Gratifications Of Health Communication Messages By Social Media Users In Rural And Sub-urban Areas Of Nigeria.

By Bisi Olawunmi Ph.D
&
Ajibolu Taiwo Balofin Ph.D

Introduction:

The Uses and Gratification Theory postulates that people use the media to seek and derive specific wants and needs. The theory asserts that media users are not passive agents in the communication process but are in control of their media consumptions. Communication scholars Elihu Katz and JayBlumler, in propounding the theory, argue that people deliberately use the media for particular purposes. (Katz & Blumler, 1974).

According to the theory, “uses” are the benefits sought, while “gratifications” are the benefits or satisfaction actually derived by people who use the media.(Lazarsfeld, 1969).Four common gratifications from media usage are:

The advent of social media has deepened discussions of Uses and Gratifications in the academia. It has inspired numerous more studies, unraveling new Hedonic gratification – related to pleasure and sensations benefitted
Social gratification – sense of belonging being members of the society; doing what others in the society are doing
Utilitarian gratification – related to fulfilling specific personal goals
Technological gratification – satisfaction in using the latest technology

Perspectives regarding the practical applications of the theory differ among communication scholars, especially when it concerns social media users. This is basically because users of social media have greater control of the media (far more than other types of media consumers such as radio listeners, TV viewers and newspaper and magazine readers. As in other fields of scholarship, health communication has recorded many studies grounded on the Uses and Gratifications theory. This study explores the application of the theory in Nigeria, using the Covid-19 health campaigns in the social media as context.

Statement of the Problem

The earliest studies on the media and their audiences placed emphasis on the media – that is, what the media did to people. (Baran & Davis, 2013). The paradigm, known as “Bullet or Hypodermic Needle Effect” was partly caused by the exponential growth on the television at the time – 1940s through 1960s. During the 1970s and 1980s, however, more studies were conducted on what people did with the media, not just what the media did to people. The paradigm shift gave birth to highly impactful “active audience perspective” in mass communication research. (Wright, 1998).

But of course the possibility of responsible audience activity was never totally ignored in early media research, but much of it gave audiences insufficient credit for selection, interpretation and use of media content. (Baran & Davis, 2013, p.55)

The excitement over the new paradigm led to numerous audience-based theories in communication scholarship, one of the most enduring being the Uses and Gratifications Theory (Berelson, Lazarsfeld & McPhee, 1954). Despite its popularity and wide applications, the Uses and Gratifications Theory suffered methodological constraints faced by its contemporary “active audience” theories. Baran and Davis (2013) put it succinctly:

Studying people’s reasons for using media was difficult, using available scientific methods, hard to find, and unlikely to be productive. Most attitude researchers had strong behaviorist biases that led them to be suspicious of taking people’s thoughts and experiences as face value. Researchers regarded people’s reasons for doing things as rationalizations for action. The real reason s people acted as they did could only be determined by analyzing the stimulus people were exposed to and the responses that they learned from them.

In other words, the relationship between media and the audience is akin to the chicken and egg riddle: Which one comes first depends on the perspective of the researcher: A critical research through the communication literature reveals that more studies have been carried out on media “uses” and media “uses and gratification” than on “media gratifications” as univariate investigation, especially regarding social audience and health communication campaigns messages. This study attempts to close this gap by exploring the nature and patterns of gratifications in rural and sub-urban areas.

The overall objective of the study is to discover the gratifications sought and derived by social media users in the study location during the Covid-19 campaign in Ekiti State, an agrarian Yoruba-speaking state in South West Nigeria. Although ithereisincreased iadoptionandiuseiofsocial imediaplatforms ialongsidetechnologicaldevicesforthepropagationofsocial ibehaviour, ,,a huge gap exists in the area ofiassessment ithe people’s iknowledge, iperception, iadoption iand iversatility iin ithe iuse iof isocial imedia iapplications i(Oluka, Nzeh & Okotie, 2020).

Research Questions

The following questions guided the investigation:

What are the socio-economic characteristics of social media users in Ekiti State?
What gratifications do social media users in Ekiti State seek?
What gratifications do social media users in Ekiti State get?
What are the challenges of using social media for health communication campaigns in Ekiti State?

Literature Review

An overview of the Uses and Gratifications Theory

The UGT emerged in the 1940s and 1950s as a response to earlier mass communication theories that predominantly focused on the effects of media on audiences (Blumler & Katz, 1974). Pioneering contributions by Elihu Katz, Jay G. Blumler, and Michael Gurevitch laid the groundwork for this paradigm shift.

The origin of the Uses and Gratifications Theory (UGT) can be traced back to the 1940s and 1950s when scholars in the field of communication studies sought to move beyond traditional theories that primarily focused on the effects of media on audiences. During this period, the dominant paradigm was the “hypodermic needle” model, which conceptualized audiences as passive recipients of media messages, susceptible to direct and uniform influence.

However, with the emergence of UGT, scholars aimed to shift this perspective by recognizing the active role of media consumers in selecting and using media for specific purposes. The theory’s roots are often associated with the works of Elihu Katz, Jay G. Blumler, and Michael Gurevitch. They sought to understand not just what media does to people, but rather what people do with media.

Elihu Katz and Paul Lazarsfeld’s studies in the field of mass communication research, such as the “Personal Influence” laid the groundwork for UGT. In these studies, researchers found that media effects varied among individuals, suggesting that people actively engaged with media based on their own needs, motivations, and social contexts.

The observation that individuals actively choose media to fulfill certain needs gained further evidence with the work of Jay G. Blumler and Michael Gurevitch. Their article “The Uses of Mass Communications: Current Perspectives on Gratifications Research” (1974) provided a systematic framework for understanding how audiences actively seek out media content to gratify specific needs.

UGT, thus, emerged as a response to the limitations of earlier theories and as a theoretical framework that shifted the focus from the media’s influence on individuals to how individuals actively use media to satisfy their desires and needs. It opened up a new avenue for understanding the complexity of audience behavior and the dynamic relationship between media and individuals.(McQuail & Windahl, (1993).

Key constructs of the UGT

UGT posits that individuals actively choose and use media based on their psychological and social needs. It suggests that people consume media for various gratifications, fulfilling specific needs and desires. The theory identifies several key assumptions:

Active Audience: UGT asserts that media audiences are not passive but actively engage with media content based on their preferences and needs.
Media Use is Goal-Directed: Individuals choose specific media outlets to satisfy particular needs, such as information, entertainment, personal identity reinforcement, or social integration.
Media Competence: People possess the ability to select media content that aligns with their preferences and needs, showcasing a level of media competence.
Dynamic Relationship: The relationship between media and audience is dynamic and subject to change based on individual experiences, preferences, and situational factors.

(Blumler & Katz, 1974).

Application of UGT in Research

The Uses and Gratifications Theory (UGT) has found wide-ranging applications across various domains within the realm of media studies, influencing both research methodologies and practical strategies. This section delves into the diverse applications of UGT, shedding light on its contributions to media planning, content development, social media research, and audience studies.

Media Planning: One significant application of UGT lies in media planning and advertising strategies. Advertisers leverage the insights provided by UGT to tailor campaigns that resonate with specific audience needs and preferences (Rubin, 2002). Understanding why individuals choose particular media outlets allows advertisers to craft messages that align with the gratifications sought by their target audience.

2.Media Content Development:Content creators, including television producers, writers, and online content developers, apply UGT principles to produce content that aligns with the anticipated gratifications of their target audience. By understanding the motivations behind media consumption, creators can tailor content to fulfill specific needs, enhancing audience engagement and satisfaction (Blumler & Katz, 1974).

Social Media Research: In the digital age, UGT has become a valuable tool for understanding user motivations on social media platforms. Researchers apply UGT principles to explore why individuals choose to engage with specific types of content, share information, or connect with others online. This research aids in the development of user-centric features and functionalities, enhancing the overall social media experience (McQuail & Windahl, 1993).
Audience Studies: UGT is critical to audience studies. It helps researchers comprehend the reasons why media motives of media users as well as the psychological aspects influencing those choices. By conducting surveys, interviews, and content analyses using UGT, scholars gain insights into the diverse motivations and needs that drive individuals to select specific media content (Rubin, 2002).

Social media uses and gratifications in health communication

In ipublic ihealth ipromotion, isocial imedia isites iallow iindividuals ito ibenefit ifrom ieasy iaccess ito ipreventive imedicine iinformation, iapplication iof isocial imedia iis iits iability ito ienable iindividuals iand iorganisations ito icooperate iin iall iphases iof iemergency imanagement: imitigation, ipreparedness, iresponse, iand irecovery i(White iet ial., i2009). iSocial imedia iprovides ia iunique iopportunity ifor ithe ipublic ito iengage iin icritical ipublic ihealth iissues, isuch ias ithe iH1N1 ipandemic, iwhere isharing iof iinformation, icollaboration, iand iinteractivity iare iencouraged i(U.S. iDepartment iof iHealth iand iHuman iServices, i2010). iEmergency inotification isystems ican iutilise isocial imedia ito idistribute iinformation ibecause iof ithe iopportunities ithey ihold i- ifast idistribution, imass icommunication ifor ilarge igroups, ilow icost iand iease iof iuse, iand iinternational idiversity i(White iet ial., i2009).

The igrowth iof isocial imedia ihas irevealed ithe ifollowing ifunctions and dysfimctions which also constitute uses and gratifications for the users:

Sharing iof iideas: iSocial inetworking isites iallow iusers ito ishare iideas, iactivities, ievents, iand iinterests iwithin itheir iindividual inetworks. iWeb-based isocial inetworking iservices imake iit ipossible ito iconnect ipeople iwho ishare iinterests iand iactivities iacross ipolitical, ieconomic, iand igeographic iborders.

Tool iof icommunication: iSocial inetworks iare iincreasingly ibeing iused iby iteachers iand ilearners ias ia icommunication itool. iTeachers icreate ichat irooms, iforums, iand igroups ito iextend iclassroom idiscussion ito iposting iassignments, itests, iand iquizzes, ito iassist iwith

homework ioutside iof ithe iclassroom isetting. iLearners ican ialso iform igroups iover isocial inetworking isites iand iengage iin idiscussion iover ia ivariety iof itopics.

Bridges icommunication igap: iSocial imedia ibridges ithe idistance iamong idifferent iaudience segments.It ioffers iplatforms ifor ionline iusers ito ifind iothers iwho ishare ithe isame iinterests iand ibuild ivirtual icommunities ibased ion ithose ishared iinterests. iThrough this, content isharing iand iuser iinteraction ibecome irelatively ieasyI and iefficient.

Source iof iinformation: iContent igenerating iand isharing isites iserve ias isources iof iinformation ifor ivarious itopics. iUsers ican isearch ifor icontent, idownload iand iuse ithe icontent iavailable ion ithese isites ifree iof icost.

Important imarketing itool: iSocial imedia iis iwidely iused iby ifirms/organisations ito imarket itheir iproducts, services and ideas.I Social inetworking isites ito igenerate iopinions ion ithe iexisting iand ifuture iproducts ithat iare iavailable iin ithe imarket. iComments ior iopinions from users ihelp ithe iorganisation ito iredesign iits messages and products me. i

Audience iinteraction itool: iSocial iMedia iNetworking iis iperfect ifor iaudience iinteraction, iaudience ifeedback, iand iaudience isupport. iNew ibusiness icontacts ican ibe iobtained ifor inetworking ipurposes.

Crisis icommunication itool: iWhen ithe imajor iforms iof ipublic irelations itools ifail, isocial imedia ican ibe iused iextensively ito icommunicate iwith ithe igeneral ipublic iregarding iany icrisis isituation ithat imight ihave igripped ithe ination ior iany iorganisation.

Cost-effectiveness: iIt iis icheaper ito iuse ionline isocial inetworking ifor iboth ipersonal iand ibusiness imatters ibecause imost iof iit iis iusually ifree. iUnlike iin iother iforms iof imedia ilike ielectronic ior iprint, ione ihas ito ipay ia icertain iamount iof imoney ifor ia inews iitem ito iget ipublished. iA iperson ican iscout iout ipotential icustomers iand itarget imarkets iwith ijust ia ifew iclicks iand ikeystrokes.

Less itime-consuming: iSocial imedia iis ian ieffective itime imanagement imedium iof icommunication iboth ifor ibusiness ias iwell ias ifor iacademic ipurposes. iOne ican ipost ia imessage ior ibrowse ifor iany iinformation iat ithe iclick iof ia ibutton. iThis iis ian iadded iadvantage iin icomparison ito iprint iand iother ielectronic imedia ilike itelevision iand iradio, ithough ione ican iget iupdates ion itelevision, iyet isocial imedia ichannels iprovide iimpromptu iinformation iand iconnection iwith ithe ipeople ithat imatter imost.

Criticisms of Uses and Gratifications Theory.

While the Uses and Gratifications Theory (UGT) has contributed significantly to our understanding of media consumption, it is not without its criticisms. This section explores key critiques, addressing the theory’s limitations and ongoing debates within the field of communication studies.

Limited Predictive Power: One notable criticism of UGT is its limited predictive power. Critics argue that individual media choices are influenced by numerous factors, making it challenging to predict specific gratifications accurately. The theory’s focus on individual agency may oversimplify the complex interplay of social, cultural, and contextual factors that shape media consumption patterns (McQuail, 2010).
2. Overemphasis on Individual Agency: UGT has been criticized for placing too much emphasis on individual agency while potentially overlooking the influence of societal and cultural factors on media consumption. Critics argue that the theory’s neglect of broader structural influences limits its ability to comprehensively explain the complexities of media use in diverse social contexts (McQuail, 2010).
3. Lack of Attention to Media Effects: Some scholars contend that UGT is more focused on the “why” of media consumption than on the effects of media exposure. The theory may not fully explain the consequences of media use on attitudes and behaviors, raising questions about its utility in assessing the broader societal impact of media content (Rubin, 2002).
Lack of Cross-Cultural Validity: Critics argue that UGT’s development and testing have primarily been in Western, individualistic cultures. As a result, the theory may lack cross-cultural validity, limiting its applicability in diverse cultural contexts where collective and social motivations may play a more significant role in media consumption patterns (LaRose & Eastin, 2004).

Method

Research Design

This istudy iadopted ia idescriptive iresearch idesign iusing imixed imethods iof idata icollection iwhich iare isurvey iand iin-depth iinterview ifor iquantitative iand iqualitative idata icollection irespectively. iThis iwas ito iensure ithat ivaluable iand iin-depth iinformation ion isocial imedia ichannels ifrequently iand imostly iused iamong iothers iwere icollected. iSet iexclusion iand iinclusion icriteria i(based ion idemographics) iwere iused ito iselect iparticipants iand irespondents ifor ithe istudy. iA iclose-ended iquestionnairewas idesigned ifor ithe icollection iof idata iwhile ian iopen-ended iinterview iguide iwas idesigned ifor ithe icollection iof iin-depth iinterview idata. The imultistage isampling imethod, icluster isampling, iand isimple irandom itechnique iwere iused iin idata icollection..

Population iand sampling

The iestimated i ipopulation iis iabout i3,270,900 ias iof i2021 was used as sample population. (NPC, 2021)

The multistage, cluster and systematic random sampling techniques were combined to obtain representative samples from the population to reflect the characteristics of the three senatorial districts of the state as shown in Table 1:

Table i1: iEkiti iCentral iSenatorial iDistrict

Ekiti iCentral iSenatorial iDistricts

Population

Number iof iWard

Ado-EkitI LGA

Ijero iLGA

Ekiti iWest iLGA iIrepodun/Ifelodun

iLGA iEfon iAlaaye iLGA

427,700

302,500

244,900

179,100

118,900

Total

1,273,100

Source: iNational iPopulation iCommission, i2021

Table i2 iEkiti iNorth iSenatorial iDistricts

Ekiti iNorth iSenatorial iDistricts

Population

Number iof iWard

Ido/Osi iLGA iIkole iLGA iIlejemeje iLGA iMoba iLGA

Oye iLGA

218,100

232,300

59,300

198,300

187,900

Total

895,900

Source: iNational iPopulation iCommission, i2021

Table i3

Ekiti iSouth iSenatorial iDistrict

Population

Number iof iWard

Ekiti iEast iLGA

Ekiti iSouth-West iLGA iEmure iLGA

Gboyin iLGA iIkere iLGA

Ise/Orun iLGA

188,600

225,100

128,500

201,800

202,500

155,400

Total

1,101,900

Source: iNational iPopulation iCommission, i2021

Determined ithe isample isize ifor ieach isenatorial idistrict iusing isample isize iformula ibelow:

Finite ipopulation: in′ i=n

1+ iz² ix ip i(1-p)

ε²N

N i= ipopulation isize i• ie i= iMargin iof ierror i(percentage iin idecimal iform) i• iz i= iz-score

Where iz i= i1.96(9 ie= i5%

Ekiti iCentral iSenatorial iDistrict thus had a sample of 385.

Ekiti North Senatorial District had a sample of 384

Ekiti South Senatorial District had a sample of 385

Total sample size was 1154 irespondents idrawn ifrom ithe ithree isenatorial idistricts

For imore iinclusiveness iof irespondents, ipurposive iselection iof ithe ilocal igovernment iarea iwith ithe ilargest ipopulation iin ieach isenatorial idistrict iwere iselected. iThese iare;

Ekiti iCentral iSenatorial iDistrict -Ado iEkiti iLocal iGovernment iArea iwith i427,700.
Ekiti iNorth iSenatorial idistrict – Ikole iLocal iGovernment iArea iwith i232,300.
Ekiti iSouth iSenatorial idistrict – Ekiti iSouth iWest iLocal iGovernment iArea i225,100.

Using ithe iskip ilinear isystematic isampling itechniques iin iselection iof iwards iwhere iquestionnaire iwas iadministered;

Ado iLocal iGovernment iArea iwith i13 iwards, i6 iwards iwere iselected iusing isystematic itechnique.

Ikole iLocal iGovernment iArea iwith i12 iwards, i6 iwards iwere iselectedusing isystematic itechnique

Ekiti iSouth-West iLocal iGovernment iArea iwith i11 iwards, i5 iwards iwere iselected iusing isystematic itechnique

Administration iof iquestionnaire ito ithe iskip ilinear isystematic iselected i

For ian iin-depth iinterview, ipurposive isampling itechnique iwas iused ifor ithe iselection iof iopinion ileaders iin ithe iselected ilocal igovernment iareas iin ieach isenatorial i

3.3.1 iSummary iof iSelected iSample iand iLocation

Selected isample ilocations iusing isystematic isampling itechniques iin ithe iselection iof iwards iwhere icopies iof ithe iquestionnaire iwere iadministered:

Table i4: iSelected iSample/Location

Ekiti iCentral iSenatorial iDistrict i(Ado iEkiti iLGA)

Ekiti North Senatorial iDistrict

(Ikole iEkiti iLGA)

Ekiti iSouth iSenatorial iDistrict i(South iWest iEkiti iLGA)

Selected iWards/Respondents i1’ iIdofin i- i65

3’ iIdolofin i- i65

5’ iIjoka i- i65

7’ iOke-Ila i- i65

9’ iDallimore i- i65

11’ iIrona i- i65

Total i385 iRespondents

Selected iWards/Respondents i1’ iAraromi i- i64

3’ iIkole ieast i- i64

5’ iIkole isouth i- i64

7’ iIkole iWest iII i- i64

9’ iItapaji i- i64

11’ iOdo iAyedun i- i64

Total i384 iRespondents

Selected iWards/Respondent i1’ iIgbara iOdo iI i– i77

3’ iIlawe iI i- i77

5’ iIlawe iIII i- i77

7’ iIlawe iV i- i77

9’ iOgotun iI i– i77

Total i385 iRespondents

Data Collection

Structured iquestionnaire and interview guide were deployed to capture information from the sample. i

iTo i itest ithe ireliability iof ithe iquestionnaire, iThe iComposite iCronbach’s iAlpha iscore ifor ithe iquestionnaire iwas iused ito ijudge ithe iinternal iconsistency iscore iof ithe iquestionnaire.

R Results

Table 6: Socio-economic and demographic characteristics of social media users

Variables

Categories

Frequency

Percentages i(%)

Gender

Male

Female

207

843

19.7%

80.3%

Age(years)

20-49

50 iand iabove

678

372

64.6%

35.4%

Highest ieducation ilevel iobtained

Secondary

Tertiary

1018

3.0%

97.0%

Religion

Christianity

Islam iTraditional

991

94.4%

4.7%

1.0%

Marital istatus

Single

Married iDivorced

126

914

12.0%

87.0%

1.0%

Table i6 ishows ithat ithere iwas ia ihigher ifrequency iof ifemales i(80.3%) ito imales i(19.7%). iIn iaddition ifrom iTable i4.1, imost iof ithe irespondents ihad itertiary ilevel iof ieducation i(97%) iwhile i(3%) ihad isecondary ilevel iof ieducation; i94.4% ipracticed iChristianity, i4.7% iIslam iwhile i1% itraditional ireligion; ithe imajority iof ithe irespondents i(64.6%) iwere iin iage igroup i20-49; iand ifinally, i12% iof ithe irespondents iwere isingle, i87% iwere imarried iand i1% iwere idivorcees.

Figure i1: iPie ichart ishowing igender idistribution iof istudy irespondents

Figure i2: iPie ichart ishowing ieducation ilevel iof istudy irespondents

Figure i3: iPie iChart ishowing ireligion iof istudy irespondents

Figure i4. iPie iChart ishowing ithe imarital istatus iof istudy irespondents

Table i5:iForms iof isocial imedia iplatforms iemployed iby iorganizations ior iimmediate icommunities ito iensure ieffective icommunication.

Variables

Categories

Frequency

Percentages

Registered isocial imedia iplatforms

Twitter iFacebook iWhatsApp iInstagram iOthers

275

684

3.0 i% i26.2% i65.1%

1.0 i% i4.8%

Data iobtained ifrom irespondents iin iTable i7 ishow that ia iconsiderably ilarge inumber iof ithe ipopulace iused iWhatsApp i(65.4%) iand iFacebook i(26.2 i%) iwhile ivery ifew iused iTwitter i(3%),iInstagram i(1%) iand iothers i(4.8%).

Gratifications of social media users in Ekiti State

Table i8: iSocial gratifications sought via social media on Covid-19 messages

	Kinds of Gratifications sought	Extent of gratifcations derived from Covid 19 greetings				Total
		Often	Sometimes	Rarely	Not at all	Total
	Safety	128	19	211	372	730
	Social inclusion	51	23	89	29	222
	Self efficacy	10	50	8	30	98
Total		169	42	358	481	1050

Table i8 ireveals ia istatistically isignificant irelationship ibetween ikinds of gratifications sought and extent of gratifications derived from ithe isocial imedia iby respondents. About one out of every ten respondent mostly sought safety needs gratifications from the social media. They wanted to feel safe looking at trends in the social media. Unfortunately, more than half of those who sought safety needs claimed not to get it all. Less than one-quarter said they rarely felt safe browsing the social media on Covid-19 information while less than 12 per cent said that they often felt safe regarding Covid 19 by accessing the social media.

About 20 per cent of the respondents mostly sought social inclusion in the social media about Covid-19 messages. They wanted to be sure that by being on the social media, they would not be the odd ones in the society. They did not want to be left out as people bonded to fight the terrible scourge. Said a respondent in during the in-depth interviews:

I wanted to be sure my relatives and loved ones were okay and were coping with the challenges of Covid-19. People were dying and many others were getting sick. The major way to know about how my loved ones were feeling was through the social media.

Table 9 shows that those who sought the need for social inclusion actually received gratifications for social inclusion. The social media helped them not to be isolated. This was a kind of “escape” for them.

The third most important gratification sought by the respondents was ‘self-efficacy’. This category of respondents sought to build their capacity to overcome Covid-19 problems through the social media. For instance to see how to wear their masks properly or know the wrong ways to wear their masks. Some others wanted to know which protocols were correct as many of such protocols inundated the media. Various local prescriptions of herbs were all over and this set of respondents relied on the social media to teach themselves on self-management to the health crises. Sixty respondents obtained the gratifications they sought in this regard. They believed that through te social media, they were able to obtain self-management of the Covid-19 disease.

Table i9: iChi-square itests iof igratifications sought and received.

	Value	df		Asymp. iSig. i(2-sided)
Pearson iChi-square	74.047^a		6 6 1	.000
Likelihood iRatio	69.717			.000
Linear-by-Linear iAssociation	1.354			.245
N iof iValid iCases	1050

Challenges encountered using social media for accessing health communication messages

Table i10: iChallenges iencountered iin ithe iuse iof iinternet-enabled iplatforms iby istudy ipopulace.

	Variable	Categories	Frequency	Percentage i(%)
1	How igood iis iyour idata	Poor	7	7%
	network ion ithe ifollowing	Fair	518	49.3%
	scale iin iyour ilocation?	Good	396	37.7%
		Excellent	129	12.3%
2	Is iinternet ibundle idata	Yes	451	43.0%
	cheap iand iaffordable ito	No	459	43.7%
	you?	I idon’t	140	13.3%
	(Cost)	Know
3	Is incessant power	Yes	566	53.9%
	supply ifactor iimpeding	No	347	33.0%
	your iaccess i i ito i i ioffice	I idon’t	137	13.0%
	internet inetwork?	Know

Table i10 ipresents ithe ifrequency iof iresponses ion iinternet iservice ireliability, icost, iand ipower isupply ias iencapsulated iin ichallenges ihampering ithe iuse iof iinternet-enabled idevices iand isocial imedia iplatforms.Five ihundred iand ieighteen i(49.3%) iof ithe irespondents istated i‘fair’ idata inetwork, i396 i(37.7%) iindicated‘good’as ia iresponse iwhile i129(12.3%) ireported ian i‘excellent’ idata iservice iexperience. iAlso, ithere iwas ino isignificant idifference iin irespondents’ iperception iof ithe icost iof ithe iinternet ibundle while i566 i(53.9%) ishowed ithat iincessant ipower isupply iimpeded itheir iaccess ito ithe ioffice idata inetwork.

Discussion

This study confirms the assumption that people use the social media mostly for social goals, as the name “social media” actually suggests. Other goals are secondary to the social need of the users, going by the findings to this investigation. The study also validates the importance of distinguishing between “uses” (the benefits sought), and the “gratifications” (the benefits or satisfaction actually derived by people who use the media) Although this distinction is not water-tight, it nevertheless helps to provide deeper understanding of what people do with the media (different from what the media do to people).

Most people in rural and sub-urban areas of Nigeria do not have access to the mass media especially radio, TV, outdoor, newspapers and magazines. They generally obtained information from the elites through the two-step/multi-step/opinion leadership hypothesis. They are able to bridge this gap by having access to the media through the social media. As noted by respondents who part in the Indepth Interviews, there is still a huge challenge over connectivity and quality of technology regarding rural and sub-urban populace. For instance, many of them do not use the kinds of phones that could give them quality access to top social media networks. Some others face the challenge of recharging their sets because the social media platforms consume more electricity. Yet, as revealed by this study, social media users found the social media very helpful in accessing information on Covid-19 and in providing gratifications for them which enhanced their self-management of the scourge.

Regarding the four common gratifications from media usage, the study points to social gratification as the major gratification that the respondents derive from the social media. Utilitarian and technological gratifications are not as important. This finding may have resulted from the fact that Covid-19 was used as referent point in the research. It was a deadly scourge which people did not take with levity and in this circumstance, it should be expected that gratifications such as need for escape and entertainment would be pushed to the background by users. (Eze,&Nwamzam, ,2019)

Conclusion

This study reinforces the idea that individuals actively choose media to fulfill certain needs gained as Blumler and Gurevitch predicted in their theoretical postulations of Uses and Gratifications. Research in to gratifications sought are not the same in all situations. There are situations where the gratifications derived from health messages broadcast on the social media did not match the intentions of the communicators of the health messages. This investigations, thus, helped in understanding how the audience of mass communication comprehend the reasons behind media consumption patterns and the psychological aspects influencing those choices.

The methodology applied in this study also underscores the need for researchers to explore more the Uses and Gratifications approach in conducting surveys, interviews, and content analyses through the lens of UGT. Through this, scholars would gain insights into the diverse motivations and needs that drive individuals to select specific media content (Rubin, 2002).

It is evident from findings to this investigation that the social inetworking isites iallow iusers ito ishare iideas, iactivities, ievents, iand iinterests iwithin itheir iindividual inetworks. iWeb-based isocial inetworking iservices,imake iit ipossible ito iconnect ipeople iwho ishare iinterests iand iactivities iacross ipolitical, ieconomic, iand igeographic iborders.

References

Baran, J. and Davis, K. (2012). Mass Communication Theory: Foundation, Ferment, andFuture.Michael Rosenberg

Berelson, B, Lazarsfeld. P.F. & McPhee, W.N. (1954). Voting : a study of opionion function in a presidential campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago

Eze, P., &Nwamzam, A. (2019) Impact of Internet on Students and Lecturers in Nigeria HigherInstitutions of Learning. International Journal of Humanities, Social Sciences andEducationVol 6(6)pp 14-19 www.arcjournals.org

Katz, E., &Blumler, J. G., (1974). The Uses of Mass Communications: Current Perspectives on Gratifications Research. London: Sage Publications.

LaRose, R., & Eastin, M. S. (2004). A social cognitive theory of Internet uses and gratifications: Toward a new model of media attendance. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 48(3), 358–377.

Lazarsfeld, P.F. (1969). An episode in the history of social research: A memoir. In D. Fleming B. Bailyn (eds) The intellectual migration: Europe and America: 1933-1960. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University

McQuail, D. (2010). Mass communication theory: An introduction. London: Sage Publications.

McQuail, D., & Windahl, S. (1993). Communication models for the study of mass communications. New York: Routledge.

NPC (2021). National Population Commission, www.https/:nationalpopulation.org./ekiti_state.

Oluka, N., Ezeh, N. and Okotie,A. (2020). Impact of Wuhan Corona Virus Pandemic onEducation in Nigeria: A Critical Appraisal. International Journal of Research andInnovationin Social ScienceVol 5(8)pp513-522

Rogers, E.M. (1993). Diffusion of innovation. (5^th edition). New York: The Free Press.

Rubin, A. M. (2002). The uses-and-gratifications perspective of media effects. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 525–548). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Wright, C.B. (1998). Mass communication: A sociological perspective. 5^th edition. New York: Random House

Bisi Olawunmi Ph.D is a Senior Lecturer of Mass Communication-
Adeleke University, Ede, Osun State, Nigeria.

Ajibolu Taiwo Balofin. Ph.D
(Tai Balofin)
is a Professor of Media Studies & Communications
Virginia University of Lynchburg, Virginia, USA

Research Design

Table i1: iEkiti iCentral iSenatorial iDistrict

Table i2 iEkiti iNorth iSenatorial iDistricts

Table i3

N i= ipopulation isize i• ie i= iMargin iof ierror i(percentage iin idecimal iform) i• iz i= iz-score

3.3.1 iSummary iof iSelected iSample iand iLocation

Data Collection

iTo i itest ithe ireliability iof ithe iquestionnaire, iThe iComposite iCronbach’s iAlpha iscore ifor ithe iquestionnaire iwas iused ito ijudge ithe iinternal iconsistency iscore iof ithe iquestionnaire.

Call - +1 (347) 536-4384