媒体中的环境辩论:亚利桑那州硬岩开采案例与能源转型困境

IF 2 4区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Catherine F. Brooks, Brigitte Juanals, Jean-Luc Minel
{"title":"媒体中的环境辩论:亚利桑那州硬岩开采案例与能源转型困境","authors":"Catherine F. Brooks, Brigitte Juanals, Jean-Luc Minel","doi":"10.1177/21582440241267847","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article delves into the debates, both in print and digital media, surrounding copper mining and its associated concerns, particularly those related to hardrock mining. Guided by agenda-building, pragma-dialectics, and stakeholder theories, this research employs topic modeling to scrutinize the media strategies and arguments employed by key stakeholders involved in an environmental movement. The aim is to unveil implicit communication activities that contribute to the emergence of public debates, shedding light on the nuanced dynamics within stakeholder discourses. The analysis shows that by referring to authoritative arguments, the local press distributes the places of power while representing conflicting standpoints and arguments. With digital media, the opponents build a pro-environmentalist network to publicize the issues relative to the mining project and the importance of defending southwestern habitats and landscape. Mining proponents similarly rely on business communities to underscore the importance of hardrock mining for things like decarbonized energy and modern living. Across groups, stakeholder communication situates differing conceptions of the relationship between humans and their natural environment. Our findings reveal that, consistently across various groups, the discourse maintains a degree of stability as topics and arguments persist over time. On one side, discussions highlight the destructive impacts of mining, while the opposing perspective underscores the significance of sustainable and resilient mining practices. This analysis of stakeholder discourses in the media helps uncover the various ways primary actors maintain their positionality and power in this particular case.","PeriodicalId":48167,"journal":{"name":"Sage Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Environmental Debates in the Media: The Case of Hardrock Mining in Arizona and Energy Transition Dilemmas\",\"authors\":\"Catherine F. Brooks, Brigitte Juanals, Jean-Luc Minel\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/21582440241267847\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article delves into the debates, both in print and digital media, surrounding copper mining and its associated concerns, particularly those related to hardrock mining. Guided by agenda-building, pragma-dialectics, and stakeholder theories, this research employs topic modeling to scrutinize the media strategies and arguments employed by key stakeholders involved in an environmental movement. The aim is to unveil implicit communication activities that contribute to the emergence of public debates, shedding light on the nuanced dynamics within stakeholder discourses. The analysis shows that by referring to authoritative arguments, the local press distributes the places of power while representing conflicting standpoints and arguments. With digital media, the opponents build a pro-environmentalist network to publicize the issues relative to the mining project and the importance of defending southwestern habitats and landscape. Mining proponents similarly rely on business communities to underscore the importance of hardrock mining for things like decarbonized energy and modern living. Across groups, stakeholder communication situates differing conceptions of the relationship between humans and their natural environment. Our findings reveal that, consistently across various groups, the discourse maintains a degree of stability as topics and arguments persist over time. On one side, discussions highlight the destructive impacts of mining, while the opposing perspective underscores the significance of sustainable and resilient mining practices. This analysis of stakeholder discourses in the media helps uncover the various ways primary actors maintain their positionality and power in this particular case.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48167,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sage Open\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sage Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241267847\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sage Open","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241267847","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文深入探讨了印刷媒体和数字媒体围绕铜矿开采及其相关问题(尤其是与硬岩开采相关的问题)展开的辩论。在议程构建、实用辩证法和利益相关者理论的指导下,本研究采用话题建模的方法,仔细研究了参与环保运动的主要利益相关者所采用的媒体策略和论点。其目的是揭示有助于公众辩论出现的隐性传播活动,揭示利益相关者话语中的微妙动态。分析表明,通过引用权威论点,当地媒体在代表相互冲突的立场和论点的同时,也分配了权力的位置。通过数字媒体,反对者建立了一个支持环保的网络,宣传与采矿项目相关的问题以及保护西南部栖息地和景观的重要性。采矿项目的支持者也同样依靠商业团体来强调硬岩采矿对去碳化能源和现代生活的重要性。在不同的群体中,利益相关者的沟通体现了人类与自然环境关系的不同理念。我们的研究结果表明,在不同的群体中,随着话题和论点的长期存在,讨论始终保持着一定程度的稳定性。一方面,讨论强调了采矿的破坏性影响,而相反的观点则强调了可持续和弹性采矿实践的重要性。对媒体中利益相关者言论的分析有助于揭示在这一特定案例中,主要行为者维持其地位和权力的各种方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Environmental Debates in the Media: The Case of Hardrock Mining in Arizona and Energy Transition Dilemmas
This article delves into the debates, both in print and digital media, surrounding copper mining and its associated concerns, particularly those related to hardrock mining. Guided by agenda-building, pragma-dialectics, and stakeholder theories, this research employs topic modeling to scrutinize the media strategies and arguments employed by key stakeholders involved in an environmental movement. The aim is to unveil implicit communication activities that contribute to the emergence of public debates, shedding light on the nuanced dynamics within stakeholder discourses. The analysis shows that by referring to authoritative arguments, the local press distributes the places of power while representing conflicting standpoints and arguments. With digital media, the opponents build a pro-environmentalist network to publicize the issues relative to the mining project and the importance of defending southwestern habitats and landscape. Mining proponents similarly rely on business communities to underscore the importance of hardrock mining for things like decarbonized energy and modern living. Across groups, stakeholder communication situates differing conceptions of the relationship between humans and their natural environment. Our findings reveal that, consistently across various groups, the discourse maintains a degree of stability as topics and arguments persist over time. On one side, discussions highlight the destructive impacts of mining, while the opposing perspective underscores the significance of sustainable and resilient mining practices. This analysis of stakeholder discourses in the media helps uncover the various ways primary actors maintain their positionality and power in this particular case.
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
Sage Open
Sage Open SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
721
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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