Critical theory seems unpopular, probably because of its ideological bias, as Pease, Form, and Rytina (1970) claim. Liebert and Imershein (1977) similarly assert that a common theoretical trend in community research is a "distinct political theme that tends to find the greatest effectiveness and the greatest power, and even the most universal power structure , to reside in a certain organized diversity, a pluralistic state of subsystems within an integrated system of elites” (pp. 191-192). The primary goal of critical theory, as James Bohman (2005) notes, is to counteract oppression. This theory has not only been used by incorporating the best tools, but, more importantly, to critique what is happening in the research context. Given that the community studied is Bautista, a resettlement area and has an existing power structure, a critical analysis and decision-making approach was adapted using the case study design to examine the location. Critical theory questions structures and assumes that science is objective and “value-free.” Its objective is the emancipation of peoples from domination (Quebral, 1992 cited in Drilon, 1998). Critical theorists such as Karl Marx and Jürgen Habermas criticize unequal social conditions, particularly groups excluded from power or free access to information. Thus, critical theorists do more than observe, interpret, or describe; they criticize. From the perspective of power structure research, this theory helped the researcher by asking who benefits from the unequal distribution of power and who do they benefit by focusing on the community issue. In terms of communication, critical scholars have focused on the role of communication in society and on the control of communication...... middle of paper ...... cal dimension » of his work (Dreyfus & Rabinow, 1982, p. He asserts that power and knowledge are not external to each other, but operate in a mutually generative manner, because "nothing can exist as an element of knowledge if [...] it does not have the effects of coercion” and as “nothing can function as a mechanism of power if it is not deployed according to procedures, instruments, means and objectives that can be validated in more or less coherent knowledge systems” (Foucault, 1997, p. 52). Thus, rather than studying knowledge and power separately, it is “the connection between the power of knowledge” that must be described in order to grasp the acceptability of the power system of knowledge (p. 53). We must analyze the links between power and knowledge to understand why a certain “regime of truth” became acceptable at a given historical moment...