Controversial Communication

Charles Forceville
{"title":"Controversial Communication","authors":"Charles Forceville","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190845230.003.0011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although neutral about ethics and ideologies, RT acknowledges that while claiming to be optimally relevant to their envisaged audiences, communicators may not be entirely truthful—or may shamelessly lie through their teeth—by accommodating the issue of trust in its model. More specifically, RT distinguishes between addressees believing (1) that a communicator is both competent and benevolent; (2) that the communicator is benevolent but not necessarily competent; or (3) that the communicator may be less than benevolent. This chapter examines a number of misleading mass-communicative visual and multimodal messages and shows how their contentious nature can be accounted for in RT terms. It further argues that the RT concept of “echoic mention,” developed to theorize irony, can be extended to other types of transformative use of original messages, and thereby is a cognate of what in other paradigms is called “intertextuality.”","PeriodicalId":388834,"journal":{"name":"Visual and Multimodal Communication","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Visual and Multimodal Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190845230.003.0011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although neutral about ethics and ideologies, RT acknowledges that while claiming to be optimally relevant to their envisaged audiences, communicators may not be entirely truthful—or may shamelessly lie through their teeth—by accommodating the issue of trust in its model. More specifically, RT distinguishes between addressees believing (1) that a communicator is both competent and benevolent; (2) that the communicator is benevolent but not necessarily competent; or (3) that the communicator may be less than benevolent. This chapter examines a number of misleading mass-communicative visual and multimodal messages and shows how their contentious nature can be accounted for in RT terms. It further argues that the RT concept of “echoic mention,” developed to theorize irony, can be extended to other types of transformative use of original messages, and thereby is a cognate of what in other paradigms is called “intertextuality.”
有争议的沟通
尽管对道德和意识形态保持中立,RT承认,虽然声称与他们设想的受众最佳相关,但传播者可能不会完全真实-或者可能无耻地撒谎-通过在其模型中容纳信任问题。更具体地说,RT区分了收件人相信(1)传播者既能干又仁慈;(2)沟通者是仁慈的,但不一定有能力;或者(3)传播者可能不够仁慈。本章研究了一些误导性的大众传播视觉和多模态信息,并展示了它们的争议性如何在RT术语中得到解释。它进一步认为,“回声提及”的RT概念,发展为理论化反讽,可以扩展到其他类型的原始信息的转换使用,因此是其他范式中所谓的“互文性”的同源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信