养育新的道德恐慌:反同性恋数字行动主义与反动媒体生态

IF 2.4 2区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Michael M Reinhard
{"title":"养育新的道德恐慌:反同性恋数字行动主义与反动媒体生态","authors":"Michael M Reinhard","doi":"10.1177/15274764241277475","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article looks at the appropriation of cancel-culture activism by anti-queer parental rights activists online. By examining their digitally mediated anti-queer rhetoric, this paper studies how these activists drive public outrage to promote cultural censorship. Surveying digital campaigns by Libs of TikTok and Moms for Liberty, this paper analyzes how their media amplifies “grooming” and “pedophilia” discourses to dynamize older anti-queer stereotypes. Drawing upon the language of child protectionism from 1970s educational debates, this mediated rhetoric demonstrates how anti-queer activists have appropriated the social justice origins of cancel-culture online. By using social media to frame conservative activists as marginalized, these campaigns invert the history of anti-LGBTQ+ media and educational environments to rationalize anti-LGBTQ+ censorship. By looking at how this rhetoric flows from social media into conservative TV journalism, this paper uncovers how this digital activism shapes a broader reactionary media ecology with corrosive democratic effects in the United States.","PeriodicalId":51551,"journal":{"name":"Television & New Media","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Parenting a New Moral Panic: Anti-Queer Digital Activism and Reactionary Media Ecologies\",\"authors\":\"Michael M Reinhard\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15274764241277475\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article looks at the appropriation of cancel-culture activism by anti-queer parental rights activists online. By examining their digitally mediated anti-queer rhetoric, this paper studies how these activists drive public outrage to promote cultural censorship. Surveying digital campaigns by Libs of TikTok and Moms for Liberty, this paper analyzes how their media amplifies “grooming” and “pedophilia” discourses to dynamize older anti-queer stereotypes. Drawing upon the language of child protectionism from 1970s educational debates, this mediated rhetoric demonstrates how anti-queer activists have appropriated the social justice origins of cancel-culture online. By using social media to frame conservative activists as marginalized, these campaigns invert the history of anti-LGBTQ+ media and educational environments to rationalize anti-LGBTQ+ censorship. By looking at how this rhetoric flows from social media into conservative TV journalism, this paper uncovers how this digital activism shapes a broader reactionary media ecology with corrosive democratic effects in the United States.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51551,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Television & New Media\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Television & New Media\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15274764241277475\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Television & New Media","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15274764241277475","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了反同性恋父母权利活动家在网络上对取消文化活动的挪用。通过考察他们以数字为媒介的反同性恋言论,本文研究了这些活动家如何推动公众愤怒以促进文化审查。通过对 TikTok 的 Libs 和 "妈妈争取自由 "组织的数字宣传活动进行调查,本文分析了他们的媒体是如何放大 "诱奸 "和 "恋童癖 "的论述,从而激发旧有的反同性恋刻板印象的。借鉴 20 世纪 70 年代教育辩论中的儿童保护主义语言,这种媒介化修辞展示了反同性恋活动家如何利用网络取消文化的社会正义起源。通过利用社交媒体将保守派活动家塑造成边缘人,这些活动颠覆了反 LGBTQ+ 媒体和教育环境的历史,使反 LGBTQ+ 审查合理化。通过研究这些言论是如何从社交媒体流向保守派电视新闻的,本文揭示了这种数字激进主义是如何在美国形成具有腐蚀性民主效应的更广泛的反动媒体生态的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Parenting a New Moral Panic: Anti-Queer Digital Activism and Reactionary Media Ecologies
This article looks at the appropriation of cancel-culture activism by anti-queer parental rights activists online. By examining their digitally mediated anti-queer rhetoric, this paper studies how these activists drive public outrage to promote cultural censorship. Surveying digital campaigns by Libs of TikTok and Moms for Liberty, this paper analyzes how their media amplifies “grooming” and “pedophilia” discourses to dynamize older anti-queer stereotypes. Drawing upon the language of child protectionism from 1970s educational debates, this mediated rhetoric demonstrates how anti-queer activists have appropriated the social justice origins of cancel-culture online. By using social media to frame conservative activists as marginalized, these campaigns invert the history of anti-LGBTQ+ media and educational environments to rationalize anti-LGBTQ+ censorship. By looking at how this rhetoric flows from social media into conservative TV journalism, this paper uncovers how this digital activism shapes a broader reactionary media ecology with corrosive democratic effects in the United States.
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
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
49
期刊介绍: Television & New Media explores the field of television studies, focusing on audience ethnography, public policy, political economy, cultural history, and textual analysis. Special topics covered include digitalization, active audiences, cable and satellite issues, pedagogy, interdisciplinary matters, and globalization, as well as race, gender, and class issues.
×
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