SWOT
Journal of Communication, Autumn, 1985,
writes of ‘shared fantasies’ which ‘provide
group members with comprehensible forms for
explaining the past and thinking about the future- a basis for communal and group conscious-
ness’ (see narrative paradigm).
Bormann posits a three-part structure to the
theory: (1) the part which deals with the discovery
and arrangement of recurring communicative
forms and patterns that indicate the evolution
and presence of a shared group consciousness;
(2) the part which consists of a description of
the dynamic tendencies within communication
systems ‘that explain why group consensuses
arise, continue, decline, and disappear’, and the
eff ects such group consensus has in terms of
meanings, motives and communication within
the group: the basic communication process is
the dynamic of people sharing group fantasies;
and (3) that part of the theory which consists of
the factors which explain why people share the
fantasies they do, and when.
By ‘fantasy’ Bormann means the creative and
imaginative shared interpretation of events ‘that
fulfi l a group psychological or rhetorical need’.
What the author terms ‘rhetorical fantasies’ are
the result of ‘homo narrans in collectives sharing
narratives that account for their experiences and
their hopes and fears’. Such rhetorical fantasies
may include ‘fanciful and fictitious scripts of
imaginary characters, but they often deal with
things that have actually happened to members
of the group or that are reported in authenti-
cated works of history, in the news media, or in
the oral history and folklore of other groups and
communities’.
Th e sharing of fantasies brings a ‘convergence
of appropriate feelings among participants
... when members of a mass audience share
a fantasy they jointly experience the same
emotions, develop common heroes and villains,
celebrate certain actions as laudable, and inter-
pret some aspect of their common experience in
the same way’.
Th is Bormann names symbolic convergence.
Whilst the ‘rational world paradigm’ claims
that there is an objective truth which speakers
can mirror in their communication, and against
which its logic and argument can be tested and
evaluated (and therefore regards myth and
fantasy as untrue, as the recounting of false-
hoods), for those giving credence to shared
fantasies, ‘the stories of myths or fantasy themes
are central’.
An underlying assumption of the theory seems
to be that fantasies are not only creative but also
surrendering privacy rather than guarding it has
become the online fashion. Th rough facebook,
youtube and twitter, etc. we post details of
ourselves for all to read; we risk surveillance
(some call it stalking) because it is a two-way
process, an opportunity for interactivity, regard-
less of the dangers of ‘consorting with strangers’.
See biometrics; cctv: closed-circuit tele-
vision; echelon; internet: monitoring of
content; regulation of investigatory
powers act (ripa) (uk), 2000; journalism:
phone-hacking; usa – patriot act, 2001.
See also topic guides under media: freedom,
censorship; media issues & debates.
SWOT Analytical approach widely used to scan
and evaluate the internal and external environ-
ment of an organization. It can also be employed
to evaluate specific organizational activities,
for example the design of new products, as
well as in planning marketing and public
relations campaigns. Th e approach taken is
to analyse Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportuni-
ties and Th reats. In Exploring Public Relations
(Pearson Education, 2009), Ralph Tench and
Liz Yeomans provide some examples: strengths
may include brand loyalty and well-motivated
employees, whilst a limited range of products
or an ageing customer-base may be identifi ed
as weaknesses; potential opportunities could
include new markets and threats can include
the possibility of political instability aff ecting
operations. Th ey further comment that whilst
the organization itself can often determine its
strengths and weaknesses, ‘opportunities and
threats, are generally external to the organiza-
tion and can be derived from wider environ-
mental analysis ... but are usually related to
those factors that have a direct impact on it’. See
epistle.
Sykes Committee Report on Broadcasting,
1923 See bbc, origins.
Symbol Any object, person or event to which
a generally agreed, shared meaning has been
given, and which individuals have learned to
accept as representing something other than
itself: a national fl ag represents feelings of patri-
otism and national unity, for example. Symbols
are almost always culture-bound. See iconic;
metaphor; myth; semiology/semiotics;
sign; signification.
‘Symbolic annihilation of women’ (by the
media) See norms.
Symbolic code See codes of narrative.
Symbolic convergence theory Ernest G.
Bormann in his article ‘Symbolic convergence
theory: a communication formulation’ in the