Three theses on the mediatization of politics: evolutionist, intended, or imagined transformation?

IF 1.8 Q2 COMMUNICATION
Angelos Kissas
{"title":"Three theses on the mediatization of politics: evolutionist, intended, or imagined transformation?","authors":"Angelos Kissas","doi":"10.1080/10714421.2019.1647726","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article discusses the mediatization of politics and its theorization as a process of transformation in the making of (political) meaning through three different theses, presented as evolutionist, intended, and imagined transformation. These theses differ from each other not as much on what they describe as meaning-making transformation – the personalization, conversationalization, and dramatization of politics – as on what they consider to be the causes, extent, and consequences of this transformation. By examining their differences, the article argues that mediatization cannot be fully explained with reference either to a single-universal media logic (as in the thesis of evolutionist transformation) or actor-perceived media logics (as in the thesis of intended transformation). It is seen (in the thesis of imagined transformation), instead, as being catalyzed by the imaginary of media omnipresence, the overwhelming sense that media are everywhere, and therefore potential media effects must be anticipated, which intensifies the fusion of public with private spheres of political life. At the same time, this private-public fusion takes place through existing, institutionalized practices of media performativity, such as the performativity of charisma (personalization), ordinariness (conversationalization) and spectacle (dramatization), bearing implications for the exercise of power and democratic practice in our societies.","PeriodicalId":46140,"journal":{"name":"COMMUNICATION REVIEW","volume":"22 1","pages":"222 - 242"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10714421.2019.1647726","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COMMUNICATION REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10714421.2019.1647726","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

ABSTRACT This article discusses the mediatization of politics and its theorization as a process of transformation in the making of (political) meaning through three different theses, presented as evolutionist, intended, and imagined transformation. These theses differ from each other not as much on what they describe as meaning-making transformation – the personalization, conversationalization, and dramatization of politics – as on what they consider to be the causes, extent, and consequences of this transformation. By examining their differences, the article argues that mediatization cannot be fully explained with reference either to a single-universal media logic (as in the thesis of evolutionist transformation) or actor-perceived media logics (as in the thesis of intended transformation). It is seen (in the thesis of imagined transformation), instead, as being catalyzed by the imaginary of media omnipresence, the overwhelming sense that media are everywhere, and therefore potential media effects must be anticipated, which intensifies the fusion of public with private spheres of political life. At the same time, this private-public fusion takes place through existing, institutionalized practices of media performativity, such as the performativity of charisma (personalization), ordinariness (conversationalization) and spectacle (dramatization), bearing implications for the exercise of power and democratic practice in our societies.
关于政治中介化的三篇论文:进化论的、有意的还是想象中的转变?
摘要本文通过三个不同的命题,即进化论的、有意的和想象中的转变,讨论了政治的中介化及其理论化,即(政治)意义的转变过程。这些论文彼此之间的不同之处不在于它们所描述的意义制造转变——政治的个性化、对话化和戏剧化——而在于它们所认为的这种转变的原因、程度和后果。通过考察它们的差异,文章认为,中介化既不能完全参照单一的普遍媒体逻辑(如进化论转化论),也不能完全参照行动者感知的媒体逻辑(即意图转化论)来解释。相反,(在想象转型的论文中),在媒体无处不在的想象的催化下,媒体无处不在的压倒性感觉,因此必须预期潜在的媒体效应,这加剧了政治生活中公共领域与私人领域的融合。与此同时,这种私人与公共的融合是通过现有的、制度化的媒体表演实践来实现的,例如魅力(个性化)、平凡(对话化)和奇观(戏剧化)的表演,对我们社会的权力行使和民主实践产生了影响。
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
COMMUNICATION REVIEW
COMMUNICATION REVIEW COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
14
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信