Summary Course Science and Communication (VU) - all CARQ seminars
74 views 0 purchase
Course
Science and Communication (AM_470587)
Institution
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (VU)
Save yourself the trouble of reading and re-reading all those papers for the course Science and Communication, read this summary instead! This document contains an extensive summary of all articles that were discussed in the CARQ seminars, combined with my personal interpretation of the CARQ and th...
Communication, Power and Counter-power in the
Network Society – M. Castells (L2)
Communication and information are fundamental sources of power because of the battle in society
over the minds of the people. Communication, particularly socialised communication, provides the
support for the social production of meaning. Castells defines power to be the structural capacity of
a social actor to impose its will over other social actor(s). In that view, counter-power is the capacity
of a social actor to resist and challenge power relations that are institutionalised.
Both powers and counter-powers operate nowadays in a new technological framework; this has
consequences for the ways, means, and goals of their conflictive practice. Causes for this
transformation may be:
- The predominant role of media politics and its interaction with political legitimacy
- Segmented, customized mass media in the production of culture
- Emergence of mass self-communication
- The use of one-directional mass communication and mass self-communication in the
relationship between power and counter-power
The social context in which this takes place is characterised by:
- The state (traditionally the main site of power) is challenged by globalisation, market
pressure towards deregulation, and a crisis of political legitimacy.
- Cultural industries and business media are both concentrating and segmentating leading to
customised delivery of messages.
- Opposition between communalism (roots in religion, nation, etc.) and individualism (roots in
consumerism, networked individualism as sociability, desire for individual autonomy)
Mass communication and media politics
Politics is primarily media politics with main channels being the print press, television, and radio. The
media are not the holders of power, but they constitute by and large the space where power is
decided. In our society, politics is dependent on media politics. The language of media has its rules. It
is largely built around images, not necessarily visual, but images. The most powerful message is a
simple message attached to an image. The simplest message in politics is a human face. Media
politics leads to the personalization of politics around leaders that can be adequately sold in the
political market. It is the symbolic embodiment of a message of trust around a person, around the
character of the person, and then in terms of the image projection of this character.
The importance of personality politics is related to the evolution of electoral politics, usually
determined by the independent or undecided voters. Voters don’t read the candidate platforms but
rely on the media reports of the candidates’ positions; ultimately their voting is a function of trust.
This makes the character, as portrayed in the media, essential, and the destruction of credibility and
character assassination become the most potent political weapons. Scandal politics in an expensive
business, funded by less than moral means (e.g. undisclosed donors).
Media politics, scandal politics, and the crisis of political legitimacy
Scandal politics has two kinds of effects. Firstly, it may weaken the credibility of those subjected to
the scandal. Secondly, it can have an unwanted effect. The large amount of dirt can make the public
indifferent, cynical towards all politicians, or look at it as entertainment unlinked to politics (which
can even make the candidate more popular). A lot of cynicism can lead to a crisis of political
legitimacy and eventually cumulate in triggering political change. Many people tend to vote against
candidates, rather than for, or vote for third party or protest candidates.
The rise of mass self-communication
The diffusion of Internet and mobile communication has laid the foundation for a network society
based on a global web of horizontal communication networks. People have developed their own
system of mass communication. The traditional media have adapted and have started to incorporate
content originated by their users and by mixing vertical and horizontal communication modes. This
does not mean that they are taking over this new form of communication, as also new media have
,arisen. The growing interest of corporate media for Internet-based forms of communication is in fact
the reflection of the rise of a new form of socialized communication: mass self-communication. And
it is self-generated in content, self-directed in emission, and self-selected in reception by many that
communicate with many.
Mass self-communication and counter-power
Social movements may be progressive or reactionary, or just alternative. They are purposive
collective actions aimed at changing the values and interests institutionalised in society, what is
tantamount to modify the power relations. Mass self-communication offers a medium for these
social movements to build their autonomy and confront the institutions in their own terms.
However, these movements do not limit themselves to this new form of communication, but remain
connected to their local experience and the landing sites of their struggle. This analysis is supported
by social trends such as:
- The existence of the global movement against corporate globalisation in the internet.
- The building of autonomous communication networks to challenge the power of the
globalised media industry and of government and business controlled media.
- The development of autonomous forms of political organising in political campaigns.
- The spread of instant political mobilisations by using mobile phones, making it difficult for
governments to hide or manipulate information
The grand convergence: power relations in the new communication space
The study of the transformation of power relations in the new communication space must consider
the interaction between political actors, social actors, and media business in both the mass media
and networked media, as well as in the interconnection between different media that are quickly
becoming articulated in a reconfigured media system. What we see is that large businesses start to
insert themselves in the free mass self-communication possibilities such as MySpace and Youtube as
they provide great marketing opportunities. We see the coexistence and interconnection of
mainstream media, corporately owned new media, and autonomous Internet sites. A major reason
for the persistence of relatively autonomous social networking sites, regardless of their connections
for new media corporate strategies is that the authentic nature of these social networking services
seems to be critical. People don’t like it when they know they are using a corporate product, so
companies are more likely to succeed when they discreetly cooperate with an existing networking
service than to set up one of their own.
According to Williams and Delli Carpini (2004), the new media environment disrupts the traditional
“single axis system” of political influence and creates a fluid “multiaxity” of power in three ways:
1. The expansion of relevant media and blurring of news and entertainment has led to a
struggle within the media for the role of authoritative gatekeeper of scandals
2. The 24-hour news cycle means that outlets have to gather and broadcast news rapidly, thus
eliminating the role of editors
3. The binary between media and the rest of everyday life is disappearing
Electoral campaigns have become ‘hypermedia campaigns’, thus changing the dynamics, forms and
content of media politics. A common occurrence is the linking of less-known electoral candidates to
damning search words (a Google bomb).
CARQ
Core citation: “the media have become the social space where power is decided”
Argumentative structure:
1. Power is created by shaping peoples’ mind
2. Politics is heavily dependent on media communication to attain power
3. Although media distribute the information, they are still dependent on the information they
receive from politics and the demands of their clients
4. Media politics is heavily reliant on scandal politics which tries to discredit political figures
, 5. The rise of mass self-communication is changing the way in which information becomes
available to the public and is a great platform for protest groups (counter-forces)
6. Politics and companies have taken to this new form of communicating and use it to influence
the public.
7. The traditional media will not be completely replaced by this new form of mass self-
communication, but will work together with it.
Relate:
- Description of media as a two-way form of communication (traditional media more towards
a form of one-way communication). lecture
Questions:
- This text was written about 10 years ago, do you think the use of the internet has changed,
and how could this affect the conclusion from this article?
CARQ class discussion
Core message/citation: communication has always been defining how power is established. In this
new technological context the power of communication is shifting from vertical communication (by
institutions) to horizontal communication (the public). The public can engage in politics themselves
and gain power.
Arguments:
- Rise of mass self-communication
- Traditional politics is joining the mass self-communication
- Scandal politics is a source of public distrust
- The public can engage in politics via the internet
o This gives them counter-power
Questions:
- Looking back to 2007, to what extent do you think this development has played out as
Castells hoped?
- In what ways has this change of power manifested itself?
- What is the value of mass self-communication?
‘Boat people’ in Australia: press, policy, and public
opinion – B. Holtom (L2)
The discourse of exclusion that is socially constructed through press, policy and public agendas
continues Australia’s long history of justified exclusion. The process of Othering can occur along
various fissures, most commonly race.
A history of ‘boat people’
The term ‘boat people’ refers to irregular maritime migrants who arrive by boat seeking asylum in
Australia and are subject to offshore processing by Australian authorities on islands of excised
territory. Australia treats refugees arrived by boat differently than other refugee visa sub-classes and
tries to evade protection obligations. The term ‘boat people’ first came into use in the 1970s. The
attacks of 9/11, the salience of similar threats, and negative portrayal of refugees (e.g. throwing
overboard children to force help, which was untrue) was used to justify delegitimization of the right
of boat arrivals to protection and citizenship. The historical fluctuations or irregular boat arrivals
parallel political decisions and events.
Methodology
A cross-examination of a quantitative analysis of newspaper articles with findings from qualitative
focus group discussions to explore how the representation of boat arrivals in the media affects
public opinion.
Look at agenda-setting (using certain words or images repetitively with an issue) in the three main
newspapers, good for 95% of the combined readership. The content of the papers was quantified in
, terms of predetermined categories. 30 articles per newspaper in the period of January to May 2012
were used.
Two focus groups were used, consisting of 7 and 5 students from the University of New South Wales.
Boat people: excluded through the press
An important theme is exclusion; asylum seekers and boat arrivals were often described in contrast
to oneself or to Australian citizens or Australia (signalled by using ‘we’ versus ‘them’). Australian
news in general has the tendency to portray all foreign people and events as unknown, not
associated, or unimportant. Representation of other places or people often serves to reflect the
desires and preconceptions of those who have the power to define both the Self and the Other.
Considerable differences were found in the portrayal of boat people with more negative associations
in The Daily Telegraph and more positive associations in the SMH. In 2012 the Australian Press
Council stipulated that journalists should refer to boat people as ‘asylum seekers’ (an originally
positive term), rather than ‘illegal immigrants’. However, ‘asylum’ has become an ambiguous term
due to its conflation with illegal immigration and this comes at the cost of public trust. The focus
group showed that people who are reliant on the media coverage tend to use the terms boat people
and asylum seeker interchangeably, while people who are educated on the topic are more nuanced.
Participants in the focus groups had difficulties with understanding the policies on asylum seeker,
signalling that they had received inadequate or one-sided information by the media.
According to the Refugee Convention asylum seekers should have equal claim to asylum regardless
of their method of arrival. In Australia, boat arrivals are subject to exclusionary policies and public
opinion because the boat itself is socially constructed as illegal as it is seemingly uncontrollable and
the passengers are presumed to lack identity documents. In reality, over 80% of all asylum seekers
arrive by plane, though this is rarely reported and people estimate the percentages to be the other
way around. Relative reporting can provide a solution because it normalises the asylum process.
Boat people: excluded through policy
The maintenance of difference and distance in the public psyche and press about asylum seekers
and boat arrivals is made possible through respective exclusionary policies. By placing people on
offshore islands (non-places) and referring to these people only by nationality or numbers of arrival,
‘boat people’ become ‘non-people’ in the public psyche, which is visible in a lack of empathy. A focus
is placed on the responsibility of Australia to “its own people and taxpayers” rather than the moral
obligation to asylum seekers, though people are not necessarily opposed to them.
CARQ
Core citation: “in Australia, press and policy agendas intersect with public opinion to contribute to
the ongoing exclusion of ‘boat people’. In the press, conscious and unconscious framing mechanisms
create a metaphysical distancing of boat arrivals from the public.”
Argumentative structure:
- Background to the topic
- Methodology
- Exclusion in the press
o We vs. them
o Association with negative phrases
o Participants of the focus groups are inadequately informed by the press to
understand policies on the topic
o Selective reporting / dehumanizing
- Exclusion in policy
o Placing boat arrivals on offshore islands (non-places)
o Justified by fear for terrorists.
Relate:
- The author leans a bit to a one-way, linear communication model by emphasising the effect
of media reporting on public knowledge and policy making, while paying little attention to
how the public influences/helps to create communication
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller BMWer. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $9.77. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
