Book contents
- Rethinking Media Research for Changing Societies
- Communication, Society and Politics
- Rethinking Media Research for Changing Societies
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figure
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Living in a Datafied World
- Part II Journalism in Times of Change
- Part III Media and Problems of Inclusion
- Part IV Engagement with and through Media
- 10 Constructive Engagement across Deep Divides
- 11 Fostering Engagement in an Era of Dissipating Publics
- Part V The Role of Scholars
- Other Books in the Series (continued from page ii)
- References
10 - Constructive Engagement across Deep Divides
What It Entails and How It Changes Our Role as Communication Scholars
from Part IV - Engagement with and through Media
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 September 2020
Book contents
- Rethinking Media Research for Changing Societies
- Communication, Society and Politics
- Rethinking Media Research for Changing Societies
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figure
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Living in a Datafied World
- Part II Journalism in Times of Change
- Part III Media and Problems of Inclusion
- Part IV Engagement with and through Media
- 10 Constructive Engagement across Deep Divides
- 11 Fostering Engagement in an Era of Dissipating Publics
- Part V The Role of Scholars
- Other Books in the Series (continued from page ii)
- References
Summary
This chapter focuses on the idea of constructive engagement, an umbrella term for mediated and non-mediated forms of communication in which differences can be expressed, respected, and resolved. Hartmut Wessler identifies three ways current scholarship can shift to better address the topic: first, to move from research that emphasizes voice to the practices associated with listening; second, to turn from disruptive conflict toward identifying the potential for integrative conflict; and third, by moving from modes of argumentation to research that examines the “self-transcendent emotions” that fuel constructive interaction with individuals across social divides. Wessler suggests that focusing on constructive engagement can link long-standing concerns articulated by theorists like Habermas focused on rational-critical deliberation with efforts made by social theorists like Georg Simmel, Lewis Coser, and Helmut Dubiel to highlight the integrative and constructive potential of robust but contained conflicts.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Rethinking Media Research for Changing Societies , pp. 139 - 152Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Althaus, Scott L. (2012). “What’s Good and Bad in Political Communication Research? Normative Standards for Evaluating Media and Citizen Performance.” In Semetko, H. A. and Scammell, M. (eds.), Sage Handbook of Political Communication (pp. 97–145). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Baker, C. Edwin (2002). Media, Markets, and Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bennett, W. Lance and Pfetsch, Barbara (2018). “Rethinking Political Communication in a Time of Disrupted Public Spheres.” Journal of Communication, 68, 243–253.Google Scholar
Brady, William J., Wills, Julian A., Jost, John T., et al. (2017). “Emotion Shapes the Diffusion of Moralized Content in Social Networks.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(28), 7313–7318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Craft, Stephanie and Vos, Tim P. (2018). “Have You Heard?” Journalism Practice, 12(8), 966–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobson, Andrew (2014). Listening for Democracy: Recognition, Representation, Reconciliation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dovidio, John F., Love, Angelika, Schellhaas, Fabian M. H., and Hewstone, Miles (2017). “Reducing Intergroup Bias through Intergroup Contact: Twenty Years of Progress and Future Directions.” Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20, 606–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubiel, Helmut (1999). “Integration durch Konflikt?” In Friedrichs, J. and Jagodzinski, W. (eds.), Soziale Integration. Sonderheft 39 der Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie (pp. 132–143). Opladen, Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
Ferree, Myra Marx, Gamson, William Anthony, Rucht, Dieter, and Gerhards, Jürgen (2002). Shaping Abortion Discourse: Democracy and the Public Sphere in Germany and the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fraser, Nancy (1992). “Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy.” In Calhoun, C. (ed.) Habermas and the Public Sphere (pp. 109–142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Freelon, Deen (2015). “Discourse Architecture, Ideology, and Democratic Norms in Online Political Discussion.” New Media & Society, 17(5), 772–791.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen (1996). Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katriel, Tamar (2004). Dialogic Moments: From Soul Talks to Talk Radio in Israeli Culture. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar
Mouffe, Chantal (2013). Agonistics: Thinking the World Politically. London: Verso Press.Google Scholar
Oliver, Mary Beth, Raney, Arthur A., Slater, Michael D., et al. (2018). “Self-Transcendent Media Experiences. Taking Meaningful Media to a Higher Level.” Journal of Communication, 68, 380–389.Google Scholar
Papacharissi, Zizi (2015). Affective Publics. Sentiment, Technology, and Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rinke, Eike Mark (2017). A Framework for Critical-Empiricist Research in Political Communication. Paper presented at the annual conference of the International Communication Association (ICA), May 24–28, San Diego. https://osf.io/8u5vb/Google Scholar
Rinke, Eike Mark and Moy, Patricia (2018). Political Correlates of Apophatic and Cataphatic Listening Styles. Paper presented the annual conference of the American Political Science Association (APSA), August 30–September 2, Boston. https://osf.io/aqk6d/Google Scholar
Schieferdecker, David and Wessler, Hartmut (2017). “Bridging Segregation Via Media Exposure? Ingroup Identification, Outgroup Distance and Low Direct Contact Reduce Outgroup Appearance in Media Repertoires.” Journal of Communication, 67(6), 993–1014.Google Scholar
Scudder, Mary F. (2016). “Beyond Empathy: Strategies and Ideals of Democratic Deliberation.” Polity, 48(4), 524–50.Google Scholar
Stellar, Jennifer E., Gordon, Amie M., Piff, Paul K., et al. (2017). “Self-Transcendent Emotions and Their Social Functions: Compassion, Gratitude, and Awe Bind Us to Others through Prosociality.” Emotion Review, 9(3), 1–8.Google Scholar
Van Aelst, Peter, Strömbäck, Jesper, Aalberg, Toril, et al. (2017). “Political Communication in a High-Choice Media Environment: A Challenge for Democracy?” Annals of the International Communication Association, 41(1), 3–27.Google Scholar
Wessler, Hartmut and Rinke, Eike Mark (2014). “Deliberative Performance of Television News in Three Types of Democracy: Insights from the U.S., Germany, and Russia.” Journal of Communication, 64(5), 827–851.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by