부산대학교 도서관

이 연구는 언론학의 역사에 관한 최근 연구 성과들에 기초하여, 현대 미국 주류 언론학의 창시자 (founder)로 인정받는 윌버 슈람이 한국전쟁 중에 미국 정부 기관들의 심리전 연구과제를 수행하게 된 맥락과과정을분석하고그연구과제의내용과결과를검토한후에, 슈람의이같은한국전쟁심리전연 구과제의 수행이 주류 언론학의 제도화에 어떤 영향을 미쳤는지 논의했다. 이 연구를 위한 자료로는 미 국의 국립문서기록관리청(NARA)에 보관된 미국 정부 문서들, 그리고 윌버 슈람이 한국전쟁 당시 근무 했던 일리노이대학의 아카이브가 소장하고 있는 슈람의 서신들과 공문들을 활용하였다. 연구 결과 슈 람은 1947년에 일리노이대학의 언론학연구소를 설립한 직후부터 연구과제 수탁을 위해 미국 정부 기 관과활발히접촉했고, 그러한노력의성과로한국전쟁선전전연구과제3개를수행하게되었던것으로 밝혀졌다. 이를 통해 슈람은 애국적인 ‘냉전의 전사’로서 미국 정부의 전쟁 수행에 공헌했을 뿐만 아니 라, 확보된 막대한 연구비를 사용하여 일리노이대학의 언론학연구소의 신속한 정착과 발전, 나아가 정 책과학으로서의 주류 언론학의 제도화와 지배적 패러다임의 정립에 크게 기여한 것으로 평가되었다.
This study tries to answer three questions. First, how do the two perspectives, such as the traditional Whiggish historiography and critical revisionist historiography view the role of Wilbur Schramm in the institutionalization of communication studies? Second, in what ways did Schramm get the huge research projects on the propaganda war from a few U.S. government security agencies during the Korean War, and what were the themes, methods, and results of those projects? Third, what influences did Schramm have on the institutionalization of communication studies by taking the propaganda projects related to the Korean War? This study used some public and private documents collected from the University of Illinois Library and the National Archives and Records Administration. It was found that Schramm actively contacted a few U.S. government agencies right after the establishment of the Institute of Communications Research, University of Illinois in 1947, and that he got the propaganda war projects from the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Army, and the Department of State each year during the Korean War. With a great amount of money he acquired through the projects on propaganda war, Schramm recruited new faculty members and supported the graduate students, and as a result he contributed to the stabilization and growth of the ICR as well as the production of many new researchers in the field. As a result, he helped the fast institutionalization of communication studies, and it could be said that he was a founder of the field. However, the fast institutionalization of this field through inflow of a big money from the government agencies left some bad impacts on it. Above all, it helped make the identity of the field as being against democracy owing to its dominant paradigm to be used best for the persuasive communication studies, which supported the ruling class’s efficient control of the people. Moreover, for the communication studies as a policy science could not construct comprehensive and systematic theories, it was mostly ignored by many great scholars in other fields, who came to be concerned with communications, and it fell into isolation and separation from the academic world.