchers would go about the business of research, exploring ideas,
engaging in debates purely for the excitement of knowledge building, and creating a world of
research and resulting knowledge to make the world a better place. But communication as a
discipline is also part of the real world of universities, where,quitesimply, administrative
decisions have an in influence on the process of knowledge building. At the very simplest
level, communication researchers study messages. Not limited to a particular research method,
communication research instead is most often boundaried based on subject matter.

In the post-World War II era when communication was emerging as a discipline, rather
than providing communication scholars, who at the time might have had Ph.D.s from sister
disciplines in any case, a separate and new department, some universities housed them in
English or theater departments. or in journalism schools.

These departments may have been somewhat disparate at the time but they worked, at
least for the administration. Communication departments may exist in their particular
configuration due to historical accident, although noc necessarily one with problematic
outcomes.

Communication Associations, Conferences and Journals

Associations and their conferences are a mainstay of academic life. Associations, whose
members are often communication researchers and educators but may be professional
practitioners, as well, utilize associations to keep up with news in the discipline, network with
colleagues, and publicize their own work. he main associations in the discipline of
communication are the lntemational Communication Association and the National
Communication Association. Both are broad in scope and cover all aspects of communication,
diversely defined.
 Other Associations as more narrow, either by focus, or by region. here are many
communication journals and to list them would be lengthy and would risk suggesting
preference for one over the other. Thus, beyond the obvious role of sharing communication
scholarship. communication journals define communication. Journals shape the discipline and
its research in very meaningful ways. Communication is both about the philosophy and the
theory that undergirds it. and the real, pragmatic aspects of the discipline.