Through this hypodermic injection of messages, we can see how this relates to the present day radio and mass communication. Radio stations, through programming, omit their beliefs and opinions to a passive audience, whom largely cannot interact (unless they call the radio station) with the station. The meaning is absorbed by audiences, which is then spread amongst society and eventually forms consensus. However, semiologists, such as Rayner, Wall and Kruger (2001), argue that media texts (radio) that there are multiple meanings constructed within a text and left to the receiver the decrypt what they feel is the correct meaning. To put this back into the context of radio, this is why radio stations have call in programs where listeners can present their convictions to a topic determined by the station. Contrast to the transmission model semiotics is very much an interactive process, where the sender and receiver compromise to find meaning.
Schirato and Yell exclaim that three major points are needed in order to understand/ analyse messages. There must be a relationship between the communication and culture; meaning is context specific and cultural literacy (Schirato and Yell, 1996). The relationship between communication and culture is that what people actually do, is both constrained by, and develops as a response to the rules and conventions of a culture (Baudrillard, 1983). Basically, this means that people are products of their culture and are moulded to its beliefs. .
Context is important since it determines under what circumstances communication takes place and negotiates possible meanings. For example, in a telephone conversation, if the receiver is asked a question as to their preference in a matter, such as a meal; they reply "I don't care." In this situation it is safe to assume that the person has no real preference in the matter and they are content with decision of the sender or others around them.