产生文化权威的模式:数字平台上的学者和记者

IF 2 2区 社会学 0 LITERATURE
Shira Zilberstein
{"title":"产生文化权威的模式:数字平台上的学者和记者","authors":"Shira Zilberstein","doi":"10.1016/j.poetic.2024.101871","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study investigates the motivations and practices of information professions using a digital platform, with a focus on expanding definitions of cultural authority. While prior research has explored models such as citizen science and engaged journalism, which propose changes in the relationships between information producers, consumers, and content, limited attention has been given to professionals' practices and motivations for adopting different models. To address this gap, I conducted 78 interviews with information professionals who write digital newsletters and analyzed their professional backgrounds and newsletter texts. Through this analysis, four dominant models of generating cultural authority emerged, which are linked to how professionals use digital platforms, as well as their goals for information production. Professionals generate cultural authority as (1) hierarchical expertise to produce knowledge as a public good; (2) accountability and transparency to contest dominant discourses; (3) intimacy and trust to exercise creativity; and (4) the incorporation of positionality and multiple perspectives to foster community. The findings challenge the prevailing notion that professionals' practices are primarily influenced by access to capital, instead highlighting the significance of motivations and the redefinition of roles and goals in content production. By illuminating the shifting meanings of expertise and professionalism on new media platforms, the study contributes to ongoing debates about truth, value, public trust, and the role of information professionals in public life.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47900,"journal":{"name":"Poetics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304422X2400010X/pdfft?md5=7c537635e0841a477d3afc663e300c5b&pid=1-s2.0-S0304422X2400010X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Models of generating cultural authority: Academics and journalists on a digital platform\",\"authors\":\"Shira Zilberstein\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.poetic.2024.101871\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This study investigates the motivations and practices of information professions using a digital platform, with a focus on expanding definitions of cultural authority. While prior research has explored models such as citizen science and engaged journalism, which propose changes in the relationships between information producers, consumers, and content, limited attention has been given to professionals' practices and motivations for adopting different models. To address this gap, I conducted 78 interviews with information professionals who write digital newsletters and analyzed their professional backgrounds and newsletter texts. Through this analysis, four dominant models of generating cultural authority emerged, which are linked to how professionals use digital platforms, as well as their goals for information production. Professionals generate cultural authority as (1) hierarchical expertise to produce knowledge as a public good; (2) accountability and transparency to contest dominant discourses; (3) intimacy and trust to exercise creativity; and (4) the incorporation of positionality and multiple perspectives to foster community. The findings challenge the prevailing notion that professionals' practices are primarily influenced by access to capital, instead highlighting the significance of motivations and the redefinition of roles and goals in content production. By illuminating the shifting meanings of expertise and professionalism on new media platforms, the study contributes to ongoing debates about truth, value, public trust, and the role of information professionals in public life.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47900,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Poetics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304422X2400010X/pdfft?md5=7c537635e0841a477d3afc663e300c5b&pid=1-s2.0-S0304422X2400010X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Poetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304422X2400010X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Poetics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304422X2400010X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究调查了信息专业人员使用数字平台的动机和实践,重点是扩展文化权威的定义。此前的研究探讨了公民科学和参与式新闻等模式,这些模式提出要改变信息生产者、消费者和内容之间的关系,但对专业人士采用不同模式的实践和动机的关注却很有限。为了弥补这一不足,我对撰写数字时事通讯的信息专业人员进行了 78 次访谈,并分析了他们的专业背景和时事通讯文本。通过分析,得出了产生文化权威的四种主要模式,这些模式与专业人员如何使用数字平台以及他们的信息生产目标有关。专业人员产生文化权威的方式有:(1)等级专业知识,将知识作为公共产品生产;(2)问责制和透明度,对主流话语提出质疑;(3)亲密关系和信任,发挥创造力;以及(4)融入立场和多角度,促进社区发展。研究结果对专业人士的实践主要受资本获取影响的普遍观点提出了质疑,而是强调了动机以及重新定义内容制作中的角色和目标的重要性。通过揭示新媒体平台上专业知识和专业精神含义的变化,本研究为当前关于真相、价值、公众信任以及信息专业人员在公共生活中的作用的辩论做出了贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Models of generating cultural authority: Academics and journalists on a digital platform

This study investigates the motivations and practices of information professions using a digital platform, with a focus on expanding definitions of cultural authority. While prior research has explored models such as citizen science and engaged journalism, which propose changes in the relationships between information producers, consumers, and content, limited attention has been given to professionals' practices and motivations for adopting different models. To address this gap, I conducted 78 interviews with information professionals who write digital newsletters and analyzed their professional backgrounds and newsletter texts. Through this analysis, four dominant models of generating cultural authority emerged, which are linked to how professionals use digital platforms, as well as their goals for information production. Professionals generate cultural authority as (1) hierarchical expertise to produce knowledge as a public good; (2) accountability and transparency to contest dominant discourses; (3) intimacy and trust to exercise creativity; and (4) the incorporation of positionality and multiple perspectives to foster community. The findings challenge the prevailing notion that professionals' practices are primarily influenced by access to capital, instead highlighting the significance of motivations and the redefinition of roles and goals in content production. By illuminating the shifting meanings of expertise and professionalism on new media platforms, the study contributes to ongoing debates about truth, value, public trust, and the role of information professionals in public life.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Poetics
Poetics Multiple-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
16.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Poetics is an interdisciplinary journal of theoretical and empirical research on culture, the media and the arts. Particularly welcome are papers that make an original contribution to the major disciplines - sociology, psychology, media and communication studies, and economics - within which promising lines of research on culture, media and the arts have been developed.
×
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