Week 1: Neuman's critique on Williams's Television
I don't know Williams before reading Television, and don't know Neuman before reading this question. I have no idea what kind of research Neuman did, but I believe this is important to understand his critique on Williams’s book. My feeling is that he defines “research” narrowly as what he is familiar with, probably empirical either qualitative or quantitative, and other methods are dismissed as lack of sophistication and focus.
Neuman commented that Williams's book reflected his “uneasiness with … the whole notion of gathering data to test ideas,” indicating that Williams did not do or did not do enough of gathering data and testing ideas. So did Williams gather data and test his ideas? And if he didn't, as Neuman claimed, does it make his book lack of sophistication and focus and therefore lack of constructive influence?
Williams obviously did data gathering and analysis, as long as data and analysis are not equalized with number and statistics. In the former part, he tried to recount the history of television’s development. He explored both the technology aspect and the social and commercial aspects, and tried to understand/explain their interrelationship. I think these historical records, presented not in numbers but in characters, are valuable data, and his analysis is insightful and inspiring. In the latter part of the book, he collected data on TV programs and did some content analysis. Though it is not so fascinating to me as the former part, I guess it fits Neuman’s definition of data collection better.
I don’t think Williams tested his ideas, but I don’t think it is his purpose either. He gathered and analyzed information in order to develop a theory or at least an understanding of television. He even made some predictions at the end of the book about the future development of television, based on his theory/understanding, though he wouldn’t have tested them due to his temporal limitation.
To give a definitive review of television, Williams included a lot in his book. Due to the broad topic and the length of the book, it might seem lack of focus. However, it is not my impression. I feel that the whole book focuses on the cause-effect relation between television and all other aspects of our life. He first talked about how to identify and study a cause-effect relation, especially cautioned against some popular but flawed thinking. Later he briefly analyzed some cause-effect relations himself.
With all these reasons above, I do not agree with Neuman’s critique. He is right in that Williams didn’t test any specific hypotheses with statistical data analysis, but this does not make his work lack of focus or sophistication. His historical and inductive point of view should have a constructive influence on the design and execution of research on television, as it did.