[Previous message][Next message][Back to index]
[ecrea] CfP: Changing Media - Changing Democracy?
Wed Jun 11 05:30:23 GMT 2014
CALL FOR PAPERS
Changing Media – Changing Democracy? Exploring the Democratic Potential
of Social Media
20 Anniversary Conference of the Institute for Comparative Media and
Communication Studies at the Austrian Academy of Sciences
Along with the 4th Research Conference of the Austrian Research
Association - Working Group on the Future of Democracy
& the 2014 Workshop of the Network “Media Structures”
November 6-7, 2014; Vienna, Austrian Academy of Sciences
TOPIC AND AIM OF THE CONFERENCE: In January 2014, Facebook reported
profits that beat Wall Street’s expectations, and its worldwide user
base grew to 1.2 billion in the fourth quarter of 2013, up 16% from a
year earlier (even when Facebook is gaining fewer new users than in past
quarters). In the German speaking countries, on average 3 (!) out of 8
people are active Facebook users. Unsurprisingly, there is widespread
consensus that social media such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are
changing political communication. However, no such consensus exists when
it comes to assessing the effects that the emergence of social network
services, blogging environments, online discussion forums, and content
communities have on political processes. On the one hand, it is argued
that the widespread use of the Internet for social networking, blogging,
video-sharing, and tweeting fosters participatory democracy. Just as the
decentralization of media leads to a reduction in the distance between
the actors of political communication, the classical division of roles
between actors in and around the political system become less distinct.
Politicians and media are no longer the sole producers of political
information; instead actors from civil society, i.e., citizens and NGOs
are appearing as contributors to the political discourse. What is being
expressed here is the hope for the democratic ideal of a deliberative
communication forum on the Web, based on the expectation that the
diversity and accessibility of media options lower the barriers to
engage in public discourse.
This optimistic view of a universally accessible, transparent discourse
is challenged by the notion that it is precisely the universal
accessibility and global public sphere of the digital networks that can
also facilitate forms of use which threaten democracy. One of the main
reasons for this more pessimistic view is that governments as well as
large private-sector corporations are increasingly using social media as
a means of maintaining ever-greater control over citizens. In this view,
social media are perceived as highly centralized networks in which
content is disseminated through just a few influential hubs, and in
which most users, regardless of their personal background, defer to
these conventions of form and content. A further critical perspective on
the structural features of the Web relates to the danger that the public
sphere may disintegrate into fragmented partial publics
(“Teilöffentlichkeiten”) that can no longer connect sufficiently to form
a shared public world. Consequently, with regard to the potential for
intellectual reflection, it is argued that Internet users are presented
with content which is perfectly tailored and filtered to meet their
preferences. These two evaluations of the influence of online media on
the political process refer to two contradictory theses: the so-called
“normalization thesis”, which sees what is being done with the methods
of the new media as a continuation of earlier, offline communication
practices, however, in a more comprehensive way and, thus, jeopardizing
former democratic achievements, and the “innovation hypothesis”, which
focuses on the potential of online media to revitalize a broad
democratic discourse.
The Viennese conference aims to shed light on these developments by
exploring the changes to political processes as triggered by the
changing media structures along three perspectives, which might be
responsible for different assessments of the democratic potential of
social media: citizens, politicians, journalists.
THE CITIZENS’ PERSPECTIVE: Processes of political communication used to
be primarily linear, and shaped by professional communicators. The
question arising now is to what extent social media disrupt this linear
form. The underlying idea of such media is that everyone on the Web can
potentially take part in discussions and initiate topics, an area
previously monopolized by mass media and other professional
communicators. On the Web, topics are generated in an interactive
exchange in which citizens can (at least) partially assume the functions
of journalism. As reflected by the concept of “produsage”, production
and usage form a joint process in which contents are changed dynamically
by means of interactivity, multiple user groups and thematic shifts.
Research questions are concerned with the consequences of this
tremendous acceleration in processes of interaction and the exchange of
information, brought about by the ubiquity of media communications, as
well as with the ability of social media to promote a “bottom-up” form
of political opinion-making (as opposed to former top-down influences)
due to low access barriers, a great number of various discussion forums
and the aid of a new, participatory journalism. Last but not least it
has to be asked whether an “autonomous public sphere” (as conceived by
Habermas) can be revived in the digital age, thus turning the linearity
of political processes in a “networking democracy”.
THE POLITICIANS’ PERSPECTIVE: After all, it is not only citizens but
also those involved in political PR who are increasingly learning how to
react flexibly to the challenges posed by the new communication
technologies. The prime goal here is to adapt one’s strategies to the
multitude of different media channels and the even greater diversity of
media usage. Thus for example there are moves to revive decentralized
(but centrally regulated) forms of communication, and to coordinate
marketing activities so as to precisely target segmented groups. In
order to be able to make profitable use of Internet-based communication,
i.e. to combine the control capacity offered by direct technologies with
more accurate targeting and lower costs, data on media use and personal
profiles of users are required as well as constant efforts to fine-tune
the methods deployed to gather this information. Therefore, on the one
hand, it has to be asked as to how the roles of communication
specialists and managers, polling institutes and “spin doctors” are
changing and whether these consulting services are becoming even more
important than in the days of mainstream television. This is bound to
have significant repercussions for politics. Moreover, the interplay
between rapidly advancing communication technologies, corresponding PR
strategies, and new opportunities for participation, combined with
increasing competition between politicians and parties canvassing for
votes, gives rise to a dynamic which enables political actions to take
place as “permanent campaigning”, the consequences of which for the
viability of democratic structures should be considered.
THE JOURNALISTS’ PERSPECTIVE: Finally, a further consequence of digital
communication applications in the “network society” (as Castells has
called it) concerns the changing relationships within the media system.
The prevalence of social networks has not only led to a change in media
usage, culminating in an (inter)active approach to the online media, and
given new importance to direct forms of communication, but has also led
to a diversification of the range of media available, combined with
simultaneous shifts within media structures. This pertains both to the
fundamental changes in the television sector, in which a large number of
specialized programmes (“narrowcasting”) have replaced what was formerly
mainstream television, and to similar processes of specialization in
the press, which have occurred at least partly in response to the new
digital channels of distribution. In these more competitive structures,
at least some of the previous players are becoming less important while
those remaining in the market are forced to enter into new inter-media
processes in which the roles of “sender” and “receiver” are far less
clearly divided than traditional journalism would like them to be. It
has become clear that (particularly) political journalism as we know it
is in search of a redefinition of its purpose and social contract, as
well as a reconstitution of its boundaries that have become alarmingly
fuzzy with the rise of participatory modes of communication. Given the
fact that information on politics is to most people “second hand”
information, the implications of this redefinition for the journalism’s
normative functions and performative roles are one of the most important
challenges in democratic societies.
SUBMISSION AND SELECTION OF PAPERS: The call is open to all social
sciences. We invite paper proposals which address one of the three main
perspectives or focus on comparing and relating two or more
perspectives. Conference submissions are for 20-minute presentations and
should be made in English or German. The extended abstract must not be
longer than 8,000 characters (including blank spaces). Please add a
title page to the abstract containing the name(s) and address(es) of the
author(s) and the title of the presentation. Please send your proposal
to the organizers ((cmc /at/ oeaw.ac.at)) no later than July 15th, 2014 (using
a PDF file). All submissions will be anonymously peer-reviewed according
to the criteria of originality, relevance, theoretical foundation,
appropriateness of the methods used, clarity of language, and reference
to the conference theme. All submitters will be informed about the
outcome of the selection process by August 31th, 2014.
INTEGRATED PhD WORKSHOP on November 7th: The conference will be
supplemented by a workshop in which PhD students can present their
dissertation research in media structures without any thematic
restrictions imposed. Renowned scholars will comment on the
presentations, thus offering a unique opportunity to obtain constructive
feedback from experts. Abstracts for submission to the PhD workshop can
also be in English or German, must not exceed 8,000 characters
(including blank spaces) and should also be submitted to (cmc /at/ oeaw.ac.at)
no later than July 15th, 2014.
CONTACT: Dr Josef Seethaler, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Institute for
Comparative Media and Communication Studies, 1010 Wien, Postgasse 7,
(cmc /at/ oeaw.ac.at), Phone +43-1-51581-3110, Fax +43-1-51581-3120,
http://www.oeaw.ac.at/cmc
---------------
ECREA-Mailing list
---------------
This mailing list is a free service offered by Nico Carpentier and ECREA.
--
To subscribe, post or unsubscribe, please visit
http://commlist.org/
--
To contact the mailing list manager:
Email: (nico.carpentier /at/ vub.ac.be)
URL: http://homepages.vub.ac.be/~ncarpent/
--
ECREA - European Communication Research and Education Association
Chauss�de Waterloo 1151, 1180 Uccle, Belgium
Email: (info /at/ ecrea.eu)
URL: http://www.ecrea.eu
---------------
[Previous message][Next message][Back to index]