Stuart Hall and the Asymmetry of Encoding and Decoding

In this posting, rather than simply summarizing it, I will attempt to discuss Hall’s theory in a manner that expounds how the two aspects of communication and culture interact.

Essentially what Hall focuses on are two key aspects of the communication process: encoding and decoding. These are the steps by which information is packaged and subsequently unpackaged by each respective party in the communication process. Hall stresses these two because he states that though relatively similar factors affect both the processes encoding and decoding, the asymmetry between those factors on either end of the discourse creates noise and misinterpretation. The reasons for the asymmetry lay in the vast array of differing experiences, social situations, culture, etc. that exist between the two parties.

This is where the aspects of communication and culture come into play yet again. When we conclude, as Hall has, the reasons for commutative misunderstanding as being rooted in social and cultural differences (of course among others), we can examine how they are interrelated. Though Hall uses a large scale model to demonstrate how the asymmetry of encoding and decoding allow for the clouding of messages, I’d like explore how this asymmetry exists on a smaller scale.

We see and experience this in our everyday life, messages we send to others being misinterpreted and the frustration which stems from it. It would be quite the feat to count the instances where you thought or uttered the phrase “well, that’s not what I meant” to someone else. This is one of the few universal instances which occurs throughout all people who have lived long enough to have ever uttered a word or even made a hand motion.

Though we use language, a system which we would all unanimously agree to grasp, to communicate, we must understand that the system of symbols and sequences which we personally use to represent and conceptualize our ideas may differ from others meanings attached to the same symbols. This is crucial as if a series of symbols is encoded into a message by one individual (or party) one must not assume the universality of those symbols as decoded by the other individual.

Though it is impossible to have almighty knowledge of how every other individual will decode a message, no person is below the capacity to attempt to understand other perspectives. Attempting to grasp the semiotics and differences in encoding and decoding messages possessed by different social groups, classes, cultures, etc. inherently helps to combat the asymmetry in Hall’s model. This asymmetry doesn’t necessarily have to be across cultural or social borders but the inherent difference in language and experiences between any given cultures helps to propagate it.

Lastly, most humour and comedic content can be distilled down to the observance of a fundamental difference between the poor encoding of one message leading to the horribly misconstrued decoding of that message. I’ll leave you with this as demonstrated by the classic Abbot & Costello piece “Who’s on First.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sShMA85pv8M