Within the context of media and communications studies, this idea of distorted communication was proposed by the cultural theorist Stuart Hall in one of his papers “Encoding/Decoding” (1973). In this paper, Hall argues that the meaning of the message is never static or fixed, the message is not fully linear or transparent and that the audience is never simply a passive recipient (Hall, 2006). He went on to propose the theory of encoding and decoding. By encoding, Hall referred to the process where creators of the message embed hidden meaning based on their context or ideologies. Whereas decoding is the process where the interpretation of the message by the audience is impacted by social and cultural framework (Mambrol, 2020).
Let’s further reflect on the idea of encoding and decoding.
“Is Having a Boyfriend Embarrassing Now?”
In October, Chante Joseph wrote an article for the British Vogue called “Is having a boyfriend embarrassing now?” which sparked yet another opinion-driven online conversation. The article uses strong language to describe frustration around women posting their boyfriends online and how this is no longer a trendy phenomenon (Joseph, 2025). It is clearly written to provoke a conversation targeted at heterosexual relationships. Joseph, as the writer of this article has embedded the article with a certain message of frustration. She is pointing out that women’s identities are built of more than just getting praised for keeping a man. This message is encoded with an ideology of feminism. That is to say, the article does not just have a fixed meaning but a deeper ideology behind it encoded by the author.
As the reader reasons through this article, he decodes it within such frames as religion, ethnicity, age, sexuality, gender and class (Mambol, 2006). Think of it as certain lenses. The polarised conversation this article provoked online, proves Halls point of the audience taking a stance in one of the three formats: dominant, oppositional or negotiated. If the audience were passive receivers, everyone would have decoded the message similarly.
However, in this case some chose to fully agree with the article (dominant), some fully rejected the idea of it being embarrassing to have a boyfriend (oppositional) whilst others seemed to accept but were not fully convinced by the idea (negotiated). Single and taken women across the globe started posting videos across social media platforms expressing their opinions on this matter.
In conclusion, based on Hall’s theory, media never produces passive or fixed messages. Media has a deep impact on society due to its fluid nature caused by humans coding and interpreting the codes in various ways.
References
Chante Joseph. (2025). Is Having A Boyfriend Embarrassing Now?. [Online]. British Vogue. Last Updated: 25 October 2025. Available at: https://www.vogue.co.uk/article/is-having-a-boyfriend-embarrassing-now [Accessed 14 November 2025].
Durham, Meenakshi Gigi. (2006). Media and cultural studies: keywords. [Online]. Wiley-Blackwell. Available at: https://www.vlebooks.com/Product/Index/22528?page=0&startBookmarkId=-1 [Accessed 14 November 2025].
Nasrullah Mambrol. (2020). Analysis of Stuart Hall’s Encoding/Decoding. [Online]. Literary theory and criticism. Last Updated: 7 November 2020. Available at: https://literariness.org/2020/11/07/analysis-of-stuart-halls-encoding-decoding/ [Accessed 14 November 2025].
Photo by Alasdair McLellan
Hi Sanna!! This discussion effectively applies Stuart Hall’s encoding/decoding model to a current debate in the media. The application of Hall’s 1973 theory to Chante Joseph’s Vogue article is particularly successful in highlighting how such encoded ideological messages-feminist critiques of relationship norms, for example-are decoded differentially according to the receiving audience’s social and cultural lenses. Dominant, oppositional, and negotiated readings are particularly apt here, with the online reaction to the article perfectly illustrating Hall’s contention that audiences are active, not passive. Overall, this reflection effectively shows how media texts carry layered meanings and how various decoding practices shape public conversations today.
Hi，Sanna！This blog is really interesting! I particularly like the way you concretized the “encoding/decoding” theory through that controversial Vogue article – especially the part where you used “filters” to compare the decoding framework of the audience (religion, gender, class, etc.), which instantly made people understand why the same article could trigger polarized reactions. When you analyzed the three interpretation positions of the audience, the social media case of “agreement/opposition/negotiation” you mentioned was particularly contemporary, which immediately reminded me of the related discussions I recently came across on Douyin.What resonated with me the most was the conclusion at the end: Media information is never static. Through this case, you vividly prove that it is the diverse interpretations of different people that make public discussions so rich. Your writing not only maintains academic depth but is also as easy to understand as a friend’s chat. I hope to see more such analyses in the future!
That’s so good! You used Hall’s encoding/decoding theory to get the debate out of the “right vs wrong” trap—such a great angle! The Vogue example is perfect: what looks like clickbait actually shows how audience positions—whether dominant, negotiated, or oppositional—are shaped by class, age, and platform norms. I especially loved your reminder that meaning is made in reception, not just based on the creator’s intent. Oh, one thought: today’s algorithmic feeds also “encode” by favouring certain tones (irony, outrage), and that in turn steers how we decode relationship talk!
Hi Sanna! I think this is a really excellent explanation, and I think you did a fantastic job of breaking down a complex theory and applying it to a modern, real-world example. It makes Hall’s ideas about encoding and decoding feel very relevant and easy to understand. I especially liked two things, which your example is perfect. Using the British Vogue article immediately shows how encoding and decoding aren’t just about old news reports, but are happening in our social media feeds right now. You explained the “three formats” clearly. Connecting the online debate to the dominant, oppositional, and negotiated positions really proves the main point that audiences are not passive. Overall, this is a clear and powerful piece of writing that really shows you understand the topic well!
Hi Sanna, I found your blog post really interesting to read since you have discussed the theory of encoding and decoding from the perspective of an article that became very viral in the media in such a short period of time. I was also seeing a lot of people posting their opinions about this article on social media, discussing it from different perspectives, which clearly proves that the audience is never passive, and ideology or the message behind the content is always decoded by people based on their own experience and lifestyle. Someone who values a traditional family structure would react negatively and decode this from an oppositional perspective, and someone who is not particularly interested in having a relationship would probably take a dominant position.
Hi Sanna! Your blog was so extremely interesting. You laid out your ideas in an effective way that adds to what we learned in class and brings that idea to modern society. Adding in several different persepctives to the topic was helpful in shaping your idea as well as bringing in topics like gender to the topic. Applying Hall’s theory to this current topic helped in a readers understanding to the idea.