Keynote Address and Cultural Studies Paradigm Essay Example

Keynote Address and Cultural Studies Paradigm

At the mention of keynote address, concern is put on the underlying meaning of any piece of work especially in the fields of literature and politics. This is because in most cases, when individuals deliver their pieces of work be it speech or written work, there is always the influence of the society surrounding the persona. In most cases people tend to deliver what is most acceptable to the majority has been referred to as dominant ideologies. This discussion focuses on how the keynote address issue may be put or not be put under the cultural studies paradigm.

Keynote address put into consideration culture as a very important field in the cultural studies paradigm. As such culture reveals the struggle between those who have and those without. Following this struggle, the better side of existence is left to the dominant ideology which has been well explained in the theory of ‘preferred reading’. In the dominant ideology, researchers identified the dominant, the negotiated, and the oppositional. According to the preferred reading theory, TV programs generally work in favor of meanings that are conservative to the dominant ideologies. This on the one hand makes any television text popular though it should on the hand have some sort of polysemy. This has an implication that the structured heterogeneity of the audience must have corresponding meaning in the same line of heterogeneity.

As such, polysemy on the contrary is never free but restricted and stratified since it exists at all times against the dominant ideology. This works to reduce alternate or resisting meanings and to harmonize the preferred ones around its interests. Following this theory, the main determinant of the meaning brought out in keynote address is the social context of its utility as opposed to the structuralism assumptions of meaning being based on structure.


Stuart, H. 1984. The Narrative Construction of Reality. “Southern Review” 17 (1984): 1-17