邻居中的殖民者:Nextdoor用户事后策略的批判性话语分析

IF 4.2 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
J. Lee, Chloe Ahn
{"title":"邻居中的殖民者:Nextdoor用户事后策略的批判性话语分析","authors":"J. Lee, Chloe Ahn","doi":"10.1080/1369118X.2023.2252484","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Colonizing the neighborhood is more accessible than ever before with digital platforms like Nextdoor. Through a critical discourse analysis of users’ content in West Philadelphia between May 2019 and April 2021, we found that users rarely utilized explicitly racist language or topics. Rather than interpret this as an indication that users do not engage with racializing or colonizing discourses, however, we argue that users relied on three postracial practices [Mukherjee, R., Banet-Weiser, S., & Gray, H. (2019). Racism postrace. Duke University Press] to normalize and obscure their anti-Blackness and settler ideologies in the context of broader sociocultural and political events of racial profiling and crises of care. First, users moved away from ‘objective’ racial categories to nostalgic narratives that shaped ideals of safety and community in exclusive futures. Second, they shied away from problematic but coded language to embed their racializing practices in policy and partisan discussions. Third, despite the changes users made to other discursive strategies, they remained steadfast in their preservation of surveillance and policing discourses. These themes reveal how postracial discourses reflect and produce their larger social world, obfuscating settler logics through slippery and sticky strategies.","PeriodicalId":48335,"journal":{"name":"Information Communication & Society","volume":"102 1","pages":"2472 - 2487"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Colonizers in the neighborhood: a critical discourse analysis of Nextdoor users’ postracial strategies\",\"authors\":\"J. Lee, Chloe Ahn\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1369118X.2023.2252484\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Colonizing the neighborhood is more accessible than ever before with digital platforms like Nextdoor. Through a critical discourse analysis of users’ content in West Philadelphia between May 2019 and April 2021, we found that users rarely utilized explicitly racist language or topics. Rather than interpret this as an indication that users do not engage with racializing or colonizing discourses, however, we argue that users relied on three postracial practices [Mukherjee, R., Banet-Weiser, S., & Gray, H. (2019). Racism postrace. Duke University Press] to normalize and obscure their anti-Blackness and settler ideologies in the context of broader sociocultural and political events of racial profiling and crises of care. First, users moved away from ‘objective’ racial categories to nostalgic narratives that shaped ideals of safety and community in exclusive futures. Second, they shied away from problematic but coded language to embed their racializing practices in policy and partisan discussions. Third, despite the changes users made to other discursive strategies, they remained steadfast in their preservation of surveillance and policing discourses. These themes reveal how postracial discourses reflect and produce their larger social world, obfuscating settler logics through slippery and sticky strategies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48335,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Information Communication & Society\",\"volume\":\"102 1\",\"pages\":\"2472 - 2487\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Information Communication & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2023.2252484\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"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":"Information Communication & Society","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2023.2252484","RegionNum":1,"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

通过像Nextdoor这样的数字平台,开拓社区比以往任何时候都更容易。通过对2019年5月至2021年4月期间西费城用户内容的批判性话语分析,我们发现用户很少使用明确的种族主义语言或话题。然而,我们并没有将这解释为用户不参与种族化或殖民化话语的迹象,而是认为用户依赖于三种后种族实践[Mukherjee, R., Banet-Weiser, S., & Gray, H.(2019)]。种族主义postrace。在种族定性和关怀危机的更广泛的社会文化和政治事件的背景下,使他们的反黑人和定居者意识形态正常化和模糊化。首先,用户从“客观的”种族分类转向怀旧叙事,这种叙事塑造了排外未来的安全和社区理想。其次,他们避免使用有问题但隐晦的语言,将他们的种族化做法嵌入到政策和党派讨论中。第三,尽管用户对其他话语策略做出了改变,但他们仍然坚定地保留了监视和警务话语。这些主题揭示了后种族话语如何反映和产生他们更大的社会世界,通过狡猾和粘滞的策略混淆了定居者的逻辑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Colonizers in the neighborhood: a critical discourse analysis of Nextdoor users’ postracial strategies
ABSTRACT Colonizing the neighborhood is more accessible than ever before with digital platforms like Nextdoor. Through a critical discourse analysis of users’ content in West Philadelphia between May 2019 and April 2021, we found that users rarely utilized explicitly racist language or topics. Rather than interpret this as an indication that users do not engage with racializing or colonizing discourses, however, we argue that users relied on three postracial practices [Mukherjee, R., Banet-Weiser, S., & Gray, H. (2019). Racism postrace. Duke University Press] to normalize and obscure their anti-Blackness and settler ideologies in the context of broader sociocultural and political events of racial profiling and crises of care. First, users moved away from ‘objective’ racial categories to nostalgic narratives that shaped ideals of safety and community in exclusive futures. Second, they shied away from problematic but coded language to embed their racializing practices in policy and partisan discussions. Third, despite the changes users made to other discursive strategies, they remained steadfast in their preservation of surveillance and policing discourses. These themes reveal how postracial discourses reflect and produce their larger social world, obfuscating settler logics through slippery and sticky strategies.
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
10.20
自引率
4.80%
发文量
110
期刊介绍: Drawing together the most current work upon the social, economic, and cultural impact of the emerging properties of the new information and communications technologies, this journal positions itself at the centre of contemporary debates about the information age. Information, Communication & Society (iCS) transcends cultural and geographical boundaries as it explores a diverse range of issues relating to the development and application of information and communications technologies (ICTs), asking such questions as: -What are the new and evolving forms of social software? What direction will these forms take? -ICTs facilitating globalization and how might this affect conceptions of local identity, ethnic differences, and regional sub-cultures? -Are ICTs leading to an age of electronic surveillance and social control? What are the implications for policing criminal activity, citizen privacy and public expression? -How are ICTs affecting daily life and social structures such as the family, work and organization, commerce and business, education, health care, and leisure activities? -To what extent do the virtual worlds constructed using ICTs impact on the construction of objects, spaces, and entities in the material world? iCS analyses such questions from a global, interdisciplinary perspective in contributions of the very highest quality from scholars and practitioners in the social sciences, gender and cultural studies, communication and media studies, as well as in the information and computer sciences.
×
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