The Oxford Encyclopedia of Communication and Critical Cultural Studies [1 ed.] 0190459611, 9780190459611

Citation preview

Dana L. Cloud EDITOR

The Oxford

Encyclopedia of

IN

CHIEF

Communication

and Critical Cultural Studies

Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2024

https://archive.org/details/oxfordencyclopbedO0003unse_f8w6

THE OXFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF COMMUNICATION AND CRITICAL CULTURAL STUDIES

EDITORIAL BOARD Editor in Chief

Dana L. Cloud SYRACUSE

UNIVERSITY

Associate Editors

Lisa Flores UNIVERSITY

OF COLORADO,

BOULDER

Radhika Gajjala BOWLING

GREEN

STATE

UNIVERSITY

Raka Shome NATIONAL

UNIVERSITY

OF SINGAPORE

Mary E. Triece UNIVERSITY

OF AKRON

Eric King Watts UNIVERSITY

OF NORTH

CAROLINA

AT CHAPEL

HILL

THE OXFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF COMMUNICATION AND CRITICAL CULTURAL STUDIES

Dana L. Cloud EDITOR

IN CHIEF

VOLUME 3 P-W

UNIVERSITY

PRESS

OXFORD UNIVERSITY

PRESS

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and certain other countries. Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America.

© Oxford University Press 2019 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction rights organization. Inquiries concerning

reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above. You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Cloud, Dana L., editor.

Title: The Oxford encyclopedia of communication and critical cultural studies / edited by Dana L. Cloud.

Other titles: Encyclopedia of communication and critical cultural studies Description: New York : Oxford University Press, [2019-] | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2018045236 |ISBN 9780190459611 (hardcover : set) |

ISBN 9780190606033 (v. 1) |ISBN 9780190606060 (v. 2) |ISBN 9780190062415 (v. 3) Subjects: LCSH: Culture—Study and teaching—Encyclopedias. | Communication—Study and teaching—Encyclopedias. Classification: LCC HM623 .094 2019 |DDC 302.2003—dc23 LC record available at https:// Iccn.loc.gov/2018045236

135798642

Printed by Sheridan Books, Inc., United States of America

About the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication

The Oxford Encyclopedia of Communication and Critical Cultural Studies is published as part of the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication, a dynamic and scholarly digital resource. This online collection of overview articles provides in-depth, foundational essays on both core and emerging topics in communication. All articles are commissioned under the editorial leadership of international experts of the highest caliber and are vetted through rigorous peer review. A living reference work, the online publication is updatable and enriched with crosslinking and multimedia features. The essays are intended for scholars, practitioners, and university-level readers, including advanced undergraduates, graduate students, and researchers.

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication Editor in Chief: Jon F. Nussbaum Selected print titles from the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication: The Oxford Encyclopedia of Health and Risk Message Design and Processing Edited by Roxanne L. Parrott The Oxford Encyclopedia of Intergroup Communication Edited by Howard Giles and Jake Harwood

The Oxford Encyclopedia ofJournalism Studies Edited by Henrik Ornebring

aa

’

ta

Iipn.o

e

=.

sIVIRAt \nsza9 biaKxd | r

=

’

~~

=

»

——

=

= yu

>

— a

,

aa

=

—

:

—_

=

lo Prag mh Sortetidig epi rial a sty JA

MGPC

fad

oe

ARs Ulapllaa hareiede seers ies eves

leno Mies

algal ab * are

tere cuiteee). wanparesh ed +5 Wane: tedaiiae baa

olive ihre

aes rvving

i

eS

hers

(04

qiaey

eat cuman :

© ssstmakday

—

oe

mame

—_ —_

tenon

‘anil

vonmetime

Od Twit: Pmalwtie dul biehoseer) om ‘a Puneet hw pk ayaa oushong raha be

_

Pe

b Aram

etre Lov agle van lorena 7s Hie

—s

:

dome mn

ene lt

:

Contents

List of Articles

ix

Topical Outline of Articles — xiii

Preface (vol.1)

xvii

THE OXFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF COMMUNICATION AND CRITICAL CULTURAL STUDIES

Directory of Contributors Index

1827

1819

0

ArOa4e

_— CATE ARTIS -

Ald

«2 oar

AO

a

_

—

a

= |

oe

F

OL,

7

List of Articles

A

Arjun Appadurai and Critical Cultural

Studies (Swapnil Rai)

Affect in Critical Studies (Brian L. Ott) Alain Badiou’s New Constructivism and

Universalism (Antonio Calcagno) Alternative Organizational Culture (George

Cheney and Debashish Munshi) Althusser and Structuralism in Communication Studies

Big Data and Communication Research

(Ralph Schroeder) Brian Massumi and Communication Studies

(Marnie Ritchie)

(Matthew S. May and Kate Siegfried) Alzheimer’s, Age Panic, Neuroscience: Media Discourses of Dementia and Care

(E. Ann Kaplan and Sally Chivers) Angela Y. Davis and Communication Studies

(Catherine R. Squires) Anti-Semitism and Communication

(Amos Kiewe) Antonio Gramsci and Communication

Studies (Marco Briziarelli and Eric Karikari)

C Celebrity Politics and Cultural Studies within the United States and United Kingdom (Mark Wheeler) Chandra Talpade Mohanty and Communication Studies (Madhavi Murty)

Chicana Studies (Bernadette Marie Calafell)

x

e

LIST

OF ARTICLES

Colonialism and Postcolonialism (Jenny Burman)

Communication and the Global South

(Doug Ashwell and Stephen M. Croucher) Communication Ethics (Lisbeth A. Lipari)

Critical Approaches to Motherhood (Ashley Noel Mack) Critical Audience Studies (Adrienne Shaw,

Katherine Sender, and Patrick Murphy) Critical Communication Pedagogy: Toward

“Hope in Action” (Deanna L. Fassett and C. Kyle Rudick) Critical Cultural Approaches to Gender and Sex (Claire Sisco King) Critical Food Studies (Helene A. Shugart) Critical Perspectives on Humanitarian

E Environment (Phaedra C. Pezzullo) Ernesto Laclau and Communication

Studies (Yannis Stavrakakis and

Antonis Galanopoulos) Ethics, Rhetoric, and Culture

(Ronald C. Arnett) F

A Fanonian Philosophy of Race (Armond Towns) Feminist Organizational Communication (Colleen E. Arendt and Patrice

M. Buzzanell) Fredric Jameson and Cultural Studies

(Robert T. Tally, Jr.)

Discourses (Marouf Hasian, Jr.) Critical Whiteness Studies

(Shannon Sullivan)

Cross-Cultural Adaptation (Young Yun Kim) Cultural and Creative Industries

(Vicki Mayer) Cultural Studies and Communication

(Toby Miller) Cyberculture and Globalization (André Lemos) Cyberlibertarianism (Lincoln Dahlberg)

G Game Studies (Shira Chess) Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak: Relevance for Communication Studies

(Raka Shome) Gilles Deleuze and Communication Studies

(J. Macgregor Wise) Giorgio Agamben’s Political Theory (Oliver W. Lembcke) Global Health and Critical Studies

D

(Mohan Jyoti Dutta)

Decolonization and Collaborative Media:

Globalization, Culture, and Communication:

Renationalization in a Globalized World

A Latin American Perspective

(Koichi Iwabuchi)

(Freya Schiwy) De-Westernization and Decolonization in

Gloria Anzaldua: From Borderlands to

Nepantla (Diana Isabel Bowen)

Media Studies (Antje Gliick) Dialogue, Listening, and Ethics

(Josina M. Makau) Digital Cultures and Critical Studies

H

(Larissa Hjorth) Digital Media Ethics (Charles Ess)

Hegemony in Marxist Traditions (Marco Briziarelli and

Donna Haraway and Communication Studies (Kevin Douglas Kuswa and

Homi Bhabha and Communication Studies

Edward Lubich Kuperman)

Jeff Hoffmann) (J. Daniel Elam)

LIST

OF ARTICLES

«

xi

Movements and Resistance in the

United States, 1800 to the Present

Ideology in Marxist Traditions

(Mary E. Triece)

(Mary E. Triece)

N

J Jesus Martin Barbero and Communication

Nation, Identity, and Power in the Critical Cultural Studies Tradition

Studies (Claudia Lagos Lira) Juan Carlos Rodriguez and Michel Foucault: Discourse, Ideology, and the Unconscious

(Malcolm K. Read) Judith Butler and Communication Studies

(Ana Caballero Mengibar) Neoliberalism and Communication

(Peter K. Bsumek) Néstor Garcia Canclini and Communication

Studies (Toby Miller)

(Fiona Jenkins) Jurgen Habermas and Communication

Studies (John Rountree)

0) Overview in Critical and Cultural

L

Organizational Communication

(Majia Nadesan)

Labor, Culture, and Communication

(Steven K. May) Labor Politics in the Neoliberal Global

Economy (Mahuya Pal) Liberalism and Neoliberalism (Sean Phelan and Simon Dawes)

Pp Paul Gilroy and Communication Studies (Armond Towns) Paulo Freire and Communication Studies

(Tania Ramalho) Performance of Race, Culture, and

M

Whiteness (Bryant Keith Alexander)

Mapping and Spatial Studies (Joshua Ewalt) Marxist Traditions in Cultural Studies

(Lee Artz) Materialist Rhetoric (Bryan J. McCann) Media Technologies in Communication and Critical Cultural Studies

(Ned O’Gorman) Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri in Communication Studies (Matthew Bost and Matthew S. May) Michael Warner and Communication

Studies (Robert Alan Brookey and Jason Phillips) Michel Foucault and Communication

Studies (Catherine Chaput)

Performance Studies in Critical Communication Studies

(Judith Hamera) Political Economies of Media Technologies (Vincent Mosco)

Political Economy of the Media (Dal Yong Jin) Popular Culture and Cultural Studies (M. Madhava Prasad) Posthumanism (Diane Marie Keeling and

Marguerite Nguyen Lehman) Post-Structuralism (Nathan A. Crick) Post-Truth and Critical Communication

(Jayson Harsin) Power and Control in Communication Studies

(Mohan Jyoti Dutta)

xii

«

LIST

OF ARTICLES

Progressive Social Movements and the

Internet (Sarah J.Jackson) Psychoanalytic Methods and Critical Cultural Studies (Atilla Hallsby) Public Memory (Matthew Houdek and Kendall R. Phillips) Public Pedagogy and Manufactured Identities in the Age of the Selfie Culture

(Henry A. Giroux) Public Sphere(s), Publics, and Counterpublics

(Damien Smith Pfister)

Ss Slavoj Zizek and Communication Studies (Robert McDonald) Social Movement Media and Media

Activism (John D. H. Downing) Space in Critical Communication Studies

(Donovan Conley) Stuart Hall and Communication Studies (Toby Miller) Surveillance and Public Space (Rachel Hall) A Survey of Materialism in Thought and

Communication (Kathleen E. Feyh)

Q Queer Studies in Critical and Cultural

Communication (Isaac N. West)

1 Theories of Economic Justice in the

Rhetorical Tradition (Catherine Chaput and Joshua S. Hanan)

R Race and Ethnicity in US Media Content and Effects (Dana Mastro)

U

Race, Nationalism, and Transnationalism

Urban Communication (SusanJ.Drucker

(Myra Washington and Kent A. Ono) Ranajit Guha’s Historiography of Colonial India (Vasant Kaiwar) Raymond Williams and Communication Studies (Jim McGuigan) Representations of Native Americans in the

Mass Media (Casey Ryan Kelly)

and Gary Gumpert)

V

Visual Rhetoric (Zazil Reyes Garcia) Visuality and Security (Axel Heck)

Rethinking Development Communication

(Bhavya Chitranshi and Anup Dhar) Rhetoric and Social Movements

(Christina R. Foust and Raisa Alvarado) Rhetorical Construction of Bodies

(Davi Johnson Thornton)

Ww Women Entrepreneurs, Global Microfinance,

and Development 2.0 (Radhika Gajjala and Dinah Tetteh)

Topical Outline of Articles

Articles in the Encyclopedia are organized alphabetically. Articles in this outline are arranged under the following headings: Cyberculture and Communication Ethics Gender, Queer, and the Construction of Bodies in Critical Cultural Communication Globalization, Culture, and Communication Labor, Neoliberalism, and Political Communication Marxist Traditions Media and Media Technologies

Race, Culture, and Whiteness Rhetoric and Critical/Cultural Studies Select Thinkers Social Movements Spatial Studies and Visual Studies

Cyberculture and Communication

Big Data and Communication Research (Ralph Schroeder) Cyberculture and Globalization (André Lemos)

Cyberlibertarianism (Lincoln Dahlberg)

Methods and Pedagogy

Digital Culture and Critical Studies (Larissa Hjorth)

Organizational Studies Performance Studies

Post-Truth and Critical Communication

Popular Culture

Game Studies (Shira Chess) (Jayson Harsin)

xiv

e«

TOPICAL

OUTLINE

OF

ARTICLES

Ethics

Communication Ethics (Lisbeth A. Lipari)

Labor, Neoliberalism, and Political Communication

Dialogue, Listening, and Ethics

Labor, Culture, and Communication

(Josina M. Makau) Digital Media Ethics (Charles Ess)

Labor Politics in the Neoliberal Global

Ethics, Rhetoric, and Culture

(Ronald C. Arnett)

(Steven K. May)

Economy (Mahuya Pal) Liberalism and Neoliberalism (Sean Phelan

and Simon Dawes) Gender, Queer, and the Construction of Bodies in Critical Cultural Communication Alzheimer’s, Age Panic, Neuroscience: Discourses of Dementia and Care

(E. Ann Kaplan and Sally Chivers) Critical Approaches to Motherhood (Ashley Noel Mack) Critical Cultural Approaches to Gender and Sex (Claire Sisco King) Posthumanism (Diane Marie Keeling and Marguerite Nguyen Lehman) Queer Studies in Critical and Cultural

Communication (Isaac N. West) Rhetorical Construction of Bodies

(Davi Johnson Thornton) Globalization, Culture, and Communication Critical Perspectives on Humanitarian

Discourses (Marouf Hasian, Jr.) Communication and the Global

South (Doug Ashwell and Stephen M. Croucher) Global Health and Critical Studies

(Mohan Jyoti Dutta) Globalization, Culture, and Communication: Renationalization in a Globalized World

(Koichi Iwabuchi) Nation, Identity, and Power in the Critical Cultural Studies Tradition

(Ana Caballero Mengibar) Rethinking Development Communication (Bhavya Chitranshi and Anup Dhar)

Neoliberalism and Communication

(Peter K. Bsumek) Women Entrepreneurs, Global Microfinance,

and Development 2.0 (Radhika Gajjala and Dinah Tetteh) Marxist Traditions

Affect in Critical Studies (Brian L. Ott) Althusser and Structuralism in Communication Studies

(Matthew S. May and Kate Siegfried) Cultural and Creative Industries (Vicki Mayer) Cultural Studies and Communication

(Toby Miller) Hegemony in Marxist Traditions (Marco Briziarelli and JeffHoffmann) Ideology in Marxist Traditions (Mary E. Triece)

Marxist Traditions in Cultural Studies

(Lee Artz) Post-Structuralism (Nathan A. Crick)

A Survey of Materialism in Thought and

Communication (Kathleen E. Feyh) Media and Media Technologies Decolonization and Collaborative

Media: A Latin American Perspective

(Freya Schiwy) De-Westernization and Decolonization in

Media Studies (Antje Gliick) Media Technologies in Communication and Critical Cultural Studies

(Ned O’Gorman)

TOPICAL

Political Economies of Media Technologies

(Vincent Mosco) Political Economy of the Media (Dal Yong Jin)

Methods and Pedagogy Critical Communication Pedagogy: Toward “Hope in Action” (Deanna L. Fassett and

C. Kyle Rudick) Psychoanalytic Methods and Critical

Cultural Studies (Atilla Hallsby) Public Pedagogy and Manufactured Identities in the Age of the Selfie Culture

(Henry A. Giroux)

OUTLINE

OF ARTICLES

«

xv

Critical Food Studies (Helene A. Shugart) Popular Culture and Cultural Studies (M. Madhava Prasad)

Public Memory (Matthew Houdek and Kendall R. Phillips) Public Sphere(s), Publics, and Counterpublics (Damien Smith Pfister) Race, Culture, and Whiteness Anti-Semitism and Communication

(Amos Kiewe) Chicana Studies (Bernadette Marie

Calafell) Colonialism and Postcolonialism

(Jenny Burman)

Organizational Studies Alternative Organizational Culture (George

Cheney and Debashish Munshi) Feminist Organizational Communication

(Colleen E. Arendt and Patrice M. Buzzanell) Overview in Critical and Cultural Organizational Communication

(Majia Nadesan) Power and Control in Communication

Studies (Mohan Jyoti Dutta) Performance Studies Critical Audience Studies (Adrienne Shaw,

Katherine Sender, and Patrick Murphy) Performance of Race, Culture, and Whiteness (Bryant Keith Alexander)

Performance Studies in Critical Communication Studies

Critical Whiteness Studies (Shannon

Sullivan) Cross-Cultural Adaption (Young Yun Kim) A Fanonian Philosophy of Race

(Armond Towns) Race and Ethnicity in U.S. Media Contents and Effects (Dana Mastro) Race, Nationalism, and Transnationalism

(Myra Washington and Kent A. Ono) Representations of Native Americans in the

Mass Media (Casey Ryan Kelly) Urban Communication (Susan J. Drucker

and Gary Gumpert) Rhetoric and Critical/ Cultural Studies Materialist Rhetoric (Bryan J. McCann) Theories of Economic Justice in the Rhetorical Tradition (Catherine Chaput

and Joshua S. Hanan)

(Judith Hamera) Selected Thinkers

Popular Culture Celebrity Politics and Cultural Studies within the United States and United

Kingdom (Mark Wheeler)

Alain Badiou’s New Constructivism and

Universalism (Antonio Calcagno) Angela Y. Davis and Communication Studies

(Catherine R. Squires)

xvi

«

TOPICAL

OUTLINE

OF ARTICLES

Antonio Gramsci and Communication Studies (Marco Briziarelli and Eric Karikari) Arjun Appadurai and Critical Cultural Studies

(Swapnil Rai) Brian Massumi and Communication Studies

(Marnie Ritchie) Chandra Talpade Mohanty and Communication Studies (Madhavi Murty) Donna Haraway and Communication

Studies (Kevin Douglas Kuswa and

Edward Lubich Kuperman) Ernesto Laclau and Communication Studies (Yannis Stavrakakis and

Antonis Galanopoulos) Fredric Jameson and Cultural Studies

(Robert T. Tally, Jr.) Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak: Relevance for Communication Studies (Raka Shome) Gilles Deleuze and Communication Studies

(J. Macgregor Wise) Giorgio Agamben’s Political Theory (Oliver W. Lembcke) Gloria Anzaldua: From Borderlands to Nepantla (Diana Isabel Bowen) Homi Bhabha and Communication Studies

(J. Daniel Elam) Jesus Martin Barbero and Communication Studies (Claudia Lagos Lira) Juan Carlos Rodriguez and Michel Foucault: Discourse, Ideology, and the Unconscious

(Malcolm K. Read) Judith Butler and Communication Studies (Fiona Jenkins) Jurgen Habermas and Communication

Studies (John Rountree) Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri in

Communication Studies (Matthew Bost

and Matthew S. May) Michael Warner and Communication

Studies (Robert Alan Brookey and Jason Phillips)

Michel Foucault and Communication

Studies (Catherine Chaput) Néstor Garcia Canclini and Communication

Studies (Toby Miller) Paul Gilroy and Communication Studies (Armond Towns) Paulo Freire and Communication Studies (Tania Ramalho) Ranajit Guha’s Historiography of Colonial India (Vasant Kaiwar) Raymond Williams and Communication

Studies (Jim McGuigan) Slavoj Zizek and Communication Studies

(Robert McDonald) Stuart Hall and Communication Studies

(Toby Miller)

Social Movements

Environment (Phaedra C. Pezzullo) Movements and Resistance in the United States, 1800 to the Present

(Mary E. Triece) Progressive Social Movements and the

Internet (Sarah J.Jackson) Rhetoric and Social Movements

(Christina R. Foust and Raisa Alvarado) Social Movement Media and Media Activism

(John D. H. Downing)

Spatial Studies and Visual Studies Mapping and Spatial Studies (Joshua Ewalt) Space in Critical Communication Studies

(Donovan Conley) Surveillance and Public Space (Rachel Hall)

Visual Rhetoric (Zazil Reyes Garcia) Visuality and Security (Axel Heck)

PAUL GILROY AND COMMUNICATION

their contemporary STUDIES

CULTURAL STUDIES AND BLACK LIBERATION

In the final section of arguably Paul Gilroy’s most controversial book, Against Race: Imagining Political Culture Beyond the Color Line, he sought to take the reader “Black to the Future.” As the culmination of Gilroy’s book,

“Black to the Future” is not necessarily a nod toward “colorblindness,” per se, but a rethink-

ing of what could constitute a new humanism in the future. Gilroy notes that black people, throughout history, have sought to imagine a politics of black liberation in future tense, which is to say a context that did not mirror

experiences

of racial

violence but what they hoped would come to pass. These black people, who are as diverse as Frantz Fanon and George Clinton, have

tried to think of black futurity as a politics of liberation and decolonialism, both of which would point toward a remaking, or a “becom-

ing,’ of the human, against the set “being” of Western humanist discourses. In short, while

it is often considered a departure from his previous work, Against Race ends where much of Gilroy’s work has always ended: it is a call for political intervention into the human and the nation, especially as both have been taken for granted in the construct of Britishness. Gilroy’s consistent emphasis on the future and the political requires that his work be situated within a larger project of British

1179

1180

-

PAUL

GILROY

AND

COMMUNICATION

cultural studies: he is concerned with an intervention that he hopes will transform the construct of race in our contemporary con-

STUDIES

implications of some of its key thinkers, including Raymond Williams, Richard Hoggart,

and E. P. Thompson. Each of these important

juncture. Put simply, for Gilroy, politics as-

cultural studies figures, Gilroy argues, com-

sumes both intervention into and beyond British cultural studies. This is not politics in the sense of electorate politics, left or right, per se. Instead, it is a methodological and theoretical politics of entering into a cultural studies analysis or a politics of transforming the landscape of cultural studies for the future. In the process, Gilroy seeks to speak a new

prehended “culture and its political forms... on the basis that nationality supplied”

human

into existence, one that challenges

Western scientific and philosophical discourses of the human by relying on the decolonial, planetary humanist project of Frantz Fanon. This article outlines the cultural studies project of Gilroy as one overwhelmingly concerned with interrogating what politics means for cultural studies. In doing so, Gilroy enters cultural studies with a concern for politics (nationalism, racism, and fascism) that he ar-

(Gilroy, 2006, p. 391). It is in the landscape of cultural studies that Gilroy views a political intervention as most urgent because he seeks to disrupt the racialized, nationalist, humanist implications of his own training, and he

views such a disruption as productive. Stuart Hall’s and Lawrence Grossberg’s projects mark two inseparable trajectories of politics that are important for Gilroy’s attempted intervention: first, Gilroy approaches cultural studies from the political, which he then is concerned with articulating to the economic, cultural, ideological, and social; second, Gilroy

ticulates to the economic, the social, and the

is concerned with transformation of the racialized present to ask questions about how to tell a “better story” for a black futurity. On the one hand, then, the political is a component

cultural elements of the conjuncture. Yet, pol-

necessary to understand the conjuncture; on

itics does not stop here. Gilroy also contends

the other, the political is the ultimate project of making the world anew. The conjuncture is not solely an academic or theoretical exercise but an exigence that requires political response. First, Hall defines the “conjuncture” as a

that his cultural studies project necessarily

points toward the always, unfinished, black futuristic attempt to destroy nationalism, racism, and fascism.

THE DUAL POLITICS OF BRITISH CULTURAL STUDIES

social formation, one in which meanings are generated, disseminated, and contested via social, political, economic, cultural, and ideo-

and to understand it one must outline what politics means for British cultural studies on the whole. In short, what cultural studies schol-

logical spheres of the society. This situates contextual specificity as of highest import for cultural studies analyses. Hall pulled his definition of the conjuncture from Antonio Gramsci’ conjuncture and Raymond Wil-

ars have called the political is the method-

liams’s “structure of feeling,” which “seems to

ological and theoretical mandate for Gilroy. Therefore, his engagement with politics means that he is not only one of cultural studies’ most

come naturally to people who are inside the society because they share the results of the historical experience which has produced this particular set of ideas about the family, culture, masculinity, the economy, et cetera” (Hall,

There is a precedent for Gilroy’s trajectory,

influential practitioners but is also concerned with an intervention into cultural studies itself, one that challenges the nationalist, humanist

2016, p. 37). In short, Hall’s approach to the

PAUL

GILROY

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

.

1181

conjuncture concerns the economic, social,

interventionism. The second is an interrelated

cultural, ideological, and political elements of

future potentiality, inspired by Marx:

the context. The construct of the political, Hall sug-

gests, could be engaged with based on the prerogative of the cultural studies scholar. Indeed,

one’s analysis did not have to begin with the political at all but could start with the economic, social, cultural, or ideological. Hall

notes that to enter the conjuncture requires “necessary abstraction” to one ofthese areas; doing so allows for the cultural studies scholar

The politics of cultural studies are located in the first and the last instances. In the first instance, it is political in relation to the questions it asks. While conjunctures pose their own questions, what we hear is partly determined by our political positionalities. In the last instance, its politics appears at the end of the story, which fabricates the context anew and, in ad-

to articulate an element, like the political for

dressing its problematic, opens new pos-

Gilroy, to the social, cultural, or economic. And to abstract is concerned not with stagna-

sibilities, both imaginative and strategic,

tion, but with movement, with doing some-

(Grossberg, 2010, p. 97)

for getting somewhere else.

thing politically in the world. Thus, cultural studies is not theorizing for theorizing’s sake,

where “| scholars] are using [theories] to create illusory scenarios which cheer us up” (Hall, 2016, p. 186). Instead, Hall argues there is a need for theory to do something politically. Politics, here, is not solely a mode of examining the conjuncture, but an intervention into

it. Intervention “can break down the material into forms amenable to proper conceptualisation and theorisations. This is the notion of necessary abstraction which is, as Marx says, the only way in which the mind can operate”

(Hall, 2016, p. 113). While cultural studies concerns itself with “the whole way of life,”

that does not mean that one cannot start at the economic and end at the political. Indeed, there are no guarantees to where one’s intervention may start or end, but one must intervene.

Second, cultural studies, as not just a theoretical examination of the conjuncture, but a response to it, it presumes a futurity. It is con-

cerned with thinking the world anew. In Cul-

The second political construct of cultural studies that structures Gilroy’s project is that he seeks to do something in the world, to tell

a “better story,’ or to make it a “better” place than it was before his intervention. This conception of a better story, for Gilroy, is a black futurity that has no guarantees; it is not yet

realized. Still, Gilroy hopes it can point toward a time-space, or a “chronotope,” in which race loses its political significance. Gilroy has been critiqued for pointing toward a raceless future (Saldanha, 2006; Young, 2002), one in which racial categorization loses its political import. However, this racelessness,

though never fully realized, is the ultimate end of his cultural studies political project; it is what Gilroy thinks is a better story, not necessarily a statement on what the world currently is. Further, this is fundamentally a question of the human, for Gilroy, particularly how the human is made alongside racial slavery and genocide. Ifcultural studies is to intervene in ways that mirror Hall’s and Grossberg’s con-

tural Studies in the Future Tense, Grossberg

cerns with the political (in its many iterations),

likewise suggests that there are two forms of

what Gilroy is trying to lay out (whether prob-

politics in cultural studies. The first conception of politics matches Hall’s description of

lematic or not) is what a future could look like. This is not the future, but a future, one

1182

-

PAUL

GILROY

AND

COMMUNICATION

that, if a new humanism is ever possible, must destabilize the racial construct.

STUDIES

Gilroy. Even as cultural studies has historically positioned itself as a liberal endeavor, “beneficial for all,” nationalism, racism, and fascism

GILROY’S POLITICAL CRITIQUE OF AND FROM BRITISH CULTURAL STUDIES

overlap in its conjunctural analyses. This is not a project of “false consciousness” that Gilroy seeks to wake people up from; it is a larger

conversation on the foundations of knowledge

appears as a project of white liberalism but also as the best space from which to critique racist and neocolonial structures. Put differently, the radical potentiality of cultural studies is, at

and democracy as they are defined in Western Europe. This inevitably leads Gilroy to a discussion of the human. Gilroy argues that Western politics must be thought alongside the human because the human is not neutral but a knowledge construct of “the ruthless binary

times, stunted by Western conceptions of uni-

logic of colonial government” that:

What does Gilroy seek to add to the cultural studies landscape? For Gilroy, cultural studies

versality and, relatedly, transparent acceptance of British nationalism. This inherently situates cultural studies in the domain of British politics, which masquerades as universal. Thus,

Britain less houses a universal human and more functions as the judge and jury of human recognition. Further, British assumptions of human recognition are often produced against

Nazi Germany, as the epitome of Western racism. To do so brushes over the fascist implications of British nationalism, and it is Gilroy’s goal to unveil the racist and fascist implications of liberal and conservative Britishness. Gilroy’s mode of abstraction, then, begins with the political and outlines two critiques of white liberalism within and without British cultural studies: first, Gilroy critiques cultural studies’

assumption of the human, one wedded with the construct of British nationalism; and

second, he critiques the inability of British cultural studies to understand that that same human and nation hold fascist components. First, if one considers cultural studies as re-

quiring “necessary abstraction” as an entry point into the conjuncture, Gilroy’s project expresses a deep concern with the political, always in the first instance. What this means is that constructs of democracy and nationalism are far more complex than assumed, for

[Placed] black and white, settler and native in mutually antagonistic relation.

They were separated spatially, but conceptually their common racialization ensured that they were bound to each other so tightly that each was unthinkable without the proximity and hostility of the other. This distinctive geometry of colonial power is notable for the stress it placed on recognition and interdependency and the way it pushed cultural questions to the fore: each racial or ethnic type turns out to have its own space where it is at home and can be itself. We should pause over this ecological arrangement to identify some ofits other important consequences. One of them can be highlighted through another acknowledgement of Carl Schmitt’s deeply problematic theory of politics as the practice and institutional expression of elemental distinctions between friend and enemy. (Gilroy, 2004, p. 51)

What Gilroy points to is the fact that, as Western Europe was asking questions about

the human, it was also engaged in a colonial project that would overlay onto its knowledge

PAUL

GILROY

and imperialistic constructs. The German political theorist Carl Schmitt is one example,

not because he reflected a neutral depiction of the world, but because he reflected one

that continually reified the Western European, middle-class, cisgender, heterosexual man as the closest iteration of the human, that is, “man.” The European nation, again, becomes

the end of history, and those without history are not only within/out a nation but are unrepresentable alongside Western humanism. If knowledge comes from “man” and his constructed place of Europe, Gilroy questions the

racialized and nationalist implications of the human, alongside “his” unthought replication in cultural studies. The human and the nation, then, go hand in hand. In this light, within/out the nation,

the colonized are not easily applicable to Western constructs of the human because, for

Gilroy, they have no capacity for “politics.” He means politics, here, at a simple level: the col-

onized cannot vote, they cannot influence policies, and they cannot live where they want to in the colonies. Put differently, the colo-

nized have not been allotted British recognition beyond British assumptions of the benevolent, “civilizing” implications of their colonial

violence for the colonized. Gilroy is trying to outline a different concern of politics in the col-

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

.

1183

Lisa Lowe (2015S) and Saidiya Hartman (1997) argue that racial relations are what structure the conceptions of rights, liberty, and freedom for the colonial centers. But what is important is that Gilroy is concerned with the articulation of British nationalism with Western humanism: concepts of nationalism (Britishness in this case) disproportionately step in as a presumably neutral depiction of humanity, as if both are universal entities and not constructs.

Throughout Gilroy’s career, then, he seems

to keep asking: Why does the human continue to look like a white man in asuit walking down a London street? The answer to this question cannot be separated from 19th-century constructs of the nation that were developed during British colonial rule, and this linked with Dar-

winian evolutionary distinctions developed at the same time that were purportedly showing how “developed” Britain was compared to its colonies, those without Hegelian time. Why is this important to note? British cultural studies will take up the contextual framework of studying culture in ways that are concerned with North American and colonial encroachment on a set nation-state. In other words,

because cultural studies began with an investigation of consumerist capital and globalization, many of its early important voices were

onies versus in Britain to complicate any easy

speaking to a (white) anxiety of the disrup-

application of the “rights” to everyone. This means that “democracy” for white Europeans equates to apartheid and racialized violence for the colonized: “The political as Europe knew it simply did not exist there (in the colonies). Instead, the emergence of race-coded duality marked the suspension of political relations

tion of their nation by formerly colonized people “without history” or self-determination. This conception of the colonized does not die as Britain can no longer financially

and fostered their replacement by a rather different set of what we could call parapolitical

This is the return of Frankenstein, the colo-

technologies and procedures” (Gilroy, 2004,

p. 50). Of course, one can debate Gilroy's claim that politics are suspended in the colonies.

control its colonies, but it carries over in the

postcolonial malaise of the nonwhite subject coming to, or rather “invading,” the empire.

nized “monster” that is produced via British imperialistic violence that no white people, conservative

or liberal, want

to take full

responsibility for. It is this imaginary, of

1184

-

PAUL

GILROY

AND

COMMUNICATION

Britishness “without the colonized,” that struc-

tures what Britishness is in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, according to Gilroy. Alongside the cultural invasion of popular culture from the United States, the physical “invasion” of people of color into Britain is framed not as a racist fear but as nationalist need for protection. Indeed, Gilroy notes that racism is often presumed as antithetical to Britishness. Yet, his project shows the centrality of racism to the construct of 19th-century British nationalism, popularly, academically, and politically. It is this that he calls “imperial phantasmagoria’:

STUDIES

It is in this light that all of Gilroy’s work is an illustration of “postcolonial melancholia,” or a Western incapacity to accept or recognize

that the construct of the human and the nation are not universal but tied to Western conceptions of time and space. Further, for Gilroy, the melancholic is a

mode of shifting racism onto a previous time period and removing it as a structuring element of contemporary society. It is a white fatigue with addressing race as central to Western constructs of being and nation. The need to situate race and racism as “out there,” rather than central to nationalist and self-constructs, ex-

say that it became impossible to buy a

ceeds and enters into revisionist histories of colonial violence. When discussing a contemporary reading of the Sepoy War in India, in which British troops engaged in “the practice of blasting prisoners to death by tying their bodies over the mouths of” cannons, Gilroy

box of tea, sugar, soap, or biscuits with-

notes,

While photography played a special role in the consolidation and popularization of the physical anthropology of race, in Britain at least, it is no exaggeration to

out being confronted with the petty but nonetheless potent manifestations of a glorified imperial ideal. The seeds of what would eventually become the science of propaganda, a communicative innova-

tion that flourished during the 1914-1918 war, were first planted during this moment. It is also highly significant that the systematic orientation and manipulation

of British public opinion toward the pleasures of imperial adventures made such an extensive contribution to the popu-

lar political currency of “race” and nation. A new set of class and status relations was being tailored according to the specifications of the imperial system. On the packages of chocolate and tea, in museums, school textbooks, maps, magic lantern shows, exhibitions, and magazines

and other ephemeral literature, patriotism and imperial nationalism were manipulated into deliberately seductive and stirring forms. (Gilroy, 2000, pp. 139-140)

One recent revisionist historian of this episode has provided an interesting example of the melancholic results involved in avoiding condemnation of this practice by insisting that it should be seen in context. He argues firstly, that this tech-

nique was introduced into India by the Moguls rather than the British and so they should not be blamed unreasonably for adopting it, secondly, that it was an honorable death, and, thirdly, that it was employed as an act of deterrence rather than of vengeance. (Gilroy, 2004, p. 46)

The entire point of this revised history is to note that these violent practices, though unfortunate, are not in or of a true Britain but

imported from elsewhere. Now spread this melancholia throughout the entire empire, not just to revisionist historians but everyone: scientists, medical practitioners, Thatcherite politicians, laborers, the unemployed, the

PAUL

GILROY

unemployable, patriots, neo-Nazis, anti-Nazi

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

«

1185

enough to become a genuine Brit” (1991, p.

protesters, and, importantly, cultural studies scholars. What you would have, Gilroy sug-

49). Ifthe construct of the human situates the genuine Brit as the closest articulation of man,

gests, is a racialized nation that imagines, and creates, itself as nonracial.

the new immigrants cannot register in the same way or as quickly as Williams, even though he was from Wales. In both liberal and conservative approaches to race and nationalism, Gilroy outlines arguably his most important contribution to those who study race: cultural studies, like multiple areas of study that Gilroy also critiques, can function as a project of “ethnic absolutism.” Ethnic absolutism involves the political production of ethnicities and nations as culturally and politically homogeneous, which is to say, Williams's “rooted settlements.” It is in the context that Gilroy argues that figures like Williams and Thompson can argue that the immigrants

In There Ain’t No Black in the Union Jack, Gilroy notes that racialized concepts of nationalism permeate not only the conservative descriptions of the nation but also the more liberal discourses. Many of the liberals are the same people who Gilroy argues are central to the legacy of cultural studies. This is evident in the work of Raymond Williams, who Gilroy argues situated his discussion of the nation in racial terms of the arrival of “new people.’ Here, Gilroy argues that Williams mirrors the blatant racism of someone like Enoch Powell: Williams combines a discussion of “race”

are disturbing a set, fixed British nationalism,

with comments

without investigating that those who feel the same are largely white:

on patriotism and na-

tionalism. However, his understanding of “race” is restricted to the social and cultural tensions surrounding the arrival of “new peoples.” For him, as with the right, “race” problems begin with immigration. Resentment of “unfamiliar neighbours” is seen as the beginning of a process that ends in ideological spec-

ifications of “race” and “superiority.”

The conception of nationness . . . in-

volves a distinct theory of culture and identity which can be described as ethnic absolutism. Most clearly but by no means exclusively theorized in the work of the new right, it views nations as cultural homogenous communities of sentiment in

and substantial kind of socialism,” draws precisely the same picture of the relation-

which a sense of patriotic belonging can and should grow to become an important source of moral and political ideas.

ship between “race,” national identity,

(Gilroy, 1991, pp. 59-60)

Williams, working his way toward a “new

and citizenship as Powell. (Gilroy, 1991, p. 49)

Elsewhere, Gilroy notes that ethnic absolutists view any relations of hybridity as pol-

For Williams, calls for antiracism are mis-

lution:

guided by the fact that the “true problem” with the largely immigrant of color population is that they have not been in the country long enough, while “their white neighbours” “in contrast to more recent arrivals inhabit what Williams calls ‘rooted settlements’ articulated

by‘lived and formed identities” (Gilroy, 1991, p. 50). Gilroy, then, asks “how long is long

Regardless of their affiliation to the right,

left, or centre, groups have fallen back on the idea of cultural nationalism, on

the overintegrated conceptions of culture which present immutable, ethnic differences as an absolute break in the histories and experiences of “black” and “white”

1186

-

PAUL

GILROY

AND

COMMUNICATION

people. Against this choice stands another, more difficult option: the theorisation of creolisation, metissage, mestizaje,

and hybridity. From the viewpoint of ethnic absolutism, this would be a litany of pollution and impurity. These terms are rather unsatisfactory ways of naming the processes of cultural mutation and restless (dis)continuity that exceed racial discourse and avoid capture by its agents. (Gilroy, 1993, p. 2)

Ethnic absolutism, for Gilroy, situates mixedness not as a political construct, but as an in-

terruption, a rupture of the human and “his” nation, which is to say the “true Brit.” In this sense, Gilroy argues something that Doreen Massey (1994, 2000) suggests throughout her work: that the “true Brit” is a white, male politi-

STUDIES

Britishness with fascism. What this means is that while nationalism and fascism are popularly viewed as different poles, we should question such distinctions. Nationalism, for example, is often centered in liberalist frames (or cultural studies), while fascism is viewed as conservative. However, Gilroy argues both

serve a similar racialized function: they situate race and racism as something that does not happen inside Britain, proper. This is fully elaborated in Against Race, where he notes

that there is a need to define fascism for contemporary theories of race: “It [a definition of fascism] is necessary not least because, although some contemporary enthusiasts for fascism conveniently opt to wear Nazi uni-

forms, many do not announce their nihilistic and ultranationalist commitments so boldly”

(Gilroy, 2000, p. 145). Gilroy thinks about

cal subject. Likewise, both Gilroy and Massey

fascism as more of an assemblage than a po-

suggest that same subject relied on the traversal

litical party, here: “The heritage of fascist rule

of space as productive, not the fixity of it. Although cultural studies is where Gilroy

survives inside democracy as well as outside

it” (Gilroy, 2000, p. 152). For Gilroy, then,

is intervening, he sees iterations of ethnic ab-

nationalism and fascism are not distinct, but

solutism everywhere. Ethnic absolutism is not the property solely of racist white people or

two sides of the same coin.

the white liberal cultural studies scholars, but

also antiracist people of color who attempt to situate themselves as superior to whites. In

The Black Atlantic, Gilroy critiques notions of ontologically gifted black artistic ability, which he argues “has proved unable to specify precisely where the highly prized but doggedly evasive essence of black artistic and political sensibility is currently located,’ yet this remains “no obstacle to its popular circulation” (1993,

p. 31). In particular, these presumably antiracist forms of ethnic absolutism mirror the racism of the white people under critique: one’s presumed biology provides an expression of their racial superiority or inferiority. One, thus,

takes for granted the categories of the colonizer under critique. Lastly, the relationship between nationalism, racism, and ethnic absolutism articulates

Further, in the goal of distancing fascism from British history, both liberals and conservatives sought to reclassify the Western practice of colonial racism as distinct from the “exceptional” racism of the Nazis. This is a convenient distinction, according to Gilroy, as those who faced genocide in Nazi Germany looked white, which is to say human, for those Western countries that fought the Nazis. Thus, British colonial violence in India, South America, or South Africa must be different from

what the Nazis did. This ensures that the inability to think of Westernism as centrally fascist means that antiblack or antibrown violence cannot be grieved. This is further echoed in Gilroy’s read of George Jackson, a Black Panther Party member killed in prison in the United States, who consistently noted a link between US racism, democracy, and fascism:

PAUL

GILROY

These tendencies [to kill off those who

link fascism to democracy] converge in the courageous and inspiring prison writings of George Jackson. Blood in My Eye, his last work before his assassination, is

memorable for its attempt to combine this type of observation with a systematic theory of fascism, as well as for Jackson's exploration ofthe idea that America had either developed what he called a “fascist-corporativist form of the state” or produced a new, antidemocratic hybrid that drew heavily upon the pattern pioneered by earlier totalitarian regimes. (Gilroy, 2000, p. 153)

Despite the attempts of groups like the AntiNazi League to “summon and manipulate a form of nationalism and patriotism as part

of its broad anti-fascist drive” (Gilroy, 1991, p. 131), Gilroy notes nationalism holds elements offascism. Race and racism, then, are

not things that happen out there, away from the nation, but they are central to the nation’s foundation and its related fascist implications. For Gilroy fascism is ordinary. It is not exceptional but flushed through contemporary culture. One of the interesting places Gilroy argues that fascism shows up is in popular culture, a hot topic of British cultural studies

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

.

1187

they may not always draw attention to it, fascist techniques and style contribute heavily to the operations of the infotainment telesector. These communicative patterns have even been transmitted into black political culture. Their connections with “race” persist and develop because they are [by the early 21st century] part of the way that popular culture is represented and sold as a planetary phenomenon. (Gilroy, 2000, p. 158)

Nationalism and popular culture are not

the only things Gilroy links to fascism. Contemporary sporting events also hold residue with fascism as well (Gilroy, 2000, p. 175). To brush over these connections means that scholars in and outside of cultural studies also brush over the racial implications of their studies.

Gilroy’s project must be considered as a continual celebration and critique of British cultural studies. The British is highlighted, here, for it presumes relations of nationalism, not as raceless, but as race-filled, not as antifascist, but as a different iteration of fascism.

Here, Gilroy necessarily abstracts political constructs, such as nationalism and fascism, to

enter into a larger project of British racism and ethnic absolutism. Thus, his cultural studies

scholars. Like Hall (2009), Gilroy notes that

project cannot disarticulate these political re-

popular culture is not only ordinary, but political. He links the Nazi use of propaganda and visual culture to what will become contemporary popular culture, in particular the potentiality for popular culture to create forms

lations from social, cultural, and economic frameworks.

of solidarity (such as “black popular culture”): Since then, the transformation in the

power ofimages relative to words— written and spoken—that made these developments possible has shaped forms of

BLACK FUTURITIES AND GILROY’S UNFULFILLED INTERVENTION

Some considered Gilroy’s Against Race as not only a controversial book (Saldanha, 2006), but a break from his previous project. Gilroy published Against Race in 2000 while at Yale University. In Robert J. C. Young’s review of

more generally. Pop videos and political

Against Race, he notes that “One of the curious effects of moving to Yale University seems

advertising alike demonstrate that, though

to be that those who go there always end up

solidarity, identification, and belonging

1188

-

PAUL

GILROY

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

writing about the holocaust” (2002, p. 544).

Against Race is not an end or root, but a

Yet, this book is not the first or the last time

Gilroy had considered antiblack and anti-

route, it is a dis/utopian text that speaks to futurity and a new concept of the human that

Semitic forms of racism as interconnected with

has yet to come. For Gilroy, cultural studies,

white nationalism and racism. Indeed, every-

like other forms of study, requires critique to route it toward a potentiality different from the present. He seeks to think toward a “race-

thing from There Ain't No Black in the Union Jack (1991), to Small Acts: Thoughts on the

Politics of Black Cultures (1994) to The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double-Consciousness (1993) articulate these differing yet overlapping forms of racism. Thus, when Gilroy released Against Race, he did not toss aside his

previous work in this book or his other earlier works. He instead extended the politics of his earlier work.

Interestingly, the book’s original title of Between Camps was retitled in the United States as Against Race. Patricia Hill Collins (2002) notes that the name change from Between

Camps to Against Race is not insignificant, but it reflects the US obsession with becoming a postrace society, whereby race is presumed to be no longer a significant relation. But, aside from its title, Against Race does run into criti-

cisms for its content. It has been critiqued for implying some sort of equality between

camps (Young, 2002); it has been critiqued for promoting a colorblind form of humanism (Chrisman, 2011); and, most damningly, it has

less” future, which is to say a world in which

people readily acknowledge the absurdity of racial categorizations. There are no guarantees that we are headed toward this raceless world, but Gilroy asks, How can British cultural stud-

ies intervene into black liberatory politics? Another way to say this is: Gilroy is less concerned with the idea that race no longer matters and more concerned with how British cultural studies can tell a better story about the constructedness of Britishness and race. It is in Gilroy's raceless future that the pollitical rupture is introduced into the present, one that will forever shift cultural studies toward a path that looks radically different. This has yet to come, but it is a future Gilroy welcomes and positions cultural studies as a central instrument in remaking such a story:

[The] framework within which I want to draw together the closing strands of this book. I have approached the contempo-

been critiqued for assuming that science/ge-

rary questions of racial science, multicul-

netics is the proof that can forever transform

turalism, absolutism, and nano-politics in a utopian spirit with the communicative model provided by diaspora interculture in mind. Before I enlist the raceless future in the service of my own willfully dislocated argument, I am bound to acknowledge the history of black appeals to the future that must now look toward the vernacular formations where these themes constantly cross one another.

and end race itself, rather than be central to

the racial construct (da Silva, 2007). To challenge the critiques or apologize for Gilroy’s work is not the concern, here. Instead, one can

point Gilroy's work in a different direction:

Gilroy wants to do something to point British cultural studies, and other forms of study, toward a different, better future, particularly for the human. This is anew humanism that Gilroy pulls from Fanon’s concept of planetary humanism (2004), which for Fanon is a particular becoming of the next iteration of the human

that operates against colonialism.

(Gilroy, 2000, pp. 336-337)

Gilroy positions his work on futurity within a long trajectory of black futures, centering

PAUL

GILROY

the work of Frantz Fanon. Fanon, the black

Martiniquan psychiatrist who joined the Algerian revolution to fight against the French,

saw his decolonial project not as a set, fixed end but as a process that does not culminate after the French leave North Africa. Thus, one can say

that Gilroy’s “future” breaks from cultural studies’ interests with Marx's future and engages more in a Fanonian (Fanon, 2004) decolonial future, in which one must note that Marx will

look different in the colonies. Gilroy's racelessness, then, seeks to replace British cultural studies’ interrogation of Marx’s communist future with Fanon’s decolonial one. To do so, Gilroy repackages Fanon’s new humanity, a repackaging of Fanon that can be critiqued. Indeed, Sylvia Wynter’s reading of Fanon provides the nuance that Gilroy may be lacking: the human is a form of praxis (Wynter & McKittrick, 2015). Fanon provides the basis for this thinking in a work that Gilroy pays little attention to, at least in Gilroy’s book

projects: A Dying Colonialism. Fanon notes that it takes work to be an Algerian, or the

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

-«

1189

joined the revolution, who, as such, is open to the same torture as a brown, Muslim comrade, could become Algerian. Such transforma-

tive relations are necessary because the West structures what humanity means, not only for the colonized but also for the colonizer. But these new relations show that humanity could function differently in Algiers than in it does in Paris, challenging “the very principle of foreign domination’ and bringing “about essential mutations in the consciousness of the colonized,

in the manner in which he [sic] perceives the colonizer, in his human status in the world” (Fanon, 1994, p. 69). According to Fanon, new

humanity is produced in the work toward the destruction of colonialism. The material, vio-

lent destruction of the post/de/colonial project is less investigated by Gilroy. However, this is not to argue that Gilroy takes for granted humanity; his project is about uncovering the human as central to Western knowledge constructs. Yet, it is to say that Gilroy’s new human

takes far less work than Fanon’s, and this appears to be where the majority of criticism

place where he imagined the new human “be-

Gilroy receives is aimed. Gilroy’s endeavor

coming.” In other words, one is not an Algerian because oftheir race, or their religion, or their

bends Fanon into a British context, where a

new humanism cannot function in the same capacity as it does in Algeria. Fanon, so close

claims of being native, or even just because they are breathing; these are old, faulty logics of the human provided for the colonized by the white

to death, so close to torture at the hands of the

colonizers. For Fanon, to be an Algerian is a

that took work, and that work was destructive.

future project, one becomes an Algerian. This is not a universal human realized by all (though

One can reframe the critiques of Gilroy as postrace or colorblind as lacking if one considers where/when he is going: Gilroy is com-

it could be). Instead, it is a human reached in political struggle and organization against co-

lonialism, much of which has yet to come. The humanity of “all of us” is routed in the political organization of the decolonial project.

French, saw planetary humanism as something

mitted to the long-held, future-oriented project of cultural studies that can participate in the disruption of the racial construct. Put simply, Gilroy hopes to move toward a Fanonian new

goes serious transformations in its relationships

humanism, not rooted in Western racialism but routed away from such forms. Oftentimes,

of gender, media, family, medicine, nationalism, and, for some French soldiers, even their

Gilroy (2000) sees hints of this new humanism in debatable places, such as genetics; still,

relationship to whiteness. Indeed, the white French soldier who left the French army and

that continually unveils the always already

In the becoming of the new, Algeria under-

this cannot be read as an end, but one route

1190

-

PAUL

GILROY

AND

COMMUNICATION

shaky grounds on which ethnic absolutism stands. Again, this future can be pulled not just from Gilroy, but also from Hall and Grossberg. Grossberg notes: Cultural studies matters because it is about the future, and about some of the work it will take, in the present, to shape the future. It is about understanding the

present in the service of the future. By looking at how the contemporary world has been made to be what it is, it attempts to make visible ways in which it can become something else. (Grossberg, 2010, p. 1)

STUDIES

from “identities,” considered set, fixed, to what

Hall (1996) called “identification,” which assumes no necessary correspondence, but constant becoming. This ensures that the ship is not guaranteed: it can signify both racial violence and radical potentiality: “Ships immediately focus attention to the middle passage, on the various projects for redemptive return to an African homeland, on the circulation of

ideas and activists as well as the movement of

key cultural and political artifacts” (Gilroy, 1993, p. 4). What Gilroy points to is that the ship is not the hub of an absolute identity, but a process that is constantly (re )made through its movement, in the in-between spaces. This is not a finite remaking, but one that contin-

Cultural studies, then, is a future-tense proj-

ect; it seeks to open up new worlds. The racelessness of Gilroy’s career is less a fulfilled project and more an unfulfilled time-space that he is pointing toward, one fluid and never settled. Indeed, cultural studies is responsible for not only outlining the conjuncture but also doing something about it. One can debate whether or not Gilroy’s is that better story necessary, but one cannot debate that he has not tried to put it into the ether. Without surprise, the potentiality of the future has often situated Gilroy’s work in questions of movement. In his attempt to critique

ues into the 21st century. If that is the case, then those identities can be re/produced in alternative, new fashion into the future as

well. Thus, the ship becomes a central component of how the black body comes into being in violent ways, but also in ways designed to create new modes of political solidarity. The black future is now. In Darker than Blue, Gilroy continues the conversation of blackness and movement, turn-

he always paid attention to the question of

ing attention to automobility and black moral and economic relationality. He does this by investigating Williams's construct of “mobile privatization,’ which Gilroy argues holds different meanings for black people. According to Gilroy, in the shift from industrialism to

routes over roots. Roots, again, have a starting

consumerism, Williams noted that an “in-

point and an end; routes do not—they extend

creased privatisation of life and its fragmentation into active, small-family units was being combined with an unprecedented degree of

ethnic absolutism, nationalism, and fascism,

well into the future, changing direction, shift-

ing trajectories as needed. It is in the question of routes, not roots, that Gilroy promotes a potential new look at the human, one not wedded to the Western construct of national borders, but to processes that make up the production of borders and people based on movements. In The Black Atlantic, then, it is

important that the ship is a metaphor for black identity: it is that which shifts conversations

mobility” (Gilroy, 2010, p. 24). For Williams, the television and the automobile were technological responses to this tension between mobility and privacy; they were technologies that enclosed one privately and allowed for new forms of mobility. Importantly, this form of movement and simultaneous privacy inspired a sense of anxiety for many; it spoke to a shift

PAUL

GILROY

in a rooted understanding of Britishness via tensions between movement and privacy. Williams noted discomfort in the transformations of capitalism, of which mobile privatization was of theoretical utility to outline. Yet, mirroring Massey's critique of time-space com-

pression (1994), Gilroy notes that such anxiety is a very Western European, white

male feeling:

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

.

1191

and liberatory politics. Doing so is a component of his larger political intervention into cultural studies as a conjuncture. Throughout Gilroy’s work, one can see the concern with telling better stories, with a cri-

tique of the present for the future’s sake. Importantly, this is necessarily a black future, one that is not antithetical to Marx’s future but remakes that future specifically for the colonies. In short, racelessness is no determined

I want to go further than Williams and to suggest that a historical consideration of the car's totemic power can provide analytical tools with which to illuminate neglected aspects of the twentieth century’s black freedom struggles and of their complex relationship to the racially stratified societies from which they sprang. These were social movements animated by people who had very good reasons to fear the constraints involved in being tied to one place. That anxiety may well have inclined them towards the pleasures of speed, autonomy, and privatised transport, quite apart from their attraction to

the automobile as a provocative emblem for the wealth and status they desired but were so often denied. (Gilroy, 2010, pp. 24-25)

Importantly, what Gilroy points to is that blackness has historically been articulated to restrictions on mobility—to enslavement, to

apartheid, to incarceration—so much so that the movement Williams feared was embraced by black people seeking to flee racial discrim-

reality, but an unguaranteed time-space Gilroy would like to see, one that he thinks British

cultural studies is in a good place to investigate and bring about.

CONCLUSION What is Gilroy’s biggest problem? It is not postracism or even colorblindness, but a politics of intervention. The future is no destination, but a potentiality. This ensures that Gilroy is not describing the world “as it is” (whatever that means), but as he would like it to be. This,

of course, is the larger project of cultural studies. There is no universal theory of the world as it is. There is a conception of a world as how one wants it to be. For Grossberg (2010), this links the cultural studies project not to a guaranteed progressivism; he believes it can hold potential conservative elements as well. Indeed,

Grossberg suggests that the right is telling better stories than the left. Gilroy’s better story is a complex one that differs from Grossberg’s. While Grossberg’s

story (1992, 1997, 2010) has been one con-

ination. It is in movement, again, that black

cerned with what cultural studies is, particularly in the United States, Gilroy’s story chal-

futurity is sought. This should not be thought

lenges the racial, humanist, nationalist, and

of as a progress narrative, a linearity associated with much of Western thought. Instead,

Yet, even as he speaks to Britain, as Young notes,

movement and futurity suggest liberation from the Western construct of linearity to begin with. What this implies is that Gilroy is looking ahead, not for progress but for survival

fascist leanings of much of Western academia. Gilroy’s work is not in the British context alone,

especially as Against Race straddles “two camps [the United States and Britain] in a dislocated way, addressing two audiences with different

1192

-«

PAUL

GILROY

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

cultural politics who, the publishers seem to believe, in turn need their own individualized

His most controversial book, Against Race, has been viewed as a nod toward colorblindness,

titles” (Young, 2002, p. 544). What Young suggests is that Gilroy has multiple audiences, often with radically different conceptions of

as Gilroy discusses the late-20th-century crisis of the racial construct for western Europe and the United States. Importantly, this book also

race. I agree with this, but I want to suggest

points toward the importance of World War

more: Gilroy’s political project of British cultural studies cannot situate raceless futurities in Britain alone. Gilroy must think black futurities within and without a multiplicity of modernities. In this light, Gilroy’s is an unfinished project, one that will not “end” race, but that does not mean that he does not dream ofsuch potentialities.

Il for white, Euro-American self-conceptions of antiracism. In particular, Nazism was impor-

tant for both Britain and the United States to shun racism as a central component of their own foundations. This situated the United States’ and Britain’s engagement in racial slav-

PRIMARY

in the Cold War era, as communism became a rising threat. In short, with the rise of the United States and the decline of British imperialism, capitalism and colonial violence were

SOURCES

Paul Gilroy’s work has transformed, but he has consistently been concerned with making the world anew. Each of his works would prob-

ably fit within a particular strand of black studies that is increasingly popular in the United States: “Afro-optimism.” Put simply, Gilroy’s work has always been concerned with thinking about not just racial violence, but also the ways in which black people have fought against

ery, colonialism, and imperialism as not racist, but benevolent for people of color, particularly

presented as less violent than communism for people of color in order to maintain or sustain worldwide, political, and economic stand-

ing. Arguably Gilroy’s best book, Postcolonial Melancholia, is a treatise on the current state of

Britain, one

that prophetically speaks to

Brexit in 2017, in which immigration was cited

as one important reason for Britain to leave

racial violence, making themselves anew in the process. His earliest book, There Ain’t No Black

the European Union. The book outlines the

in the Union Jack, provides a good example of cultural studies, as he articulates the politics of nationalism and fascism to race and class in

brown immigrants coming to Britain, and the increasing sorrow of a long-lost white nation.

Britain, and thinks through the differences be-

tween black liberation and antiracism. The Black Atlantic is, arguably, his most popular work. It is the book that much of contemporary black and postcolonial studies continue to point toward, especially for its critique of identity as a set, fixed, rooted category. Alternatively, Gilroy provides an analysis of race as routed through multiple trajectories, which,

importantly, begins with the middle passage and the ship as a “chronotope,’ a black timespace that sees no guarantees in black identity.

continuance of white anxiety of black and

The central irony, for Gilroy, is that these black and brown immigrants are not randomly coming to Britain, but they are part of its former colonies. The colonies that Britain

used to say were “part of the nation” with the threat of Soviet communism are now threat-

ening when they try to move into the nation they were told was theirs. This creates a malaise over the white British population, who, through their ethnic absolutist assumptions of rootedness, presume they have lost something. In turn, there is no one willing to take responsibility for the colonial past that brings black

PAUL

GILROY

and brown immigrants into the nation in the first place. This is not a comprehensive list of

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

.

1193

REFERENCES

Gilroy's work. Darker than Blue and Small Acts are equally as interesting and important. Further, Gilroy has a plethora of journal articles

Chrisman, L. (2011). The vanishing body ofFrantz Fanon in Paul Gilroy’s Against Race and After

and book chapters that one could turn to, along

2(4), 39-544. da Silva, D. F. (2007). Toward a global idea of race.

with many scholars who engage with work similar to his (some are listed in the “Further Reading” section). However, these works pro-

vide an overview of Gilroy’s critique of the nation and the rooted sense of absolutism that continues to structure it.

FURTHER

READING

Empire. Black Scholar, 41(4), 18-30. Collins, P. H. (2002). A tale of two titles. Ethnicities,

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Fanon, F. (1994). A dying colonialism. New York, NY: Grove Press. Fanon, F. (2004). Wretched of the earth. New York, NY: Grove Press. Gilroy, P. (1991). There ain't no black in the Union Jack: The cultural politics ofrace and nation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Gilroy, P. (1993). The black Atlantic: Modernity and

Carby, H. (2009). Becoming modern racialized subjects. Cultural Studies, 23(4), 624-657. Fanon, F. (2008). Black skin, white masks. New York, NY: Grove Press.

Gilroy, P. (2011). Fanon and Amery: Theory, torture and the prospect of humanism. Theory, Culture, and Society, 27(7-8), 16-32. Hall, S. (1986a). Gramsci’s relevance for the study of race and ethnicity. Journal of Communication

Inquiry, 10(2), S-27. Hall, S. (1986b). The problem ofideology—Marxism without guarantees. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 10(2), 28-44. Hall, S. (1996a). The after-life of Frantz Fanon: Why Fanon? Why now? Why Black Skin, White Masks? In A. Read (Ed.), The fact of blackness: Frantz Fanon

double-consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Gilroy, P. (1994). Small acts: Thoughts on the politics of black cultures. New York, NY: Serpent’s Tail Press. Gilroy, P. (2000). Against race: Imagining political culture beyond the color line. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Gilroy, P. (2004). Postcolonial melancholia. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Gilroy, P. (2006). British cultural studies and the pitfalls of identity. In M. G. Durham & D. Kellner (Eds.), Media and cultural studies: Keyworks (pp. 381-395). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Gilroy. P. (2010). Darker than blue: On the moral econ-

Institute of Contemporary Arts. Hall, S. (1996b). Introduction: Who needs “identity”?

omies of black Atlantic culture. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Grossberg, L. (1992). We gotta get out of this place: Popular conservatism and postmodern culture. New

In S. Hall & P. du Gay (Eds.), Questions of cultural identity (pp. 15-30). London, UK: SAGE.

Grossberg, L. (1997). Bringing it all back home: Essays

and visual representation (pp. 12-37). London, UK:

Hall, S. (1996c). When was “the postcolonial”? Thinking at the limit. In I. Chambers & L. Curti (Eds.), The post-colonial question (pp. 242-259). New York, NY: Routledge.

Mercer, K. (1994). Welcome to the jungle: New posi-

York, NY: Routledge.

on cultural studies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Grossberg, L. (2010). Cultural studies in the future tense. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Hall, S. (1996). Introduction: Who needs “identity?”

New York, NY: Rout-

In S. Hall & P. du Gay (Eds.), Questions of cultural identity (pp. 1-17). London, UK: SAGE.

Robinson, C. (1993). The appropriation of Frantz

Hall, S. (2009). What is this “black” in black popu-

tions in black cultural studies.

ledge. Fanon. Race and Class, 35(1), 79-91.

lar culture? In J. Storey (Ed.), Cultural theory and

1194

«

PAULO

FREIRE

AND

COMMUNICATION

popular culture: A reader (pp. 374-382). New York, NY: Routledge. Hall, S. (2016). Cultural studies 1983. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Hartman, S. (1997). Scenes of subjection: Terror, slavery, and self-making in nineteenth-century America.

London, UK: Oxford University Press. Lowe, L. (2015). The intimacies of four continents.

STUDIES

who sought to do away with the possibility of self-determined progressive social change, Freire—or Paulo, as he was known to his

friends—was able to escape into exile, only to experience from abroad the support necessary for him to champion the causes of emancipation of the oppressed.

Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Massey, D. (1994). Space, place, and gender. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Massey, D. (2000). Travelling thoughts. In. P. Gilroy, L. Grossberg, & A. McRobbie (Eds.), Without

guarantees: In honour ofStuart Hall (pp. 225-232) New York, NY: Verso Books. Saldanha, S. (2006). Reontologising race: The machinic geography of phenotype. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 24, 9-24. Wynter, S., & McKittrick, K. (2015). Unparalleled catastrophe for our species? Or, to give humanness a different future: Conversations. In K. McKittrick (Ed.), Sylvia Wynter: On being human as praxis

(pp. 9-89). Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Young, R.J. C. (2002). Paul Gilroy’s Between Camps. Ethnicities, 2(4), 544-547. Armond Towns

PAULO FREIRE AND COMMUNICATION STUDIES Paulo Freire, social theorist, philosopher of education, and activist educator, who privi-

leged communication through dialogue as pedagogical method, was the first Brazilian public intellectual whose thought became internationally respected and influential in education. The context where his work was shaped is Brazil’s Northeast Region, specifically the state of Pernambuco. The historical time period of his activity, the second half of the 20th century, led him to respond authentically to the aspirations and needs of the wretched. Facing the military who took power Brazil (1964-1985)

and other parts of the Latin American continent

SETTING The Pernambuco area constituted the entire territory of the Brazilian Northeast Region. It included coastal tropical forests most valuable to European explorers and colonizers from the onset of the 16th century. It provided the best wood and soil for sugar cane and cotton plantations. On the backs of African slaves and an increasingly racially mixed population—black, Native, and European—it soon became the richest of the Portuguese colonies in Brazil, its commerce facilitated by geographic proximity to Europe. Pernambuco

attracted other migrants from Europe and the Middle East. Away from the coast, semi-arid conditions permitted cattle raising that produced the meat, usually dried under the sun, that helped to feed slaves, their white owners, and the rest of the

population. The official—and late—abolition of slavery in 1889 did little to change the actual living conditions of the people. Former slaves became poorly paid salaried workers. Many moved to the capital, Recife, to populate the mocambos, muddy shantytowns along canals and rivers, and other poor neighborhoods. A history of separatist movements and fierce repression by the Brazilian government led to the breakup of the province's large territory into smaller states that today constitute Brazil’s Northeast Region. As in any slave society, the cultural ethos of the region was authoritarian and violent,

unequal and elitist. A few families owned immense tracts of land and ruled over their inhabitants, enslaved or free. Society was

PAULO

FREIRE

patriarchal and machista, above all else. These are the features that generally constitute the conditions of human geography surrounding Paulo Freire’s early life. GROWING-UP YEARS

Paulo Reglus Neves Freire was born on September 19, 1921, in Pernambuco’ capital city, Recife, in the modest Casa Amarela (Yellow House) neighborhood. He was the youngest

of the four (Tudinha) including Armando) his family

children of Edeltrudes Neves Freire and Joaquim Temistocles Freire, two older boys (Temistocles and and a girl (Stela). Freire described as middle class, though it was hard

for them to make ends meet, a situation that

worsened in his early years. According to Brazilian racial codes, the Freires were consid-

ered white and were, therefore, more privileged. Having risen to the rank of sergeant in the military, Joaquim later became a military police officer, a low-paid occupation. Due to illness, he retired with meager earnings and tried unsuccessfully to make do by selling home-made crafts and other goods. Edeltrudes was a housewife who likely earned some extra money by sewing to help with expenses. The older children sought employment as soon as they came of age. Recife turned out to be unaffordable. The Freires had to move to smaller Jaboatao, also along the coast. Freire was eight, old enough to miss his first home and friends. Despite economic difficulties that worsened through the impact of the 1929 crisis and ensuing depression, the parents were doting. Paulo remem-

bers his father as a caring man who discussed politics, history, and current events, which left

long-standing impressions on his young mind. He read aloud and sang songs to his children. His mother, devoutly Roman Catholic, was

loving and supportive of Freire and his siblings, raising them in the faith. The family was harmonious. Freire tells of a carefree boyhood

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

«

1195

playing street soccer, whistling, catching birds, sneaking into movie matinees to watch American Westerns, and simply gazing at nature, sea

and sky, typical of Brazilian youth’s experience at the time. Freire learned to read with his parents under

the fabled mango tree in the backyard. He also attended Eunice Vasconcelos’ school for about a year. She made an impact on the young pupil already fascinated by language and grammar. He attended primary school, where he met students from diverse backgrounds, most of them poor. Food was generally scarce. Freire indicates feeling hungry often, but he learned from seeing the emaciated bodies of others that his hunger was not the worst. Tudinha became a widow in 1934, when

Freire was 13. The family’s economic situation was aggravated. Edeltrudes wanted Paulo to attend secondary school, at the time only available to a privileged few. She knocked at doors in Recife, as no such institution was

available in Jaboatao. Aluizio Pessoa de Araujo, principal of the Colégio Oswaldo Cruz, a private school, welcomed her and admitted her son. Despite starting late, at age 16, with the

added burden of a daily commuter train ride, Freire was able to develop into a young scholar of Portuguese grammar, syntax, and literature

due to the love of language he demonstrated. He soon would be tutoring and then teaching,

earning some money, and preparing for admission to law school, one of the narrow

gates to what constituted higher education in mid-20th-century Brazil. EARLY ADULTHOOD

From 1943 to 1947, Freire taught at the Colégio and became educated as a lawyer. He met his first wife, Elza Maia Costa de Oliveira, a teacher

five years his senior. They were married in 1944 and had five children, two boys and three girls. Paulo’s law career was short-lived. Tending to a debt case, he empathized with the client, who

1196

-

PAULO

FREIRE

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

could not pay his lenders or his lawyer. Elza supported Paulo's decision to leave the law

in place and nurture new ones, while provid-

because she saw her husband as an educator, above all.

workers.

Freire’s first opportunity for a better paying civil service job was at the newly created Servi¢o Social da Industria (SESI, Social Services for

success of the Cuban revolution, wanted free-

Industry, 1946), a paragovernmental organi-

zation in charge of social services for workers,

with the goal of improving the quality of education and culture, bettering the quality of workers’ lives and communities, and creating conditions for safe and healthy workplaces.

Freire worked at SESI for 10 formative years,

ing little for the majority of the people, the The left, encouraged by the struggle and dom from Western colonialism and imperialism and autonomy to establish some form of socialist Brazilian state that would work to eliminate poverty and illiteracy as central fea-

tures of development. The influential Catholic Church in Brazil and elsewhere in Latin America had developed a left wing, siding with the poor and oppressed. One ofits radical leaders and proponents of what came to be known

becoming a director and superintendent of the division of education and culture and later a consultant traveling nationally for the division

as liberation theology was Helder Camara. Known as “bishop of the slums,” widely re-

of research and planning.

bishop of Olinda and Recife in 1959. There is no question about which side Freire was going to take. Under the climate of revolutionary agitation in Pernambuco, he joined

Through SESI, Freire was able to visit numerous schools; interact with students, teachers, and parents; and investigate educational

spected and beloved, Camara became the Arch-

conditions and ways to improve them. Through

a group of progressive workers’ leaders, art-

many conversations, he became aware of how pervasive authoritarianism in the culture bled

cratic values, attitudes, and behaviors in schools, in communities, and within SESI itself.

ists, and intellectuals. They supported the election of leftist Miguel Arraes as mayor of Recife in 1960 and as governor in 1961. Arraes invited Freire to be part of his policy initiative, the Movimento de Cultura Popular (MCP, Popular Cultural Movement), with the goal of learning about and supporting the expression of many folk traditions and arts of the Northeast and extending education, particu-

In 1959 Freire completed doctoral studies

larly literacy to the illiterate. At the time,

with a dissertation on education on the current Brazilian state of affairs, based on his in-

Freire also was involved in the creation of the Servico de Extensao Cultural (SEC, Cultural Extension Service) at the University of Recife

through the relationships between teachers and students and parents and children, whose discipline often resulted in what today’s society identifies as physical and emotional abuse. He

was always concerned about fostering demo-

vestigations and experiences through work. Central to those times was the vision of national development, which differed for the right and the left. The conservative right wanted to change

the nature of society progressively through economic development associated within the framework of international capitalism, Amer-

ican and European. It wanted to keep the historical power structure with the elites firmly

(today theFederal University of Pernambuco), with the goal of bringing the university out to

the community, engaged in teacher professional development and popular education. If the intense activity of the MCP creating circles of culture in many places around Recife and surrounding communities was important to Freire’s fashioning his work in literacy, the work in SEC allowed for an important literacy

PAULO

FREIRE

project that took place in Angicos, Rio Grande do Norte. In collaboration with Brazil’s Ministry of Education, this project was financed by the Alliance for Progress, John F. Kennedy’s USAID (US Agency for International Development) program to support Latin

American development along the interests of the US government in response to the perceived dangers of the spread of the Cuban revolution. While the Alliance stopped financing the project because of its political nature just three months before the military

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

1197

with many other activists, workers’ leaders, and intellectuals, Freire was imprisoned. For

7S days he was constantly interrogated and accused of being a “communist.” He was fortunate to find refuge at the embassy of Bolivia and stayed in that country for a short period of time after the junta (“The Supreme Command of the Revolution”) provided him

and his family safe passage. Freire, Elza, and the children found themselves in exile in Chile. Paulo was 43.

coup d‘état, Freire and his group ofliteracy teachers were able to teach 300 adults organized in cultural circles in just 45 days. The success of this literacy project led the Brazilian president, Joao Goulart, and his minister of

period that country was experiencing with pro-

education, Paulo de Tarso, to invite Freire to

gressive action, politics, and hope for a future

lead a national effort based on the Angico’s model.

ident Eduardo Frei, a Christian Democrat,

The emerging “Paulo Freire method,’ as it became known, to its creator’s aversion—he

strongly believed it was above all a way of thinking, interacting, and relating—had as its

goal not only to support students becoming literate, reading words and texts. More importantly, students became aware of their human-

ity and position in society and its issues of power—about social injustice and how they could act to change their lot. They learned to read their world’s social texts. Such literate Brazilians would become knowledgeable voters and help construct a better nation. For conservative elites, these ideas of what Freire called conscientizacao (“conscientization”) were destabilizing, a subversion of institutionalized

social order, and a threat to national security as they defined it. With increased anticommunist fearmongering and agitation taking place to destabilize society, Goulart’s government was toppled on April 1, 1964. A military junta that called itself “revolutionary” ascended to power, shortly thereafter starting its bloody mission. Along

GLOBAL CITIZEN

Freire and his family spent five years in Chile, from 1964 to 1969, during an effervescent

of self-determination for Latin America. Pres-

made education and land reform the priorities of his administration. (These creative times ended when, with President Richard Nixon’s

CIA backing, General Pinochet took power to stop the policies of the democratically elected socialist president, Miguel Allende, in 1973.)

Pre-military-dictatorship conditions in Chile offered Freire opportunities in government in-

stitutes, the University of Chile, and UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) to continue his read-

the-world/read-the-word emancipatory literacy project with workers and teachers. Paulo, with Elza at his side, listened more than he talked during local cultural circles, always care-

ful not to impose strategies that had been successful in northeastern Brazil on Chile's different social context.

These were writing years for Freire. He finished and published Education as Practice of Freedom in 1967. He completed an essay, Extension and Communication, on issues concern-

ing communication between experts and rural workers, based on the Chilean experience of

1198

-

PAULO

FREIRE

AND

COMMUNICATION

agrarian reform. A manuscript of his master-

piece, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, written in his native Portuguese in Chile, came to light in Spanish in 1968, the year of distinctive

global upheaval. The English translation was published in 1970, opening international markets and venues of influence for the book and its author. It was translated into several languages. Finally it came to light in Brazil in 1975, into the slowly eroding hegemony of the military dictatorship. The Pedagogy of the Oppressed readership spread like wildfire, and it is still burning. With his name on the world stage, Freire

received concomitant offers from Harvard Uni-

versity (and others) in the United States and the World Council of Churches in Switzerland. He was able to negotiate a year at Harvard's Center for the Study of Education and Development (1969-1970). Freire chose to work at the World Council of Churches as a conscious radical option. Exiled in Chile, he had already visited the United States twice and wished to have a longer experience there. However, he

did not want to become a bookish academic: “I find myself a teacher in the street corner.’ At the Ecumenical Center in Geneva, Paulo

Freire was able to be involved in education projects taking place on “street corners” around

STUDIES

Guinea-Bissau. Freire and other members of IDAC wrote extensively about this project. It reaffirmed what Freire already knew—that an educational experience cannot be transferred, it is always renewed in a new setting. RETURN TO BRAZIL AND LATER YEARS

An increasingly stronger political movement called for political openness, democratic elections, and the end of the military dictatorship. Brazilians in exile who had escaped persecution and violence started moving back and were granted legal amnesty in 1985. Sadly, Freire was not allowed to return before his mother’s death, which caused him much dis-

tress. But he took a first work-related trip to Brazil and then made a decision to move back for good in 1980 at age $8. Both man and country were different then. Paulo and Elza had to again readjust to a new life, now in the south of Brazil.

Paulo Freire was hired at two flagship universities in Sao Paulo state, the University of

Campinas (UNICAMP) and the Catholic University of Sao Paulo. He was also reinstated as full professor and retired immediately from his former position at the Federal University

the globe. He stayed for a decade (1970-1980).

of Pernambuco, granted due to the new law

Meeting other Brazilian exiled expatriates

of amnesty. He continued to write and was

ofa like mind, in 1971, with Claudius Ceccon,

engaged in the social, cultural, economic, re-

Babette Harper, and the couple Miguel and Rosiska Darcy de Oliveira, Freire founded the Instituto de Acao Cultural (IDAC, Institute for Cultural Action) to examine and enhance knowledge behind the values and principles guiding education for conscientization and as a practice of freedom. Soon IDAC experienced so many requests for seminars and workshops that they had to be careful not to distract from their mission. The work through IDAC opened the doors of Africa to Freire. Among other literacy projects, the most fruitful took place for five years in the former Portuguese colony of

ligious, and political life of Brazil during those years. Freire became a card-carrying member of a new party, the Partido dos Trabalhadores (PT, Workers’ Party), under the leadership of Luiz Inacio da Silva, known as Lula, proposing a progressive democratic agenda for Brazil. Freire concerned himself with enduring

issues of his homeland: continued hunger among many; abandoned street children; social

justice; and democratization. He wrote extensively, individually and with others, about educational and literacy work, past and present.

PAULO

FREIRE

Paulo slowed down during a period of grief. Elza, his beloved companion of 42 years, a true warrior, as Brazilians call extraordinarily strong women, passed away in October 1986. This was the same year when, receiving UNESCO's Peace Prize, Paulo acknowledged and thanked

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

«

1199

involvement of all members of schools and communities in educational decisions. Authentic assessment, retention, and age progres-

sion of students became important, as well as

Elza’s death devastated Paulo. He wished to die and experienced disabling depression, making family, friends, and coworkers very concerned about his health and well-being.

raising teachers’ pay. Finally, a mass literacy program through the Movimento de Alfabetizacao de Adultos e Jovens (MOVA, Movement of Adult and Youth Literacy) was institutionalized to support the literacy of paulistas, Sao Paulo's people, through conscientization. Paulo Freire lived another six years after

Fortunately, two years later Freire married his

hard, hands-on work on urban education. Dur-

doctoral advisee Ana Maria (Nita) Araujo, a

ing this period, Paulo and Nita Freire traveled extensively for professional and personal reasons. Freire, with involvement and support

Elza, “without whom I would not be here.”

widow. Serendipitously, she was youngest daughter of Aluizio Pessoa de Aratijo, the educator who had taken young Paulo under his wing, providing secondary and college-prep

education in Recife. Nita was a literacy educator and researcher in her own right. Freire had known her as a child and had been her teacher as a teen. Their relationship was passionate, and passion gave him the will to live. From

1989 to 1991, Freire took on the

challenging job as the Secretary of Education of Sao Paulo city, Latin America’s largest, at

the invitation of the Worker's Party newly elected mayor, Luiza Erundina de Sousa, a

social worker who also had migrated south

from Nita, continued his collaboration with

others, particularly in the United States, where the field of critical pedagogy that his work had inspired was becoming current in academic circles. He worked with Myles Horton, the noted American popular educator and civil rights activist, and numerous noted professors, including Henry Giroux, Michael Apple, Shirley Steinberg and Joe Kincheloe, Peter McLaren, Carlos Alberto Torres, and many others, always mixing loving friendship

and professional collaboration. Just before his unexpected death at age 75 from heart com-

from the Northeast. In charge, Freire did what

plications, on May 2, 1997, in Sao Paulo, Freire

he knew best and fundamentally believed, engaged in dialogue with people in schools,

was planning and looking forward to a Harvard return. Obituaries appeared around the world.

students, parents, teachers, administrators,

Paulo Freire centers were created in Brazil and elsewhere and continue to honor and extend his legacy.

and all support personnel to find out about problems they faced in schools and seeking solutions. As happens in a metropolis of the size of the city of Sao Paulo, building maintenance needed to be addressed. The demand for education was also greater than its supply; new schools had to be built. To address the curriculum, he called on Ana Maria Saul, his col-

league at the Catholic University of Sao Paulo, to work with specialists to make necessary curricular changes. The goals here included joyful learning and happiness, as well as democratic

PEDAGOGY OF THE OPPRESSED

To the average reader, Paulo Freire’s seminal work is not an easy read. While well crafted and carefully elaborated, its language is also philosophical and abstract. The text distills revolutionary thinking from Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Jean-Paul Sartre, Georg Lukacs, Erich Fromm, Frantz Fanon, Albert Memmi, and others, as well as writers from Brazil and Latin

1200

-

PAULO

FREIRE

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

America, Regis Debret, Candido A. Mendes, Alvaro Vieira Pinto, and Ché Guevara. Each

the oppressor’s domination. The oppressor treats the dominated as things, impedes them

paragraph demands reflection. Paragraphs build the theory through spiraling intercon-

from being, from being more, from being fully human, not domesticated.

nections of concepts; one goes back before

The oppressor’s concept of “banking” education implies a student’s empty head—as an

moving forward and upward to greater understanding of the pedagogy’s underlying big picture.

The book comprises four chapters, just over 200 pages. Chapter 1 justifies a pedagogy of the oppressed and theorizes the situations in which oppressors and oppressed find themselves in society. Chapter 2 perhaps the most cited, introduces the ideas of “bank-

ing” and emancipatory education. Chapter 3 discusses dialogue as a human phenomenon. In Chapter 4 Freire takes up antidialogue and dialogue as matrices of two opposed theories

account or coffer—and a teacher-teller, “de-

positing” narratives as currency in the pupil's increasingly uncritical mind. This education for adaptation and passivity is not emancipatory education, for it assumes that no one teaches anyone and no one educates themselves alone. On the other hand, the goal to

change the world is the medium for people to educate each other in communion. The curriculum problematizes humans in their relationships with and within the world (Freire, 1978, p. 77). Here people learn to investigate

of cultural action, one serving oppression and the other, liberation.

the world critically in dialogue with others.

To provide a summary of Pedagogia do oprimido |Pedagogy of the Oppressed] (Freire, 1970) is a difficult task. What follows is one attempt at creating a narrative that expresses

our unfinished, in-progress, nature. Dialogue is the essence of education as practice of freedom (Freire, 1978, p. 89). Humans cannot be mute; empty words do not

some of its fundamental ideas.

feed us. “To exist, humanly, means to enunci-

There are two possible, contradictory, existential possibilities for humankind. Further

logue with others. This is a creative process,

humanization is one, our true “vocation”;

dehumanization is the other. Oppression— oppressors—dehumanize the oppressed. The oppressed ultimately rise, following our historical humanist task—liberation. This does not happen without praxis, the search for and enactment of the emancipatory struggle. The pedagogy of the oppressed is this very praxis, the oppressed reflecting and acting on Oppressions, an engagement in the struggles for emancipation where teaching and learning creates and re-creates itself: “Freedom, which is something to be achieved and not a gift, demandsits permanent searching” (Freire, 1978,

p. 35). The pedagogy ofthe oppressed necessitates intersubjectivity through dialogue between leaders and partakers in joint action to avoid repeating the pattern of violence of

Thus, we become “more,” always actualizing

ate the world, changing it” (1978, p. 92) in dianot an instrument of domination. Dialogue requires deep love for and commitment to humankind and the world. Dialogue also requires humility—not arrogance—and faith in human beings and in our vocation to be more. The content of the pedagogical dialogue is based on a present situation that reflects aspirations that will serve as guide to political action. For leaders, this means investigating the thematic universe expressed in the oppressive situation (Freire, 1978, p. 102) that limits

the lives of those involved; it represents a border between “to be” and “to be more” that needs to be crossed. A universal contemporary theme could be liberation from domination; the investigation probes what people think about these issues and, in doing so, expresses contradictions. Answers

are then

PAULO

FREIRE

codified through representations (e.g., photographs, paintings, videos). Participants in the cultural circle dialogue will codify these representations.

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

.

1201

people must organize themselves, a “highly pedagogical moment when the leadership and the people learn about true authority and freedom together, that, as one body, they search

Humans engage in praxis by reflecting and

to inaugurate in the transformation of the real-

acting on our situations. Revolutionary praxis

ity that mediates between them” (Freire, 1978,

demands leaders who respect the people, and they do this through dialogue: “This dialogue,

p. 211). The last element is cultural synthesis.

as a radical requirement of the revolution, re-

through praxis, with no imposed models, no scripts or prescriptions,

sponds to another radical demand—humans as beings who cannot exist outside of communication because they are communication.

To put up obstacles to communication means to transform people in almost ‘things, and this task and objective belongs to the oppressors, not to revolutionaries” (Freire, 1978, p. 149). Further, “Dialogue, as encounter of

Here, the new reality is relentlessly re-created

CONCLUSION Controversy about Paulo Freire continues in Brazil. On April 13, 2012, Dilma Rousseff, its first woman president, signed law 12.612 offi-

cially declaring Paulo Freire Brazil’s Patron

people to ‘pronounce’ the world, is a funda-

of Education. In 2015, Rousseff was ousted

mental condition for humanization” (p. 160). Freire ends his book by summarizing two possible theories of cultural action. One is antidialogical, oppressive; the other is dialogical, revolutionary, and emancipatory. Under

through impeachment by a right-wing political coup. Conservatives, emboldened by the outcome of the manufactured crisis shaking

antidialogical circumstances,

the need for

conquest arises. To maintain oppression, the

conqueror needs to divide the people in many ways; those who dare to raise voices to change conditions are immediately indicted, often violently. The people are manipulated through myths created to mold the oppressed to the needs of the oppressor and cultural invasion is accomplished. Oppressors infiltrate the cul-

the country, set it, yet again, back to its au-

thoritarian and exclusionary past, and returned power to the hands of the old elites. Having a leftist education patron who insisted on demonstrating the very political nature and impossibility of neutrality in education and schooling did not sit well with the organization Escola Sem Partido (Schools without

jects. Conditions of inauthenticity are created as the oppressed learns to respond to the needs of the oppressor, housing the oppressor within themselves. “The dominated con-

[Political] Parties). One of its members from Sao Paulo spearheaded an initiative to remove Freire as patron. Fortunately, the Brazilian senate’s Commission of Human Rights and Participative Legislation stopped the action, considering it “ideological censorship.” Freire remains Patron of Education in Brazil. While efforts continue to undermine

sciousness exists, dual, ambiguous, with fears

his legacy, it is important to remember his

and mistrusts,” attests Freire (1978, p. 29S).

fundamental contribution to humanity. In Pedagogy of the Oppressed and other works, Paulo Freire demonstrated the importance of education for emancipation that strengthens and enhances democracy. Emancipation results from collective effort in which the individual in the group reflects on society’s limiting conditions

tures of the conquered, turning them into ob-

Under dialogical circumstances, collabora-

tion is the first step, founded on dialogue— communication. Unity is next, where under-

standings about why the oppressed are better offin communion against the efforts to divide and conquer them need to be developed. The

1202

PAULO

FREIRE

AND

COMMUNICATION

and acts to open the doors of dreamed possibilities and enact change. His dialogical method demanded that humans be better

subjects, both interacting and communicating, and showing solidarity in the ongoing

STUDIES

scholar: Pedagogy ofIndignation (2004); Daring to Dream: Toward a Pedagogy of the Unfinished (2007); Pedagogy of Commitment (2014); and Pedagogy of Solidarity (2016, with Walter de Oliveira).

grounds on which he built his theory of

Ana Maria (Nita) Freire also wrote the biographical works Chronicles of Love: My Life with Paulo Freire (2001) and Paulo Freire: Uma

liberation.

Historia de Vida [Paulo Freire: A Life History]

construction of a utopia. The critics of his work have not been able to shake the solid

(2007).

Paulo Freire also wrote with others. With LINKS

TO

DIGITAL

MATERIALS

Instituto Paulo Freire (http: //www.paulofreire.org) —Sao Paulo, Brazil. Site in Portuguese.

Freire Institute (http://www.freire.org/)—University of Central Lancashire, Lancashire, UK. Paulo Freire Institute (http://pfiucla.blogspot.com)

—University of California, Los Angeles.

FURTHER

READING

AND

DISCUSSIONS

Freire’s books translated into English and

other languages from their original in Portuguese include Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970) and Education: The Practice ofFreedom

(1976), which lay the fundamentals of Freire’s

his long-time friend, translator, and collabo-

rator, Donaldo Macedo, his Literacy: Reading the Word and the World (1987) is an important work. There are three “spoken books”:

with Ira Shor,APedagogy for Liberation (1987); a dialogue with Antonio Faundez, Chilean

philosopher, Learning to Question: A Pedagogy ofLiberation (1989); anda dialogue with Myles Horton just before the latter’s death, We Make the Road by Walking: Conversations on Edu-

cation and Social Change (1990). Carlos Alberto Torres offers an in-depth look into philosophical currents influencing Freire’s work and chapters on the methodology of thematic investigation and the Paulo Freire system, which revisits the Angicos experience, in his First Freire: Early Writings in

practice and theory, respectively, and remain the works of central interest to communicaSocial Justice Education (2014). tion scholars, development specialists, and For an earlier account of Freire’s work, see educators. Other texts include The Politics of professor of religion John Elias’s Paulo Freire: Education: Culture, Power and Liberation (1985);

Pedagogue of Liberation (1994). For an ex-

Pedagogy of the City (1993), based on Freire’s

haustive account of Freire’s life and work, refer

experience as the Secretary of Education of to James D. Kirylo’s Paulo Freire: The Man the city of Sao Paulo, the largest in Latin from Recife (2013), which includes reproducAmerica; Pedagogy of Hope (1998), in which tions of drawings used in Freire’s literacy Freire discusses the genesis of Pedagogy of the work. James Kirylo and Drick Boyd (2017) Oppressed; and Letters to Cristina: Reflections discuss issues related to the role of religion on My Life and Work (1996). in Paulo Freire: His Faith, Spirituality, and Works published posthumously include Theology. Pedagogy of Freedom: Ethics, Democracy and Antonia Darder revisits the mission of Civic Courage (2001) and compilations of un- the progressive educator in Reinventing Paulo

published work by Ana Maria (Nita) Araujo Freire, Paulo Freire’s widow and literacy

Freire: A Pedagogy ofLove (2002); in Freire and Education (2015) she discusses Paulo Freire’s

PAULO

FREIRE

theories in three chapters on liberation, the pedagogy of love, and critical consciousness, and transcribes her 1992 dialogue with Freire and Peter Park on diversity. Darder provides a reading guide for the American student in The Student Guide to Freire’s Pedagogy of the

Oppressed (2018). South African author Sandra Smidt provides Introducing Freire: A Guide for Students, Teachers and Practitioners (2014) where she discusses in clear and direct language the complexities of Freire’s thought and includes a glossary. She also connects Freire to Augusto Boal's Theater ofthe Oppressed. Chapters byWayne Au, Gustavo E. Fischman, Ricardo D. Rosa, and Pia Lidquist Wong in the Routledge International Handbook of Critical

Education (2009) address Freire’s legacy in critical education. AndrewJ.Kirkendall’s Paulo Freire and the Cold War Politics ofLiteracy provides a historical context for understanding

AND

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

«

1203

Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. New York, NY: Seabury Press.

Freire, P. (1976). Education: The practice offreedom. London, UK: Writers & Readers.

Freire, P. (1978). Pedagogia do oprimido (Sth ed.). Rio deJaneiro, Brazil: Editora Paz e Terra. Freire, P. (1985). The politics of education: Culture, power and liberation. Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey.

Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the city. New York, NY: Continuum.

Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed (20th anniversary ed.). New York, NY: Continuum.

Freire, P. (1996). Letters to Cristina. Reflections on my life and work. New York, NY: Routledge.

Freire, P. (1998). Teachers as cultural workers: Letters to those who dare teach. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of the heart. London, UK: Bloomsbury.

Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy ofhope: Reliving Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.

Freire’s works, including a thorough chapter

Freire, P. (2001). Pedagogy offreedom: Ethics, democracy and civic courage. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

on the World Council of Churches and the African experience, including Guinea-Bissau.

Freire, P. (2003). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). New York, NY: Continuum.

Michael A. Peters and Tina Besley, editors,

Freire, P. (2004). Pedagogy of indignation. Boulder, CO: Paradigm.

offer a rich collection of Freire-inspired work around the world in Paulo Freire: The Global Legacy (2014).

Paulo Freire: Uma Biobibliografia [Paulo Freire: A Biobibliography], consisting of works in Portuguese and Spanish, is the most comprehensive collection of Freire’s material

Freire, P. (2007). Daring to dream: Toward a pedagogy of the unfinished. New York, NY: Routledge.

Freire, P. (2014). Pedagogy of commitment. Boulder, CO: Paradigm.

Freire, P. (2018). Pedagogy of the oppressed (SOth anniversary ed.). London, UK: Bloomsbury.

in the world, including an international bibli-

ography and more than 100 short analytical contributions discussing the work of Freire and his influence in contemporary pedagogy. REFERENCES

PAULO

FREIRE’S

BOOKS

IN ENGLISH

TRANSLATION

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Herder & Herder.

PAULO FREIRE’S BOOKS COLLABORATION

IN

Freire, P., & Faundez, A. (1989). Learning to question: A

pedagogy ofliberation. New York, NY: Continuum. Freire, P., & Horton, M. (1990). We make the road by walking: Conversations on education and social change. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey. Freire, P., & Shor, I. (1987). A pedagogy for liberation. Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey.

1204

PERFORMANCE

-

BOOKS

ABOUT

PAULO

OF RACE,

CULTURE,

FREIRE

Freire, A. M. A. (2001) Chronicles of love: My life with Paulo Freire. Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang.

Freire, A. M. A., & Macedo, D. (Eds.). (2001). The Paulo Freire reader. New York, NY: Continuum. Freire, A. M. A. (2007). Paulo Freire: Uma hist6ria de

vida [Paulo Freire: A Life History]. Petropolis, Brazil: Editora Paz e Terra.

Freire, A. M. A. (2016). Daring to dream: Toward a pedagogy of the unfinished (2007). New York, NY: Routledge. Freire, A. M. A., & Oliveira, W. (2016). Pedagogy of solidarity. New York, NY: Routledge. Collins, D. (1977). Paulo Freire: His life, works, and thought. New York, NY: Paulist Press.

Elias, J. L. (1994). Paulo Freire: Pedagogue of liberation. Malabar, FL: Krieger. Gadotti, M., Freire, A. M. A., Ciseski, A. A., Torres C. A., Gutierrez, F., and Gerhadt, H. P.

(Eds.). (1996). Paulo Freire: Uma biobibliografia. [Paulo Freire: A biobibliography]. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Institute Paulo Freire, UNESCO. Retrieved

from http://seminario-paulofreire.pbworks.com/f /unid2_ativ4paulofreire_umabiobibliografia.pdf Grollius, G. (2009). Paulo Freire and the curriculum.

AND

WHITENESS

Darder, A. (2018). The student guide to Freires Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London, UK: Bloomsbury Academic.

Gadotti, M. (1994). Reading Paulo Freire. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as a practice of freedom. New York, NY: Routledge.

Kirkendall, A. J. (2010). Paulo Freire and the Cold War politics of literacy. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Peters, M. A., & Besley, T. (2014). Paulo Freire: The global legacy. New York, NY: Peter Lang. Streck, D. R., Redin, E., & Zitkoski, J. J. (2012). Paulo Freire encyclopedia. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Torres, C. A. (2013). A pedagogy of consciousness: Understanding the first Freire and his journey in

transformative social justice learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Torres, C. A., & Noguera, P. (Eds.). (2009). Social justice education for teachers: Paulo Freire and education as a possible dream. The Hague, Netherlands: Sense. Tania Ramalho

New York, NY: Routledge.

Kirylo,J.D. (2013). Paulo Freire: The man from Recife. New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Kirylo, J. D., & Boyd, D. (2017). Paulo Freire: His faith, spirituality, and theology. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense. Kress, T., & Lake, R. (2013). Paulo Freire’s intellec-

tual roots: Toward historicity in praxis. New York, NY: Bloomsbury.

PERFORMANCE OF RACE, CULTURE, AND WHITENESS

INTRODUCTION

Rossatto, C. A. (2005). Engaging Paulo Freire’s peda-

The nature of human social engagement could

gogy ofpossibility: From blind to transformative op-

be described as operating along four basic principles: (1) notions of naming and recognizing features of particularity and difference;

timism. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Smidt, S. (2014). Introducing Freire: A guide for students, teachers and practitioners. New York, NY: Routledge. Torres, C. A. (2014). First Freire: Early writings in social justice education. New York, NY: Teachers College.

OTHER

Darder, gogy Darder, NY:

BOOKS

RELATED

TO

FREIRE

A. (2002). Reinventing Paulo Freire: A pedaof love. Boulder, CO: Westview. A. (2015). Freire and education. New York, Routledge.

(2) establishing relational rituals and activities that build organizational systems in and as communities; (3) instantiating hierarchies

of power that regulate the vagaries of daily living; and (4) enacting methods of communication that seek to promote ideas and mediate social understanding. Hence, the construction of “performance of race, culture, and whiteness” addresses how social identities,

PERFORMANCE

and the politics that undergird them, are made manifest through performances of human social engagement. Performances that are both embodied actions with intent and strategic constructions of self and other that hold relations and relationships in a tensive struggle for power. Performance thus becomes the strategic mode of communication that makes manifest race, culture, and whiteness as social constructions; the naming and sustaining of

difference within sanctioned systems of power (race), the embodiment and enactment of belief that is both agonistic and antagonistic

(culture), and the promoted inheritance and maintenance of superiority relative to a pained history of dominance (whiteness).

OF RACE,

CULTURE,

AND

WHITENESS

1205

sustaining hierarchies of power and privilege and its role in resisting, subverting, and navi-

gating within them.” The core of Hamera’s construction situates performance within the field of performance studies as a critical tool, as an explanatory metaphor of human interaction, and as an embodiment of doing that

“functions as an organizing trope for examining arange ofsocial practices” (Hamera, 2006, p. 2). The nature of these distinctions might

also play in the critical discussion of sociocultural happenings (performance in everyday life) or in the restaging of human experience in conspicuous performance for close scrutiny by a discerning audiences (as shown in the performance script offered in the conclusion).

To further explicate a definitional frame of

PERFORMANCE

performance, it can also be engaged across

asamode of communication (Bauman, 1986),

Elizabeth Bell’s (2008) constellation of interrelated concepts. In this case performance is both process and product. It is a thing doing

a constitutive process of “making, not faking”

and creating, as well as a thing being done.

(Turner, 1982) situated between making be-

Performance is a mode of communicative behavior. It reinforces how we make and share meaning within a communal (symbol-making and -sharing) society. Hence performance is

Performance is an embodied practice of behavior situated in context. Variously defined

lieve and making belief (Schechner, 2006),

as “restored behavior” or “twice behaved be-

havior” (Schechner, 1985), and, along with the dynamics of the term performance, as being “on the move” (Conquergood, 1995;

see also Hamera, 2018). Conquergood (2002) described performance “(1) as work of imagination, (2) as a pragmatics of inquiry (both

as model and method), as an optic and operation of research, and (3) as a tactics of inter-

also a mechanism, mode, and method of shaping identities (Bauman, 1986; Diamond, 1996; Pelias, 1992; Schechner, 2002; Turner,

1982). Performance is productive and purposeful, which suggests that performance causes, creates, and produces both itself and

vention” (p. 152). His description establishes

things outside of itself. It further suggests that performance is activity with intent and pur-

performance as a technology of knowing, cri-

pose. It generates activity, meaning, response,

tiquing, analyzing, and giving witness to the

effect, and the sociopolitical nature of those orientations. And in the process, performance shows positionality. For practical purposes, “positionality” refers to someone’: political positioning in relation to ideas, beliefs, and values (Goffman, 1959; Johnson, 2003; Stern

nature of and argument about everyday human social engagement as activism.

Conquergood’s

(2002) approach also

serves to outline the embodied intentionalities

of performance to affect/effect particular social aspects in everyday civic culture. Judith Hamera (2018) writes: “Performance Studies as a field examines both the role of performance in

& Henderson, 1993; Strine, Long, & Hopkins,

1990). And performance is traditional and transformative. This suggests that performance

1206

+

PERFORMANCE

OF RACE,

CULTURE,

references past ways of doing, seeing, and knowing things and acts of human social engagement. Performance involves and invokes the literal and the figurative, the seen and

the imagined, the theoretically concrete and things within the spiritual realm. In this sense, performance asks audiences to question and recognize past practices and work toward social and cultural transformation (Blau, 1990;

Conquergood, 1995; Sayre, 1990). Bell suggests that these definitional frames of performance can be used to further articulate the three large claims important to all theories of performance: That performance is epistemic. Performance works establish specific ways of discovery and knowing. This suggests that through performance we come to know things in everyday life through experiencing, through observing other perfor-

AND

WHITENESS

and procedures. Such performances of resistance have the potential to lead to change, and change potentially establishes new performances that become either constitutive or establish ongoing patterns of resistance to hegemony (e.g., feminism, queer theory, ethnic studies, etc.).

Performance is also critical. In this construction performance seeks to explore the deep structures that undergird and inform processes of effect and circumstance. Through close and critical examination in performance and of performances, there is an attempt to

deconstruct experience to find the origins of meaning. It is a process of retelling the nature of experience and examining the twice behaved behavior (Schechner, 1985). Madison (2012) offers six purposes of critical work that further empower the intelligibility of per-

mances, through the rehearsal of possibilities and potentialities. And through engaging performances and having those performances evaluated by others as effective or not through their interpersonal and critical response to performance. Performance is also constitutive. It establishes,

formance in the service of discovery. In applying Madison’s intention to performance, performance (as critical) seeks to articulate and identify hidden forces and ambiguities that operate beneath appearances, guide judgment and evaluation emanating from our dis-

creates and is given form while it also estab-

cal expression within different interpretive communities relative to their unique symbol

lishes, instigates, and gives meaning in the act

of doing. Such as in the case of doctrines, laws, policies, and procedures in the way that rules work toward dictating or shaping human action

as expected performed cultural membership. Thus, the attitudes, beliefs, and values that are

shared by a group of people are displayed in performance moving toward definitions and notions of culture as communal connections. The recursive cycles of an issuance of belief, assumption of belief by doing, and the recognition of the doing confirms individual membership through recognizable and associational performances. Oppositional performances such as acts of resistance, riot, or protest also establish relationality through a rejection of particular social norms, policies, acts/actions,

content, and direct our attention to the criti-

systems, customs, and codes. Performance

also seeks to demystify the ubiquity and magnitude of power, provide insight and inspire acts of justice, and name and analyze what is intuitively felt (Bell, 2008; Madison, 2012). To this extent, performance with a critical intentionality does not forestall the aesthetic pleasures of engaging and audiencing performance. But it reinforces the purposefulness of performance as a critical aesthetic that seeks to inform as it engages. In The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (1959), sociologist Erving Goffman dramatizes the associational reference of performance to theatrical structures including “front” and “backstage” dimensions of behavior. This

PERFORMANCE

construction offers an accessible comparative framework that does not conflate performance with entertainment. But in his dramaturgical approach, human interaction is viewed as a performance shaped by environment and audience. It is constructed to provide others with “impressions” that are consonant with the desired goals of the actor (p. 17). Goffman defines “interaction” as the “reciprocal influence of individual upon one another's actions when in one another's immediate physical presence” and “performance” as “all the activity of a given

OF RACE,

CULTURE,

AND

WHITENESS

1207

scientists” (p. 199). Within their construct, there is not an argument against the recognition of

a materiality of difference (e.g., skin color, bodily features, etc.) but the social construction and values placed within or mapped onto

those differences establishing a hierarchy of value. Rodolfo D. Torres, Louis F. Mirén, and

Jonathan Xavier Inda (1999) state it best:

participant on a given occasion which serves

race has “no biological basis. ‘Race’ is not a fact of nature. But ‘it’ does exist to the extent that ‘race’ is an integral part of a classificatory systems through which a racialized social order is reproduced and maintained” (p. 5). Short

to influence in any way any of the other partici-

of examining a history of race, the nature of

pants” (1959, p. 15). The very core of Goffman’s

the offering by Donnor and Ladson-Billings begins to signal the undergirding intention of critical race theory (CRT), which can be used to outline problematics related to race.

approach is to illuminate the commonalities of intention and impression management both

in the sociological real of everyday life and in the theatrical realism that is simulated on the stage. RACE Race, most often referenced as the categorized

phenotypic materiality of human origins (Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid), is a social construct to mark difference. A differ-

ence that establishes a set of relational practices and commitments that are historically and situationally derived. The effects of such distinction are made manifest in forms of power, privilege, and propriety that both intervene and guide the politics of human social engagement. A relationality of value that always marks privilege over pathology with

white (Caucasoid) being placed in the position of hierarchy over all others. In establishing an argument of “Critical Race Theory and the Postracial Imaginary,’ Jamel K. Donnor and Gloria Ladson-Billings (2018) write that “the challenge for social scientists working with race is that all social science disciplines (to some extent) use the concept ‘race’ as if were a fact of nature despite the denial of its existence by natural scientists and social

Delgado and Stefancic (2001) outline some

basic tenets of CRT that also provide an orientation to the everyday presence and effects of race and the social operations of racism. First, CRT is grounded in the notion that racism is ordinary, not aberrational. It is the usual way society does business. Racism is the everyday experience of most people of color in the United States. Second, CRT suggests that systems of white-over-nonwhites serve important purposes, both in the psychic sense of personal superiority and in the material valuation and benefits of such social

consideration. Third, CRT interrogates the “social construction” thesis, which holds that

race and races are products of social thought and relations. The social construction of race suggests that “race” does not even correspond to a biological or genetic reality. Rather, races are categories that society invents, manipulates, or reinvents when convenient—relative

to the evolution of social need. People with common origins share certain physical traits of course, such as skin color, physique, and hair texture. But these constitute only an extremely small portion of their genetic endowment.

1208

«

PERFORMANCE

OF RACE,

CULTURE,

AND

WHITENESS

Fourth, CRT focuses on differential racial-

In which case, these basic tenets of CRT offer

ization and its many consequences. Critical

a broader, though necessarily contained dis-

writers in law, as well as social science, have

cussion of race as a social construct that marks difference through a recognition and prejudice

drawn attention to the ways in which the dominant society racializes different minority groups at different times. This occurs in response to shifting needs such as the labor market. Hence the hierarchy of value has, as in the history of African/black slavery in the United States, as an economic variable rela-

tive to who are the workers and how are cost of living wages determined. Fifth, CRT ad-

dresses how identity politics are always complicated and infused by the reality of intersectionality and antiessentialism. In which case, there is no person who has a single, easily stated, unitary identity that is not always and already complicated by the politics of origin, miscegenation, gender, and class. These vari-

ables exist among others that often inform the social construction of a singular identity to which race often serves as the first variable of categorization and reduction.

Sixth, CRT identifies the notion of a unique voice of color. Coexisting in somewhat uneasy

of difference. Ijeoma Oluo (2018) offers an important definitional distinction in racism. She

writes that racism is not just a “prejudice against someone because of their race,” but “a prejudice against someone because of their race,

when those views are reinforced by systems of power” (p. 26). This important definitional distinction acknowledges a predisposition to difference, in relation to the sociological struc-

tures that sanction a differentiate power relative to the marking of difference. And ostensi-

bly that difference effects everyday acts of racism in which racism is a performative act, or a thing done in relation to others.

Roderick A. Johnson (2007) writes that race as a sociological construct “both accounts

for the logics by which institutions differentiate and classify, include and exclude, and

names the processes by which people inter-

tension with antiessentialism, the voice-of-

nalize those logics” (p. 192). Such processes of internalization could lead to forms of internal oppression, as well as the more empowering

color thesis holds that because of their differ-

mobilization of identity politics that coalesce

ent histories and experiences with oppression black, Indian, Asian, and Latino/a writers and

movements of resistance and communities of critical social and academic thought. Such is

thinkers may be able to communicate to their white counterparts matters that the whites are unlikely to know. Minority status, in other words, brings with it a presumed competence to speak about race and racism. The “legal storytelling” movement urges black and brown writers to recount their experiences with racism and the legal system, and to apply their own unique perspectives to assess master nar-

the guiding impulse of the performance of resistance as political activism. It also bolsters self-value and histories of struggle and survival in the emergence of ethnic studies in

American colleges and universities. CULTURE

Culture is most often discussed as the constellation of practices that represents attitudes,

ratives (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001, pp. 6-9). CRT has a further interest in the counternarrative to race pathology, with a critique of white privilege and the social capital of whiteness as marketable commodity or the “prop-

values. This staid approach to defining culture lacks the dynamism of culture that is consistently animated by membership; social, politi-

erty functions of whiteness” (Harris, 1993).

cal, and environmental context; and change

beliefs, commitments, rituals, and communa!

PERFORMANCE

in the narration of individualized experience made manifest through performance. Drawing from perspectives of culture grounded in traditions of critical ethnography and Performance Studies, the following two definitional

frames animate the notion of culture.

Kathleen Stewart's (1996) ethnographic study offers an orientation to culture that is fluid and emergent and in which “the side of the road” becomes both metaphor and metonymy. It is both comparable to and representative of the descriptive topography of the West Virginia landscape, which is always in-

clusive ofits people. She writes: Culture, as it is seen through its productive forms and means of meditation, is

not reducible to a fixed body of social value and belief or direction precipitant of lived experience in the world. But grows into a space on the side of the road where stories weighted with soci-

ality take on a life of their own. (p. 210)

OF

RACE,

CULTURE,

AND

WHITENESS

1209

the political and associational values of com-

munal life, emerges in the telling of the told by multiple coinformants of community/culture

(Pollock, 1990).

Dwight Conquergood (2013) writes of cul-

ture as performance in which the animating force of culture becomes the defining feature of its essence. He asks: “Is culture a system, a

cross-hatch of rules, a pattern of meanings a deep storage vault, a set of distorting filters or

blinders, a worldview, or so on?” (p. 16). He answers his own question in suggesting that

cultural processes both pull towards a moral center as social dramas are enacted while they simultaneously express themselves outward from the depth of that symbolizing, synthesizing core. That is, cultures throw off forms of them-

selves—literally, “expressions” that are publicly accessible. These forms of expression of culture collect, set, heighten, frame, stylize, regulate, reproduce, refract,

contain, and fix amorphous energies,

Stewart's orientation to culture is in the multilayered and sedimented stories that people tell of experience, almost documenting life in story; story that becomes lessons and ways of remembering, archiving, and pro-

moting social membership. Stewart’s description of culture is as an emergent quality in and of space, those practiced places of human social engagement (Certeau, 1984). Her definitional frame, while situated in a critical ethnographic study of the West Virginia coal camps, offers a broad understanding of culture that resists the reductive characteristics of circumstance and the projected tropes of regionality or even ethnic existence of the people, but emerges through story, or how people narrate lived experience. It is through the storying that the

“sociality takes ona life oftheir own” (Stewart, 1996, p. 210). And the articulation of sociality,

drives, impulses, tension. These height-

ened surfacing forms throw into bold relief the core values, virtues, and vision

of a culture. (Conquergood, 2013, pp. 16, 18)

In his approach, Conquergood invokes Victor Turner’s (1982) notion of the social drama: “A sequence of social interactions of a conflictive, competitive, or agonistic type”

(p. 33) that progresses and delineates its stages as breach, crisis, redress, and reintegration or

schism to describe the dynamism of culture that continually makes and remakes itself. Conquergood speaks to the symbolizing practices within culture that define and make meaning through varying expressive and particularized modes that are recognizable, or that become recognizable within a communal system of sharing and sense making. All of

1210

-

PERFORMANCE

OF RACE,

CULTURE,

which become critical components of culture grounded in performance and performative enactment and how people perform cultural membership. WHITENESS

While whiteness references a particularized racial category, it can be discussed as a set of

performative practices that manifest the social perceptions and effects of being white. There are extensive treatises on the emergence of white studies across a range ofresearch traditions including those by Appelbaum (2016), McIntosh (1990), and Morrison (1993), as well as Hill (1997) and Roediger (1994). The autoethnographic piece by Bonnie Kae Grover, “Growing Up White in America?”

(Delgado & Stefancic, 1997) offers a particularly potent reflective stance on defining whiteness. It reads more as performance text than the presumptions of a scholarly treatise:

AND

WHITENESS

This short excerpt is important because it speaks from an autoethnographic perspective of how whiteness is performed and perceived as a social and relational act; as something

that bleeds the borders between performance, race, and culture. The narrative questions the discovery and the naming of being white as a privileged positionality that creates a hierarchy of value, and then how that privilege is made manifest in performing whiteness and thus recentering white authority (Perry, 2007, p. 245). The narrative also helps to process what John Warren (1999) outlines as four general

approaches in the whiteness literature. First, a method of researching whiteness as a social critique and a push for antiracist social practice. This research considers multiple locations and utilizes multiple methods in an effort to advocate for social change leading to the end of racism. Second, a course of study that considers the use of whiteness as a lens for reading, critiquing, or deconstructing multiple kinds of texts, most specifically literary, scholarly, or

No, I not ashamed of being white. But I

cinematic sources. Third, research that seeks

am ashamed of what being white can mean to some folks who are proud of being white. And I’m ashamed of what it can mean to be white when that whiteness can so easily be used to hurt people who aren't white. I definitely am ashamed of that part of whiteness. Because in America, whiteness means being domi-

to understand whiteness as rhetorically discursive space. This trend has authors insisting on questions about what this location or positionality does and how it operates rhetorically as a privileged place of power. And fourth, how whiteness is understood as enactment. This body of research seeks to understand how race, specifically whiteness, can be understood as a performance that works to constitute and continually reconstitute itself through everyday embodiments and practices. In the preceding autoethnographic narra-

nant, and it stands to reason that if some-

body’s dominant, somebody else is down. It's delightful to be able to mindlessly enjoy “white” culture. But is it really white? Or did white folks just apply the Discovery Doctrine like the white Europeans did when they took over the continent? And did somebody else or at least their culture get stamped out in the bargain one more time? (Grover, 1997, p. 34)

tive, Grover (1997) begins with a positional stance that both identifies being white and her orientation to being white in relation to the public critique of whiteness associated with being white. She then acknowledges shame of the social critique of whiteness followed by the recognition of the relational harm that

PERFORMANCE

whiteness both informs and inflicts on those who are nonwhite. She names not only the historicity of whiteness in America, but its direct association with power and privilege. Then she offers a counterlogic that situates whiteness in a noncritical historical context of manifest destiny and the unassailable right to claim space, place, and the authority of naming linked with the great discoveries of Europeans in the Americas. And while intended as a rhetorical strategy of interrogating whiteness and calling whites to reflect on their volition in performance whiteness—the strategy actually reinstantiates whiteness and white privilege. In her narrative voice, Grover goes further to attempt to resurrect the logic of whiteness, but not without challenge when

she states that “whiteness is only one possible part of the greater wonder of being alive in this world,” Grover, 1997, p. 187). Her call to recognize being white is a call to recognize

the culpabilities of performing whiteness. And her call for a deep reflection of white people to explore “the greater wonder of being alive” further instantiates the privileges of whiteness coupled with the ability to claim a diversity of origins, their otherness, while still claiming the

positionality and privileges of being white. The use of this particular excerpt is not intended to demean the articulation of opinion and accomplishment of the author's contribution, which could be read from and through differing lenses. But to show the manner in which whiteness reinstitutes/reconstitutes/ reinstantiates itself even in the process of assuming a critical positionality on being white (Perry, 2007). It also provides a short case study that constellates Warren's four general approaches in the whiteness literature: a push for antiracist social practice and an effort to advocate for social change leading to the end

OF RACE,

CULTURE,

AND

WHITENESS

.

1211

The Calgary Anti-Racism Education collec-

tive (CARED, 2018) provides a series of helpful guides that outline key features of whiteness and a comparative distinction between white versus whiteness. These distinctions are based on the difference between the materiality of bodies in/as white as a racial category versus the social cache of being white made manifest not only in white bodies, but the performance and performativity of whiteness that makes the privilege of being white possible. CARED differentiates between the sociological category of white as it relates to race whiteness as the performative dimension of being white, and whiteness as a set of norma-

tive privileges granted to white-skinned individuals and groups. Whiteness is normalized in its production/maintenance for those of and within that group, such that its operations are “invisible” to those privileged by it, it isa form of habituated performance (hooks,

1994). But is not “invisible” to those who are oppressed and disadvantaged by it. In addition, whiteness is both performed and relational in the public knowledge of privilege that is socially granted to whiteness and white people. Whiteness (like the broader category of “white”) has shifted over time (i.e., Irish, Italian, Spanish, Greek and southern

European peoples have at times been “raced” as nonwhite) (Frye, 1983; Ignatiev, 2008;

Kivel, 1996). Whiteness as a whole shapes how white people view themselves and others. It places white people in a place of structural advantage where white cultural norms and practices go unnamed and unquestioned (Frankenberg, 1993). Hence, a form of cultural racism is founded in the belief that “whiteness is considered to be the universal... and allows one to think and speak as if Whiteness described and defined the world” (Henry &

of racism, whiteness as a lens for reading texts,

Tator, 2006, p. 327).

whiteness as rhetorically discursive space, and how whiteness is understood as enactment.

Relative to the social construction of whiteness as a performative accomplishment cultural

1212

-

PERFORMANCE

OF RACE,

CULTURE,

contexts in which the value determination of

whiteness (and being white) has meaning, whiteness is a performance that seeks a knowledgeable audience for its importance. In which

AND

WHITENESS

a strategic template for the assumption of performative claims on diverse identities. Butler

(1988) writes that

case, whiteness is both reinforced in communities of whites and confirmed in the powereffect over nonwhites. This occurs in a social

gender is in no way a stable identity or locus of agency from which various acts proceed; rather, it is an identity tenu-

economy in which such value is recognized

ously constituted in time—an identity

and is allowed to be reinforced. In this sense,

instituted through a stylized repetition of

whiteness mimics not only the history of racial

acts. Further, gender is instituted through

categorization, but also the mechanisms of performance and practices of culture that both

the stylization of the body and, hence,

animate its presence and establish associa-

in which bodily gestures, movements,

tional value in communities of recognition.

and enactments of various kinds constitute the illusion of an abiding gendered

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO ENGAGE IN THE PERFORMANCE OF RACE, CULTURE, OR WHITENESS?

must be understood as the mundane way

self. (p. S19) Like gender, through a Butlerian lens, race,

Keeping the preceding definitional frames in

culture, and whiteness function as performatives. Race, while considered the materiality

mind—to perform race, culture, or whiteness

and designation of origins, is in fact a social

is to recognize the social valuation of these

construction that is imbued with meaning made manifest not just in the materiality of bodies but also in the performative associa-

categorical, associational, and performative

qualities and then enact them in the company of witnessing and knowledgeable audiences with purpose. This performance means to embody and project the tropes and figures of being within the processes of information, formation, and transformation of the self in society. At times it means to practice or sub-

vert the ubiquity and magnitude of power linked with issues of race, culture, or white-

ness for personal and social advantage as a form of resistance. And it means to position oneself in the moral center of the social dramas that are enacted around such embodied and performative practices that give rise to struggles of self and social determinations. This is not accomplished merely through mimicry but also through a sophisticated knowing of both stylistics and anticipated effects of performative presence in that performance always makes manifest that which it invokes.

Judith Butler (1988) promotes a construction of (gender) performativity that serves as

tions of race. The events in Charlottesville, Virginia, on August 12, 2017, are relevant to

this discussion. Hundreds of white nationalists, alt-righters, neo-Nazis, and members of

the Ku Klux Klan participated in a “Unite the Right” rally that resulted in the death of one counter-protester and two police officers. Prior to the rally many cities across the country had decided to remove Confederate statues of Civil War heroes from town squares and seats of state government as a recognition

of the pained reminders of racism in US history. Earlier in 2017, the Charlottesville City Council

had voted to remove the Robert E. Lee statue and rename the park where it was located. The protest by white nationalists to this decision was met with counter protests by those who both saw the political and cultural necessity of removing the statue and the need to stand up against the performed racism of the white nationalists who would resist the decision.

PERFORMANCE

This example is used for a number of reasons: (1) the national discussion on remov-

ing Confederate statues reinforced how the statues stood as edifice to the racist history of this country, and the enduring argument of white superiority and to the war to maintain

OF RACE,

CULTURE,

AND

WHITENESS

.«

1213

performance the appearance of being natural. Butler (1988) writes, “the appearance ofsubstance is precisely that. A constructed identity, a performative accomplishment which the mundane social audience, including the actors themselves, come

to believe and to

slavery; (2) the statues stood as ideological

perform in the mode ofbelief” (p. 520). And

performances of white-race pride; (3) the

it is through the conscious repetition of socially constructed norms, like the existence and emergence of white nationalist organizations and what they represent, which in part seek to sustain the presumed privileges of whiteness. The emphasis here on “conscious” is important. It is important relative to the subversive qualities of cultural performance, in the

presence of the white nationalists was a public performance and promotion of racial privilege as they chanted, “You will not replace us!”; and (4) the very notion ofwhite nationalists is a collective performed identity of whiteness as a dominant relational politic. The Charlottesville case also forces a reckoning of the social construction of race, racial authenticity, and sustaining race through performance, both

Charlottesville case, in which the rage of racial

inside and outside of particular bodies as daily

identity fuels the conflict with racial justice and democracy. But in Butler’s (1993) understanding, performativity is neither conscious, conspicuous, calculating, nor choice driven per se—it is an assimilation of the presumptions of the everyday, the socially expected; the regenerating of the norms of daily sociality. She writes: “Performativity is neither free play

practice and as public critique (Alexander, 2017; Johnson, 2003; McAllister, 2011). Karen E. Fields and BarbaraJ.Fields (2012) introduce the notion of “racecraft” to suggest both the performative and sociorelational as-

pects of race, and thus racism as predefined difference and the reaction to that difference: “Unlike physical terrain, racecraft originates not in nature but in human action and imagination; it can exist no other way. The action

and imagining are collective yet individual, day-to-day yet historical, and consequential even thou nested in the mundane” (pp. 1819). In their construction there is a relational-

ity between the categorization of race and the performativity of racism, each pivoting and

producing the reality of the other. For Butler, performativity becomes the construction of possibility in which racial and cultural norms and discourses are maintained, both

for the purpose of confirming and validating social membership as well as for subverting the privileges and possibilities of being the other

(passing). The Charlottesville case with white nationalists precisely evidences how the ongoing citationality of norms and discourses through performativity gives race and cultural

nor theatrical self-presentation; nor can it be

simply equated with performance. Moreover, constraint is not necessarily that which sets a limit to performativity; constraint is, rather,

that which impels and sustains performativ-

ity” (p. 9S). Yet Butler’s utterance that equates performance with “neither free play nor theatrical self-presentation” reduces the import of performance drawing attention back to the criticality of performance as making not faking (Chadderton, 2018). Hamera (2006) indicates that “performance is both an event and a heuristic tool that illuminates the presentational and representational elements of culture. Its inherent ‘eventness’ (‘in motion’) makes it especially effective for engaging and describing the embodied processes that produce and con-

sume culture” (p. $). Performance is also the mechanism in which race, culture, and enacted

identities such as whiteness are sustained.

1214

PERFORMANCE

OF RACE,

CULTURE,

A CONSPICUOUS PERFORMANCE OF RACIAL ENCOUNTER IN THE EVERYDAY While Grover’s story on growing up in white America and the case of Charlottesville might serve as case studies of the performative aspects of race, and racial passing, the following

crafted autoethnographic performance further reifies the nature of performance and performative experience in everyday life and how staged performance makes conspicuous every-

day experience to draw attention for closer scrutiny and visibility. The script exemplifies and embodies the politics of performance, and particularly the enactment and effects that link performance of race, culture, and

whiteness. “Walking

the

Dog/Being

the

Dog”

Throughout my life, my black father told me stories about living in the Jim Crow South. Many of these stories hinged on a strained performance of servitude under the lingering privileges of whiteness and the dangers of blackness. My father told “back of the bus” stories and “back door” stories. He told Ku Klux Klan stories and lynching stories. He told, “Don’t look at white women stories” and

“Don't look the white man in the eye stories.” And, like my father, my mother told “daughter of a sharecropper” stories. She told “being a black female domestic” stories.” And she told “having to care for white babies when her own babies had to go without” stories. The stories they told were not told as entertainment or as fanciful tales of days gone by. These were pained stories that my black parents told me as lessons, not of their hardship or sacrifice, but of their strategies for survival. I currently live in a neighborhood adjacent to the private Catholic-Jesuit university campus where I work. Some might describe the neighborhood as upscale.

AND

WHITENESS

There are several white faculty members from the university who live nearby, including several from the college that I serve as the academic dean. In the dailyness of my excursion back and forth between campus and home, I see few other black folks. But more important to this story, the white folks who see me see very few other black folks in their neighborhood. One day I was walking my dog, a thirteen-year-old cocker spaniel named Pepper Anne (Peppy for short). I was wearing my

hoodie and a knit cap. (Maybe I looked like Trayvon Martin). We walk every morning and see some of the same people; people walking their dogs and people leaving their homes in the morning to begin their day. Peppy and I are a friendly duo, so we say good morning as we cross paths with others during our morning ritual. Often, we pause as

she, the dog, meets and greets her friends. It is an interesting thing to walk a dog, because I probably would not have much to talk about with many of these people other than to exchange greetings, but the dogs seem to find a conversation of engagement that forces the humans to perform sociality. On this particular morning I see a white woman whom I have seen before walking her dog. I recognize her coming toward me from a distance on the sidewalk. She is slight of build and her dog is bigger and maybe a little sturdier than Peppy. The difference today is that she continues moving in my direction as I move in her direction. Usually she crosses the street before we encounter each other. This is a person on whom the niceties of morning greetings are usually lost. While I might wave or say “good morning” or Peppy might bark, she never responds. This morning she is walking toward

me and not crossing. We get about 20 feet away from each other and she begins to scream, “Stay away from me! Stay away from me and my dog! Iam warning you!”

PERFORMANCE

OF RACE,

CULTURE,

AND

WHITENESS

She is really screaming! And at that point her dog becomes unruly and she becomes entangled in his leash. I am not fully aware of

“Tam also confused.” “I don’t know what is going on.”

what's going on in the moment, or whether

“Lam innocent.”

.

1215

Or as if to say,

the dog is in attack mode to protect his owner because of her screaming, or whether the

attack mode is the true nature of the dog and she is trying to protect us (or herself). I only know that she began to scream before the dog became unruly. Because there are cars parked on the side ofthe road to my right, my only option to avoid her is to walk into the yard to my left, to walk the distance through the yard to pass the spectacle of which I am not a part. Peppy leads the way because she is scared, and she wants to get away from both the barking dog and the screaming white woman, as do I. In that moment, the screaming attracts the

attention of other good white folks. Several of them pause, standing outside their cars, look-

ing to see what is happening. I see a few faces looking through windows. The man whose yard I am crossing is now standing on his front porch with his hands on his hips. It is a fucking 360° cinematic moment with me at the center pivoting to see multiple pairs of white eyes staring at the scene, staring at me.

In that moment I am vulnerable to this historical legacy of relational dynamics—a white woman screaming in a white neighborhood at to what appears to be a black man encroaching upon her and other white people seemingly coming to her rescue.

But I actually say nothing and keep walking. Quickly. And I do not turn fully around but take only side glances to ensure that no one is following me. That morning, Peppy and I take an alternate route back home. While the scene I have described could have been about the white woman warning me of her aggressive dog, there are missing pieces in her public performance that go unresolved. Like maybe the actual evidence of threat, other than my black male presence; or Like maybe the specter of my snarling vicious cocker spaniel threatening an attack, Or maybe even an apology. (Alexander, 2017, p. 62-64)

Within this short performative script

(which has been performed in front of an audience), I am seeking to exemplify the politics and polemics of performing race, culture,

and whiteness in an everyday situation. Within the narrative there is a naming and recognizing of features that mark particularity and difference. By virtue of place and circumstance there is an establishment of relational orientations that activate the properties and proprieties of community. Through the racial subjects in the narrative there is an instantiation

And Iam one of their neighbors too.

of hierarchies of power that regulate the play-

And I walk this path every morning.

ers, actors, and audience in the unfolding social

And I have a PhD, dammit! And I am an academic dean at the

drama. And the communicative strategy of outrage and fear, both to the presumed victim and

private Catholic Jesuit University that is a block away.

positionalities of value to which action and

perpetrator (not clear which is which) invokes

moment. I offer the onlookers a befuddled

response are needed. And the historicity of racial roles and cultural relations mediate social understanding as it shapes the perfor-

look, as if to say,

mance in the scene and of the scene.

But I am a black man first, and none of

the other traits offer me protection in the

1216

-

PERFORMANCE

OF RACE,

CULTURE,

The construction “performance of race, culture, and whiteness” invokes an interrelatedness of intensions and effects. Race, culture,

and whiteness are all social constructs that are animated through performance: doing, telling, showing, being. In which case performance is process and product, productive action with

purposeful intent, and performance becomes the engine of performativity’s stylization while also presenting the possibility of transformative disruptions and interventions as resistance. The social actors in the dramas of everyday life do not always self-select the roles they play. But they can reshape the performances with which they engage in promoting productive culture and establishing constructive relational engagements toward social justice. FURTHER

READING

Afary, K. (2009). Performance and activism: Grassroots discourse after the Los Angeles rebellion of 1992. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Alexander, B. K. (2006). Performing black masculinity: Race, culture, and queer identity. Lanham, MD:

Alta Mira Press. Alexander, B. K. (2012). The performative sustaina-

bility of race: Reflections on black culture and the politics of identity. New York, NY: Peter Lang. Althusser, L. (2014). On the reproduction of capitalism:

Ideology and ideological state apparatuses. London, UK: Verso. Campbell, M. L. (2016). Making black Los Angeles: Class, gender, and community, 1850-1917. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. Cooks, L. M., & Simpson, J. S. (2007). Whiteness,

pedagogy, performance. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Diamond, E. (Ed.). (1996). Performance and cultural politics. New York, NY: Routledge.

Ehlers, N. (2012). Racial imperatives: Discipline, per-

formativity, and struggles against subjections. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Giroux, H. A. (1997). Rewriting the discourse of racial identity: Towards a pedagogy and politics of whiteness. Harvard Educational Review (Summer),

1-29.

AND

WHITENESS

Gudmundson, L., & Wolfe, J. (Eds.). (2010) Blacks and blackness in Center America: Between race and place. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Hamera, J. (2007). Dancing communities:

Perfor-

mance, difference and connection in the global city. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Madison, D. S., & Hamera, J. (Eds.). (2007). Handbook of performance studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Pelias, R. (1992). Performance studies: The interpretation ofaesthetic texts. New York, NY: St. Martin's Press.

Roediger, D. R. (1991). The wages of whiteness: Race

and the making of the American working class. London, UK: Verso Books. Roediger, D. R. (2002). Colored white: Transcending

the racial past. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Roediger, D. R. (2005). Working toward whiteness: How America’s immigrants became white. New York, NY: Basic Books. Roediger, D. R. (2008). How race survived United

States history: From settlement and slavery to the Obama phenomenon. London, UK: Verso. Roediger, D. R. (2012). The production of difference:

Race and the management of labor in U.S. history. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Rottenberg, C. (2008). Performing Americanness: Race, class, and genderinmodern African-American

and Jewish-American literature. Hanover, NH: Dartmouth College Press. Warren, J. (2001). Doing whiteness: On the performative dimension of race in the classroom. Communication Education, 50(2), 91-108.

Warren, J. (2003). Performing purity: Whiteness, pedagogy and the reconstitution of power. New York, NY: Peter Lang. Yancy, G. (2017). On race: 34 conversations in a time

ofcrisis. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. REFERENCES

Alexander, B. K. (2017). Black male/white tower: A performative film autocritography. In Gil Richard Musolf (Ed.), Oppression and resistance: Structure, agency, transformation (pp. S1-68). Blue Ribbon Papers of Studies in Symbolic Interactionism Series Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Limited.

PERFORMANCE

Applebaum, B. (2016). Critical whiteness studies. In G. W. Noblit (Ed.), Oxford research encyclopedia of education Oxford, UK, and New York, NY: Oxford

Unviersity Press. Retrieved from http://oxfordre .com/education/ Bauman,

R. (1986). Story, performance, and event: Contextual studies in oral narrative. Cambridge,

UK: Cambridge University Press. Bell, E. (2008). Theories of performance. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Blau, H. (1990). The audience. Baltimore, MD: John

Hopkins University Press. Butler, J. (1988). Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory. Theatre Journal, 40(4), 519531. Butler, J. (1993). Endangered/endangering: Schematic racism and white paranoia. In R. GoodingWilliams (Ed.), Reading Rodney King/Reading urban uprising (pp. 15-22). New York, NY: Routledge. Calgary Anti-Racism Education. (2018). Understanding whiteness. Calgary, Canada: Author. Retrieved

from

http://www.ucalgary.ca/cared

/whiteness/ Certeau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life. Berkeley: University of California Press. Chadderton, C. (2018). Making whiteness and acting white: The performativity of race and race as a performative. In J. Butler (Ed.), Race and education. New York NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Conquergood, D. (1995). Of caravans and carnivals: Performance studies in motion. Drama Review,

39(4), 137-141. Conquergood, D. (2002). Performance studies: Interventions and radical research. Drama Review,

46(2), 145-156. Conquergood, D. (2013). Performing cultures: Ethnography, epistemology, and ethics. In E. P. Johnson (Ed.), Cultural struggles: Performance,

ethnography, praxis (pp. 1S-25). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (1997). Critical white

studies: Looking behind the mirror. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2001). Critical race theory: An Introduction. New York: NYU Press.

OF RACE,

CULTURE,

AND

WHITENESS

.«

1217

Donnor,J.K., & Ladson-Billings, G. (2018). Critical race theory and the postracial imaginary. In

N. K. Denzin & Y S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative inquiry (pp. 195-213). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE. Ferguson, R. A. (2007). Race. In B. Burgett & G. Hendler (Eds.), Keywords for American cultural studies (pp. 191-196). New York: NYU Press. Fields, K. E., & Fields, B.J.(2012). Racecraft: The soul

of inequality in American

life. London,

UK:

Verso. Frankenberg, R. (1993). White women, race matters:

The social construction of whiteness. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Frye, M. (1983). On being white: Thinking toward a

feminist understanding of race and race supremacy. In T. Burg (Ed.), Politics of reality: Essays in feminist theory. New York, NY: Crossing Press. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in every-

day life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Grover, B. K. (1997). Growing up white in America? In R. Delgado & J. Stefancic (Eds.), Critical white studies: Looking behind the mirror. Philadelphia,

PA: Temple University Press.

Hamera, J. (2006). Opening acts: Performance in/as communication and cultural studies. Thousand Oaks,

CA: SAGE. Hamera, J. (2018). Performance studies in critical communication studies. In J. Nussbaum (Ed.),

Oxford research encyclopedia of communication. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://oxfordre.com/communication

Harris, C. (1993). Whiteness as property. Harvard

Law Review, 106(8), 1707-1791. Henry, F., & Tator, C. (2006). The colour of democ-

racy: Racism in Canadian society (3rd ed.). Toronto, Canada: Nelson. Hill, M. (1997). Whiteness: A critical reader. New York: NYU Press.

hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York, NY: Routledge. Ignatiev, N. (2008). How the Irish became white. New York, NY: Routledge Classics.

Johnson, E. P. (2003). Appropriating blackness: Performance and the politics of authenticity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

1218

«

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

Johnson, R. (2007). Race. In B. Burgett & G. Hendler (Eds.), Keywords for American cultural studies. New York: NYU Press.

Trends, issues, priorities. In G. M. Philips & J. T. Wood (Eds.), Speech communication: Essays

Kivel, P. (1996). Uprooting racism: How white people can work for racial justice. Gabriola Island, Canada: New Society Press. Madison, D. S. (2012). Critical ethnography: Method, ethics, and performance (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks,

Communication Association (pp. 181-204). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Torres, R. D., Mirén, L. FB, & Inda, J. X. (Eds.).

CA; SAGE:

McAllister, M. E. (2011). Whiting up: Whiteface minstrels and stage Europeans in African American performance. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

McIntosh, P. (1990). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. Philadelphia, PA: Independent School. Morrison, T. (1993). Playing in the dark: Whiteness and the literary imagination. New York, NY: Vintage.

Oluo, I. (2018). So you want to talk about race. Berkeley, CA: Seal Press. Perry, P. (2007). White. In B. Burgett & G. Hendler (Eds.), Keywords for American cultural studies (pp. 242-246). New York: NYU Press. Pollock, D. (1990). Telling the told: Performing “like a family.” Oral History Review, 18(2), pp. 1-36. Roediger, D. R. (1994). Towards the abolition of whiteness: Essays on race, class and politics. London, UK: Verso Books. Sayre, H. (1990). Performance. In F, Lentricchia &

T. McLaughlin, Critical terms for literary study

(pp. 91-104). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press,

Schechner, R. (1985). Between theatre and anthropology. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press,

Schechner, R. (2002). Performance studies: An introduction. London, UK: Routledge. Schechner, R. (2006). Performance studies: An in-

troduction (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. Stern, C. S., & Henderson, B. (1993). Performance: Texts and contexts. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Stewart, K. (1996). A space on the side of the road: Cultural poetics in an “other” America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Strine, M. S., Long, B. W., & Hopkins, M. FE. (1990). Research in interpretation and performance studies:

to commemorate the 7Sth anniversary of the Speech

(1999) Race, identity and citizenship: A reader. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Turner, V. (1982). From ritual to theatre: The human seriousness ofplay. New York, NY: PAJ. Warren,J.T. (1999). Whiteness and cultural theory: Perspectives on research and education. Urban Review, 31(2), 185-203. Bryant Keith Alexander

PERFORMANCE STUDIES IN CRITICAL COMMUNICATION STUDIES

PERFORMANCE IN/AS COMMUNICATION STUDIES Performance studies presumes that political economy, cultural continuity, self-fashioning, and interpersonal exchange are embodied, aesthetic, affective, creative, contested, and

rhetorical processes whose work can be understood through analyses of their presentational and representational particulars. Within the field of communication, it is most closely aligned with rhetoric and critical cultural studies. But its many interdisciplinary incarnations include those that privilege modes of communication other than the linguistic, in-

cluding dance studies and ethnomusicology. Issues of aesthetics are central to the field;

performance studies assumes that matters of aesthetics are historically and contextually particular, are socially produced, and have political economic causes and effects. Performance studies scholars investigate storytelling, ritual, dance, music, and theater:

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

live and mediated, professional and amateur. But they also deploy “performance” as a heuristic tool for examining practices of everyday life, history, the economy and the law, material culture, and other cultural forms not typically considered performance, with the goal of excavating their aesthetic, theatrical, spectacular, audience-directed qualities, and then

explaining how these qualities do cultural and political work. Thus, in performance studies, performance is both an object and a method of study: a mode of communication and a strategy for framing and examining cultural artifacts and processes. The body is central to performance studies scholarship, not only because performance is conventionally understood as an embodied practice, but also be-

cause this conventional view reflects the deeper realization that our existence, communica-

tion, institutions, and our senses of self are

physical, material, and affective: inherently intersectional (Crenshaw, 1991; Flores, 2014)

and enmeshed in aesthetic and disciplinary regimes that may be thought of in theatrical terms. Finally, the field of performance studies insists on performance practice as a mode of scholarly production with activist potential. Performance studies scholars perform and direct performances by others. They produce performance festivals, write scripts, adapt texts for the stage, create one-person shows and installations, create performative prose, make

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

«

1219

useful summary for the multidimensionality of performance studies. According to Con-

quergood (2013, p. 42), the field triangulates: 1. Accomplishment—the making of art and remaking of culture, creativity; embodiment; artistic process and form ...

2. Analysis—the interpretation of art and culture; critical reflection; thinking

about, through, and with performance ... 3. Articulation—activism, outreach, connection to community applications and interventions.

The analytical and critical potential of performance studies derives from the productive elasticity and epistemologically ambivalent status of performance itself. Performance’s potency as an intellectual formation is affirmed by negation in the antitheatrical prejudice, perhaps best distilled in Plato’s Ion. In this dialogue (Plato, 1998), Socrates ruthlessly dismisses the hapless rhapsode (solo performer), Ion, as lacking any systematic art or domain of knowledge to call his own, as ir-

rational, and as a vector through which this dangerous irrationality infects his audiences. As a performer of Homer's poetry, Ion is reduced to a degraded copy of a copy: three removes from the Truth. Typically read as Plato’s critique of mimesis (representation), Ion also provides epistemological infrastructure for later views of theater and performance prac-

films, and author digital and printed textual products. In so doing, they challenge the textcentrism of the academy, explore the affective and corporeal dimensions of knowledge pro-

cally deceptive, and morally suspect. Yet it bears mention that the dialogue form is a play script—one critic calls it a “spectacle” (Richter,

duction in the field and in the archive, and

1998, p. 19)—and Socrates is a character

advocate for a “commingling of analytical and artistic ways of knowing that unsettles the institutional organization of knowledge and

within it. Jon’s performance potential is intrinsic to its intellectual work. Even in this withering critique, performance demonstrates its aesthetic and rhetorical utility, its affective force, and its wily refusal to stay in its putatively degraded and subordinated place.

the disciplines” (Conquergood, 2013, p. 41). Dwight Conquergood, one of the foremost US representatives of the field, provides a

tice, and performers, as inauthentic, intrinsi-

1220

-

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

The antitheatrical prejudice, coupled with performance’s corporeality, position it within what Michel Foucault (1980, p. 82) calls “subjugated knowledges”: those that are “located low down on the hierarchy, beneath the required level of cognition or scientificity.” As an embodied practice, it is associated with “body,” not “mind”; as an affective and affect-

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

In challenging both the default primacy of texts and the false opposition of text to performance in epistemological hierarchies, the field of performance studies also attempts to undermine the “apartheid of knowledges that divide theory from practice, scholarly production from embodiment, and thinking from

ing form, it is linked with the irrational. This

doing” (p. 43). Performance’s status as a subjugated knowl-

subjugated status manifests in performance's ambivalent place within elite US universities. As performance studies scholar Shannon

edge within these elite knowledge systems does not position it as intrinsically resistant to or critical of these systems, in and of itself.

Jackson notes in Professing Performance (2004),

Indeed, as the example of Louis XIV staging himself through the ballet reminds us, elite

in these institutions, performance practice— whether in the form of drills in argumentation or as actual theater—was dismissed as mere skill building, “equated with the extracurricular domain of exercise and athletics” (p. 58). Performance, like speech communication, was “applied” knowledge more easily incorporated into technical institutes and land grant universities. The fact that it was inescapably corporeal meant that it was also feminized knowledge, as women were relegated to

“body,” opposed to men as “mind.” Jackson notes that performance was suspect in the academy, in part because “(t]he image of a performing professor recalled and reproduced the feminized and amateur display associated with the unprofessional belletrist”

(2004, p. 59).

individuals, actors, and nation-states routinely deploy performance to assert and affirm their power. Performance studies as a field examines both the role of performance in sustain-

ing hierarchies of power and privilege and its role in resisting, subverting, and navigating

within them. The field’s emphasis on embodiment, including its recognition of the intrin-

sically intersectional and situated nature of the body, makes it a generative intellectual home for critical scholars investigating affect and desire, lived experiences of gender, race,

sexuality, ability, and class, and the ways that these forces and multiple dimensions

of

difference shape and are shaped by cultural, sociopolitical life.

Performance’s early institutional status as subjugated knowledge was cast in opposition

DEFINITIONS OF PERFORMANCE

to textual/textualized, elite structures of knowl-

In their essay “Research in Interpretation and

edge production and, in this binary, aligned with subjugated peoples whose reliance on orality, putative lack of print literacy, and/or status sans papiers was used to perpetuate their subordination. As Conquergood (2013, p. 35) argued, “The hegemony of textualism needs to be exposed and undermined.... The root metaphor of the text underpins the supremacy of [elite] Western knowledge systems by erasing the vast history of the tacit and the habitual.”

Performance Studies: Trends, Issues, Priorities,’ Mary Strine, Beverly Long, and Mary Frances Hopkins (1990) describe, rather than

define, performance as an “essentially contested concept...its very existence is bound up in disagreements about what it is and disagreements over its essence is itself part of that essence” (p. 183). Conquergood (1995, p. 137) labeled performance “a term on the move.” As these characterizations attest, multiple

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

-

1221

definitions of performance operate across the field. Folklorist Richard Bauman (1986, p. 3) defines performance as

Although Butler uses performance to elaborate on her theory of gender and posits that drag in particular is a parodic practice reveal-

a mode of communication, a way of

production, she does not consider theater per se a viable tool for doing this critical work. Nevertheless, both performance studies scholars in communication and those in theater studies use her conception of the performative to explore a wide range of normative and antinormative actions on stage and off. In such

ing the constructed, imitative nature of gender speaking, the essence of which resides

in the assumption of responsibility to an audience for a display of communicative skill, highlighting the way in which communication

is carried

out, above

and beyond its referential content.

analyses, “[w]hen performativity materializes Anthropologist Victor Turner (1982, p. 3) defines performance as a constitutive process,

as performance in that risky and dangerous negotiation between a ‘doing’ (a reiteration

one of “making, not faking” social life and cul-

of norms) and a thing done (discursive con-

tural continuity; performance studies scholar

ventions that frame our interpretations), be-

Diana Taylor (2016, p. 6) locates performance

tween someone's body and the conventions of

“between the AS IF and the IS, between pre-

tend and new constructions of the ‘real.”

embodiment, we have access to cultural meanings and critique” (Diamond, 1996, p. S). For

Theater director Richard Schechner (1985,

example, communication and performance

pp. 35-36) defines performance as “restored behavior” or “twice-behaved behavior.” The contested nature and multiple definitions of performance make it incumbent on researchers to clarify the parameters and presumptions about performance that they bring to their work, including articulating who or what performs, and in what sense.

In addition to performance, performance studies scholars deploy theories of performativity in their research, especially philosopher J. L. Austin and gender theorist Judith Butler. Austin (1975, p. 6) posited the performative

speech act as one in which “the issuing of the utterance is the performing of an action” when requisite conditions of authority are met. Butler

studies scholar Kristin M. Langellier, whose

work examines the performance of personal narrative, writes:

Why add performativity to performance? By performativity, I highlight the way speech acts have been extended and broadened to understand the constitutiveness of performance. That is, personal narrative performance constitutes identities

and experience, producing and reproducing that to which it refers. Here, personal narrative is a site where the social is articulated, structured, and struggled over. (Langellier, 1999, p. 129, emphases in

original)

(1990) uses Austin’s formulation to argue that gender is an embodied utterance: one that gains stability through repetition. It is “the repeated stylization of the body, a set of repeated acts within a highly rigid regulatory frame that congeals over time to produce the appearance of substance, of a natural sort of being” (Butler,

The fundamentally contested nature of performance, and multiple adaptations of performativity to include performance practice, both reflect and are reflected in the interdisciplinarity and crossdisciplinarity of contemporary performance studies as an institution. As the-

1990, p. 25).

ater historian Tracy Davis (2008, p. 1) notes,

1222

-»

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

studies,’ among others. Although departments of performance studies are found primarily in the United States and the United

public speaking and rhetoric in the latter. Elocution, the practice that first institutionalized protoperformance studies within communication, was both a symptom of and a cause of the emergence of a transatlantic public sphere in the 18th century. Irish actor and educator Thomas Sheridan defined it as “the just and graceful management of the

Kingdom, performance studies scholars, schol-

voice, countenance, and gesture in speaking”

arship, and journals are global. Yet this interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary diffusion may obscure specific genealogies of the field,

London in 1762 (quoted in Bacon, 1960, p.

in addition to departments of performance and communication studies, “performance schol-

ars can be found under the mantle ofphilosophy, ethnography, art history, political theory, media studies, music, rhetoric, and literary

including foundational practices, texts, and

presumptions that operate within specific institutional locations. Thus, rather than simply ask what performance is, it is more useful to explore its roots in communication, anthro-

pology, and theater studies. There are other genealogies of performance studies as well. For example, ethnomusicol-

ogy emerged from musicology, the study of musical structures, styles, history, and recep-

tion, which focused primarily on European canonical texts. Ethnomusicologists deploy methods of participant observation to explore music's social work with an explicit, though not exclusive, focus on nonelite global and

intercultural forms and communities. Dance studies grew from interdisciplinary origins in anthropology, history, movement notation and analysis, and performance practice. Both ethnomusicology and dance studies draw from and contribute to theoretical and methodological developments in performance studies. Within communication departments, journals, and scholarship, however, the genealogies dis-

cussed in the rest of this article are primary.

in a famous series of lectures delivered in 148). It was a genre of solo performance and a tool for self-advancement. As a genre, the solo elocutionist’s recitals

or lectures were the theater’s more reputable cousins: bourgeois, pedagogical, and disciplined. As a tool for consolidating middle class capital, “[e]locution was designed to recuperate the vitality of the spoken word from rural and rough working class contexts by regulating and refining its ‘performative excess’ through principles, science, systematic study, and standards of taste and criticism” (Con-

quergood, 2006, p. 143). The elocutionists’ academic and popular performances of literature coincided uneasily with the consolidation of literature as a university discipline in the United States at the turn of the 20th century, contributing to the growth of oral interpretation as a pedagogical and hermeneutic

tool: what Jackson (2009, p. 9) describes as “the ultimate form of close reading.” The oral interpretation of literature found a home in communication departments, par-

ticularly, although not exclusively, in land grant colleges and universities. Its status was betwixt and between public speaking, rhetorical criticism, and forensics, the competitive

GENEALOGIES OF PERFORMANCE STUDIES

Performance genealogies academy as terpretation

studies and communication share of practice; both fields enter the “doings”: elocution and oral inin the case of the former, and

extracurricular counterpart to debate that featured solo and group performances of literature. Indeed, “oral interpretation” as both a term and a performance practice endures in forensics, although it has largely disappeared from the US university curriculum. In its mid20th-century incarnation, oral interpretation

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

«

1223

firmly adhered to a New Critical paradigm that posted a stable, self-contained meaning within literary texts. This meaning, as well as the mechanics that produced it, were embod-

performance at the heart of the reproduction of social life. Bacon (1979) established the potential for performance to engage, not sub-

ied in performance. Oral interpretation was

bodied practice. Bacon's student, Dwight Conquergood, used “sense of the other” as a way to theorize the critical potential of performance, and as the basis for an ethics of performance ethnography—a research method that profoundly expanded the scope of the field. In his widely cited 1985 essay, “Performing as a Moral Act,’ he argued that performing ethnographic data offered a way of “deeply sensing the other” (p. 3). Ethnographic performances “explode” the aesthetic distance of oral interpretation’s

not acting; performers were not to disappear into the text. Rather, their task was to expli-

cate literary techniques, such as point of view and direct and indirect discourse, presentationally in the works that they performed. While performance in oral interpretation was a critical practice, it was exclusively a formalist one.

Three developments established the foundations for the emergence of performance as a tool for sociopolitical critique within com-

sume, difference in both hermeneutic and em-

munication. In AGrammar ofMotives (1945),

earlier New Critical paradigm because, in their

Kenneth Burke proposed “dramatism” as a way to explore motive in rhetorical situations.

fieldwork, ethnographers strive “to grasp the native's point of view, to understand the human complexities displayed in even the most humble folk performance,” and to account for the political economic exigencies that shaped these

His “pentad”—act, scene, agent, agency, and

purpose—established performance as a hermeneutic tool beyond the explication of a text’s formal aesthetic features. Sociologist Erving Goffman’s The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (1959) posited interpersonal exchange as theatrical, including “front” and “backstage” dimensions of behavior. His work expanded the potential of performance as a hermeneutic tool beyond the text. Finally, Wallace Bacon, professor of oral interpretation at Northwestern University and widely

events (p. 2). Thus, performance generally, and performance ethnography in particular, were replete with the moral and ethical complexities outlined in Conquergood’s “Moral Map” (p. S) depicting ethically problematic stances vis-avis the Other. He labeled the ethical ideal “dialogic performance’; later in his career, he

preferred the term “co-performative witness-

credited as a founder of the field, theorized

ing” (2013, p. 37) as a more accurate expres-

the performance of literature as inherently engaging Otherness. In his foundational textbook, The Art of Interpretation (1979, p. 36), he writes, “For the interpreter, belief in the

sion of how researchers and interlocutors constitute and are constituted by their mutual performances for and with each other. The critical turn in performance studies exemplified by Conquergood’s research was heavily indebted to the critical cultural theory entering the US academy in the mid-1980s, as well as the performance turn in folklore studies. The writings of Russian literary theorist and philosopher Mikhail Bakhtin were especially useful. Bakhtin’s concept of “dialogism” (1981), essential to Conquergood’s formulation of an ethical stance in performance and

otherness of the text, full awareness of its

state of being, is a major stage in mastering the art of performance.” In Bacon's view, the text’s fundamental difference from life merited respect; it appeared as a literal presence on stage as a book or a script. Burke (1945) opened the door to performance as a vital lens through which to identify and examine the rhetorical act. Goffman (1959) located

1224

-«

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

ethnography, posited that literary works, the

micropractices of everyday life, and, indeed, language itself were material, social, and intrin-

sically in communication with history and context: “Every utterance participates in the ‘unitary language’ and at the same time par-

takes of social and historical heteroglossia”

(p. 272). In addition, Bakhtin’s interest in the body, as well as his theorization of the carni-

valesque (1984) as a fleshly celebration that temporarily reversed social hierarchies, supported the increasing emphasis by performance studies on performing bodies rather than stable texts. The field of performance studies was critically and theoretically omnivorous, drawing from and applying a wide range of approaches to power and resistance. For example, the criti-

cal method of deconstruction, most frequently associated with philosopher Jacques Derrida (1978), exposed the text itself as intrinsically unstable and porous, making the New Critical presumption about self-contained meaning untenable and freeing performers to explore intertextual relationships. Critical race theorists and activists, feminists, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/ questioning

(LGBTQ) scholars forcefully challenged the presumptive universality and putative political neutrality of the normative subject and arts canons, marking them as hegemonically white, heterosexual, and male. Creative production

was increasingly viewed as intrinsically shot through with power relations and enmeshed in history and political economy. Postcolonial theorists critiqued the implicit and explicit Eurocentrism of canonical texts and aesthetic practices, while highlighting the strategic and

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

During this same period, folklorists, especially Richard Bauman (1986), Roger Abra-

hams (1972), and Dell Hymes (1981), were increasingly moving away from simply collecting folk texts, instead emphasizing the embodied performance practices that constituted such texts: what performance studies scholar D. Soyini Madison (1998) describes as engaging the “telling” and not simply the “told.” In addition to reinforcing the embodied practice of performance per se as a crucial object of study, the performance turn in folklore expanded the critical genealogies of performance studies beyond white male progenitors of the mid-20th century. An especially notable example is African American novelist and anthropologist Zora Neale Hurston (1891-1960). Hurston studied the tactical and pleasurable performances of her African American interlocutors, presenting them in vivid prose that preserved the textures of their voices. In addition, she presented her fieldwork through performance: the theatrical review The Great Day, which premiered in New York City in 1932, discussed in Kraut (2008). Hurston’s use of performative writing, her incisive readings of African Americans’ practices of resistance to white hegemony, and her commitment to publicly staging her fieldwork make her a foundational contributor to performance studies. In addition to these theoretical, methodo-

logical, and artistic developments, changes in performance practice were enfolded into the emerging discipline of performance studies. For example, in his influential courses on performance art, Leland Roloff extended the

genealogy of performance in communication to include European and US avant-garde

resistant practices of colonized and subaltern peoples. Performance studies scholars deployed insights from all these theories and

performance-based

methods, while challenging them to account

provisational art events, and the works of Fluxus,

for embodied practices as sites of cultural production and crucial public discourse.

an interdisciplinary, conceptual art movement emphasizing eventness over the production

movements that staged provocations and works

(e.g., futurists,

Dadiaists, and surrealists). Happenings, live im-

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

of objects, likewise were viewed as useful progenitors. These movements’ investment in the body—rather than the object—as the artwork, their rejection of canonical theater conventions, and their use of highly charged personal and affective material contributed to performance studies practice as well as to the contested definitions of performance itself. Outside of communication, performance studies per se emerged betwixt and between theater and anthropology. Anthropologist Victor Turner’s (1982) formulation, “social drama,” is central to this genealogy. Turner's four-stage model—the breach of norms, crises, redressive actions, and resolution—offers

a template for analyzing the contestory, emergent nature of cultural continuity. These four stages operate within structures of authority, as well as antistructures that include activities outside or beyond the reach of authority. Crucial to social drama is Turner’s foundational idea of “liminality”: the threshold state, neither here nor there, that is perilous but replete with the potential for social change. Liminality emerged as so central to performance studies that theorist Jon McKenzie (2001) views it as a disciplinary norm. He

writes that

we have come to define the efficacy of performance, and of our own research,

if not exclusively, then very inclusively, in terms of liminality—that is, a mode of activity whose spatial, temporal, and symbolic “in-betweenness” allows for social norms to be suspended, challenged, played with, and perhaps even transcended. (McKenzie, 2001, p. 50)

Turner's productive collaborations with theater director Richard Schechner generated crucial conceptual infrastructure for this emerging field. Schechner (1985) posited theatrical

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

-

1225

performers themselves as intrinsically liminal figures: “not” themselves but “not-not” themselves either. Contemporary critical performance stud-

ies scholars in communication draw primarily from both the communication and the anthropology-theater genealogies in their work. In addition, they deploy critical race, gender, and

LGBTQ theory, media theory, psychoanalysis, phenomenology, and British cultural studies, among many other conceptual and analytic tools. In so doing, they also argue for the utility of performance within these critical proj-

ects. This diversity of theoretical approaches parallels the diversity of sites examined by performance studies researchers, as well as the

wide range of methods and modes of scholarly representation that they use to do so. The remainder of this article offers examples of performance studies research projects and is not intended as an exhaustive canon. These examples are primarily, though not exclusively, the work of scholars who identify or have institutional afhliations with the discipline of communication, broadly construed. Performance studies research explores such a wide range of practices and artifacts that it is not possible to account for them all. The examples discussed here are grouped according to some, though not all, of the key methods that performance studies scholars use to collect and present their data. PERFORMANCE

ETHNOGRAPHY

In his now-canonical essay “Rethinking Ethnog-

raphy,’ Dwight Conquergood (2013) detailed the fundamental epistemological and praxical connections between participant observation research and performance studies. He writes, “With renewed appreciation for boundaries, border-crossings, process, improvisation, con-

tingency, multiple identities, and the embodied nature of fieldwork practice, many

1226

-«

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

ethnographers have turned to a performanceinflected vocabulary” (p. 92). “Performance ethnography,” as a distinct methodological practice, is the result of these affinities. As performance studies scholar and ethnographer D. Soyini Madison explains in her authoritative book Critical Ethnography (2012), performance ethnographers “describe and deepen [performance’s] multiple operations” (p. 166) by immersing themselves in specific sites to probe the embodied, processual, and contested

nature of these locations. Like all participant observation research, performance ethnography triangulates personal experience and observation; the insights, explanations, and theoriz-

ing of site interlocutors; and secondary scholarship. While other genealogies of fieldworkalso include embodied knowledge gained through shared physical practice—dancing and making music with one’s interlocutors, for example—performance ethnography goes further: exposing the presentational, theatrical, and performative structures of cultural life; using theatrical performance as a hermeneutic tool to investigate contested dimensions of a particular site; and, frequently, circulating insights from the field through performance. Madison’s monograph Acts of Activism: Human Rights as Radical Performance (2010)

exemplifies these multiple dimensions of performance ethnography. The text itselfis structured in theatrical terms: divided into “Acts,”

both to underscore activism as bodily doing and to insist on performance practice—that of her Ghanaian interlocutors as well as her own—as vital public discourse on behalf of human rights within neoliberal globalization. She opens by explicitly situating performance within theories and practices of human rights: Performance, as a tactic and as emergent, in the service of human rights and social

justice is variously effective and affective. By tactic, in this instance, I mean creating

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

a means and a space from whatever elements are available in order to resist or subvert the strategies of more powerful institutions, ideologies, or processes. (p. 2; emphasis in original)

Madison (2010, p. 224) argues that “performance and activism are mutually constitutive because performance demands that we pay attention to the deep particularities of human

action,” including the “layers of contexts and motivating factors” that generate such action. After operationalizing the relationship between performance and human rights, she turns to detailed analyses of debates over Trokosi/ Troxovi, the traditional practice of consigning girls and women to shrines where, depending

on the point of view, they are enslaved or ennobled; resistance to water privatization within neoliberal economic restructuring; and Ghanaian demonstrations against US racist police brutality and local domestic violence. In addition to performance ethnography, Madison uses oral history and close readings of street demonstrations, as well as the research, development, production, and close

reading of performances: both those that she creates and those created by her interlocutors. Here, the development ofa performance is not directed toward a simple product. It is an analytical tool: a way to think deeply about the ethnographic terrain, a materialization of the struggle over an ethical interpretation of a complex debate, and a tactic for investigating her own intersectional positionality as an

African American scholar investigating a Ghanaian practice.

For example, Madison draws on interviews and field data to create “Is It a Human Being or a Girl?”: a performance that dramatizes the highly contested nature of Trokosi/Troxovi in Ghana, sets the practice within local negotiations of tradition versus modernity and debates over the comparative virtues of indigenous

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

practices versus Westernization, and explores

its “deep particularities” (p. 60). Crucially, the

performance does not simplify the debate, nor does it reduce its complexities to easy pieties or slogans. It does not stage or represent Trokosi/Troxovi subjects for the voyeuristic gaze of spectators. On the contrary, “Is It a Human Being or a Girl?” presents Madison's and her interlocutors’ efforts to “interpret both the symbolic universe and the face-value

veracities of the field that are deep with particularities and change” (p. 83). Madison critiques the US media's sensationalization of the practice, the attendant minimizing of its

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

+

1227

particulars, and use of performance as an analytical and presentational tool are hallmarks of performance ethnography. Two additional works highlight the unique ways in which performance ethnographers address these elements in their very specific sites, while underscoring the overall interdisciplinarity and critical potential of the field. Both take up core performance studies themes of embodied practices and affects as resistance to structures of domination; the material and corporeal

effects of globalization, including migration and tourism, on performers and audiences;

characterizations. Instead, Madison's perfor-

and a range of intersectional frictions in local aesthetic productions. In his multisited ethnography Performing Queer Latinidad: Dance, Sexuality, Politics (2012), performance studies scholar Ramén H. RiveraServera defines latinidad as “an identity-

mance materializes public deliberations around the practice, with the goal of moving beyond reductive binaries. Her script uses “Recorders” and “Performers,” not characters. This performance strategy of staging the debates rather than individuals operates in tandem with performances organized by local activists, including graduation ceremonies for women who have left the shrines and government and non-

shared by Latinos and Latinas. Consistent with the field’s emphasis on identity-as-enacted, Rivera-Servera argues that latinidad is produced though daily interpersonal and theatrical performances. Drawing on performance studies scholar E. Patrick Johnson’s (2001) influential conception of “quare,’ a vernacular theorizing of queer identity that challenges

contested nature in Ghana, and the scant

attention paid to local initiatives to curb its abuses. In this context, theatricalizing Trokosi/ Troxovi risks reinscribing these dismissive

governmental organization (NGO) initiatives

in support of women and girls. Madison includes the script for “Is Ita Human Being ora Girl?” in her book, expanding the public stage for debate to include the reader. The inclusion of this script—and others— is itself an act of activism: “What I had ‘to do’ in bearing witness and in the spirit of ‘artistry, analysis, and activism’ was to provide an opportunity for others to respond, that is, to provide the

opportunity of response-ability to an audience” (p25). Madison’s intersectional analysis, focus on embodied practices as both objects and methods of study, minute attention to the imbrication of global political economy in local

in-process” (p. 28), not as a stable essence

presumptions of LGBTQ communities as normatively white, Rivera-Servera traces interconnections between queer latinidad, movement, and migration as they emerge in

specific US contexts. Two examples, one examining onstage per-

formance and another focusing on performance in everyday life, expose the ways that these interconnections are always local and become visible in acts of self-presentation. Rivera-Servera analyzes the repertoire of renowned dancer and performance artist Arthur Aviles as queer Latino/a “homemaking”: a paradigm for building complex solidarities and institutions through dance. As an embodied and performative practice, queer homemaking

1228

-

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

challenges conventional paradigms and characterizations of arts organizations that reinscribe and reinforce tropes of the heteronor-

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

production, even in highly commodified contexts like tourism. Rather than examine tourist iterations of Congo festivities as intrinsically

mative family. Yet homemaking is also a fraught,

inauthentic, Alexander Craft posits a schema

contested, and ongoing process, as Rivera-

that avoids a simplistic binary of “authentic”

Servera finds in his ethnography of queer nightlife in Phoenix, Arizona. There, frictions

between upwardly mobile queer Latinos and Latinas and working-class queer Latino /aimmi-

grant laborers play out in dance club locations and hierarchies, dance vocabularies, and mutual suspicion of taste and aesthetics. Yet even amid these undeniable frictions, the trans-

national conviviality of the dance club and the embodied intimacies of moving with one

another are “choreographies of resistance”: embodied practices that performatively produce vital utopian queer cultural spaces of latinidad that challenge debilitating encounters with racism, homophobia, and their imbrication in state practices (p. 43).

and “fake,” while theorizing the ways that the

traditional Congo form inevitably shapeshifts with its audiences. “Local” performances during Carnival “are produced and consumed primarily for the community,” while “like-lo-

cal” events are “for the consumption of global tourists” (p. 140). Indeed, tourist contexts demonstrate the crucial role of the audience in performance’s critical work. In the case of Congo as resistant cultural nationalism, performers’ ability to “trick back” on power depends on “an in-group that gets the joke and an outgroup that is the joke” (p. 142). Alexander Craft uses Victor Turner's “social drama’ as theoretical infrastructure but forcefully adapts it to explicitly address intersec-

Performance ethnographer and communi-

tional dimensions of race, class, and gender—

cation scholar Renée Alexander Craft likewise

In her book When the Devil Knocks: The Congo Tradition and the Politics ofBlackness (2015), she examines the Africana tradition of Congo fes-

which are largely absent from Turner’s analyses—while highlighting the everyday logistical performances that sustain the framed performance events. She insists on the inextricability of cultural performance from local and global political economy: emphasizing both the “circum-local” migrations

tivities within Carnival in Portobelo, Panama:

of people, narratives, and performance prac-

cultural performances of the type that served

tices that have sustained Congo performances in Portobelo and the role of national infrastructure like superhighways in increasing tourism. By attending to microruptures, such as those between young and older perform-

sees performance at the center of communal identity, while resisting fictions of that identity as stable, homogeneous, and friction free.

as prime sites for examination by the field's folklore and anthropology progenitors. Initially a crucial site of resistance against Spanish colonizers and the Catholic Church, Congo per-

formances continue to celebrate and performatively insist on the country’s black cultural past, while also performatively producing a black cultural present that is radical in its ambitions and effects.

These performances operate as a form of resistant cultural nationalism for those who

produce them. Their resistant potential is inseparable from incarnation in performance

ers and audiences, she also demonstrates the

highly contested nature of crucial, intermediate stages of cultural performance as social repair, too often generalized in the field’s privileging of liminality. Like Madison, Alexander Craft performs her ethnographic work both for and with her Portobelo interlocutors in Panama and for US audiences. She forthrightly addresses the

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

points where her performances seem to “fail... No one could have convinced me otherwise” (p. 166), as in one case when she scheduled her

event against both bad weather and an National Basketball Association (NBA) game eagerly anticipated by her Portobelo audiences. In addition to these live performances, Alexander Craft has created “Digital Portobelo: Art + Scholarship + Cultural Preservation” (http: //

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

-°

1229

communities. As literary theorist Francoise Lionnet (1989) has written of Zora Neale Hurston’s autoethnographic text, Dust Tracks on a Road, this scholarly strategy evokes the ethnic reality of which it partakes but, in so doing, puts into question the mimetic principles of description and classification which inform its writing. It thus simultaneously demystifies

digitalportobelo.org/), an interactive, online archive of interviews, videos, archival data, and

the writing of both the self (auto) and the

maps that capture the performative productions of Portobelo itself in both “storied” and “lived” views. This is an activist project, one that explicitly blurs the boundaries of ethnography,

culture (ethno) because it involves the self and its cultural contexts in a dialogue that transcends all possibility of reducing one to the other. (p. 122)

curatorship, and cultural advocacy.

AUTOETHNOGRAPHY AND PERFORMATIVE WRITING

Performance studies scholars recognized the critical affinities that link autoethnography to the work of queer solo performance artists, especially Karen Finley, John Fleck, Holly

Performance studies scholars deploy autoethnography and performative writing to challenge norms of academic representation that privilege the distance between knower and

of autobiography to challenge the homophobia and gender revanchism of the United States

known, the detachment from affect and em-

some of these artists’ performance strategies:

bodiment, and the presumptive neutrality

direct address to the audience, solo embodi-

Hughes, and Tim Miller, who used elements

during the Reagan era. Further, they deploy

and transparency of conventions in academic

ment of multiple characters, and interweaving

writing. Autoethnography and performative

of highly lyrical language with conventional narrative. Although autoethnographic texts and performances are challenged by some in

writing often, though not always, operate in

tandem with the goal of calling attention to how knowledge is produced through these conventions, as well as how identity is produced through conventional narrative. Performance practice is central to both methods. Autoethnography emerged as a critical response of subaltern subjects to the colonial roots and impulses of classic anthropology, particularly the practices of Western European and US ethnographers who cast racial and ethnic others as representatives of “vanishing” or “primitive” cultures. Autoethnography was a way that those who were written about could turn the tables on and control scholarly representations of themselves and their

the field for their potential to reify a seemingly stable and essential self (see, e.g., Terry, 2006),

other performance studies scholars use autoethnography to probe the political economic regimes through which intersectional selves are produced in dialogic relation to others. An exemplary illustration of the dialogic potential of autoethnography is the exchange between performance studies scholars Tami Spry and Bryant Keith Alexander. In her 1997 performance “Tattoo Stories,” Spry reflects on her relationship with her mother and, in so doing, on the race and class privilege and gendered constraints that shaped but do not

1230

»

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

fully define her. In a follow-up publication (2000), which includes the text of the performance, Spry writes, “I believe I exist somewhere

amid the sociopolitical narratives written on my body; I hover, duck, and dodge to resist

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

The journal article “Skinflint (or, The Garbage Man’s Kid)” (Alexander, 2000) is his outing of himself: a public performative claim of identity. In it, Alexander writes that Spry’s performance

a reifying surface/body politic of mother, daughter, woman, white, heterosexual” (p. 84). The live performance offers a materialization of this “ever-fluctuating” identity and its relationship to the body. In the performance,

Spry (2000, p. 84) relates a story that her mother repeatedly told her: When I was little, like three, and four,

and five, up until I was a teenager, my mom used to tell me that I wasn't really hers, that I wasn’t really her child and that my real father was the garbage man and that he might come to get me some day. And she would go on to say that she found me one day in the garbage can...and that she took me in. And it was like this family joke, that she wasn’t really my real mom, and that I was the garbage man's kid and that he could show up any day. It was supposed to be this funny joke.

causes me to make the reflexive move as an audience member and revisit my

own implication in telling and living tragic family stories. In the process I came to a new understanding of self. TodayI take the public opportunity to out myself:

[As myself—in a confessional mode] “I am the son of a garbage man.” I say that for the first time after 34 years of subterfuge and euphemistic descriptions such as: [As myself—embarrassed, hesitantly grap-

pling] “My dad isa...My dadisa ... My dad is a...a truck driver.” “My dad works for...the...the city.” [With an increasing rate and frustration] “My dad is a san...ni...tational

engineer.’ (p. 106)

Bryant Alexander is the child of a garbage man; he does not share Spry’s racial and heterosexual privilege. In his response to Spry’s reference—one that also appears as a scholarly article and a performance text—he writes:

Spry’s and Alexander’s generative dialogic autoethnographies do not stabilize identities outside of intersectional political economic dynamics. On the contrary, the exchange emphasizes the ways that race, gender, and class shape jokes and shame, as well as the ways these are performed by the

As the “real” child of a garbage man, the joke forces me to reflect on my own

self, both for the self and for audiences of

other, which resulted from internalized

external others. These autoethnographies “interrupt” putatively smooth processes of self- and cultural knowledge (Alexander,

racism and classism. My response is what Charles E. Semmes calls the “taking in and believing” of racist and classist prejudices that demonize and minimize specialized groups. (Alexander, 2000, p. 105)

Spry and Alexander mark affect and movement in their texts: the parenthetical references to emotions building and to bodies swaying and wandering. This is both a convention of

incomprehensible projections of self as

2006, p: 27).

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

performance scripts and, in the context of their scholarly essays, an example of performative writing. In performative writing, the author attempts to make the written word operate as a “doing,” and thus to expose the scholarly enterprise as a form of poiesis, as saturated with

affect and as highly situated. In performance and communication scholar Della Pollock’s (1998) influential essay, “Performing Writing,” she characterizes it as “an important, dangerous, and difficult intervention into routine representations of social/performative life” (p. 75). This writing is evocative, subjective, and citational: reflexive about its own materiality and conventions.

It is also controversial, as the example of performance and communication studies scholars Frederick Corey and Thomas Nakayama’s

(1997) essay “Sextext” demonstrates. Drawing on Roland Barthes’s influential book The Pleasure of the Text as an interlocutor, Corey and Nakayama presented a performatively written, sexually explicit account that examines the interrelationships between the body and the text as sources of queer pleasure. The narrator, a fictional queer doctoral student, also

assumes the identity of gay porn star Mark Stark and probes economies of desire in the flesh and on the page. The essay presents multiple scenes of desire, satisfaction, frustration; it ponders whether “academic writing, like pornographic writing, is an explosion of desire”

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

-«

1231

the field and on the page was both attacked and defended in these exchanges. So volatile was the conversation around this example of performative writing that, 15 years later, the editor of CRTNET published an analysis of this “Scandal in Academia” (Benson, 2012). PERFORMANCE HISTORIOGRAPHY AND ORAL HISTORY

Performance has a complex relationship to the archive, and, indeed to attempts at preservation. For example, performance studies scholar Peggy Phelan (1993, p. 146) argues that “performance's only life is in the present. Performance cannot be saved, recorded, documented,

or otherwise participate in the circulation of representations of representations: once it does so, it becomes something other than

performance.” Such a viewis resisted by those who argue that it assumes a pure, “unmediated”

live performance: an unproblematic “original.” Others posit a relationship between performance and the archive as a complex interaction rather than a binary opposition. Diana Taylor (2003) uses “archive” and “repertoire” to distinguish between artifacts that “exceed the live,” like “documents, maps, literary texts, letters, archeological remains, bones, videos,

films, CDs, all those items supposedly resistant to change,” and cultural productions that “enact embodied memory” respectively (pp.

(Corey & Nakayama, 1997, p. 65). Immediately

19-20). Both are mediated; they work “in

after its publication, it was vehemently de-

tandem” (p. 21). Still other performance studies scholars theorize performance as a driver of cultural continuity. Theater historian Joseph Roach

nounced

on the Communication

listserv

CRTNET as pornographic, as not being scholarship, and as a threat to the respectability of communication as a discipline. It was defended equally vigorously, including by those calling out potential homophobic anxieties of the essay’s detractors. Indeed, the entire field of performance studies, including its critical commitments to engaging embodied intersectional identity and its explorations of affect in

(1996) posits a complex relationship between memory, performance, and the ongoing (re-) production of culture, using “surrogation” to describe how such operations work. “Surrogation” is a process of substitution that fills vacancies in the social fabric: routine vacancies created by deaths or lapses in memory,

1232

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

and highly fraught vacancies generated by cul-

Slavery to Civil Rights (2011), performance

tural ruptures or cultural genocide. These substitutions materialize through performance. Roach (1996, p. 3) writes, “Performance, in

studies scholar Robin Bernstein uses performance as a strategy for analyzing the sociopoliti-

other words, stands in for an elusive entity that it is not but that it must vainly aspire both to embody and to replace.”

her method “reading scriptive things” (p. 8):

Performance studies scholars who do archival research inevitably confront these multiple dimensions of performance—as dis-

appearance, as traces of repertoires within the archive, and as strategies of cultural continuity— but they also remind us that such research is

itself an embodied and highly affective practice. In her history of Hull House performance,

Shannon Jackson (2000, p. 3) notes the researcher’s “[c]allused fingers, numb limbs, and swollen feet...the bodily basis of research.’ Performance historian Lisa Merrill reflects on

her own intersectional position as a lesbian scholar researching 19th-century actress Charlotte Cushman, “a lesbian in an era before some claim the word—or the self-identification—

existed,” in her award-winning biography When Romeo Was a Woman: Charlotte Cushman (1999, p. 2). She writes, “What do I see that they have not? How has the shared referentiality of lesbian experience and recent work in gay and lesbian history allowed me to see and

cal work of everyday material culture, labeling

The method entails using archival knowledge and historical context to determine the documented, probable, and possible

uses of a category of object. This horizon of known and possible uses then informs a close reading of an individual artifact. The operative questions are, “What his-

torically located behaviors did this artifact invite? And what practices did it discourage?

Bernstein analyzes the “topsy-turvy doll,” with two heads at opposite ends—one black and one white—and a shared skirt, as such a

scriptive thing. Pulling the skirt over one head exposed the other. As Bernstein (2011, p. 87) points out, the doll “determinatively scripts one action: any user, regardless of age, race, gender,

or historical context, necessarily obscures one character pole to play with the other character pole.’ The two positions cannot exist at the same time. The “topsy-turvy doll” did crucial work in everyday pre— and post-Civil War

understand the apprehensions and the long-

contexts: among other things, affirming puta-

ing Charlotte felt?” (pp. 1-2).

tively immutable racial binaries. But Bernstein notes that the doll also included the possibility that playing with it could rehearse the ways that racial hierarchies could flip. These dolls were made by enslaved AfricanAmerican women, raising two additional scrip-

Performance studies historiographers excavate the little-known or undertheorized political economic contexts, aesthetics, and legacies of theatrical performances and performers. (see, e.g., Raphael, 2009; Perucci, 2012; Goltz,

2015; Paredez, 2009). In addition to analyzing historical performances, they tease out the residues of everyday embodied practices from the archive, and sometimes deploy perfor-

tive possibilities. Bernstein (20, pp. 88-89) writes, “When an enslaved woman sewed a

production, even in contexts where it seems

topsy-turvy doll for her enslaved child, typically a daughter, she offered that child an opportunity to own and to have complete power over a representation of a ‘white girl?” In ad-

counterintuitive. For example, in Racial Inno-

dition, when an enslaved woman sewed such

cence: Performing American Childhood from

a doll for a slaveholding white child, she “sent

mance to understand the potency of cultural

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

that child to bed with a sign of systemic rapes committed by members of that child’s race, if not that child's immediate family...a sign of the child’s enslaved half-sibling, either literal

or symbolic” (p. 89). As Roach’s (1996) theory of surrogation suggests, performance studies scholars view the

production ofhistory itself as a performance; this is especially apparent in the method of oral history. In the oral history interview, the performance studies researcher engages with an interlocutor to produce history as both the “narrated event”—the “told’—and the “narrative event’—the affect, embodiment, tone, and

attentiveness to the interlocutor (i.e., the process of “telling”) (Bauman, 1986; Madison, 1998). That is, oral histories are produced through and as performances: making, not faking, history-as-memory.

As Madison (2012, p. 34) notes, they “present to us one moment of history and how that moment in history is remembered through a particular subjectivity (emphasis in original).” Performance studies scholars are keenly attuned to these performance dynamics: noting that identities are affirmed and resisted, stakes in

events and insider interpretations asserted, and self-presentation managed through the oral history encounter. In addition to conceptualizing the oral history interview as a performance, scholars in the field stage oral histories. As Della Pollock (2005, p. 3) argues, “Staged performance or ‘reperformance’ [of

oral history material] appreciates the magnitude of the primary interview encounter by expanding it to include other listeners... . It moreover does so live, not only mirroring the primary telling but actively favoring oral history as a mode of embodied knowing” (emphasis

in original). E. Patrick Johnson’s book Sweet Tea: Black

Gay Men of the South (2008) exemplifies the performance studies scholar’s engagement with oral history performance in narrative and

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

-

1233

narrated events, as well as in reperformance

onstage. Early in the book, Johnson (2008, p. 8) notes that he is less interested in creating conventional historical narratives than he is in

understanding the meanings and symbols embedded in the act of storytelling— of bearing witness to one’s life and then co-performatively interpreting the significance of that story. To construe this research as co-performance means not only acknowledging that both the researcher and the narrators are performing for one another; it also entails “paying attention” in a way that engages the bodily presence of both the researcher and the researched in the narrative event. The coperformative nature of the book’s narratives and analyses are especially apparent in Johnson's self-reflexive discussions of his own performance practices. As is typical for performance studies scholars, these practices pro-

vide a shared basis for theorizing embodied and affective experience. For example, in his discussion of the comfort that African American gay men find in the black church despite its condemnation of their sexuality, Johnson describes the pleasure and acclaim that he found as a young singer in his church choir: “What I realize now, but didn’t back then, was that I

was a budding diva who was using the medium of gospel music to express not only my spirituality, but also my gender and sexual identity” (2008, p. 185). Johnson extends this shared

embodiment, the “I-to-eye encounter” (p. 547) of oral history, to the stage with a widely praised play, also entitled Sweet Tea. THE PRODUCTIVE PLURALITY OF PERFORMANCE STUDIES

Performance ethnography, autoethnography and

performative

writing,

performance

1234

-«

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

historiography, and oral history are not the only methods used by performance studies scholars. That said, the projects surveyed in this article give a sense of the scope of performance studies research: examining everything from the biographies of individual performers to the intersectional autobiographies of scholars

Miller, L. C., Taylor,J.,& Carver, H. (Eds.). (2003).

in the field (e.g., Gingrich Philbrook, 2013),

REFERENCES

from race and utopia as performatively produced (Alexander, 2012; Dolan, 2005S) to culture and the law as constituted in performance (e.g,, Chambers Letson, 2013). Although the

field resists reduction to a strict canon of texts or themes, the works surveyed here share a set

of common theoretical and methodological commitments:

the imperative to articulate

how and what performs, rather than assume that definitions of performance are obvious and uncontested; the understanding that per-

formativity materializes in performance; the obligation to account for the intersectional particulars of performing and audiencing bodies;

and the deep investment in performance practice as both a rigorous mode of knowledge production and a rigorous mode of scholarly communication.

Voices made flesh: Performing women’s autobiography. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Stern, C. S., & Henderson, B. (2010). Learning to perform: An introduction. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.

Abrahams, R. D. (1972). Folklore and literature as

performance. Journal of the Folklore Institute, 9(2), 75-94.

Alexander, B. K. (2000). Skin flint (or, the garbage man’s kid): A generative autobiographical performance based on Tami Spry’s tattoo stories. Text

and Performance Quarterly, 20(1), 97-114. Alexander, B. K. (2006). Performing black masculinity: Race, culture, and queer identity. Lanham, MD:

Alta Mira & Littlefield. Alexander, B. K. (2012). The performative sustainability of race. New York, NY: Peter Lang. Alexander Craft, R. (2015). When the devil knocks: The Congo tradition and the politics of blackness in Panama. Columbus: Ohio State University Press. Austin, J. L. (1975). How to do things with words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bacon, W. A. (1960). The dangerous shores: From elocution to interpretation. Quarterly Journal of

Speech, 46(2), 148-152. FURTHER

READING

Afary, K. (2009). Performance and activism: Grassroots discourse after the Los Angeles rebellion of 1992, Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Bell, E. (2007). Theories of performance. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Denzin, N. K. (2003). Performance ethnography: Critical pedagogy and the politics of culture. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Hamera,J.(Ed.). (2005). Opening acts: Performance in/as communication and cultural studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Langellier, K. M., & Peterson, E. E. (2004). Storytelling in daily life: Performing narrative. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Madison, D. S., & Hamera, J. (Eds.). (2005). Sage handbook ofperformance studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Bacon, W. A. (1979). The art of interpretation (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press. Bakhtin, M. M. (1984). Rabelais and his world

(H. Iswolsky, Trans.). Bloomington: University of Indiana Press.

Bauman, R. (1986). Story, performance, and event: Contextual studies in oral narrative. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Benson. T. W. (2012) A scandal in academia: Sextext and CRTNET. Western Journal of Communication,

76(1), 2-16.

Bernstein, R. (2011). Racial innocence: Performing American childhood from slavery to civil rights. New York: New York University Press. Burke, K. (1945). A grammar of motives. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

PERFORMANCE

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY: Routledge. Chambers-Letson,J.T. (2013)..A race so different: Per-

formance and law in Asian America. New York: New York University Press.

Conquergood, D. (1985). Performing as a moral act: Ethical dimensions of the ethnography ofperformance. Literature in Performance, 5(2), 1-13.

Conquergood, D. (1995). Of caravans and carnivals: Performance studies in motion. TDR: The Drama Review, 39(4), 137-141. Conquergood, D. (2006). Rethinking elocution: The

trope of the talking book and other figures of speech. InJ.Hamera (Ed.), Opening acts: Performance in/ as communication and cultural studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Conquergood, D. (2013). Cultural struggles: Performance, ethnography, praxis (E. P. Johnson, Ed.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Corey, F. C., & Nakayama, T. K. (1997). Sextext. Text and Performance Quarterly, 17(1), S868. Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241-1299. Davis, T. C. (Ed.). (2008). Introduction. In Cambridge

COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

+

1235

Goltz, D. (2015). Ironic performativity: Amy Schumer’s big (white) balls. Text and Performance Quarterly,

35(4), 266—285, Hymes, D. (1981). “In vain I tried to tell you”: Essays in Native American ethnopoetics. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Jackson, S. (2000). Lines of activity: Performance, historiography, Hull House domesticity. Ann Arbor:

University of Michigan Press, Jackson, S. (2004). Professing performance: Theatre in the academy from philology to performativity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Jackson, S. (2009). Rhetoric in ruins: Performing

literature and performance studies. Performance Research, 14(1), 6-16. Johnson, E. P. (2001). “Quare” studies, or (almost) everything I know about queer studies I learned

from my grandmother. Text and Performance Quarterly, 21(1), 1-25. Johnson, E. P. (2008). Sweet tea: Black gay men of the South. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

Kraut, A. (2008). Choreographing the folk: The dance stagings ofZora Neale Hurston. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Langellier, K. M. (1999). Personal narrative, per-

companion to performance studies (pp. 1-8). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Derrida, J. (1978). Writing and difference (A. Bass,

formance, performativity: Two or three things I know for sure. Text and Performance Quarterly,

Trans.).Chicago , IL: University of Chicago Press. Diamond, E. (Ed.). (1996). Introduction. In Perfor-

Lionnet, F. (1989). Autobiographical voices: Race,

19(2), 123-144,

gender, self-portraiture. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Uni-

mance and cultural politics (pp. 1-14). New York, NY: Routledge.

Madison, D. S. (1998). “That was my occupation”:

Dolan, J. (200S). Utopia in performance: Finding hope at the theater. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Oral narrative, performance, and black feminist thought. In D. Pollack (Ed.), Exceptional spaces:

Flores, L. (2014). The rhetorical “realness” of race, or why critical race rhetoricians need performance studies. Text and Performance Quarterly, 34(1),

Essays in performance and history (pp. 319-342).

versity Press.

Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

Madison, D. S. (2010). Acts of activism: Human rights

94-96. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected inter-

as radical performance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge

views and other writings 1972-1977 (C. Gordon,

Madison, D. S. (2012). Critical ethnography: Method,

Ed.; C. Gordon, L. Marshall, J. Mepham, & K. Soper, Trans.). New York, NY: Pantheon. Gingrich Philbrook, C. (2013). Exit strategy (for my grandmother, Margaret Gingrich). Cultural

ethics, and performance (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Studies Critical Methodologies, 14(2), 111-115.

Goffman, E, (1959). The presentation ofselfineveryday life. New York, NY: Anchor.

University Press,

McKenzie, J. (2001). Perform or else: From discipline to performance. London: Routledge. Merrill, L. (1999). When Romeo was a woman: Char-

lotte Cushman and her circle offemale spectators. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

1236

«

POLITICAL

ECONOMIES

OF MEDIA

Paredez, D. (2009). Selenidad: Selena, Latinos, and

the performance of memory. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Perucci, T. (2012). Paul Robeson and the Cold War performance complex. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Phelan, P. (1993). Unmarked: The politics of perfor-

TECHNOLOGIES

Taylor, D. (2016). Performance. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Terry, D. (2006). Once blind, now seeing: Problematics of confessional performance. Text and Performance Quarterly, 26(3), 209-228. Turner, V. (1982). From ritual to theatre: The human seriousness ofplay. New York, NY: PAJ.

mance. New York, NY: Routledge.

Plato. (1998). Jon. In D. H. Richter (Ed.), The critical tradition: Classical texts and contemporary trends (pp. 29-37). Boston, MA: Bedford. Pollock, D. (1998). Performing writing. In P. Phelan & J. Lane (Eds.), The ends of performance (pp. 73-103). New York: New York University Press. Pollock, D. (Ed.). (2005). Introduction: Remembering. In Remembering: Oral history performance

(pp. 1-17). New York, NY: Palgrave. Raphael, T. (2009). The president electric: Ronald Reagan and the politics ofperformance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Richter, D. H. (1998). Introduction to Plato. In D. H. Richter (Ed.), The critical tradition: Classical texts and contemporary trends (pp. 17-20). Boston, MA: Bedford. Rivera-Servera, R. H. (2012). Performing queer latinidad: Dance, sexuality, politics. Ann Arbor:

University of Michigan Press. Roach, J. (1996). Cities of the dead: Circum-Atlantic performance. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Schechner, R. (1985). Between theatre and anthropol-

ogy. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Spry, T. (1997). Tattoo stories: A postscript to Skins. Performance at the National Communication Association Convention in Chicago. Spry, T. (2000). Tattoo stories: A postscript to

Skins. Text and Performance Quarterly, 20(1), 84-96. Strine, M. S., Long, B. W., & Hopkins, M. F. (1990). Research in interpretation and performance studies: Trends, issues, priorities. In G. M. Philips & J. T. Wood (Eds.), Speech communication: Essays to commemorate the 7Sth anniversary of the Speech Communication Association (pp. 181-204). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Taylor, D. (2003). The archive and the repertoire: Per-

forming cultural memory in the Americas. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Judith Hamera

POLITICAL ECONOMIES OF MEDIA TECHNOLOGIES

DEFINITIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS

Within the field of critical studies, political economy approaches examine the relationship between power and communication. Specifically, political economy addresses the social relations, particularly the power relations that mutually constitute the production, distribution, and consumption of resources, including media technologies. This formulation has practical value because it calls attention to how the communication business operates, for example, how journalism moves through a chain of producers such as a newspaper company, then to online and print distributors, and finally to readers, whose clicks, purchases,

and downloads are fed back into new processes of production and whose attention is sold to advertisers. A more general and ambitious definition of political economy is the study of control and survival in social life. Control refers specifically to the internal organization of social group members and the process of mobilizing power to adapt to change. Survival means how people produce what is needed for social reproduction and continuity. Control processes are broadly political, in that they constitute the social organization of relationships within a community, and survival processes are mainly economic, because

POLITICAL

ECONOMIES

they concern production and reproduction. Following from this definition, political economists demonstrate that those who control markets are able to exercise a high degree of control over media technologies and the revenue

they generate (Murdock & Gripsrud, 2015). Political economy approaches have con-

sistently placed in the foreground the goal of understanding social change and historical transformation. For classical political econo-

OF MEDIA

TECHNOLOGIES

«

1237

the disciplinary boundaries that mark much of academic life today, through Marx, and on to contemporary institutional, conservative, and

neo-Marxian political economies. How do these influence media, communication, knowledge production, and entertainment (Fuchs & Mosco, 201Sa, 2015b; McChesney, 2013)? How, for example, does the wealth of Carlos Slim,

as Adam Smith (1937), David Ricardo (1819),

Rupert Murdoch, and other media moguls translate into political power and onto the media outlets they own? How do the Big Five tech companies, the five wealthiest corporations in

and John Stuart Mill (1848), this meant com-

the world—Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Google,

prehending the great capitalist revolution, the

and Microsoft—turn wealth into political and social influence? Political economy perspectives are also marked by a commitment to moral philosophy, defined as an interest both in the values that help to create social behavior and in those moral principles that ought to guide efforts to change it. Like most perspectives in critical theory, it is therefore both descriptive and normative. For Adam Smith (1976), as evidenced in his Theory

mists of the 18th and early 19th centuries, such

vast social upheaval that transformed societies based primarily on agricultural labor into commercial, manufacturing, and, eventually,

industrial societies. For Karl Marx (1976), it meant examining the dynamic forces within capitalism and the relationship between capitalism and other forms ofpolitical economic organization, in order to understand how social

change would ultimately lead from capitalism to socialism. Despite differences in their approaches, each of these political economists attributed to communication technology a significant role in historical transformations. Today political economists concentrate on the transition from industrial capitalism to informational capitalism, by pointing to the central-

ity of digital technologies in all facets of society. Political economy approaches are also characterized by an interest in examining the social

whole or the fotality ofsocial relations that make up the economic, political, social, and cultural

areas of life. Political economy approaches have consistently aimed to build on the unity of the

political and the economic by accounting for their mutual influence and for their relationship to wider social and symbolic spheres of activity. The political economist asks: How are power and wealth related? This has been the case from the time of Adam Smith, whose interest in un-

derstanding social life was not constrained by

of Moral Sentiments, this meant understanding values such as self-interest, materialism, and in-

dividual freedom that contributed to the rise of commercial capitalism. For Karl Marx, moral philosophy meant the ongoing struggle between the drive to realize individual and social value in human labor and the pressure in capitalism to reduce labor to a marketable commodity. Contemporary political economy tends to

favor moral philosophical standpoints that promote the extension of democracy to all aspects of social life. This goes beyond the political realm, which guarantees rights to participate in government. It extends to the economic, social,

and cultural domains where supporters of democracy call for income equality, access to education, and full public participation in cultural production based on the right to communicate freely (Pickard & Yang, 2017). Following from this view, social praxis, or the fundamental unity of thought and action,

1238

e

POLITICAL

ECONOMIES

OF MEDIA

also occupies a central place in political economy approaches. Specifically, against traditional academic positions, which separate the sphere of research from that of social intervention, political economists, in a tradition tracing its roots to ancient practices of providing advice and counsel to leaders, have con-

sistently viewed intellectual life as a form of social transformation and social intervention as a form of knowledge. Although they differ fundamentally on what should characterize intervention, from Adam Smith, who supported free markets, to Marx, who called on labor to realize itself in revolution, political economists are united in the view that the division between research and action is artificial and must be overturned. For example,

praxis provides the foundation of a genuinely activist journalism, which Marx himself demonstrated in his massive body of reporting and commentary on everything from slavery in America to British imperialism in India and

China (Mosco in Fuchs & Mosco, 201Sa, pp. 23-35). Italso took the journalist Ben Bagdikian from his reporting job at the Washington Post newspaper to assisting in the widespread release of the Pentagon Papers, which detailed the history of government lying about the Vietnam War, and then on to an academic career uncovering media monopolies (Bag-

dikian, 2004). RESEARCH APPROACHES

Political economy approaches offer a variety of viewpoints and vigorous internal debate. Arguably the most important divide emerged in responses to the classical political economy of Adam Smith and his followers. One set of responses, which eventually established contemporary economics, focused on the individual as the primary unit of analysis and the market as the principal structure, both coming together through the individual's decision to

TECHNOLOGIES

register wants or demands in the marketplace. Over time, this approach progressively eliminated early political economy’s concerns for history, the social totality, moral philosophy, and praxis. In doing so, it transformed political economy into the science ofeconomics founded on empirical investigation of marketplace behavior conceptualized in the language of mathematics. Broadly understood as neoclassical economics

or simply, in recognition of its

dominant position as today’s orthodoxy, economics, it concentrates on land, labor, and

capital, which are factors of production valued solely for their ability to enhance the market value ofa final product (Jevons, 1965).

A second set of responses opposed this tendency by retaining the concern for history, the social whole, moral philosophy, and

praxis, even if that meant giving up the goal of creating the science of economics. This set constitutes the wide variety of approaches to political economy. A first wave of approaches included traditional conservatives who sought to replace marketplace individualism with the

collective authority of tradition (Carlyle, 1984), communitarians who urged putting community ahead of the market (Owen, 1851), and Marxian thinkers who concentrated on labor and the struggle between social classes. Subsequent formulations built on these perspectives, leaving us with a wide range of current formulations. Although economics occupies the center and center-right of the academic political spectrum, a neoconservative political economy thrives in the work of people such as George J. Stigler (1971), James M. Buchanan (1999), and Ronald Coase (1991), all recipients of the

Nobel Prize in economics, who apply the categories of neoclassical economics to all social behavior with the aim of expanding individual freedom. Institutional political economy occupies a slightly left of center view, arguing, for example, in the work of Galbraith (1985),

POLITICAL

ECONOMIES

that institutional and technological constraints shape markets to the advantage of those corporations and governments large enough and sufficiently powerful to control them. Institutionalists created the framework for studies of media concentration which now focus on the power of dominant US technology firms and their counterparts in the telecommunications industry. Neo-Marxian approaches continue to place social class at the center of analysis, and are principally responsible for debates on the relationship between monopoly capitalism, the automation and deskilling of work, the growth of a surveillance state, and

the rise of a centrally controlled international division of labor (Mosco, 2017). Finally, social movements have spawned their own schools of political economy, principally feminist political economy, which addresses the persistence of patriarchy and the dearth of attention to household labor (Huws, 2014), environmental political economy which concentrates on the links between social behavior and the

OF MEDIA

contributions

TECHNOLOGIES

of two

founding

-

1239

figures,

Dallas Smythe (1981) and Herbert Schiller (1996). Smythe taught the first academic course in the political economy of communication at the University of Illinois and is part of the first of several generations of scholars interlinked in this research tradition. Schiller,

who followed Smythe at the University of Illinois, similarly influenced several generations ofpolitical economists. Their approach to communication studies, drawing on both

the institutional and Marxian concern about the growing size and power of transnational communication businesses, places them squarely in the institutional school, but their interest in

social class and in media imperialism gives their work a definite Marxian focus. Nevertheless,

they were less interested than European scholars in providing an explicit theoretical account of communication. Rather, their work and, through

marked the 20th-century industrial order. In addition, every generation of political economists has been influenced by the perceived need to create alternatives to orthodox eco-

their influence, a great deal of the political economy research in North America, has been driven by a sense of injustice that the communication industry has become an integral part of a wider corporate order that is both exploitative and undemocratic. Although Smythe and Schiller were concerned with the impact within their respective countries, they both developed aresearch program that charted the growth in power and influence of transnational media and information technology companies throughout the world. Their writing comprised scholarly work, policy intervention, and activism, thereby providing contemporary models for how to be an organic intellectual in an age of media conglomerates. Partly owing to their influence, North American research has produced a large literature on industry- and class-specific manifestations of

nomics and, following from this, to develop

transnational corporate and state power. This

media policies based on these alternatives. North American research in the political economy of media and information technologies has been extensively influenced by the

research is distinguished by a commitment to

wider organic environment (Brevini & Murdock,

2017), and a political economy that focuses on the rise of social movements, social anar-

chism, and the use of technology to resist government and business (Tufekci, 2017).

Social and intellectual forces helped to construct the political economy of communication. One of the chief influences was the transformation of the press, electronic media, and telecommunications from modest, often

individual- or family-owned enterprises, into the large, multidivisional organizations that

participate in ongoing social movements and

oppositional struggles to change the dominant media and create alternatives (Eubanks, 2017;

1240

-«

POLITICAL

McChesney,

ECONOMIES

2013; Mosco,

OF MEDIA

2017; Schiller,

TECHNOLOGIES

oppose Western control and create indigenous

journalism and entertainment media.

2014). A major objective is to advance public interest values before government regulatory and policy organs and to create different forms of storytelling that may provide the foundation for new forms of media (Siapera & Veglis, 2012). European research is less clearly linked to specific founding figures and, although it is also

a major stream has grown in response to the modernization or developmentalist theory that originated in Western, particularly US,

connected to movements for social change,

attempts to incorporate communication into

particularly in defense of public service media

an explanatory perspective on development congenial to centrist academic and political interests. The developmentalist thesis held

systems, the leading work in this region has

been more concerned with integrating commu-

Research on the political economy of communication from the less developed world has covered a wide area of interests, although

one, most prominent in the work of Murdock

that media, including new technologies, are resources, which, along with urbanization, education, and other social forces, stimulate economic, social, and cultural modernization.

and Golding (Brophy & Mosco, 2016), has

Media growth became an index of develop-

emphasized the power of social class. Building on the Frankfurt School tradition, as well as on the work of Raymond Williams, it docu-

ment (Rogers, 1971; Schramm, 1964). Drawing

nication research within various neo-Marxian

and institutional theoretical traditions. Of the

two principal directions this research has taken,

and movements that oppose neoconservative state practices promoting liberalization,

on several streams of international neo-Marxian political economy, including world systems and dependency theory, political economists challenged the fundamental premises of the developmentalist model, particularly its perceived technological determinism and the lack of interest in how power shapes relationships between rich and poor nations (Alzouma,

commercialization, and privatization of the com-

2005; Bolano, Mastrini, & Serra, 2004; Pen-

munication industries. It aims to create room

dakur, 2003; Yu, 2017). One result was the creation of genuinely critical developmental

ments

the integration

of communication

institutions, mainly business and state policy authorities, within the wider capitalist economy, and the resistance of subaltern classes

for democratic media including popular

journalism. A second stream of research foregrounds class conflict and is most prominent in the work

media approaches (Talabi, 2013).

of Armand Mattelart and Siegelaub (1983),

The failure of development schemes incorporating media investment sent modernization theorists in search of revised models that

and Mattelart (2000). Mattelart has drawn

add new media, telecommunications,

from a range of traditions including depend-

Third World, particularly in Latin America, where Mattelart was an advisor to the government of Chile before it was overthrown in a

information technologies into the mix (Jussawalla & Taylor, 2003). Political economists have responded principally by addressing the power of these new technologies to help create a global division of labor. A first wave of research saw the division largely in territorial terms: unskilled labor concentrated in the poorest nations, semiskilled and more complex assembly labor in semiperipheral soci-

1973 military coup, used the mass media to

eties, and research, development, and strategic

ency theory, Marxism, and the worldwide experience of national liberation movements to understand communication as one among the

principal sources of resistance to power. His

work has demonstrated how peoples of the

and

POLITICAL

ECONOMIES

planning limited to First World corporate head-

quarters where most profit would flow. Contemporary research acknowledges that class divisions cut across territorial lines and maintains that what is central to the evolving international division of labor is the growth in flexibility for global firms that control the range of media technologies which overcome

traditional time and space constraints to form multifaceted global supply chains (Huws, 2014; Wasko & Erickson, 2008).

COMMODIFICATION

Three social processes are central to political economy approaches to the study of media and communication technologies: commod-

OF MEDIA

TECHNOLOGIES

«+

1241

has led to the increased commercialization of

media, the privatization of once public media and telecommunications institutions, and the liberalization of communication and informa-

tion technology markets, thereby deepening the concentration of power among a handful of giant mass media and social media firms

(Murdock & Wasko, 2007; Schiller, 2014). Political economy approaches to media and information technologies have been notable

for their emphasis on examining the significance of institutions, especially those businesses and state authorities responsible for the production, distribution, and exchange of media and information commodities as well as for the regulation and oversight of the media

technology marketplace. In recent years this

and structuration.

has included the five largest media and in-

Commodification is the process of taking goods

formation technology companies in order of market value: Apple, Google, Microsoft,

ification, spatialization,

and services that are valued for their use, for

example, food to satisfy hunger, stories we tell one another, and transforming them into

commodities that are valued for what they can earn in the marketplace, for example, farming to sell food, posting stories on social media sites that sell user attention to advertisers. The process of commodification holds a dual significance for media and information technologies because they contribute to the general commodification process throughout society and they also make up a leading industry of their own that generates significant revenue. For example, the introduction of computers gave all businesses, not just communication

Amazon, and Facebook, and their major challengers in China: Alibaba, Tencent, Baidu, Huawei, and Wanda. Although it has not ne-

glected the commodity itself and the process of commodification, political economy has tended to foreground the study of business and government. When it has treated the com-

modity, political economy approaches have

process of production, distribution, and ex-

concentrated on media content and less so on users or audiences and on the labor involved in the production of media and information technologies. The emphasis on institutions and content is understandable in light of the importance of global media and information technology companies and the growth in the value of

change, permitting firms to monitor sales, inventory levels, and their customers with greater

their content. These firms create media products with multiplier effects that generate rev-

precision. Additionally, commodification is an entry point to understand specific media technology institutions and practices. For example, the intensification of commodification over the last several decades, responding in part to global declines in economic growth,

enue from selling content, delivering readers to advertisers, and making use of the least expensive labor.

companies, greater control over the entire

Political economy also addresses the commodification of audiences, particularly to understand the common

practice whereby

1242

-

POLITICAL

ECONOMIES

OF MEDIA

advertisers pay for the size and characteristics ofan audience of users that Facebook, Google,

and other firms deliver. This generated a vigorous debate about whether audiences sell

TECHNOLOGIES

or “gig” economy with large media and information technology companies relying less on full-time, established media and informa-

in return for whatever content is produced (Smythe, 1981). Political economy research has advanced the analysis of audience research by examining audience history and the complex relationships of audiences to the producers of

tion technology professionals, and more on part-time and freelance labor paid low wages and with few ifany supplemental benefits and rights (Cohen, 2015; Mosco, 2017). Braverman’s work gave rise to an enormous body of empirical research and theoretical debate, focusing principally on the need to address

content (Hagen & Wasko, 2000). It has also

the contested nature of the process, the active

their labor power, in effect, their attention,

extended the debate over audience labor to

resistance of workers and the trade union

the Internet, where the process of building

movement, and on how the transformation

websites, modifying software, and participating in social media communities both resembles and differs from the labor of audiences that Smythe described (Fuchs, 2013).

of the labor process was experienced differently by industry, occupation, class, gender, and race (Mosco, 2009). As the commodification process expanded, media companies sought to cut the labor bill and expand revenue by replacing mechanical with electronic systems to eliminate jobs in the printing industry. Today’s digital systems allow companies to expand this process by replacing jobs with technology, employing a greater share of part-time and temporary workers, and relying on audiences, especially for

In addition to media content and audiences,

media and information technology labor is subject to the commodification process. Braverman’s now classic work (1974) directly confronted the transformation of the labor process in capitalism. According to him, gen-

eral labor is constituted out of the unity of conception, the power to envision, imagine,

and design work, and execution, the power to carry it out. In the process of commodification, capital acts to separate conception from

execution, skill from the raw ability to carry out a task, to concentrate conceptual power ina managerial class that is either a part of capital or represents its interests, and to reconstitute

the labor process with this new distribution of skill and power at the point of production. In the extreme, and with considerable labor

resistance, this involved the application of detailed and intrusive “scientific management” practices, pioneered by Frederick Winslow Taylor. Braverman documented the process of labor transformation in the rise of manufacturing, but he is particularly recognized for demonstrating the extension of this proc-

online media, to do more of the media labor.

Companies generally retain the rights to the multiplicity of repackaged forms and thereby profit from print, audio, video, and online forms.

Broadcast journalists carry cameras and edit tape for delivery over television or computer networks. Companies now sell software well before it has been fully debugged on the understanding that customers will report errors, download and install updates, and figure out how to work around problems. This ability to eliminate labor, combine it to perform multiple tasks, and shift labor to unpaid consumers further expands the revenue potential throughout the workforce in what is now called the “gig” economy. Workers have responded to this by bringing together employees from dif-

ess into the service and information sectors.

ferent media, including journalists, broadcast

We now see this operating across the digital

professionals, and technical specialists in the

POLITICAL

ECONOMIES

film, video, telecommunications, and com-

puter services sectors, into trade unions and professional associations that represent large

segments of the communications workforce (Mosco, 2017). SPATIALIZATION The second starting point for the political economy of communication is spatialization,

or the process of overcoming the constraints of space and time in social life. Classical political economists such as Adam Smith and David Ricardo found it necessary to devote considerable attention to the problem of how to value the spaces taken up by land and the built environment. Furthermore, their devel-

opment of a labor theory of value was intimately linked to the problem of how to define and measure labor time. Today, political economists maintain that corporations, aided by developments in media and information technology, transform the spaces through which flow both the people and the goods that make up global production and distribution supply chains whose transformation is evidenced in the massive relocation of millions of jobs to China, India, and other lower-wage regions of the world (Brophy, 2017; Qiu, 2016). Political economy approaches to media and information technologies have traditionally addressed spatialization as the institutional extension of corporate power in the communication industry. This is manifested in the sheer growth in the size of media and information technology firms, measured by assets, revenues, profit, employees, and stock share

OF MEDIA

TECHNOLOGIES

1243

specifically examined growth by taking up different forms of corporate concentration (Birkinbine, Gomez, & Wasko, 2017). Horizontal concentration takes place when a firm in one line of the media and information technology business buys a major interest in another operation that is not directly related to the original business. The typical form of this is cross-media concentration or the purchase by a firm in an older line of media, say a newspaper, of a firm in a newer line, such as a television station or an online service. Vertical integration describes the amalgamation of firms within a line of business that extends a company’s control over the process of production, such as when a major online media

company, for example Amazon, buys a major newspaper company, the Washington Post. In addition to demonstrating how media and information technology firms have developed into transnational conglomerates that now rival, in size and power, firms in any industry, political economists address the development of flexible forms of corporate power evidenced in the joint ventures, strategic alliances, and

other short-term and project-specific arrange-

ments that bring together companies or parts of companies, including competitors (Baltruschat, 2010). These take advantage of more

flexible means of communication to come together for mutual interest. In recent years, political economists have addressed the impact of media and information technology on the built environment, including massive de-

mands on electrical energy supplies, as well

as the impact on climate change (Brevini & Murdock, 2017).

values. For example, communications systems

in the United States are now shaped by a handful of media companies including Walt Disney, Comcast Corp., Twenty-First Century

Fox, and Time-Warner, Inc., and by five leading social media and information technology firms. Political economy approaches have

STRUCTURATION The third entry point for political economy approaches is structuration, which helps to balance a tendency in political economic analysis to concentrate on structures, typically

1244

-«

POLITICAL

ECONOMIES

OF MEDIA

TECHNOLOGIES

business and governmental institutions, by incorporating the ideas of agency, social process, and social practice to understand social class,

practice, they have tended to focus on social class. There are good reasons for this empha-

race, gender, and other significant social

for comprehending social life, and numerous studies have documented the persistence of class divisions. Nevertheless, there are other dimensions to structuration that complement and conflict with class structuration, including gender, race, and those broadly defined social movements that, along with class, make up much of the social relations of communication.

divisions (Giddens, 1984). Concretely, this means broadening the conception of social class from its structural or categorical sense,

which defines it in terms of what some have and others do not. A categorical approach to media and information technologies takes up the growing inequality between media companies and their workforce as well as between media owners and their audiences (Eubanks, 2017; Mosco, 2017; Servaes & Oyedemi,

2016). Political economy approaches extend this view to incorporate both a relational and a formational sense ofthe term. A relational view of social class foregrounds the connections, for example, between business and labor, and the ways in which labor constitutes itself within the relationship and as an independent force in its own right. A relational view of social class maintains, for ex-

ample, that it is not defined simply by access to resources such as media and information technologies, but by relationships to other social classes characterized, for example, by harmony, dependency, and conflict. Moreover, a formational conception of class views its constituents as producers of their own identity, however tenuous, volatile, and conflicted. This

research aims to demonstrate how classes constitute themselves, how they make history, in the face of conditions that constrain this his-

tory-making activity (Dyer-Witheford, 2015). A formational approach is especially relevant

sis. Class structuration is a central entry point

Political economy approaches have made important strides in addressing the intersection of feminist studies and the political economy of the media and information technologies

(Meehan & Riordan, 2002). They have also taken major steps in research on information technology, gender, and the international di-

vision of labor, which addresses the problems that women workers face in industries such as

microelectronics, where they experience lower wages and poorer working conditions than their male counterparts (Mosco, McKercher, & Huws, 2010; Women’s Media Center, 2015).

Political economy approaches have addressed imperialism extensively, principally by examining the role of the media and information technology in the maintenance of control

by richer over poorer societies. Race figures significantly in this analysis and more generally in the social process of structuration, as Gandy’s (1998) pioneering research took up in his multiperspectival assessment of race and the media. In the West, there remain significant and persistent racial issues in media

to the media industry because it has a long

and information technology workplaces, despite calls for diversity. Racial divisions are a

tradition of struggles, including the formation

principal constituent of the multiple hierarchies

of powerful trade unions that fought fiercely

of the contemporary global political economy and race, as both category and social relationship, helps to explain access to national and

over wages, working conditions, and the introduction of new technologies (McKercher

& Mosco, 2007). When political economy approaches have given attention to agency, process, and social

global resources, including communication, media, and information technology

(Wilson, Gutierrez, & Chao, 2012).

POLITICAL

ECONOMIES

One of the major activities in structuration

is the process of constructing hegemony, defined as what comes to be incorporated and contested as the taken-for-granted, common

sense, naturalized way of thinking about the world, including everything from cosmology through ethics to everyday social practices. Hegemony is a lived network of mutually constituting meanings and values, which appear

to be mutually confirming (Gramsci, 1971).

Out of the tensions and clashes within various structuration processes, the media come to be organized in full mainstream, opposi-

OF MEDIA

TECHNOLOGIES

1245

fissures that provide for considerable ferment from within (Grossberg, 2010). Nevertheless, the cultural studies perspective can contribute to challenging political economy approaches in several ways. Cultural studies perspectives have been open to a broad-based critique of positivism (the view that sensory observation is the only source of knowledge). Moreover, it has defended a philosophical approach that concentrates on subjectivity or on how people interpret their world, as well as on the mate-

tional, andalternative forms (Williams, 1983).

rial creation of knowledge. From a cultural perspective, one cannot simply assume that the readers and viewers of news and entertain-

Following from this, political economists examine the ways mainstream media, including

ment interpret stories in precisely the ways intended by media owners, as has been the case

social media, produces a hegemony ofvalues that give priority to the market, to individualism, and to the military, in what political economists Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky

to the mainstream power structure (Costanza-

in some political economy research. Cultural analysts help political economists to recognize the ability of readers and viewers to make their own meanings and judgments by leaving room for a range of interpretations. Cultural studies has also broadened the meaning of cultural analysis by starting from the premise that culture is ordinary, produced by all social actors, rather than only by a priv-

Chock, 2014).

ileged elite of media owners, and that societies

(2002) called a propaganda model of the media. Others tend to focus on media that opposes hegemony with visions of populism and democracy that aim to build alternatives

are organized around gender and nationality divisions and identities as much as around

THE CHALLENGE FROM CULTURAL STUDIES

social class. According to this view, media is

Understanding political economy approaches to media and information technology requires

media but is also contained in the stories, journals, Facebook posts, tweets, and blogs of

one to look outward, at the relationship be-

ordinary people. Although political economy approaches can learn from these departures, they can equally enrich cultural studies. Even as they increasingly take on a philosophical approach that is open to subjectivity and is more broadly inclusive, political economy perspectives are united in insisting upon a realist epistemology that maintains the value of historical re-

tween this theoretical formulation and those on its borders. Although one can map the universe of academic disciplines in many different ways, it is particularly useful to situate

political economy approaches in relation to cultural studies. The cultural studies approach is a broadbased intellectual movement that focuses on

not only what is produced in the mainstream

broadly to include all forms of social commu-

search, of thinking in terms of concrete social totalities, with a well-grounded moral philos-

nication. It contains numerous currents and

ophy, and a commitment to overcome the

the constitution of meaning in texts, defined

1246

-»

POLITICAL

ECONOMIES

OF MEDIA

distinction between social research and social practice. For the political economist interested in media technologies, reality exists as mutually constituted out of language and action, as the ongoing effort to describe and explain social life. Reality may be constructed, but it most assuredly exists. Political economy approaches depart from the tendency in cultural studies to exaggerate the importance of subjectivity, as well as the inclination to reject thinking in terms of historical practices and social wholes. They also depart from the tendency of cultural studies to use language that belies the approach’s original vision that cultural analysis should be accessible to those ordinary people who are responsible for creating culture. Finally, political economy approaches call on cultural studies to pay more attention to labor, the labor process, and the

importance of labor in contemporary movements for social change (Maxwell, 2015). It is

not just the technologies that bring us the printed page or screen that matter; it is also the labor of those who use them to create meaning and earn a living.

NEW RESEARCH

DIRECTIONS

TECHNOLOGIES

address standpoints of resistance. For example, Eubanks (2011) concentrates on gender as a standpoint of resistance, while Brophy (2017) emphasizes the resistance among media and information technology workers. Fourth, political economists have begun to make the transition from their established strength in examining how power operates in older media technologies such as television, to examine a variety of new approaches to new media, especially the Internet. For example, Burkart (2014) describes the challenges that new media

pose for traditional politics, Pasquale (2016) demonstrates the importance of using a robust political economy approach to examine elec-

tronic surveillance, and Jin (2017) documents the importance of a political economy of personal communication technologies for understanding an entire society. Finally, current approaches have expanded research on media reform and media activism. For example, Pickard and Yang (2017), and Tufekci (2017) demonstrate the importance of praxis for policy and activism in debates about the value of media and information technologies. These fresh developments show the continued vitality and flexibility of political economy approaches to media and information technology.

Five major trends characterize contemporary

research that applies political economy approaches to media technologies. First, as evidenced in the work of Yao (2014), Qiu (2016),

and Tufekci (2017), the approaches are now consistently international, in that they are carried out by scholars from all over the world who are increasingly interested in addressing global issues. Second, the field has also ex-

panded on its traditional commitment to communication history, especially the history of opposition to dominant powers in industry

and government (Fones-Wolf, 2006). Third, political economy approaches have also broadened their traditional focus on examining dominant powers and processes of exploitation to

REFERENCES

Alzouma, G. (2005). Myths of digital technology in Africa: Leapfrogging development. Global Media and Communication, 1(3), 339-354. Bagdikian, B. (2004). The new media monopoly. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Baltruschat, D. (2010). Global media ecologies: Networked production in film and television. London, UK: Routledge. Birkinbine, B., Rodrigo Gémez, R., & Wasko, i

(Eds.). (2017). Global media giants. New York, NY: Routledge. Bolano, C., Mastrini, G., & Serra, F. (2004). A Latin American perspective for the political economy of communication. The Public, 11(3),47-S8.

POLITICAL

ECONOMIES

Braverman, H. (1974). Labor and monopoly capital. New York, NY: Monthly Review. Brevini, B., & Murdock, G. (Eds.). (2017). Carbon capitalism and communication. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Brophy, E. (2017). Language put to work: The making

of the global call centre workforce. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Brophy, E., & Mosco, V. (2016). Profit and power: British Marxists on the political economy of the media. In D. Berry & P. Bounds (Eds.), British Marxism and cultural studies: Essays on a living tradition (pp. 153-181). Farnham, UK: Ashgate. Buchanan, J. M. (1999). Public finance and public choice: Two contrasting visions of the state. Cam-

bridge, MA: MIT Press. Burkart, P. (2014). Pirate politics: The new information policy contests. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

Carlyle, T. (1984). A Carlyle reader. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Coase, R. H. (1991). The nature of the firm: Origins, evolution, and development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Cohen, N. S. (2015S). Entrepreneurial journalism and the precarious state of media work. South Atlantic Quarterly, 114(3), 313-333. Costanza-Chock, S. (2014). Out of the shadows, into the streets! Transmedia organizing and the immigrant rights movement. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Dyer-Witheford, N. (2015). Cyber-proletariat: Global

labour in the digital vortex. London, UK: Pluto Press.

Eubanks, V. (2011). Digital dead end: Fighting for

social justice in the information age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Eubanks, V. (2017). Automating inequality. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.

Fones-Wolf, E. (2006). Waves of opposition: Labor and the struggle for democratic radio. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Fuchs, C. (2013). Culture and economy in the age of social media. New York, NY: Routledge. Fuchs, C., & Mosco, V. (Eds.). (201Sa). Marx and the

political economy ofthe media. Boston, MA: Brill. Fuchs, C., & Mosco, V. (Eds.). (201Sb). Marx in the age of digital capitalism. Boston, MA: Brill. Galbraith, J. K. (1985). The new industrial state (4th

ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

OF MEDIA

TECHNOLOGIES

1247

Gandy, O. (1998). Communication and race: A structural perspective. London, UK: Arnold. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press. Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks. New York, NY: International Publishers.

Grossberg, L. (2010). Cultural studies in the future tense. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Hagen, I., & Wasko, J. (Eds.). (2000). Consuming

audiences. Creskill, NJ: Hampton. Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (2002). Manufacturing

consent: The political economy of the mass media. New York, NY: Pantheon. Huws, U. (2014). Labor in the global digital economy:

The cybertariat comes of age. New York, NY: Monthly Review Press. Jevons, W. S. (1965). the Theory of political economy (Sth ed.). New York, NY: A. M. Kelley.

Jin, D. Y. (2017). Smartland Korea: Mobile communication,

culture,

and

society.

Ann

Arbor:

University of Michigan Press. Jussawalla, M., & Taylor, R. D. (Eds.). (2003). Infor-

mation technology parks of the Asia Pacific: Lessons for the regional digital divide. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe. McChesney, R. W. (2013). Digital disconnect. New York, NY: The Free Press. McKercher, C., & Mosco,V.(Eds.). (2007). Knowledge

workers in the information society. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Marx, K. (1976). Capital: A critique ofpolitical economy (B. Fowkes, Trans.). London, UK: Penguin. Mattelart, A. (2000). Networking the world, 17942000 (L. Carey-Libbrecht and J. A. Cohen, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Mattelart, A.,& Siegelaub, S. (1983). Communication

and class struggle: Vol. 2. Liberation, socialism. New York, NY: International General.

Maxwell, R. (Ed.). (2015S). Routledge companion to labor and media. New York, NY: Routledge.

Meehan, E., & Riordan, E. (Eds.). (2002). Sex and money: Feminism and political economy in the media. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Mill, J. S. (1848). Principles of political economy. Boston, MA: C.C. Little and J.B. Brown.

1248

«

POLITICAL

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

Mosco, V. (2009). The political economy of communication (2nd ed.). London, UK: SAGE. Mosco, V. (2017). Becoming digital. London, UK:

Emerald.

Mosco, V., McKercher, C., & Huws, U. (Eds.). (2010). Getting the message: Communication workers and

markets,

crisis.

London

tion. Bell Journal ofEconomics and Management Science, 2(1), 3-21.

Talabi, F. O. (2013). The challenges of development journalism in Nigeria. Journal of Social Sciences, 2(1), 81-86.

Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and tear gas: The power

global value chains. London, UK: Merlin.

Murdock, G., & Gripsrud, J. (Eds.). (2015). Money talks: Media, Intellect.

Stigler, G.J. (1971). The theory of economic regula-

, UK:

Murdock, G., & Wasko, J. (Eds.). (2007). Media in the age of marketization. Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Owen, R. (1851). Labor: Its history and prospects. New York, NY: Fowlers and Wells.

and fragility of networked protest. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Wasko, J., & Erickson, M. (Eds.). (2008). Cross-

border cultural production: Economic runaway or globalization? Youngstown, NY: Cambria Press. Williams, R. (1983). Culture and society 1780-1950. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Pasquale, F. (2016). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wilson, C. C., I, Gutierrez, F., & Chao, L. M. (2012). Racism and sexism in the media. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Pendakur, M. (2003). Indian popular cinema: Industry, ideology, and consciousness. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton. Pickard, V., & Yang, G. (Eds.). (2017). Media activism in the digital age. New York, NY: Routledge.

Women’s Media Center. (2015). The status ofwomen in the U.S. media. Retrieved from http://wme.3cdn net/83bf6082a319460eb1_hsrm680x2.pdf. Yao, J. (2014). Knowledge workers in contemporary China: Reform and resistance in the publishing in-

Qiu, J. L. (2016). Goodbye iSlave: A manifesto for digital abolition. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Ricardo, D. (1819). On the principles ofpolitical economy and taxation. London, UK: G. Bell and Sons. of innovations. New York, NY: The Free Press.

Rogers, E. (1971). Communication

dustry. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Yu, H. (2017). Networking China: The digital transformation of the Chinese economy. Urbana: University ofIllinois Press.

Schiller, D. (2014). Digital depression. Urbana: University ofIllinois Press. Schiller, H. I. (1996). Information inequality: The

Vincent Mosco

deepening social crisis in America. New York, NY:

Routledge. Schramm, W. (1964). Mass media and national development. Stanford, CA: Stanford University

POLITICAL ECONOMY OF THE MEDIA

Press.

Servaes, J., & Oyedemi, T. (Eds.). (2016). Social inequalities, media and communication: Theory and roots. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Siapera, E., & Veglis, A. (Eds.). (2012). The handbook of global online journalism. New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell. Smith, A. (1937). An inquiry into the nature and

causes of the wealth of nations. New York, NY: Modern Library.

Smith, A. (1976). The theory of moral sentiments. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Classics.

Smythe, D. (1981). Dependency road: Communication, capitalism, consciousness and Canada. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

EMERGENCE OF POLITICAL ECONOMY

Political economy is one of the major perspectives in media studies. The political economy of the media originated in the 1920. Since then,

the political economy of media has guided the works of media researchers around the world within communication and media research

(Fuchs & Mosco, 2016a; Garnham, 2000; McChesney, 2008; Mosco, 2009; H. Schiller, 1992; Wasko, Murdock, & Sousa, 2011;

Winseck & Jin, 2011). While there are several

POLITICAL

ECONOMY OF

THE

MEDIA

1249

significant fields and subjects, political economy in the realm of media and culture looks especially at the production, distribution, and consumption of media resources, with a primary focus on ownership and power relations.

This article addresses the political economy of media as one of the most significant approaches in media studies. Political economy of the media includes several domains includ-

Thus, it looks at concentration of media industries, trends of convergence, structural inequities

information and communication technology. A political economy approach analyzes the power relationships between politics, media-

of access, and labor processes that are exploitative. Inspired by Marx's ideas of looking at capitalism as an unjust system, this approach points to media biases generated out of corporate ownership and control and how they affect the collective consciousness of people around the world. Since Marx shared this ethical concern and argued that it could only be eliminated by abolishing capitalism, the political economy of media was typically seen as the exclusive preserve of the political left, known as Marxism,

because of its critical stance toward the media market (McChesney, 2008; Winseck, 2016). What is significant is that when political

ing journalism, broadcasting, advertising, and

tion, and economics. This article first identifies

the intellectual history of the field, focusing on the establishment and growth of the political economy of media as an academic field. Second, it discusses the epistemology of the

field by emphasizing several major characteristics that differentiate it from other approaches within media and communication research. Third, the article charts the beginnings of

political economy studies of media with the culture industry and its regulation to an understanding of information and communication technologies (ICTs) and/or the digital media-

economists conduct their research on communication and media, their works are mostly associated with their critique of modern capitalism. Due in large part to the criticism of

ticular, it discusses the ways in which media scholars develop and use political economy in

mass production, monopolistic ownership,

by platform technologies, focusing on three new

and capital gains to a handful of mega media

areas that political economists need to under-

giants, from the outset, “theoretical and em-

stand further, including digital platforms, big data, and digital labor. These areas are crucial

pirical questions about how to organize economic life and balance markets against state intervention were inextricably bound up with questions about the constitution of the good society” (Wasko et al., 201, p. 1). This crucial

tradition has had a major impact on the political economy of culture and media precisely because “the media industries play a central role in modern societies, as industries in their own

driven communication environment. In par-

digital media and the new media milieu driven

for analysis because they are not only intricately connected but also have become the

major parts of modern capitalism. LITERATURE REVIEW: POLITICAL ECONOMY OF COMMUNICATION From the mid-20th century, when traditional media, such as newspapers, broadcasting, and film, influenced people’s lives, to our contem-

right and as the major site of the representations and arenas of debate through which the overall system is imagined and argued over” (Wasko

porary society in which ICTs and/or digital

et al., 2011, p. 2). Of course, several media

media tremendously influence our daily ac-

scholars have criticized political economy of

tivities, media scholars have conducted their

the media, assuming this to be reductionist,

too economistic, and simplistic (Wasko &

research on different subjects and themes, including media content, media policy, media

Meehan, 2013).

structure, and audiences. Among these, the

1250

POLITICAL

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

political economic approach and method is appropriate for media studies in many cases mainly because the political economy of media has focused on the structural and institutional changes within the broader context of society. As McChesney points out,

political economists of media do not believe the existing media system is natural

or inevitable to change. They believe the media system is the result of policies made in the public’s name but often without the public’s informed consent. Political economists of media assume

does this with a special interest in how economic factors influence politics and social relations. Second, the political economy of

media looks specifically at how ownership,

support mechanisms (including advertising), and media and/or cultural policies influence media behavior and content. This line of inquiry emphasizes structural factors and the labor process in the production, distribution, and consumption of media and culture. The political economy of media cannot provide a comprehensive explanation of all media activity, but it can explain certain issues

the media system is an important factor

extremely well, and it provides a necessary context for most other research questions in

in understanding how societies function,

media (McChesney, 2000, p. 111).

but they do not assume it is the only or most importable variable.

Meanwhile, Garnham (2000, p. 4) claims that the structures and processes of media are deeply embedded within the wider structures and processes of a given social formation. “Who

(McChesney, 2008, p. 12)

Above all, the rise of the communication

can say what, in what form, to whom, for what

industries in the 20th and 21st centuries has led business to take a close look at the economics of communications. The critical political economy of communication examines the nature of the relationship between media and communication systems and the broader social structure of society. In this regard, Dan Schiller argues that studying communication is not only to be concerned with the contributions of a restricted set of media: “The po-

purposes, and with what effect” will be in part determined by and in part determine the structure of economic, political, and cultural power in

tential of communication study, in short, has

converged directly and at many points with analysis and critique of existing society across its span” (D. Schiller, 1996, p. vii). Robert

McChesney (2000) also emphasizes that the scholarly study of the political economy of communication entails two main dimensions. First,

it addresses the nature of the relationship between media and communication systems on the one hand and the broader social structure of society on the other. In other words, it examines the ways in which media and communication systems and content reinforce, challenge, and

influence existing class and social relations. It

a society. Vincent Mosco (2009, p. 24) especially defines the political economy of media as the study of the social relations that “mutually constitute the production, distribution, and consumption of communication resources,” such as newspapers, videos, films, and audiences.

What these scholars commonly argue is that the media are the leading sector of the capitalist economy as they became a central part in an economic system with the growth of the media market and the development of communication technologies. As Winseck aptly puts it, “political economies of media take it as axiomatic that the media must be studied in relation to their place within the broader economic and social context. This context is undeniably one where capitalist economies have expanded greatly” over the past several decades (20H, p. 4). For them, political economy has been useful to criticize a government-controlled media system while the political economy of

POLITICAL

communication

is to analyze and criticize

the corporate communications system and the relationship between governments and media in a corporate capitalist society.

Furthermore, the political economy of media approach considers media and communication to be parts of the whole economic system, even becoming among the main sectors with the development of information and communication technologies. Of course, understanding the changing media and communication industries is not brought about by examining only the communication industry itself, but by also examining the communication industry as a core business of highly capitalized corporations; therefore, it is critical to investigate the political economic development of the media industry and its ongoing reconfiguration (Jin, 2011). However, over the past two decades, there have been some criticisms from diverse perspectives on the political economy of media. These critics have focused on the presumable lack of methodological rigor and conceptual changes since the early 1990s. In other words, the critical political economy thesis has come under increasing criticism from various aspects.

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

1251

defend their ways of life and, in some respects,

even share their images with the rest of the world. Meanwhile, Curran and Park (2000)

developed de-Westernization theory to make their critiques on critical political economy by emphasizing the increasing role of non-Western countries in the global cultural and media markets. Likewise, these media scholars argued

that the term dominance itself was vague, as political economists did not explain the range of dominance well. Of course, their major criti-

cism was the lack of methodologies to measure the degree of dominance of one particular nation-state of region over other countries.

However, several political economists like Christian Fuchs and Dwayne Winseck have continued to intensify their analyses of media

and culture mainly because the media industries and content are becoming bigger and more significant in the 21st century. While admitting these criticisms of political economy, Jonathan Hardy (2014) argues especially that critics—classical free-market economists and cultural studies scholars—often reduce

Several media scholars (Curran & Park, 2000;

and dismiss such work done by critical political economists without understanding the diversity and self-criticism of political econ-

Jung, 2011; Langdale, 1997; Straubhaar, 1991)

omy; therefore, he clearly states the signifi-

argued that it was no longer possible to sus-

cance of the further development of critical political economy in the digital media era.

tain the notion of Western media domination,

which had been a major position of political economy under the contemporary global media milieu, which is characterized by a plurality of players and cultural flows. What they commonly argued was that there were a few

INTELLECTUAL HISTORY OF THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF MEDIA

emerging cultural industries in the world, including Brazil, Mexico, India, and Korea.

While there were several precedent developments in the field of political economy, the Frankfurt School is mainly identified as

Television program producers in Mexico and

the starting point of our contemporary un-

Brazil (e.g., Telenovela) have created programs

derstanding of political economy. In other words, critical political economy originated

for Latin America, and producers in Korea have made programs for the East Asian cultural market (Jung, 2011; Sinclair, Jacka, & Cunningham, 1996). With the example of Televisa

with the Institute of Social Research, estab-

lished at the University of Frankfurt in 1923. Upon the appointment of Max Horkheimer

in Mexico and TV Globo in Brazil, Straubhaar

as director in 1930, the Institute turned from

(1991) emphasizes that national cultures can

its initially hard-nosed brand of Marxism;

12$2

POLITICAL

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

rather than presuming strict economic determinism, it began taking seriously “the claims

of culture and consciousness” (Eagleton, 2003,

p. 71). This transformation entailed “shifting the focus from society’s socio-economic base

As Foster and McChesney (2013) point out,

“central to the Frankfurt School's concerns was the relationship of mass culture to politics and social change,” and in this regard,

the Frankfurt School attempted to synthe-

to its cultural superstructure” (Jay, 1992, p. 21).

size Marxist theories of political economy

After 1930, critical theorists at the Frankfurt

with Freudian

School eschewed the hard-economic determinism characterizing the early Frankfurt

tives (Foster & McChesney, 2013). Adorno viewed the political economy of culture

School.

Several key Frankfurt theoreticians

through multiple lenses. For example, his

denied that knowledge can ever be value-free;

knowledge of music contributed to the case study of a cultural form undergoing massive changes due to its industrialization (Morgan, 2013). Regardless of some critiques, the

a position distinguishing them again from conservative political economists. They especially maintained that culture is key to

psychoanalytical

understanding power relations in our con-

Frankfurt

temporary society, and hence critical theorists addressed mass media, thereby inaugu-

Adorno, can be seen as “early exemplars of a critical-institutional perspective on cultural production, media, and communication” (Morgan, 2013, p. 46).

rating critical media

studies. Much

later,

critical political economy and cultural studies were separated (Babe, 2009, p. 16). Most of all, Theodor W. Adorno, who was

one of the key figures of the Frankfurt School, deeply influenced later critical political economists. Although several media scholars seldom identified him as an inaugurator of critical political economy of media, some admit him as a critical theorist (see Gunster, 2004). His most renowned essay on the political economy ofmedia,

School

theorists,

perspec-

in particular

Against this backdrop, several political economists in the field of communication and

media developed their theoretical and methodological frameworks in both Europe and North America. Several Frankfurt School members, including Paul Baran, fleeing, to the United

States in the 1920 and 1930s especially, became a key historical juncture to academically connect Europe and North America. In Europe, political economists, such as Kaarle

Nordenstreng and Tapio Varis (1974), Peter The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception’ in a book (Dialectic

Golding and Graham Murdock (1991), Nich-

of Enlightenment, coauthored with Max

olas Garnham (2000), and Christian Fuchs and Vincent Mosco (2016a, 2016b) have greatly

Horkheimer) was dedicated to critiquing

contributed to the advancement of the politi-

instrumental reason; therefore it is indis-

cal economy in the global context, which has also substantially influenced media and com-

putably a factor that Adorno invented the analytical construct, the culture industry, and did so to help describe and investigate the consequences of mass producing culture for purposes of profit. (Babe, 2009, pp. 18-19)

Babe (2009, p. 19) argues that “Adorno inaugurated political economy studies of media.”

munication studies. The Legacy of Robert A. Brady in North American Political Economy of the Media. Unlike Europe, in North America,

the political economy of media was profoundly influenced by the economist Robert A. Brady, so this part focuses on the genealogy of political

POLITICAL

economy

in the North American

context.

Brady obtained a PhD in economics from Columbia University in 1929, when Frankfurt scholars fled Germany and began to teach and research at the same school, and he joined the University of California at Berkeley in 1929 until 1963. He developed the ideas for the political economy of media as the first genera-

tion ofpolitical economy.

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

.-

1253

telecommunications systems emerged in

favored regions and joined the urban press and the film industry as major enterprises embodying new forms of economic, political, and cultural practice modes. (D. Schiller, 1999, p. 89)

Brady later asked several fundamental questions that can be applied in the realm of media

As an economist, his essential work is “about

and communication, differentiating himself

power and the organization of power around the logic of technology as operated under capi-

from other conservative economists. He did not formally work within the established edifice of Marxist theory but instead consistently stressed the socioeconomic power of business. He emphasized that the centralizing tendencies came to pervade business, not only in its internal organization but also in its relations with society at large (Brady, 1943). Brady found that a centralized new system dominated instead of competitive interactions among many individual economic units as in the laissez faire era. The vital question was whether the resultant webs of control could be made to harmonize with democracy or whether centralized business power would take the to-

talism” (Lynd, 1943, p. viii), yielding insights and understanding of modern society's careening path between enhancing or destroying “life and culture.” In his several works, including

Business as a System of Power (1943), Brady

traced the rise of bureaucratic centralism in Germany, France, Italy, Japan, and the United States, and the emergence of an authoritarian

model of economic growth and development. Brady (1952) focused on consumer interests

and economic planning in government and, as a result, had a wealth of experience out of

which to formulate the thesis of the citizen’s stake in price control (Brady, 1952). Brady criticized that “the process of expanding business organization and business-government

interpenetration has been greatly speeded up. ... For example, fascist Italy has greatly expanded the power and influence of the cor-

porate system” (1943, pp. 295-296) As Dan Schiller clearly puts it:

Throughout the 1930s and 1940s, within the broader political context of U.S. antifascism, Brady developed a potent analy-

talitarian road (D. Schiller, 1999, pp. 89-90). Brady argued that “in the struggle for control over business power, small business is everywhere losing out” (1943, p. 4). He was also interested in identifying a few key issues, such as the forms of ownership

and control that typified this thriving communications sector and policies that determined the societal distribution of goods and services, as well as the ways in which the media’s emerging systems of decision-making interlocked with those that governed other

sis of emerging authoritarian economic

economic, political, and cultural institutions.

and cultural practices. This framework was substantially carried over, and further developed, by the two pioneers of the political economy approach, Dallas W. Smythe and Herbert I. Schiller. Before

These were questions that a radical political economic of communication arising between 1950 and 1970 in the United States (D. Schiller, 1999, pp. 89-90). Brady had a profound impact on the conceptual framework on which the postwar political economy approach was built.

World

War

II, electronic

media

and

1254

POLITICAL

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

Most of all, the plausible candidate for point oforigin ofcritical political economy of media is the University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign (UIUC), where, in 1948-1949,

Dallas W. Smythe began teaching the first course in the United States on the political economy of communication. Dallas Smythe, who knew Brady at UC Berkeley, worked together with Brady as colleagues during the early 1960s at

UIUC, with Thomas Guback and George Gerbner; and Dallas Smythe and Herbert Schiller integrated Brady’s ideas into a political economy of communications. Smythe’s book on the political economy of media, Dependency Road, appeared in 1981, and several of the major constructs developed in Dependency Road— the consciousness industry, the commodification of culture, audience as commodity, the consumption of entertainment as extended work time, conflicts between individual psychological needs and requirements of the socioeconomic system—were anticipated in the work of both Horkheimer and Adorno in the 1930s and 1940s (Babe, 2009, p. 23). In fact, at UIUC, Smythe was joined by Herbert Schiller, and an American tradition in critical po-

litical economy of media was born (Babe,

2009, p. 50).

Smythe, a Canadian, served as the first chief economist at the US Federal Communica-

a foundation for one of the major critical approaches to the study of communication.’ Smythe’s emphasis on the industrial uses of the radio spectrum also prepared the way for later research that would emphasize the emergent significance of communications as a pivot of late capitalist development. Finally, Smythe’s major conclusion echoed Brady’s guiding tenet that democratic principles somehow had to be squared with modern industry (Schiller, 1999, p. 98). Herbert Schiller, another early key figure in political economy of the media, emphasized the significance of Brady’s writings for his own outlook. Raising the communications sector to anew analytical prominence, Schiller’s depiction of the web of connections that constituted the communications military-industrial coalition still lay within the formal orbit traced by Brady. The contemporary character and workings of this antidemocratic power nexus was the chief subject of Schiller’s book (1992)

(D. Schiller, 1999, pp. 98-99). The coalescence of electronics and economics detected by Schiller toward recognition of the communications industries as pivots of an informationalized capitalist accumulation process, directly recalled the combination of spirit and structure that Brady had seen 30 years earlier as distinctive of an encroaching fascism (Schil-

tions Commission and went on to introduce

ler, 1999, p. 99). Where Brady’s interest was

the first courses in the United States on the political economy of communications (19481949) at UIUC (Maxwell, 2003). Smythe emphasized the significance of media and communication as social processes and the need to consider media and communication activities within larger political and economic contexts, which has become one of the most important norms in the field of political economy of the

national, Herbert Schiller’s main focus was

international, emphasizing the asymmetrical power relations between Western and nonWestern societies. H. Schiller argued that “the American interest in overseas communications

extends from direct ownership of broadcast facilities to equipment sales, management service contracts, and program exports” (1992,

p. 125). As such, early political economists

media. In Illuminating the Blindspots (Wasko, 1993), a collection of articles by political econ-

were indebted to Brady for their own research

omists dedicated to Smythe, his “teaching and theoretical work in political economy provided

which built the tradition of political economy of the media in North America.

interests and critical understanding of media,

POLITICAL

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

.

1285

EPISTEMOLOGY OF POLITICAL ECONOMY OF MEDIA

example, neoclassical economics, pluralist political science, and cultural studies.

The philosophical foundation of the political economy of media can be understood by advancing basic epistemological and ontological

(Mosco, 2009, pp. 10-11)

principles. “An epistemology is an approach to understanding how we know things. The political economy of communication is grounded in a realist, inclusive, constitutive, and critical

epistemology” (Mosco, 2009, p. 128). The political economy of media is realist in that it recognizes the reality of both concepts and social practices, thereby distinguishing itself from

diographic approaches that argue for the reality ofideas alone and nomothetic approaches, which claim that ideas are only labels for the singular reality of human action. Following from this, political economy is inclusive in that it rejects essentialism, which would reduce all social practices to a single political economic explanation, in favor of an approach that views concepts as entry or starting points into a di-

verse social field (Resnick & Wolff, 2006, cited in Mosco, 2009, p. 10). As Mosco (2009, p. 10)

also argued, “the epistemology is constitutive in that it recognizes the limits of causal determination, including the assumption that units of social analysis interact as fully formed wholes and in a linear fashion. Rather, it approaches social life as a set of mutually constitutive processes, acting on one another in various stages

of formation, and with a direction and impact

that can only be comprehended in specific research” (Mosco, 2009, p. 10); The approach is critical because it sees knowledge as the product of comparisons between research findings and other bodies ofknowledge as well as with social values. For example, this political economy is critical in that it regularly situates the knowledge acquired in research against alternative bodies of knowledge in, for

More specifically, several key political econ-

omists of the media claim that political economy has four major elements that differentiate it from other academic fields: history, social totality, moral philosophy, and social praxis.

First, political economy has given priority to understanding “social change and historical transformation.” For political economists like Karl Marx, “it meant examining the dynamic forces in capitalism responsible for its growth

and change. The object was to identify both cyclical patterns of short-term expansion and contraction as well as long-term transformative patterns that signal fundamental change

in the system” (Mosco, 2009, p. 26). Second, political economy has sustained that the discipline should be firmly rooted in an analysis of the wider social totality. This means that political economy spans the

range of problems [in the 2010s] that tend to be situated in the compartments of several academic disciplines where those with an interest in social class go to sociology, those interested in government to political science, in the market to economics, and

so on. Political economy has been taken up with the mutual constitution and multiple determination of social life. (Mosco, 2009, p. 28)

Instead of treating the economy as a specialist and bounded domain, political economy focuses on “the relations between economic practices and social and political organization” (Wasko, Murdock, & Sousa, 201, p. 2). In fact, political economists see things in totality. In other words, political economists prefer a holistic approach because the economy is believed to interrelate with other spheres (Golding &

1256

POLITICAL

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

Murdock, 1991). Mosco (2009) examined the social whole that makes up the economic, political, social, and cultural areas of life.

epistemologies which conclude that truth can only result from contemplation. Knowledge requires more than a process

Mosco, 2009; Winseck & Jin, 2011). Mosco

of honing and purifying conceptual thought. Rather it grows out of the mutual constitution of conception and execution.

(2009) argues that political economists are

(Mosco, 2009, p. 3S)

Third, political economy emphasizes ethical and normative questions (McCheseny, 1999;

committed to moral philosophy. They explicitly write about basic moral questions such as justice, equity, fairness, and public good (Golding & Murdock, 1991; Wasko et al., 2011 ).“Moral

philosophy refers to social values and to conceptions of appropriate social practices. The goal of this particular form of analysis is to clarify and make explicit the moral positions of economic and political economic perspectives, particularly because moral viewpoints are often masked in these perspectives” (Mosco, 2009, p. 32). The moral, cultural, or spiritual domain

is itself the central subject of analysis (Mosco,

2009, p. 33). Fourth, political economists believe in social praxis: social transformation relies on unifying thinking and doing. Research is seen as a form of social intervention, an act of activism.

Intellectual life is not something carried out

Most ofall, political economists and media economists may examine the same market features (such as market structures, firm behaviors, competition, and consumer behaviors),

but the fundamental assumptions and motivations are different (Wasko et al., 2011, p. 3). These foundations are crucial for political

economy because they depart from the traditional approach to political economy, which concentrates on such structures as the business firm and government, by placing social processes and social relations in the foreground (Mosco, 2009, pp. 10-11). Political economy of the media is more philosophical, historical, and still practical. Therefore, com-

prehending the epistemology of political economy will strengthen not only people's ideological understanding of media but also

in an ivory tower, but a means to effect social

their practices as scholars, policy makers, and

change. Praxis is “an idea with deep roots in the history of philosophy and one which has found several paths to communication studies, including Marxian theory, the Frankfurt School of critical thought and the action-research tradition best embodied in sociology. Most generally, praxis refers to human activity and specifically to the free and creative activity by which people produce and change the world, in-

workers in the realm of media.

cluding changing themselves” (Mosco, 2009,

p. 34). Mosco discusses it further:

CONTEMPORARY TRENDS IN THE POLITICAL ECONOMIES OF THE MEDIA

There are many significant areas in which political economy needs to play a key role in research and practice. In fact, political economy of the media evolves in relation to developments in its objects of analysis— media

institutions,

technologies,

markets,

Praxis is important to both the epistemological and substantive premises of

and society—and to changes in scholarship.

political economy. In brief, praxis guides a theory of knowledge to view know-

“the fact that so much is changing around us means that we must be open to theoretical revision more than ever.” There is a tendency to see the political economies of media as

ing as the ongoing product of theory and practice. It rejects as partial those

However, as Winseck (2011, p. 13) points out,

POLITICAL

constituting a single field, from neoclassical

political economy to the cultural industries school (Winseck, 2011 ). Previously, political economists focused on either traditional media like broadcasting and newspapers or new media like the Internet as their main subjects and topics when they attempted to understand the power relations in the broader society. While this tradition continued into the 2010s, political economy now needs to be accustomed to a shifting media

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

«

1257

engage in debates, albeit often uninformed, on the ongoing transformation of

our knowledge economy, but it disguises more than it reveals despite its vagueness. The term captures something of significance about contemporary Western societies, where economic value is generated

through the processing of information and the monetization of knowledge. (Schafer & van Es, 2017, p. 13)

milieu that includes new digital media, both

Therefore, political economy of the media

social media and platform technologies. As Jonathan Hardy (2014) and Christian Fuchs

in the 2010s must understand the complex

(2014) argue, it is critical to understand con-

big data produced by user activities, and the customers as users mainly because the capitalization process in digital platforms focuses on the immaterial user activities instead of mate-

temporary political economy in tandem with digital technologies, including social media,

platform technologies, and mobile media. These two critical scholars based in the United Kingdom rejuvenated audience-commodity theory, developed by Dallas Smythe in their analysis of social media. Regardless of these several significant core areas, this final section emphasizes that political economy of the media in the early 21st century has to expand its scope and areas to newly advanced digital media technologies, such as social media and platform technologies, mainly because these have rapidly changed and influenced the media and communication industries. These areas are growing on a large scale, and they have not only replaced traditional media functions, but also developed a new

modern capitalism by fundamentally changing major players and directions in the global markets, which requires consideration of new perspectives.

In addition, big data has become one of the most significant parts of the information and communication society. Big data is used to describe a set of practices involving the collection, processing and analysis of large data sets. The term enables members of the general public to

connectivity among digital platform owners,

rial trade in the form of CDs, DVDs, and pro-

grams. Political economists must pay attention to these new fields of study as they are not only providing new looks toward our understanding of new media but also developing new capitalism based on monopolistic concentration of ownership and therefore capital accumulation in their hands. Digital Platforms.

Digital platforms, in-

cluding social network sites (e.g., Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter), search engines (e.g., Google, Bing, Baidu, and Naver), and smart-

phone and relevant applications (e.g., free mobile messengers like WeChat, WhatsApp, KakaoTalk, and Line), as well as online stream-

ing services (e.g., Netflix) have greatly changed both the media industries and people's daily lives. Until the early 2000s, there were no special digital platforms; however, as these

digital platforms started to come online in the mid-2000s, they immediately became major players in that they acted as new media. From elementary school students to businessmen, smartphones have become necessary tools, and the emergence of SNSs (simple notification services) has been widely used for organizing

1258

-

POLITICAL

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

civic movements. Global youth also rapidly

members

in

over

190

countries

as

access social media like Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat as their new pri-

December 2017, has become an exemplary digital platform. The company’s streaming-video

mary communication platforms. With the rise of digital platforms, people’s understanding and use of digital media have become more important features of the contemporary society.

service went live in 130 new

countries

of

in

December 2016, and it has continued to increase

its global service (Netflix, 2017; Rubin, 2016).

Most ofall, digital platforms have gained sig-

International expansion has become a

nificance for the digital economy in the networked 21st century. Digital platforms are some of the most recent tools in garnering capital gains for the developers and owners of these platform technologies. The speed of growth has

vital part of Netflix’s growth strategy, since growth in the U.S., its biggest

market, has been slowing. The company’s service has been a hit with consum-

been unprecedented as well. For example, Face-

ers around the world, thanks to its strategy of coming to new countries with its

book increased its revenues, from only $0.9 billion in 2009 to $17.9 billion in 2015. As a

growing menu of popular original content for alow monthly price.

reflection of these new media environments,

the contemporary political economy of media

Netflix helped bring about a big shift in how

starts to focus on digital platforms, which are

and when we watch videos, resulting in more

critical for people's daily activities.

binge-watching of series and more people leaving their cable subscriptions for streaming services. Hoping to become a bigger fixture of your T'V, Netflix is ramping up its list of featurelength films and growing its roster of original TV shows, such as its popular political thriller House of Cards (Rubin, 2016). In fact, the next decade will be more amazing and tumultuous as Internet TV supplants terrestrial TV (AFP, 2017). “Netflix builds on models of individualized viewing practices and self-scheduling of TV” (Jenner, 2016, p. 267). Significantly, in tandem with the growth of online streaming services, television continues to lose its function as a public sphere. As

Several non-Western countries, including

China and Korea, have developed unique digital platforms to compete with the information dominance of Western countries. However, these non-Western countries have not con-

structed a balanced global order, because their

own platforms are mainly used in their own countries, not the global markets. As with the early Internet era, people believe that digital platforms provide an egalitarian arrangement, promising to support those who stand upon them (Gillespie, 2014). However, global flows of new media technology have been asymmetrical, and thus the emergence of digital platforms asks us to identify whether asymmetrical relationships between a few developed and many developing countries continue. In fact, characterized in part by unequal technological exchanges, the current state of platform development implies a technological domination of US based platforms that have greatly

influenced the majority of countries (Jin, 2015). For example, Netflix, the world’s leading Internet television network with over 109 million

streaming service users are mainly seeking tele-

vision programs, including dramas and entertainment shows, and films, the role of television news, which has been one of the most signifi-

cant functions for democracy, has gradually disappeared. This implies that digital platforms are shifting not only the industrial structures and business models, but also the role of

mass media, which must be the major concerns for political economists.

POLITICAL

In addition, the growth of US-based digital

platforms implies that the United States continues to control the global markets as the number of global users is soaring. The asymmetrical relationship in platform technologies between the United States and many developing countries has intensified. People as platform users witness the forms of platform disparities because these digital platforms concentrate capital into the hands

of US platform owners,

resulting in

the expansion ofthe global divide (Jin, 2015). Critically interpreting the emergence of digital

platforms from political economy has become significant. In particular, as the digital platform

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

1259

Due to its increasing significance, big data has rapidly become one of the most significant subjects in conjunction with digital platforms. Although other areas, like finance and even

sports (e.g., the movie Moneyball), utilize big data, media studies has also paid attention to big data from several perspectives. Among these, political economy certainly extends its emphasis on big data as several platform corporations appropriate big data accumulated by user activities. Several political economists have critically analyzed big data due to its significant role in the information society. Significantly, in October 2016, Dan Schiller

industries are getting transnationalized, under-

participated in an interview at Chinese Social

standing the power relationships between platform owners, who are mainly in the Western countries, and platform users who are mostly in non-Western countries can be carefully analyzed to determine the nature of modern capitalism driven by digital platforms.

Science Report and expressed his concerns on big data by expressing the dilemma of humankind’s simultaneous deficit and surplus of information. He emphasized that big data refers

Big Data. The growth of digital platforms continues the process of building a global digital capitalism by concentrating production, distribution, and storage in a handful of mega corporations, and, in some cases, governments,

that manage labor and consumption through the systems that digital platforms enable. In particular, it is critical to understand the relationship between digital platforms and big data, referring to “the movements to analyze the increasingly vast amounts of information stored in multiple locations, but mainly online and

not just to the scale or volume and diversity of data that are now being created but also to the need to make sense of these data through data science, through net-

work analysis, and through other specialized disciplines that are trying to grapple with this challenge. One problem is that this often accords a new priority to an old emphasis, which is empiricist. Anything can be data, so let’s just look for patterns. We don't care if they amount to anything meaningful. Let's just see what seems to be related to what. There is, however, a

Big data is increasingly used to analyze, model,

deeper issue. An instrumental purpose is typically encoded in the accumulation and subsequent analysis of Big Data.

and forecast human behavior (boyd & Craw-

(Jianfeng, 2017)

primarily in the cloud” (Mosco, 2014, p. 177). ford, 2011 ). Several search engines, including

Google, Yahoo, and Bing, apply algorithms to databases to deliver search results. Facebook’s Graph Search takes this to a new level by providing search results tailored to the record of subjective choices such as requests and “likes” (Mosco, 2014, pp. 182-183).

What he criticized was that we had a problem “because we need to know whose instrumental purpose it is and what goals it serves.” In other words, “big data is organized around the instrumental purpose of profit maximization, which is not only exploitative but also

1260

-«

POLITICAL

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

often carries what economists call externali-

at issue is not simply between database “haves”

ties. It may have all kinds of other effects

and “have-nots”; “it is also about asymmetric

beyond the immediate goal of profit-making,

sorting processes and different ways of thinking about how data relate to knowledge and its application” (Andrejevic, 2014, p. 1676). What is significant in tandem with big data is algorithms that play “an increasingly important role in selecting what information is considered most relevant to us, a crucial feature of our participation in public life. Search engines help us navi-

but nobody pays for these—except the rest of us” (Jianfeng, 2017). Schiller continued: Big data thus poses profound questions. Because on the one hand, it gives new

power to the units of big capital that are learning to exploit it for profit-making,

while, on the other hand, it takes away power from everybody else, often without

gate massive databases of information, or the

anyone knowing what, specifically, is happening. So, we have a really big problem of balance—a power disparity—and, looking ahead, of a need for political creativity.

lem is that big corporations and governments manipulate our preferences against others to secure their monetary values. The second issue relevant to big data is privacy. In our digital society, where lots of information is stored in big data, an analysis of the databases can provide the opportunities to solve big problems of society. The problem is that “as the database contains the personal information, it is vulnerable to provide the direct access to researchers and analysts. Since

(Jianfeng, 2017)

Big data tends to neglect context and history. That is partly because big data examines human behavior as a set of discrete events or data points; however, “human decisions are not dis-

crete events. They are embedded in sequences and contexts. The human brain has evolved to

entire web” (Gillespie, 2014, p. 167). The prob-

in this case, the privacy of individuals is leaked,

account for this reality” (see Mosco, 2014 for

it can cause threat and it is also illegal” (Jain,

citation of Brooks, 2013). “The fear is that the seemingly magical combination of large data

Gyanchandani, & Khare, 2016, p. 3).

sets and massive computational power will lead people to replace narrative with correlation and, more importantly, to ask only or mainly those questions that big data can handle. In the real world of history, if not in the metaphorical one of needles and haystacks, context counts. It is not just the place where truth or solutions hide, but context actively gives shape and substance to truth” (Mosco, 2014, p. 201). As boyd and Crawford (2011) point out, the major problem is the big data divide between the Big Data rich (companies and universities

that can generate or purchase and store large datasets) and the Big Data poor (those excluded from access to the data, expertise, and processing power), which highlights the fact that a rela-

tively small group with defined interests threatens to control the big data. However, the divide

The Apple/FBI showdown was the recent installment in an unfolding legal battle over privacy protection. Beginning

with the Snowden revelations, it is widely thought that the major threat to our pri-

vacy in the digital era comes from the power of Big Government to access per-

sonal information stored in devices and

websites. As this debate rages, we are losing sight of the other enterprise of

personal data collection—known as ‘Big Data—which is subject to less popular interest, but is far grander in scope, and it involves higher stakes and numerous ongoing legal battles. (Ben-Shahar, 2016)

Big Data business is indeed big. As is wellknown,

POLITICAL

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

1261

the collection of personal data by web-

order to transform users’ daily activities into

sites, mobile apps, retailers, insurance companies—any commercial entity

monetary revenue resources (Jin, 2015). As

that receives information from people. The sum of our activities—where we browse, shop, or drive; what we read, eat, or own; who we chat with, like, or

love—is collected, neatly organized by algorithms, smartly analyzed by sophisticated software, and used or sold pri-

marily for marketing purposes. This is certainly a threat to our privacy. Unluckily, “people seem indifferent to Big Data collection. They share personal information on web platforms, knowing full well

that it is collected by websites. Even more striking is how little people value potential protections” (Ben-Shahar, 2016). Big data is especially relevant to the notion of digital labor, because platform users create data available for platform designers and owners, who garner capital through big data produced by the users. In other words, big data has been a part of a triangular circuit alongside digital platforms and digital labor. As digital platforms utilize big data gathered from platform users who contribute their time and energy, as well as creativity as producers, big data connect between platform technologies, on the one hand, and platform users on the other. There-

fore, it is critical to analyze big data not only as a single area but also as part of the new media environment to make an endless chain connection from critical political economy. Digital Labor.

‘The last, but not least, area

that political economy needs to focus on in the platform era is digital labor. Compared to traditional media, digital platforms have utilized user activities, not only as customers but also as producers of content for these platforms, which becomes a new revenue source for platform owners. Platform owners have developed their strategies to appropriate user activities in

Mosco aptly puts it:

The labor of communication is being commodified as wage labor has grown in significance throughout the media workplace. In order to cut the labor bill and expand revenue, managers replaced mechanical with electronic systems to eliminate thousands of jobs in the printing industry as electronic typesetting did away with the jobs of linotype operators. Today's digital systems allow companies to expand this process. Print reporters increasingly serve in the combined roles of editor and page producers. They not only report on a story, they also put it into a form for transmission to the printed, and

increasingly, electronic page. (Mosco, 2004, pp. 158-159)

This ability to eliminate labor, combine it to

perform multiple tasks, and shift it to unpaid consumers further expands the revenue poten-

tial (McKercher, 2002, cited in Mosco, 2004). For example, Facebook has continued to benefit from user activities. Facebook adds thousands of new user registrations globally every day. The number of Facebook users has grown from $85 million in December 2010 to 2.38 billion in December 2016, including 1.23

billion daily active users on average, and 1.15 billion mobile daily active users on average for December 2016. Approximately 85.2% of Face-

book’s daily active users are outside the United States and Canada (Facebook, 2017). Facebook has changed our understanding of user activities. Facebook users constitute a meaning-

ful economic entity, and therefore, researchers argue that user participation can be measured and sold to advertisers (Jin & Feenberg, 2015). In this regard, political economy needs to adapt audience commodity theory to user commodity. As Smythe argued, “several media

1262

+

POLITICAL

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

research corporations and media corporations themselves as well as AC Nielsen quantified audience participation in order to assure that advertisers get what they pay for when they buy audiences” (Smythe, 1981, pp. 4-5). Several theorists argue that traditional conceptions of audience participation cannot be applied to social media due to several reasons. Among these, Arvidsson and Colleoni (2012, p. 137) claim, “people who create value for Facebook and other social media platforms do so voluntarily without any kind of compulsion whatsoever. People indeed feel more than compensated by the use value and gratification they derive from these activities.” Jen-

in capitalism because it is a general equivalent of exchange; it is the only commodity that can be exchanged against all other commodities” (Fuchs, 2014, p. 64). In this regard, it is critical to acknowledge that the use value of users’ labor is established through specific processes of measurement that serve to quantify (Dowling, 2007). The commercialization of platform users has raised serious concerns because only a handful of platform owners and designers dominate the global platform markets. From a political economy perspective, digital labor as free labor cannot be exploited by platform corporations. Users put in their time, energy,

kins, Ford, and Green (2013, pp. 58-60) also

and creativity, accounting for the most signifi-

claim that social media users work for values, such as fun, excitement, and professional ac-

cant immaterial goods and services, and therefore, their efforts should be rewarded. Of course,

complishments rather than money rewards. Therefore, they argue for such digital labor

this includes both monetary rewards and nonmonetary rewards, and how to make a wellbalanced reward system needs to be determined. Platforms are not only gathering information from the massively increasing number of users, but also commercializing user information as a commodity, resulting in capital gains for platform owners in the Western countries (Jin,

“as engaged rather than exploited” (60). Meanwhile, Hardt and Negri (2000) argue, furthermore, that this immaterial labor is im-

measurable. What they commonly argue is that the economics of the audience commodity theory might not be applicable to social media. However, Christian Fuchs argues that, al-

2015). What makes the capital accumulation

though there is no doubt that users are motivated by social and communicative needs and desires to use social media, the fact that they love these activities does not make them less exploited. He clearly indicates that “exploitation is measured as the degree of unpaid labor from which companies benefit at the expense of labor. If exploitation does not feel like exploitation, then this does not mean that it does

process for digital platforms different from the

not exist” (Fuchs, 2014, p. 64). Several theoreticians, like Arvidsson and Colleoni (2012) and Jenkins et al. (2013), might believe that Smythe’s audience commodity theory and the digital labor approach in digital platforms overlook that audience members benefit from digital platforms. However, they fail to understand that “money has a central importance

old media, broadcasting in particular, is “the way

it acquires the audience commodity” (Bolafto & Vieira, 2015, p. 56). In other words, “television advertisers buy statistics about potential viewer attention to advertisements, a passive

audience model.” Platform companies instead “offer and refine information collected from an active audience when users spontaneously provide data about their personal tastes, preferences, desires, and pathways through their

browsers” Platform advertisers thus “can more accurately target the audiences they intend to

reach” (Bolafio & Vieira, 2015, p. $6). As such, the current digital labor discourse argues that such work undervalues human labor (Fuchs & Sevignani, 2013; Terranova, 2000)

POLITICAL

and fails to provide basic worker protections, such as a minimum wage, health insurance, and overtime compensation (Burston et al., 2010;

Scholz, 2013, cited in Bucher & Fieseler, 2016).

Digital labor might well represent “new forms of labor but old forms of exploitation” (Fuchs

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

«

1263

NECESSITY OF POLITICAL ECONOMY IN THE 21ST CENTURY The political economy of media has been one of the most significant fields in media and communication studies over the past several

in particular the United States, as Facebook,

decades. Political economy has historically interpreted the structural transformation of media industries within the broader context of society. Admitting to the existence of earlier political economists, this article has discussed mainly the modern traditions of the political economy of media starting with the

Twitter, and Instagram exemplify; however, the

increasing role of the Frankfurt School, in par-

majority of users are non-Americans as several emerging markets, such as China, India,

ticular, Adorno and Horkheimer in Europe and Robert Brady in North America. After documenting the genealogy of political economy by explaining the major works done by a few of the first generation of political economists such as Dallas Smythe and Herbert Schiller, this article carefully identified the epistemology of political economy. Most of all, it discussed several new areas that political economy must

& Sevignani, 2013; Paolacci et al., 2010; Scholz,

2013, cited in Bucher & Fieseler, 2016, p. 2). What is missing in these previous works is

the power inequality between Western and non-Western countries. Digital platforms are mainly developed by a few Western countries,

Indonesia, and Brazil are heavily relying on the US-based digital platforms. In fact, as of December 2016, approximately 85.2% of Facebook's daily active users are outside the United States and Canada (Facebook, 2017), which means that Facebook, as a US-based social

media platform, garners profits through its exploitation of global users, especially users in non-Western countries. As the United States has appropriated global media consumers with its popular culture, such as film, television pro-

grams, and music, American dominance in digital platforms has become eminent. It is serious because, unlike popular culture, American digital platforms control the global markets on a large scale. With popular culture, regardless

analyze, including digital platforms, big data, and digital labor, which are intricately connected. As Winseck argues, “Relations of

power have become more complicated, and obscure in the age of the Internet and the post neoliberal order” (Winseck, 2016, p. 104), and these uncertainties have continued to grow in

the era of digital platforms, because not only new digital technologies in the form of digital

of American influences, people like their own

platforms, but also big data accumulated by the

popular culture, so in many non-Western coun-

user activities and the growth of pro-sumers have fundamentally changed the media and

tries, such as Korea, Mexico, and Brazil, media

consumers still prefer local popular culture to American popular culture. However, in the realm of digital platforms, this is not the case because Google, Facebook, Netflix, and Android

operating systems account for 80%-90% of the global markets, which has not been observed

previously. This implies that these platform corporations have utilized global users as digital

labor, which should be critically analyzed.

communication

infrastructure, system, and

culture in the early 21st century. Political economy in the era of digital platforms has continued as one of the most significant theoretical and methodological frameworks. Our modern capitalism relies on digital platforms as new drivers for the global economy and cultures; however, the level of oligopoly has intensified, which means that

1264

POLITICAL

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

only a handful of platform designers and owners garner massive profits based on users’ activities creating big data. Globally, only a few Western digital platforms have increased their global dominance as Google and Facebook as well as Netflix have become major players in their fields. Regardless of the emergence of national players, such as Naver in Korea, Baidu in China,

and VK in Russia, they are not able to penetrate the global markets, and only a few countries develop digital platforms, which means that the

large majority of countries have no choice but to use Western-based digital platforms, which creates the imbalances between the global and the local forces. Therefore, the current milieu sur-

rounding media and communication asks political economists to historically and systematically analyze the trend, not only to criticize the status quo, but also to provide better solutions. Political economy is not the only academic discipline in communication and media studies. However, political economy is one of the most significant and respected research areas due to its nature, which asks people to ponder

the issues of inequality, asymmetrical power relations, and skewed ownership, which influence cultural content. In particular, in the early 21st century, the necessity of political economy approaches is becoming evident because the newly developing media environment surrounded by digital platforms and big data-driven capitalism should be understood, challenged, and controlled. Political

economy alone cannot resolve serious media issues; however, with the emphasis of political economy, we are able to develop well-educated people’s consciousness toward a new society in which people value equality, fairness, and diversity.

FURTHER

READING

Downing, J. (2011). Media ownership, concentration,

and control: The evolution of debate. In J. Wasko, G. Murdock, & H. Sousa (Eds.), The handbook of

political economy of communication (pp. 140-168). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Fuchs, C. (2010). Labor in informational capitalism and on the Internet. The Information Society, 26(3), 179-196.

Fuchs, C., & Sandoval, M. (2014). Digital workers of the

world unite! A framework for critically theorizing

and analyzing digital labor. Triple C, 12(2), 486-563. Gillian, D. (2002). Media ownership: The economics and politics ofconvergence and concentration in the UK and European media. London, UK: SAGE. Graham, P. (2006). Issues in political economy. In A. Albarran, S. Chan-Olmsted, & M. Wirth (Eds.),

Handbook of media management and economics (pp. 493-521). London, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum. Horkheimer, M., & Adorno, T. (2002). Dialectic of en-

lightenment. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Jin, D. Y. (2013). De-convergence of global media industries. London, UK: SAGE. Mattelart, A. (2000). Networking the world 17942000. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Meehan, E., & Torre, P. (2011). Markets in theory and markets in television. In J.Wasko, G. Murdock, &

H. Sousa (Eds.), The handbook ofpolitical econ-

omy of communication (pp. 62-82). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Mosco, V., & McKercher, C. (2009). The laboring of

communication: Will knowledge workers ofthe world unite? Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Noam, E. (2009). Media ownership and concentration in America. London, UK: Oxford University Press.

Schiller, D. (1999). Digital capitalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Sussman, G. (1997). Communication, technology and

politics in the information age. London,

UK:

SAGE.

Wasko, J., Murdock, G., & Sousa, H. (Eds.). (2011). The handbook ofpolitical economy of communication. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Wittel, A. (2012). Digital Marx: Toward a political economy of distributed media. Triple C, 10(2), 313-333.

REFERENCES

AFP. (2017, January 19). Netflix adds record breaking 7 million new subscribers in global expansion. Daily Mail. Retrieved from http://www .dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4134150

POLITICAL

/Nettflix-adds-7-million-subscribers-global

-expansion.html. Andrejevic, M. (2014). The big data divide. International Journal of Communication, 8, 1673-1689.

Arvidsson, A., & Colleoni, E. (2012). Value in informational capitalism and on the Internet. The Infor-

mation Society, 28(3), 135-150.

Babe, R. (2009). Cultural studies andpolitical economy: Toward anew integration. New York, NY: Lexington

Books. Ben-Shahar, O. (2016, April 1). Privacy is the new money, thanks to big data. Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites /omribenshahar /2016/04/01/privacy-is-the-new-money-thanks -to-big-data/. Bolano, C., & Vieira, E. (2015). The political econ-

omy ofthe Internet: Social networking sites and

a reply to Fuchs. Television and New Media, 16(1), $2-61. boyd, d., & Crawford, K. (2011). Six provocations for

big data. Presentation at A Decade in Internet Time: Symposium on the Dynamics ofthe Internet and

ECONOMY

Facebook.

(2017).

OF THE

Newsroom.

MEDIA

Retrieved

1265

from

http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/

Foster, J. B., & McChesney, R. (2013). The cultural

apparatus of monopoly capital: An introduction. Monthly Review, 6S(3), 1-33. Fuchs, C. (2012). Dallas Smythe today: The audience commodity, the digital labour debate, Marxist po-

litical economy and critical theory: Prolegomena to a digital labour theory of value. Triple C, 10(2), 692-740.

Fuchs, C. (2014). Social media: A critical introduction. London, UK: SAGE.

Fuchs, C., & Mosco, V. (Eds.). (2016a). Marx and the political economy ofthe media. Studies in critical social sciences (Vol. 79). Leiden, Netherlands: Brill. Fuchs, C., & Mosco, V. (Eds.). (2016b). Marx in the

age of digital capitalism. Studies in Critical Social Sciences (Vol. 80). Leiden, Netherlands: Brill. Fuchs, C., & Sevignani, S. (2013). What is digital labour? What is digital work? What’s their difference? And why do these questions matters for

understanding social media. Triple C: Communi-

Society, Oxford Internet Institute, Oxford Uni-

cation,

versity, Oxford.

Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society,

Brady, R. (1943). Business as a system ofpower. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Brady, R. (1952). The citizen's stake in price control. Paterson, NJ: Littlefield, Adams & Co.

Capitalism

and

Critique.

Open

Access

11(2), 237-293.

Garnham, N. (2000). Emancipation, the media, and modernity. London, UK: Oxford University Press. Gillespie, T. (2014). The relevance ofalgorithms. In

Brooks, D. (2013). What data can’t do. The New York

T. Gillespie, P. Boczkowski, & K. Foot (Eds.),

Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com

Media technologies: Essays on communication, ma-

/2013/02/19/opinion/brooks-what-data-cant-do

-html Bucher, E., & Fieseler, C. (2016). The flow of digital labor. New Media and Society, 19(11), 1868-1886. Curran, J., & Park, M. J. (2000). Beyond globalization theory. InJ.Curran & M. J. Park (Eds.), De-

westernizing media studies (pp. 13-18). London, UK: Routledge.

Dowling, E. (2007). Producing the dining experience: Measure, subjectivity and the affective worker.

Ephemera: Theory and Politics in Organization, 7(1), 117-132. Eagleton, T. (2003). Figures of dissent. London, UK: Verso.

Facebook. (2016). Facebook annual report. Retrieved from _https://investor.fb.com/investor-news/press -release-details/2017 /facebook-Reports-Fourth -Quarter-and-Full-Year-2016-Results /default.aspx

teriality, and society (pp. 167-194). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Golding, P., & Murdock, G. (1991). Culture, communications and political economy. In J. Curran & M. Gurevitch (Eds.), Mass media and society

(pp. S-32). London, UK: Edward Arnold. Gunster, S. (2004). Capitalizing on culture: Critical theory for cultural studies. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press. Hardy,J.(2014). Critical political economy ofthe media: An introduction. New York, NY: Routledge.

Herman, E., & Chomsky, N. (2012). Manufacturing

consent: The political economy of the mass media. New York, NY: Pantheon.

Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2000). Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Jain, P., Gyanchandani, M., & Khare, N. (2016). Big data privacy: A technological perspective and review. Journal of Big Data, 3(25), 1-25.

1266

+«

POLITICAL

ECONOMY

OF THE

MEDIA

Jay, M. (1992). The dialectical imagination: A history of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research 1923-1950. Berkley: University of California Press. Jenner, M. (2016). Is this TVIV? On Netflix, TVIHI, and binge-watching.

New

Media

and Society,

13(2)-2572273. Jenkins, H., Ford, S., & Green, J. (2013). (Eds.). Spreadable media: Creating value and meaning ina networked culture. New York: New York University Press. Jianfeng, W. (2017). Professor Dan Schiller: Dig data may increase power disparity. Chinese Social Sciences Today. Retrieved from http://www.csstoday

.com/Item/4132.aspx Jin, D. Y. (2011). Hands on/hands off: The Korean state and the market liberalization of the communication industry. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Jin, D. Y. (2015). Digital platforms, imperialism and political culture. London, UK: Routledge. Jin, D. Y., & Feenberg, A. (2015). Commodity and community in social networking: Marx and the monetization of user-generated content. The Information Society, 31(1), S2-60.

Jung, S. (2011). Korean masculinities and transcultural consumption: Yonsama, Rain, Oldboy, K-Pop idols. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.

Morgan, T. (2013). Adorno and the political economy of communication. The Political Economy of Communication, 1(2), 44-64. Mosco, V. (2004). The digital subline: Myth, power and cyberspace. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Mosco, V. (2009). Political economy of communication (2d ed.). London, UK: SAGE. Mosco, V. (2014). To the cloud: Big data in a turbulent world. Boulder CO: Paradigm. Netflix. (2017). Overview. Retrieved from https://

ir-netflix.com. Nordenstreng, K., & Varis, T. (1974). Television traf-

fic: A one-way street? Reports and Papers on Mass Communication 70. Paris: UNESCO. Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010). Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical

Turk. Judgment and Decision Making, S(S), 411-419. Resnick, S., & Wolff, R. (2006). New Departures in Marxian Theory. London, UK: Routledge.

Rubin, B. (2016). Netflix is now everywhere... except China. January 7, 2017. CNET Digital Media. Retrieved from https://www.cnet.com/au/news /netflix-goes-live-in-130-new-countries/ Schafer, M. T., & van Es, K. (Eds.). (2017). The datafied society: Studying culture through data. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press. Schiller, D. (1996). Theorizing communication: A history. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Langdale, J. (1997). East Asian broadcasting industries: Global, regional, and national perspectives. Economic Geography, 73, 305-321.

Schiller, D. (1999). The legacy of Robert A. Brady:

Lynd, R. (1943). Foreword. In R. A. Brady (Ed.), Business as a system of power (p. viii). London, UK: Transaction. Maxwell, R. (2003). Herbert Schiller. Lanham, MD:

89-101. Schiller, H. (1992). Mass communications and American

Rowman & Littlefield. McCheseny, R. (1999). Rich media, poor democracy: Communication politics in dubious times. New York, NY: The New Press. McChesney, R. (2000). The political economy of communication and the future of the field. Media, Culture, and Society, 22(1), 109-116.

McChesney, R. (2008). The political economy ofmedia: Enduring issues, emerging dilemmas. New York, NY: Monthly Review Press. McKercher, C. (2002). Newsworkers unite: Labor, convergence and North American newspapers. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Antifascist origins of the political economy of communications. Journal of Media Economics, 12(2),

empire (2d ed.). San Francisco, CA: Westview Press.

Scholz, T. (Ed.). (2013). Digital labor: The Internet as playground and factory. New York, NY: Routledge. Sinclair, J.,Jacka, E., & Cunningham, S. (Eds.). (1996). New patterns in global television: Peripheral vision. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Smythe, D. (1981). Dependency road: Communications, capitalism, consciousness, and Canada. Norwood,

NJ: Ablex.

Straubhaar, J. (1991). Beyond media imperialism: Asymmetrical independence and cultural proximity. Critical Studies in Mass Communication,

8(1), 39-70.

Terranova, T. (2000). Free labor: Producing culture

for the digital economy. Social Text, 18(2),33-S8.

POPULAR

Wasko,J.(1993). Introduction. In J.Wasko, V. Mosco, & M. Pendakur (Eds.), Illuminating the blindspots. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Wasko, J., Murdock, G., & Sousa, H. (2011). Intro-

duction: The political economy of communications core concerns and issues. In J. Wasko, G. Murdock,

& H. Sousa (Eds.), The handbook ofpolitical economy

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

STUDIES

.

1267

of readership and viewership surveys. As a definition, however, it refers only to a field of objects and is oflittle conceptual value. A purely quantitative definition would also include products of high culture, such as classical music, thus rendering the distinction mean-

ofcommunications. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Wasko, J., & Meehan, E. (2013). Critical crossroads

ingless. The second definition is value normative and residual, treating popular culture as what-

or parallel routes? Political economy and new approaches to studying media industries and cul-

binary opposition in which popular equals infe-

tural products. Cinema Journal, 52(3), 150-156.

rior, with

Wasko,J.,Murdock, G., & Sousa, H. (Eds.). (2011). The handbook ofpolitical economy of communications. Malden, MA: Wiley. Winseck, D. (2016). Reconstructing the political economy of communication for the digital media age. The Political Economy ofCommunication, 4(2), 73-114. Winseck, D. (2011). The political economies of media and the transformation of the global media indus-

tries. In D. Winseck & D. Y. Jin (Eds.), The political economies of media: The transformation of the

global media industries (pp. 3-48). London, UK: Bloomsbury. Winseck, D., & Jin, D. Y. (Eds.). (2011). The political

economies of media: The transformation of the global media industries. London, UK: Bloomsbury. Dal Yong Jin

ever is not high culture, thus constituting a an

implicit

correspondence

to

social class distinctions of taste (Bourdieu,

1984). A defining element here is the difference between an individual artist’s creation and the product of a culture industry where the artist’s role is subordinated to commercial interests. The implication is that high culture is not so much culture as art, while low or pop-

ular culture is merely culture and rarely art. But a few examples will suffice to upset this neat division. On the one hand, Shakespeare and Dickens were popular in their own time but are now central exhibits in the canon of high culture. On the other hand, there is the opera singer Pavarotti’s tremendous popular success both in terms of record sales and concert attendance. A third definition equates popular culture with “mass culture,’ which is often

POPULAR CULTURE AND CULTURAL STUDIES

compared to junk food and blamed for turning people into passive consumers of a crassly commercial product. Sometimes equated wholesale with American culture, the mass culture

DEFINITIONS No single definition can capture the range of meanings associated with the term popular culture. A survey has found six prevailing definitions, which taken together, enable us to con-

ceive the field in the broadest terms (Storey,

2013a). The first, quantitative definition, takes popular culture simply to mean what is liked by a large number of people. Quantitative approaches are useful and widely employed in the study of culture, most often in the form

perspective also comes with a contrastive image of amore organic culture that may have existed before rampant commercialization or might emerge after the demise of capitalism. As Storey

(2013a, p. 8) puts it: “What are under threat are either the traditional values of high culture, or the traditional way oflife of a ‘tempted’ working class.” Fourth, popular culture is the culture of, by and for the people, an authentic people's culture. While this definition, associated with, for instance, E. P. Thompson, has

value as a means of historical comparison, it is

1268

-«

POPULAR

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

more often used to identify among the cultural products oftoday those that are deemed to be genuinely of the people and hence immune to commercial exploitation. The question ofthe necessary mediation of the market tends to be avoided in making such claims. Storey’s last two definitions are very much confined to academic discourse, unlike the previous four that have circulation outside the academy. In brief, they are approaches, rather than definitions, arising out of new conceptual shifts

in academic discourse: the Gramscian constellation of concepts centered on the concept of hegemony, and the theory of postmodernism. To appreciate the degree of consensus there is on what popular culture means, let us look briefly at another attempt at defining it. Stuart Hall sees three possible ways of doing so. One is quantitative, what is consumed by vast masses of people, which he calls the “market” or commercial definition that comes with the figure of the “cultural dope” who passively consumes whatever is dished out by the market. On the

STUDIES

“The categories remain, though the invento-

ries change” (p. 514). Hall’s preferred definition, then, is the third “rather uneasy one”: This looks, in any particular period, at

those forms and activities which have their roots in the social and material conditions ofparticular classes; which have

been embodied in popular traditions and practices. In this sense, it retains what is valuable in the descriptive definition. But it goes on to insist that what is essential

to the definition of popular culture is the relations which define “popular culture” in a continuing tension

(relationship,

influence and antagonism) to the dominant culture. It is a conception of culture

which is polarized around this cultural dialectic. It treats the domain of cultural

forms and activities as a constantly changing field. Then it looks at the relations which constantly structure this field into dominant and subordinate formations. It

one hand, Hall dismisses this as an “unsocialist

looks at the process by which these rela-

perspective,” which in righteously denouncing the manipulative machinations of the industry also condemns the people as helpless victims

tions of dominance and subordination are

of false consciousness. On the other hand,

Hall warns against underestimating “the power of cultural implantation” (2013a, p. $12) and seeking easy alternatives. His second definition is “descriptive”: popular culture is all that the people do, which echoes the anthropological definition of culture as “a whole way of life.” This definition suffers from being too general and lacking any determinate criteria of inclusion. Second, since popular culture defined in this way makes sense only by reference to the elite culture to which it is opposed, historical changes in the content of this category tend to be neglected. There is a ceaseless transaction between elite and popular domains of culture, Hall points out, which frustrates any attempt at drawing up durable inventories.

articulated. It treats them as a process: the process by means of which some things are actively preferred so that others can be dethroned. It has at its center the changing and uneven relations of force which define the field of culture—that is, the

question of cultural struggle and its many forms. Its main focus of attention is the relation between culture and questions of

hegemony. (2013a, pp. 514-S1S) Hall's preferred definition, like Storey’s, is part ofa methodological strategy and emphasized relations of tension between opposed terms in order to desubstantialize the popular

and render it a dynamic field of forces. The definitions that take a relational, con-

trastive approach to the popular, when examined together, can give us insight into other

POPULAR

facets of the field so defined. The opposition high and low, as we have seen, involves an evaluation that stems from and reinforces social

distinctions. Classical and popular is another relation of contrast that overlaps with the normative valuation ofhigh and low to some extent

but retains a certain conceptual value insofar as popular within this equation can be taken to mean “vernacular” as opposed to the culture of the educated elite. The distinction popular versus mass likewise retains its charge even

though in many instances the two are assumed to be synonymous. One way that these terms are distinguished is by reference to the degree of “industrialization” or market mediation involved. Another criterion is the existence of a concrete relationship to a specific cultural region, ethnic, or social group that can some-

times override considerations of commercialization, as in the case of Black music in Britain,

which, while clearly a part of contemporary mass culture, cannot be dissociated from the

Black community’s restricted public sphere within which it resonates with meanings that may not be of interest or accessible to the

general consumer. Finally, there is also a distinction posited between popular and folk culture that in a way replicates the popular mass distinction on another plane. As with the latter, the popular and folk distinction is also a matter of degrees. Here folk culture is that which re-

mains strongly bound to specific community identities as an expression of the life of the community itself, whereas popular culture, though still identified with specific social groups, is no longer their own cultural expression serving

ritual or existential needs but a site of multiple forms of expression and cultural consumption that such groups are most likely to frequent. By this reckoning, popular thus falls between folk and mass on a scale running from unme-

diated cultural expression at one end to completely mediatized cultural commodities at the other.

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

STUDIES

.

1269

POPULAR CULTURE IN HISTORY What

is common

to all these definitions,

though, is “that whatever else popular culture is, it is definitely a culture that only emerged following industrialization and urbanization” (Storey, 2013a) Perhaps more accurately, it is from the advent of capitalism and print culture that we should date the rise of the popular as cultural historians, prompted by the new interest in popular culture, have shown. As Stuart Hall has pointed out, the mass culture debate “really goes back as far, at least, as the

eighteenth century” (Hall, 2013b, p. 113). Although cultural studies rejects the terms in which cultural questions of the era of industrial capitalism were debated, Hall among others has recognized the continuing relevance of the “mass society” debate that, while failing to

adequately theorize the social and cultural transformations wrought by industrial capitalism, did succeed in identifying the most important changes. Hall identifies three types of effects that the “mass society” debate attributed to the rise of industrial capitalism: cultural effects involving the debasement of high culture by the flood of mass media products, political effects such as the masses’ vulnerability to propaganda and media influence, and social

ones including the dissolution of communities. These perceptions have prevailed in intellectual and academic discourse from the 18th century to the late 20th centuries. For our purposes, therefore, studies of pop-

ular culture in vided into two contemporary. quiry, popular

the academy today can be dibroad streams: historical and As an object of historical inculture is a vast archive of cul-

tural texts that includes Renaissance drama,

mass circulation print literature of various genres that has been in circulation since the 17th century or before, stage melodrama and other popular variety entertainments of the 19th century, and so on. In the 20th century,

1270

-

POPULAR

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

popular or mass culture became the object of synchronic study informed by urgent political concerns about industrial mass society. We will henceforth refer to these as historical and political approaches to popular culture, keeping in mind that historical approaches are informed by political concerns and political approaches are not devoid of historical references. In a way, it was the perception that historical popular culture had disappeared with the rise of industrial mass culture that led to the investigation of the character of culture available to the working class or ordinary people in the 20th century. This long period thus appears as a synchronic field of cultural production and consumption in which the central paradigm relates culture as a marketed commodity to a consumer who no longer has the choice of producing her own cultural texts. This situation of captivity to a culture industry has been analyzed and evaluated from two broad, mutually opposed positions: one that has been described as “left pessimism” for its portrayal of the culture industry as an all-powerful profitmaking machine that reduces culture to an instrument for the reproduction of the working class body’s laboring capacity; and the other an attempt to see agency, meaning making, and

discrimination in the acts of consumption, the cultural practices that make use of but are not dictated by the commodity texts. POPULAR CULTURE AS AN OBJECT OF HISTORY

The archive of popular culture is the cultural and literary historian’s field of activity. One distinguishing feature of popular culture has always been its strict contemporaneity. Pop-

ular culture is always here and now, today’s culture being replaced by something else tomorrow. Yesterday's popular culture passes into history. A nostalgia industry has come up in recent decades that recycles popular culture of

STUDIES

past decades but apart from that, much of what was tremendously popular at one time is today totally forgotten and relegated to the archive, where only the historian seeks them out. Other highly popular works pass into the canon of high culture, there to be prescribed to schoolchildren and university students. The archive of popular culture also contains records of transient performative or visual art forms and a wide variety of genres of writing. Leo Lowenthal, for instance, in his study of

popular culture in 18th-century England raises a number of important questions relevant for historical research as well as present-day critical approaches to popular culture. Is there really a dichotomy of “genuine art” and “popular culture” or are these concepts “formed in different logical contexts”? In other words,

Lowenthal raises the possibility that the normative coupling of the two concepts may be an error, that each of them deals with a differ-

ent object without reference to quantitative or other definitions of popularity. When we consider something as art, we take it up individually, we are interested in its inner structure and norms, its aesthetic properties. When considered as popular culture, we are concerned with consumption, dissemination, and impact. In art we try to discern the truth, while with culture our main concern is about its “effects.” Ideally, he suggests, the two methods ought to be combined (Lowenthal, 1961, p. xix). Then again, the equations “art © insight elite...and popular culture entertainment mass audience” are themselves questionable. The elite is not congenitally averse to entertainment, nor is the mass audience immune to the

beauty of works of art. Entertainment can afford insight and art can also entertain. Further there are historical conditions in which art can become popular culture. Lowenthal gives us some interesting examples: the etchings of Albrecht Durer served as posters for the 16th-century “partisans of Protestantism.” The operas of

POPULAR

Verdi were used in mass demonstrations by the Risorgimento in Italy, and in a less edifying case Nazi Germany employed Wagner's operas as “devices for mass identification” (Lowen-

thal, 1961, p. xix). Intimations of the rise of popular culture are already observable in the 16th and 17th centuries, Lowenthal shows, citing the contrasting views of Montaigne and Pascal on “diversion.” But it is in the 18th century that the literary mass market really picks up, and “the painful process of the separation of literature into art and commodity came for the first time into the light of full intellectual awareness’ (pp. xxiii—xxiv). Although both Lowenthal and E. P. Thompson trace the rise of popular culture back to the 18th century, they are focusing on two different social groups and consequently examining two almost entirely different sets of materials. While Thompson tracks the emer-

gence of a substantially autonomous working-

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

STUDIES

.

1271

Goethe to Wordsworth in England, to Flaubert in France, the same anxiety continues to be

expressed in different ways and will culminate in the devastating critique mounted by Adorno and Horkheimer on the culture industry. These last authors draw together many of the criticisms, expressions of civilizational despair, and projects for improvement to address a situation that, in the mid-20th century, is far more complex and technologically mediated than what Goethe or Arnold in their time witnessed. Lowenthal’s archive consists of evaluations of the culture of the people by generations of artists and critics in their own time, rather

than the archive of cultural texts themselves. E. P. Thompson, by contrast, is writing a history ofthe culture ofthe working classes. Thompson's remarks about popular culture in The Making

of the English Working Class and Customs in Common have often been cited critically as representing a culturalist view of plebeian culture

class culture, Lowenthal focuses on the debate

that neglects the structural dimension. These

about the future of genuine art faced with “the tide of popular culture,’ in which poets, playwrights, novelists, and scholars were engaged, throughout the 18th and 19th centuries. Lowenthal’s discussion clearly shows that the “mass culture” critiques of the 20th century were already anticipated in the age when the market was replacing the aristocratic patron, posing a threat to established cultural values. The artist discovers that entertainment involves manipulation, that the “business intermediary between artist and public” tempts the artist to compromise on his principles, and that the needs of the mass audience will clash with the artist’s perception of his creative mission. Goethe, remarking on these developments also

remarks occur in the course of his argument for the emergence in 18th-century England ofa plebeian culture that, though operating within the field of power of the landed gentry, was not under the latter's control. As he puts it, we have a customary culture which is not subject in its daily operations to the ideological domination of the rulers. The gentry’s overarching hegemony may define the limits within which the plebeian culture is free to act and grow, but since this

hegemony is secular rather than religious or magical it can do little to determine the character of this plebeian culture. (Thompson, 1991, p. 9)

notes a new restlessness among audiences, com-

bined with passivity and conformism, which he blames on newspapers. Inferior art, whose primary aim is entertainment, is the work of “manipulators of popular taste” who appeal to the baser instincts of the public. From

For Thompson, popular culture is a contradictory field,

a pool of diverse resources, in which trafic passes between the literate and the oral,

1272

e

POPULAR

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

the superordinate and the subordinate, the village and the metropolis; it is an arena of conflictual elements, which requires some compelling pressure—as, for example, nationalism or prevalent religious orthodoxy or class consciousness—to take form as ‘system. (Thompson, p. 6)

Plebeian culture is a paradoxical thing, “a re-

bellious traditional culture” defending custom in the face of capitalist innovations that threaten the autonomy and continuity of its own communal life (Thompson, p. 9). Thus we might say that popular culture enters the academic discourse along two parallel channels that converge and clash only in the late 20th century with the introduction of popular culture as a field of research in the university under the aegis of cultural studies. One, essentially British tradition, is concerned with what is called working-class culture. It is in Britain that the social polarization that pits the working class against the bourgeoisie is most fully developed. Arnold’s social categories are the aristocracy, the philistine bourgeoisie, and the working classes. The aristocracy is a waning power that makes the bourgeoisie and the working class the main actors in the drama of what Arnold calls “culture and anarchy,’ although the philistinism of the bourgeoisie will have to be counteracted by the new aristocracy of sensibility. F. R. Leavis continued to uphold this powerful theme of the social and cultural decline precipitated by the rise of popular culture and the need to secure the “minority culture” of good taste and refinement, against its incursions. This paradigm ruled the Anglophone intellectual world for a century and continues to be influential in postcolonial Anglophone societies like India where comparable social conditions are present. In postwar Britain, Raymond Williams, Richard Hoggart,

and E. P. Thompson turn the tables on Leavisite elitism by restoring to the working

STUDIES

class the cultural capabilities that were denied them. Williams and Hoggart in particular, entering the institutional spaces for debate opened

up by the Leavisite project and in partial agreement with its premises, turn their attention

to working-class culture that they describe as possessing its own internal cohesion anda community-forming and sustaining role. Whatever the merits of the criticism leveled against their positing of an organic working-class culture, it is these scholars, with Marxist and socialist leanings, who brought working-class culture into the center of the debate and laid the ground for the advent of cultural studies. From Arnold to Thompson and Williams then, the culture of the working classes has remained

at the center of scholarly concern but has undergone a thorough rehabilitation and reval-

uation. Mention may also be made of Mary

Triece’s Protest and Popular Culture, which marks an unusual turn in this history of attention to the working class's relation to popular culture. Against the grain of the populist strain

in cultural studies (see below), Triece’s study of workers in Progressive Era America sets out

to examine “the ways that subordinate groups construct themselves rhetorically as laborers

in contradistinction to popular ideologies that address and define them as consuming agents” (Triece, 2001, p. 4).

THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL The other channel along which the study of popular or “mass” culture has proceeded on somewhat different lines can be initially identified with the Frankfurt School and in particular the work of Adorno and Horkheimer. These authors do not refer to their object as “popular culture,” reserving that term for something long past that can never be recovered. We have just seen that this paradigm has a longer history that has been unearthed in more recent decades by researchers like Lowenthal, who is also associated with the Frankfurt School, and

POPULAR

a host of others. Studies of the popular culture of 19th-century England, to give one instance,

have proliferated over the last few decades, covering such topics as stage melodrama, the serialized three-decker novels, the sensation

novels of the 1860s, the commercial newspapers, vaudeville, the panoramas, etc. We have seen how the category of popular culture, once introduced, discloses a rich archive dating back

several centuries. In going back to the 18th century and encompassing the novel and the stage entertainments, this paradigm shifts or

expands the social reference of popular culture beyond the working class. It is the middle class that is the restless, conformist, and easily satisfied audience of inferior plays in Goethe's description. Even the mid-18th-century popular bestsellers like G. M. Reynolds or the sensation novels of a decade later are essentially middle-class reading, although by now the social borders may have expanded to include working-class readers. These historical studies do not dwell on the class question to the same extent as the other strand that we have just looked at. Class identification of readership and viewership is essential to the analysis, but the primary concerns here have to do with the market, with the impact of capitalist social re-

lations and technological innovations on culture and audiences, the changing expectations

that are either readily catered to by the publishing and entertainment industries or induced by them. Adorno’ contribution to mass communications theory is the high point of this approach to the culture of the people. A widely prevalent understanding of Adornos work on popular culture sees it as “a snobbish reaction to the vulgarity of popular art advanced by a devotee of so-called high art.’ But Adorno’s cultural theory is “not a judgment of taste but a theory concerning the moral and political projects inhering in both “serious” and

“popular” art” (Williams, 2003, p. 1). Adorno’s writings on popular culture were based on a deep familiarity with it. Witkin notes his fond-

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

STUDIES

.

1273

ness for the films of Charlie Chaplin and the humor of the Marx brothers as evidence that his was not a wholesale condemnation of popular culture from an elitist perspective. Films, television, music, astrology columns in

newspapers, radio programs, and advertising were some of the topics on which he wrote, analyzing texts in great detail. He rejected the terms popular culture and mass culture for carrying the suggestion of a culture made by the people and preferred the term culture industry. This industry he regarded as motivated by the producer's profit seeking and the demands of the market. Genuine culture, popular or otherwise, in Adorno’s understanding referred to a

culture that emerged from “the life-process of individuals or communities” (Williams, 2003, p. 2), and it was the waning of this essential

dimension and its consequences to social life rather than a regression in taste that Adorno was concerned with. Faced with the power of the culture industry, Adorno saw the individual consumer as a powerless victim who yet desired its products in the absence of real choice. Individuals in modern society are alienated in the Marxist sense, cogs in the capitalist system performing repetitive, meaningless tasks. As atomized individuals bearing the commodity labor power, workers have left their communities behind, and modern social conditions offer

no opportunity for establishing the kind of human ties that can restore or reinvent com-

munity. As consumers of mass culture, they are sold a standardized product marked by the repetition of formats (song patterns, genres, formulas) broken by occasional infusions of novelty to combat the boredom that inevitably follows prolonged repetition. Adorno does not deny that there are genuine artists involved in developing the products of the culture industry, but he points out that the industry forces them to serve its needs. Unlike other in-

dustries, the culture industry still depends on the “handicraft mode” of artistic production that involves the work of individual artists. It is

1274

«

POPULAR

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

STUDIES

during which the modern individual is “free” to pursue leisure activities among which the consumption of cultural commodities has be-

decide consciously for themselves. These, however, would be the precondition for a democratic society which needs adults who have come of age in order to sustain itself and develop. Ifthe masses have been unjustly reviled from above as masses, the culture industry is not among the least responsible for making them into masses and then despising them, while obstructing the emancipation for which human beings are as ripe as the productive forces of the epoch permit.

come increasingly important. For Adorno, this

(Hall, 2013a)

in the fields of promotion and circulation of the finished cultural commodity that the industrial character of mass culture shows itself. Art, its production or consumption, requires

free time and an effort that is qualitatively different from the effort put into the production of goods to meet basic needs. In industrial capitalism, free time is known as leisure, the time that is left over from working and sleeping,

leisure is not genuinely free time but has been drawn into the calculations of the capitalist, “the leisure sphere is intended as an escape from work but, in reality, the production of leisure

BRITISH CULTURAL STUDIES

of “transferring the profit motive naked onto

Both the British “culture and anarchy” tradition and the Frankfurt School critique left the mass audience looking like a witless dupe of

cultural forms” goes through two stages, as with

commerce, devoid of culture and selfhood,

other processes in the history of capitalism: first, the capitalist seizes the cultural texts as

a passive victim of capitalist forces. One of the primary tasks undertaken by the cultural studies formation was the restoration of culture and dignity, selfhood, desire, and meaningmaking ability to this figure of “the working class consumer of culture.” It is with the institution of the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies at Birmingham with Richard Hoggart and Stuart Hall leading a team of researchers that “cultural studies” as a quasi-discipline began its journey. Some of the studies of popular culture undertaken under this rubric are now classics in the field: David Morley’s The Nation-wide Audience, Dick Hebdige’s Subculture: The Meaning ofStyle, Paul Gilroy's several books and essays, Angela Mc-

is dominated by the same mechanized work

process” (Williams, 2003, p. 44). The process

they are and profits from their wider circulation. Next, they introduce standardization, force the artist to conform to set patterns, and colonize all art forms (Hall, 2013a). A manu-

factured dominant culture, devoid of any hint of individual artistic expression, mired in cycles of repetition and innovation, supplemented by “heart throbs” and other celebrity figures, enforcing submission and conformity on all its consumers, the culture industry is “an instrument of mass deception”: The total effect of the culture industry is one of anti-enlightenment, in which, as

Horkheimer and I have noted, enlightenment, that is the progressive technical domination of nature, becomes mass

Robbie's Postmodernism and Culture, Simon

Frith’s work on music, and Stuart Hall’s essays and books on culture and politics. With stud-

deception and is turned into a means

ies of working-class television viewing habits,

for fettering consciousness. It impedes

youth cultures among teenagers, young men and women, popular music, Black British culture, the Walkman as a cultural device, popular

the development of autonomous, independent individuals who judge and

POPULAR

cultural studies would explode in the 1980s

and 1990s and capture the imagination of humanities students, in particular those who were historically new entrants into the university. Cultural studies soon spread to the United States, Australia, and other Anglophone corners of the world, acquiring local inflections wherever it went. Stuart Hall, as the leading figure in what was sometimes seen as amovement

rather than simply a new area of academic research, in a series of writings provided clarification of the methodological and theoretical underpinnings of the cultural studies project. In a pathbreaking essay called “Notes on Deconstructing ‘the Popular, ” Hall undertakes an exercise in periodization that pulls together some of the different strands we have been outlining, providing a historical perspective on the emergence of the popular. Drawing on the work of historians like Gareth Stedman Jones, Hall identifies the period 1880s—1920s as a crucial time of change that created the condi-

tions that are still with us today. The essay registers the decline of an autonomous radical working-class culture and the rise in its place of a commercial culture. The press is his central exhibit. Newspapers run by working-class associations like the Chartists, which contained discussions of workers’ issues, went into de-

cline as a commercial press arose to produce the kind of tabloid news that Arnold would rail against. Hall notes that unlike the radical press that was for and by the working class, the commercial press was for the working class but owned and run by capitalists. The kind of press that he is referring to here is part of that history of sensation and modernity that is the concern of the second strand of historical popular culture studies discussed above. The commercial press is already in formation in the magazines that printed the serial novels, in the sensation novels that disrupted the leisurely time of the bildungsroman to introduce shocks and surprises at every turn and offer

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

STUDIES

.

1275

thrills to an insatiable reading public. Thus, although Hall tells it in the restricted form of a change in the reading habits of the working class, this shift is part of the larger story of

developments in the 19th century where the middle class was equally at the center of attention. The British historian’s focus on workingclass culture and the Frankfurt School preoccupation with the industrial character of cultural production in capitalist societies and its effects on human subjectivity thus come together in Hall's revisionist look backward in his

efforts to found a theoretically sophisticated practice of cultural studies. Though the “culturalist” tendency is a clear target of attack, Hall acknowledges a key insight owed to it; that what

is euphemistically called “cultural change” actually involves willful destruction of older ways of life that meets with popular resistance, the

rebellious traditionalism of Thompson's working class whose “conservatism” is misperceived when taken out of context. Having said this, however, Hall moves on to note that “[t]here

is no separate, autonomous, ‘authentic’ layer of working-class culture to be found” (Storey, 2013a, p. $10). Rather than persist with the illusion of such a separate and heroic culture, Hall wants us to acknowledge the profound changes wrought by capitalism in all spheres of human activity and to recalibrate the scholarly apparatus accordingly. Cultural studies must distance itself from both the heroic agentiality of the working class and the idea that the people are “cultural dopes” to treat popular culture as a site defined by “the double movement

of containment and resistance” (p. $09): I think there is a continuous and necessarily uneven and unequal struggle, by the dominant culture, constantly to disorganize and reorganize popular culture; to enclose and confine its definitions and forms within a more inclusive range of dominant forms. There are points of resistance;

1276

-«

POPULAR

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

there are also moments ofsupersession. This is the dialectic of cultural struggle. In our times, it goes on continuously, in

the complex lines of resistance and acceptance, refusal and capitulation, which make the field of culture a sort of con-

stant battlefield. (p. 513)

STUDIES

especially among historians and sociologists, would opt fora culturalist approach. The structuralists took little or no account of the consumer’s agency, while the culturalists ignored the structural determination of the individual or collective capacity for self-fashioning. The turn to Gramsci was, Bennett concludes, a “way

out of this impasse” (Bennett, 2013, p. 83). In the efforts at theoretical clarification by Hall and others at the Centre, an important first step was to critically engage with the existing paradigms of popular cultural study. In the process, the aforementioned two schools

of thought came to be recognized and critically addressed as the structuralist and culturalist tendencies respectively. The structuralist tendency assumes the existence of a dominant ideology that effectively invades and subdues popular cultural traditions and turns producers of culture into passive consumers, whereas the culturalists, posit a resistant and autonomous popular culture without any structural constraints. This analysis was a moment of clarification and theoretical progress brought about by the wider dissemination of Gramsci’s thought in the English-speaking world with the publication of Selections from the Prison Notebooks in the 1970s. Gramsci’s theory of hegemony was seen as providing a solution to this dualism. As Tony Bennet puts it, from the structuralist perspective, popular culture was an “‘ideological machine’ which dictated the thought of the people” while culturalism was “uncritically romantic in its celebration of popular culture as expressing the authentic interests and values of subordinate social groups and classes” (Bennett, 2013, p. 82). Cultur-

alism spawned essentialist claims to a distinctive female or black or working-class culture. Most often the choice between these options depended on disciplinary location, with cinema and television studies being more prone to the structuralist option while studies of working-class or youth cultures or sports,

Gramsci’s writings on culture, published

as a separate volume in due course (Cultural Writings), reveals the keen interest he took in popular culture as an integral element in the cultural life of the working class. His reflections on the popular literature available to the Italian working class, for instance, are very suggestive. Beginning with the observation that in the absence of Italian writers of detective fic-

tion, the working-class papers were publishing translations from French and other sources, Gramsci relates this absence to the class character of Italian society (Gramsci, 1985). The

concept of hegemony and related concepts like common sense marked a sharp departure from the discourse of false consciousness that had dominated Marxist thinking on cultural matters. In Gramsci there is neither the “intolerable condescension of the mass culture critic”

nor a “celebratory populism” (Bennett, 2013, p. 85). Set against Gramsci, the structuralist

and culturalist perspectives turn out to have a shared conception of the sphere of cultural and ideological practices: They are in essential agreement about the existence of a dominant ideology that is bourgeois in character; where they

differ is in the degree of success they attribute to its will to dominance. Gramsci’s thought brought into focus the hitherto unrecognized problems with the idea of a monolithic and uni-

lateral dominant ideology. Distinguishing domination (by the use of force) from hegemony

(the achievement of consent), Gramsci placed culture squarely within the purview of hegemony, asa site on which the struggle to establish a social consensus was waged. “A bourgeois

POPULAR

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

STUDIES

.

1277

hegemony is secured not via the obliteration

ican serials like Dallas and Dynasty, circulating

of working class culture, but via its articulation to bourgeois culture and ideology so that, in being associated with and expressed in the forms of the latter, its political affiliations are altered in the process” (Storey, 2013b, p. 84). Neither bourgeois culture nor working-class

in developing countries of Africa and Asia, have taught women there new desires and provoked acts of rebellion against entrenched patriarchal repressions. Though undertaken independently, these studies share with works like The Nation-wide Audience a methodological shift away from textualinterpretation to audience studies. Radway,

culture can retain its essential nature, assum-

ing there is one, ina hegemonic process marked by compromise and negotiation. FEMINIST STUDIES OF POPULAR CULTURE Apart from scholars like Angela McRobbie,

whose work falls within the field of British cultural studies proper, there were parallel developments in feminist investigations of popular culture. Some of this work is inspired by the mass communications approaches such as the “images and representations approach” or adopted similar methodologies. McRobbie discusses the practices such as shopping and clothes through which young girls make their own cultural world. One of the classic works of feminist popular culture scholarship is Janice

in her preface to the British edition of her book,

is at pains to emphasize the similarities between the aims and methods of her project and that of cultural studies. Cinema studies is another field where feminist scholarship played a central role in the elaboration of the apparatus theory and the theory of gendered spectatorship in studies of Hollywood. In reaction to this, and especially focused on Hollywood women's melodrama,

a more

audience-oriented

approach has since come into prominence. Some of the problems surrounding the relations between the feminist researcher and the women audiences they studied had already been highlighted in Ien Ang’s critical note on Radway. Returning to this question in the moment of the “post-feminist” turn, Angela Mc-

Radway’s Reading the Romance, in which Rad-

Robbie, following Charlotte Brundson, points

way undertakes ethnographic work among a group of readers of romance novels. Radway readers use romance novels to construct fantasies that compensate for the deficiencies of their real lives. Another equally acclaimed

to a new awareness of the way the housewife figured in the feminist imagination. It had been expedient to conceive audiences as “housewives who would be studied empathetically by feminists” (McRobbie, 2001, p. 13) of an earlier time. But in the run-up to the post-

work is Ien Ang’s Watching Dallas, which is a

feminist moment, the more important devel-

reading of responses to a questionnaire from women watchers of the American television serial. There have been many studies of popular literature and television following these early works. Ang’s study was undertaken among European watchers of the show. In her study the audience’s acts of meaning making are related to their personal lives and a cultural context far removed from the show’s country of origin. Other scholars have looked at the way Amer-

opment was the “wider circulation of feminist values across the landscape of popular cul-

finds, among other things, that her women

ture” (McRobbie, 2001, p. 13). This “femini-

zation of popular media” goes hand in hand with strident media hostility to feminist arguments accompanied by or prompting counter-

identificatory moves by women. McRobbie shows through an analysis of texts from the post-feminist popular culture how they incorporate ironic or cheeky references to feminism

1278

-«

POPULAR

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

even as they stage the pleasures of voyeurism. Sexism in these advertisements and commercials, she argues, is no longer embedded in the

image waiting to be brought to light by a feminist critic but “enacted,” in a knowing way, as a post-feminist pleasure, with sometimes the suggestion that feminist concerns have been addressed and overcome. POPULISM

One of the risks of popular culture study is the adoption by the scholar of a populist stance toward her object of research. The affirmative

stance adopted by scholars toward the groups or texts they study has often been seen as closing the critical gap essential for scholarly investigation. Claims about the subversive effects of “proletarian shopping” and resistant or deviant readings of texts or use of commodities have invited skeptical responses. Dick

STUDIES

ongoing resistance of working-class consumers assaulted by a battery of commercially produced and distributed cultural commodities. Like other cultural studies scholars, Fiske re-

jects the Thompsonian or culturalist proposition of an autonomous working-class culture and accepts the Frankfurt School thesis of a thoroughly commodified and industrially produced and distributed mass culture. But unlike “left pessimists” like Adorno and his American follower Dwight Macdonald, Fiske

does not think that the culture industry has won. He introduces a twist whereby popular culture is a set of practices involving the use of cultural commodities by the consumers, rather than the commodities themselves. In other words, the idea of culture as a set of objects, texts, performances, is replaced by a dynamic idea of culture as what the people make of the objects, what “meanings, pleasures, and identi-

ties” they derive from it:

Hebdige’s landmark study of subcultures, for instance, has been seen as exaggerating

their political significance and overestimating their ability to resist commodification. In contemporary cultural studies John Fiske has served as a favorite target for critics of populism in the study of popular culture. Fiske’s two books Understanding Popular Culture and

There is no ‘authentic’ folk culture to provide an alternative, and so popular culture is necessarily the art of making do with what is available. This means that the study of popular culture requires the study not only of the cultural commodities out of which it is made, but also of the ways that people use them. The latter are far more creative and varied than the former.

Reading Popular Culture have been bestsellers in the field and have been very influential in cultural studies departments across the world. Fiske discusses a wide variety of cultural practices and texts supported by a formidable armory of theoretical tools derived from philosophers, sociolo-

This redefinition also expands the field of popular culture to include such nontextual practices

gists, semioticians, and historians.

as going to the mall, wearing jeans, etc.

Fiske’s definition of popular culture as “the culture of the subordinated and disempow-

The consumer of commodities has become “a user of a cultural resource” (Fiske, 1989b,

(Fiske, 1989b, p. 1S)

ered” is sharply political (Fiske, 1989b, p. 4)

p. 11): This marks a significant theoretical differ-

and assigns to it a role in the ongoing day-today struggle between the powerful and the powerless. The drama of popular culture is played out

ence between the Frankfurt School and what Fiske is trying to elaborate here. Fiske is not trying to deny the thorough commodification of culture. His argument is rather that by focusing on the commodity character of cultural texts, we miss out on the cultural dimension of

between the two contending forces, bourgeoisie

and proletariat. Fiske sometimes sounds like a journalist reporting from the frontlines on the

POPULAR

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

STUDIES

1279

their consumption, focusing only on the eco-

are still to be found in the contemporary

nomic aspect. As a commodity, a pair of jeans

world in roller-coaster rides, wrestling matches, monster truck shows, and other attractions.

serves a function. It is the wearer who brings to its use a cultural significance, thus creating

a field of meaning around the practice of wearing jeans. Meanings are produced where desire is activated. Meaghan Morris suggests that Fiske’s ideal consumer of popular culture is emblematic of the ideal type of the cultural studies scholar himself. Fiske shows how the industry responds to the meanings produced by wearers of jeans by trying to incorporate them in their own

advertising and branding process. For the theory of ideology, by contrast, jeans are a marketed commodity and to wear them is to participate in capitalist ideology. To the charge of “incorporation” by capital implicit in this analysis, Fiske answers with a theory of “excorporation,’ which is “the process by which the subordinate make their own culture out of the resources and commodities provided by the dominant system” (Fiske, 1989b, p. 15). Among the theorists Fiske mobilizes in his cause are Michel de Certeau, Umberto Eco, Roland Barthes, Mikhail Bakhtin, and Pierre

Bourdieu. From de Certeau Fiske takes the idea that people cope with the dominant by employing tactics of evasion, while Eco suggests the idea of a “semiotic guerrilla warfare” waged by the consumer to frustrate the intentions of the producers of cultural commodities, to refuse to submit to the intended meaning. From Bourdieu he derives the sociological determination of the relation between taste and class location. Much of what Fiske has to say is in keeping with the general trend of cultural studies thinking. Where he deviates from it is in the degree of freedom he seems to grant to the consumers to make their own meaning. Bakhtin’s theory of the carnival allows Fiske to move from the question of resistant meaning making to bodily pleasures as subversive. The inversions, excesses, physical proximity, fusion of consciousnesses involved in the carnivalesque

The populist tone of Fiske’s writings could also be read as the effect of a determinedly partisan political redefinition of the popular. He is aware that there is a regressive dimension to popular culture, but he is determined not to let it pollute his definition. Stuart Hall, cautioning against such one-sided views,

pointed out for instance that “the people” becomes an unstable and troublesome category when Margaret Thatcher invokes it to defend her own policies. Carnivalesque features are often seen in ultranationalist gatherings, as in

the current climate of Hindu mobilization in India. Clearly there is a need to exercise caution so as not to overstate the subversive character of popular practices of cultural consumption. Even so, the very advent of popular culture as an object of study in recent decades is a political event where disidentification with high cultural pretensions and solidarity with the dominated majority is an enabling condition. Perhaps an element of populism is bound to remain as long as popular culture continues to be an object of study. Whether inspired by Fiske or not, the

populist tendency has become more widespread and has been widely criticized. It will be useful to look at some of the exchanges between scholars within the field about the rights and wrongs of popular culture studies practice.

We have noted how with the advent of mass culture, popular culture in the old sense, which isa culture still substantially defined and to some extent controlled by the people, is seen to have disappeared. Fiske accepts this argument, but he, like all the cultural studies theorists, continues to use it. In a way Fiske is resurrecting

the popular after its destruction by mass culture with the simple gesture of shifting the focus from the products to the field of use. A “popular culture” is produced within the

1280

-

POPULAR

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

belly of the mass cultural beast by this act of redefinition. If the way people use commodities is where culture is to be found, then the

existence of a “mass culture” of industrialized commodities does not rule out the existence of a popular culture. Fiske even removes mass culture itself from the equation, there is only the culture industry and then popular culture

(Fiske, 1989b, p. 23). Disciplines like history and sociology and, in developing countries, anthropology have also seen a rush to study popular cultural objects. In the initial years of its existence, cultural studies’ claim to the field of culture was challenged by anthropology, which had its own concepts of culture. Cultural studies survived by defining its object differently, as a concern with ideological processes and strictly contemporary struggles for hegemony. In the wake of the boom in cultural studies, many anthropologists have turned their attention to the contemporary, in the process revising and

expanding the prevailing definitions. Some see in these developments a revitalization of the concept of popular culture as well as a new “undiscriminatingly sentimental view of it”

(Schudson, 2013, p. 556). Critical interrogation of the academy as a space of selective valorization of texts has led to a more inclusive approach to texts as well as the extension of textuality itself to new objects not previously so regarded. This change raises the question of the continuing relevance of the distinctions of high and low. In the wake of the populist turn,

the critical reaction has tended to resituate the debate within the institutional space of the university. Schudson thus treats popular culture as a subject taught as part of the university's humanities curriculum. With the curriculum now expanding to include “all that is human,” the question of judgment returns with new force. The judgment that one thing is better than another, now delinked from class divisions, is seen to be acommon enough oc-

currence in all fields.

STUDIES

In retrospect we realize that scholars have underestimated the role played by the educational apparatus in shaping the definitions and classifications that operate in the field of culture by keeping the attention focused on the world at large and treating the university as merely a space of investigation. Humanities

education is not the dissemination of knowledge produced by research but an engagement in conversations about the meanings of culture. The “culture and anarchy” school, we may note here, was engaged in setting up the edu-

cational institution as a bulwark against the media world, for them it was a battle for the

souls of children and youth between the school and the tabloid press. Discrimination was to combat indiscriminate and unhealthy consumption and fortify the souls of all with the nourishment of good culture. Does the popular culture turn imply the invasion of education by bad culture? The university's cultural elitism has now been substantially diluted, but are the choices of texts now to be governed by no criteria at all? Or does it mean the redefinition of good and bad culture so as to be less in alignment with class boundaries? Some of the critics of populism in cultural studies have opted for the latter. Lowenthal had suggested that the difference between art and culture may reside in the approach we take to the text, whether we take it as the work of an artist

and examine it closely for its aesthetic qualities or whether we treat it as part of a cultural phenomenon. Similarly it is now suggested that neither the highbrow works of art nor the commodities produced by the culture industry are by definition good or bad and the exercise of taste remains a necessary stage in

the appreciation of either kind of text or practice. Retreat from populism has also meant a fresh look at the scope of the field. Popular culture studies have tended to become more and more exclusively concentrated on the sphere of consumption, based on the argument that the working class or mass audience no longer

POPULAR

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

STUDIES

.

1281

has a role in the production of culture and is condemned to consume the products put before it by the industry. This kind of subjective identification of the scholar with the mass audience has meant that the sphere of cultural production under capitalist conditions no longer holds any interest. Against this, critics more recently have argued for a serious investiga-

the life of the mind co-exist with the day at the mall” (Ebert, 2009, p. 47). Noting the shared indebtedness of Showalter and Fiske to de Certeau, Ebert finds this approach to be a retreat from political action rather than an

tion of production processes as an integral

intervention.

part of popular cultural studies (MacGuigan,

More important to the future of popular culture studies than the changing views of scholars in the field (which in any case continue to see-saw between a limited set of opposed alternatives) is perhaps historical change itself, which has significantly altered the situation on the ground as far as cultural consumption is concerned. Most of the debates that we have surveyed here belong to a time before the

2013; Morris, 1990; Nowell-Smith, 1987). Critical responses to the populist turn have

raised a number of important questions. Skepticism about the subversive effects of pleasure have been expressed and about the indiscriminate use of “subversion” as the default political result (Webster, 2013). Important essays by Meaghan Morris and Judith Williamson have generated much debate in the aftermath of the populist moment. Morris somewhat sarcastically refers to a “master-disk from which thousands of versions of the same article about pleasure, resistance, and the politics of consumption are being run off under different names with minor variations” (Webster, 2013,

p. 597). She sees in Fiske’s resistant, resignifying consumer a version of the scholar himself. In her argument, an exhausted populism now tries to rejuvenate itself by positing new

groups who need lessons in the politics of consumption. Williamson too raised a critical voice against the abdication of critical responsibilities by cultural studies scholars. Teresa Ebert's critique sees in populist cultural studies a case of what she calls “delectable materialism,” which sees “the details of everyday life

as blissful singularities and in doing so segregates them from their historical conditions and severs them from the social totality whose generality actually makes singularity possible”

(Ebert, 2009, pp. 46-47). Ebert discusses a text by the literary critic Elaine Showalter that exemplifies the “consumer as radical” genre of cultural studies. Showalter readily confesses to being a shopaholic and prides herself on

this fact, identifying herself as one of “those of us sisters hiding Welcome to Your Facelift inside The Second Sex” who wishes to “make

digital turn, one of the immediate effects of

which has been to dismantle the mass cultural institutions and reorganize them in new ways.

What Nowell-Smith pointed out about Britain a while ago is now true of the world in general: Popular culture now occupies the center of the cultural field and is no longer caught up in a class-determined subordinate relationship to a high culture. The most important element of the 20th-century mass cultural moment— the deprivation of the ordinary person of the means of cultural production—has now been substantially remedied. There are avenues for exhibiting one’s creations on the Internet, and

cameras and other technologies of cultural expression are available at affordable prices. Culture is now no longer the monopoly of the culture industry. What all this means for discussions of popular culture is as yet not at all clear. But it is not hard to see that the mass phenomena of the 20th century have either crashed or undergone total transformation. Does this mean new possibilities for the rise of genuinely “popular cultures”? Are we now going to see a horizontal spread of autonomous cultures between which no hierarchy can be established?

1282

-«

POPULAR

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

STUDIES

Popular culture’s role in global power politics has been an object of study at least since the

famously spoke of a “cultural Chernobyl” and the growing success of shows like Dallas caused considerable alarm. The cultural imperialism thesis soon came under attack for assuming a passive audience and overestimating the power of American popular culture.

early 1970s, when the classic text exemplify-

Questions were also raised about the elitist

ing the “cultural imperialism thesis,’ Ariel Dorfman and Armand Mattelart’s How to Read Donald Duck was first published. The United States has been the most prolific and successful production center for popular culture in the world throughout the 20th century. Emblematic of this history are Hollywood, the center of American film production; and Walt Disney, the company named after its

character of the national cultures that were sought to be defended against American or

POPULAR CULTURE, GLOBALIZATION, AND THE POSTCOLONY

Western imports (Appadurai, 1996). Scholars wrote about the positive, reformist effects of American popular culture in the world at large

(Abu-Lughod, 2005). What is important for us in this is the fact that popular culture is at the heart of the imperialism discourse. In course of time this area of cultural exchange

founder, whose comic strips, and later films,

appears to lose its imperial character in the

have circulated throughout the world and con-

eyes of commentators as new terms such as “soft power” come to define the relation of cultural properties of nations to geo-politics. The discourse of hybridity too has been an important critical response to the imperialism argument inspired by the poststructuralist turn

tinue to enjoy immense popularity. Compared

to the Old World, with its imperialist hierarchies and strict separation of classes, America was the land of the free, where a cinema made for working-class audiences flourished, draw-

ing talent from across the Atlantic. The dynamism of its cinematic style proved immensely popular and impressed even Soviet filmmakers like Eisenstein. That was in the early decades of the 20th century. By the 1970s, America had become the new imperial power in the

world, competing with the socialist bloc led by the Soviet Union. How to Read Donald Duck demonstrates that the Disney comics are not the innocent pleasure they appear to

be but loaded with imperialist ideology. The discourse of cultural imperialism (Tomlinson, 1991) evoked the horrors of the destruction of

local cultures by the spread of American commercial cultural products disseminated through cinema and television. Even though the Third World was the perceived victim of cultural imperialism, the most eloquent criticism often came from European countries where American popular culture was crowding out local cultural content. A French culture minister

(Young, 1995). In conclusion, let us look at a

particular postcolonial national cultural space that falls within the Anglophone sphere while remaining peripheral to it, in order to see how popular culture is defined and studied there. Studies of Indian popular culture have in the past focused on objects such as calendar art, film posters, cigarette and soap box illustrations, popular cinema, television, political and religious statuary, the general elections to name a few. Overwhelmingly, popular cultural objects in India tend to have religious or political associations. This is of course in addition to film and television studies of a more recognizable kind, although even here some

of the important works are studies of the Hindu epics serialized on television, films with mythological content, and film stars and politics. Not surprisingly, popular culture studies in India have attracted a number of scholars from anthropology and Indology in addition

POPULAR

to those trained in the modern methods of film, media, and cultural studies. A brief look

at the field of Indian popular culture studies will provide a contrastive picture to the one

developed earlier of the Western scene and enable us to throw light on the historical determinants of culture. An anthology entitled Popular Culture in a Globalised India (Gokulsing & Dissanayake, 2011)contains 18 essays in 7 sections. The section titles are as follows: “Film—Television—TV Soaps—Indian Feminisms”; “Folk Theatre— Myths Mahabharatha—Ramayana—Religious Nationalism”; “Music—Dance—Fashions”; “Comics/Cartoons—Photographs/Posters—

Advertising”; “Cyberculture—The Software

Industry”; “Sports—Tourism’; and “Food Culture.” Most of these section titles are simply compilations of the topics dealt with in the essays. There is a mixture of traditional cultural references and more “modern” ones (sports,

cyberculture, comics). A look at the articles themselves however confirms the preponderance of religious or political themes even in the sections that appear to be dealing with items of modern culture. Popular culture, in other words, serves as an umbrella term under

which a diverse range of topics and objects are discussed. The definitions prevailing in the Western context do not feature here at all. These appear to be two almost entirely different fields of knowledge sharing a name. Visual images made by traditional artists for a mass market have been a popular object of study among scholars of popular culture. Calendar art is one of the most ubiquitous of such items. Jyotindra Jain, Chris Pinney, Patricia Oberoi, Kajri Jain, and others have done much

work in this field. Another important object has been the “Durga pandals” of Kolkata, temporary structures that sprout all over town to house the idol of Durga during the festival season. These are elaborate works of architecture and design undertaken increasingly

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

STUDIES

.

1283

by a combination of traditional and modern artists. These pandals, traditionally places visited by the devout, are now also attracting art lovers. Possibly, a new subject combining aesthetic with religious interest has come into existence. Tapati Guha-Thakurta has studied these pandals and written extensively about the art practices and the aesthetic qualities of these structures. These appear to be closer to the conception ofa vanished “popular culture” that figured in Western discussions. Although India remains a peripheral member of the Anglophone world, the preoccupations of the developed world do not find much of an echo here. Its colonial past, the dirigiste paternalist politico-economic order maintained for over four decades after independence, the social paralysis evidenced by the continued domination of the upper castes in all fields, and other factors have combined to produce a situation where the commodifi-

cation of fetishes is a more robust feature of the economy than the fetishism of commodities. As such it is not surprising that so much of popular culture studies in India is focused on fields contiguous with or overdetermined by religion and charismatic politics. Central to British cultural studies is the idea of a polarized society with high and low, dominant and dominated, elite and working class, etc.,

constituting a series of binaries that lead to the equation of the popular with the working class and the dominated. The intricate and fragmented hierarchies of premodern Indian society have until recently resisted the polarizing power of capitalist industrialization. The old subjectivities with the entrenched values of deference to power have not been affected by the introduction of the formal structures and procedures of republican democracy. There were always restricted enclaves of the modern

in the metropolises such as Bombay (now Mumbai) and Calcutta (Kolkata). These cosmopolitan social spaces were islands of

1284

-«

POPULAR

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

modernity, exercising a seductive power over

members of the traditional society all around it but unable to work a transformation on the society as a whole. In the last couple of decades, however, full-blown capitalism has transformed the field, and now the cultural

spaces of urban India resemble more and more their Western counterparts.

If we look at popular cinema, which is still

today the biggest and most influential of the many popular cultural practices in India, we see

a preponderance of narratives of collective fantasy. Studies of popular cinema, increasingly under the name of “Bollywood” constitute the biggest portion of popular culture studies. Repackaging of Hindi cinema as Bollywood

STUDIES

carnivalesque. In cricket stadiums, in cinema halls, in all kinds of public gatherings, we see

people willing and eager to be included in some larger formation, some manifestation

of collectivity. The popular cultural character of Indian political life too can be counted with these. The fascistic tendencies that have for some time been discernible in Indian politics should be placed alongside Stuart Hall's Thatcherism and Nazism in Lowenthal’ account, both instances of popular upsurge. In this way, Indian popular culture certainly confirms Jameson’s idea that a utopian dimension is a necessary ingredient in any culture industry product. As for dissent, it tends to take the

form of indifference rather than any active

coincides with the liberalizing, globalizing

resistance or attempt at counter signification.

policy changes introduced in the early 1990s. Since then, Bollywood has achieved world-

Scholarly differences over the meaning and significance of popular culture have arisen primarily over the question of artistic quality. Partha Chatterjee, in an essay dealing with the work of Pinney, Jain, Guha-Thakurta, and

wide success and the Indian State, for long disdainful of commercial Hindi cinema, has

now embraced it as an integral part of India’s “soft power.’ Indian and Western writers have responded to this growing demand with books on Bollywood while other scholars disapprove of this easy adoption of a marketing term as a name for India’s biggest film industry. While Indian cinema has for long been popular in Af-

others has argued, citing Stuart Hall in sup-

port, that popular cultural texts cannot be exempt from judgments about taste. He takes many of these scholars to task for bracketing out the question of aesthetic value and the estimation of popular culture by other criteria.

rica, Asia, countries of the former Soviet Union,

He argues that artists themselves, working in

and other European countries such as Greece, Western Europe and the Americas have also now opened up to this phenomenon. There is a hint in the reports about non-Indian enthusiasts

popular cultural formats, are nevertheless quite conscious of the aesthetic quality of the work that they do and are well aware when they have produced something mediocre. While this is a relevant point to make in the context of Indian cultural studies, Chatterjee does not have much to say on the possibility of approaches other than aesthetic. In Indian film studies too, a wave of populism that celebrated all things Bollywood, reinforcing this high valuation with a dismissive approach to

that it is the “backwardness” of these films, their

unabashed display of sentimental romance,

which provides a nostalgic rush, apart from the new style of dancing that has now spawned many schools all over the world, and the

outrageous costumes which appeal to the postmodern sensibility. The films themselves rarely offer any scope for a disidentificatory move on the part of the Indian audience. On the contrary, they tend to draw the audience into a performance of social fusion, bordering on the

art house cinema (Rajadhyaksha, 2003; Vasudevan, 2011) appears to have now subsided as new developments in popular cinema show up the limits of the Bollywood efflorescence.

POPULAR

This brief discussion of popular culture in a peripheral modern location shows that historical, sociopolitical, and economic conditions

determine the nature and function of popular culture in any society.

CULTURE

AND

CULTURAL

STUDIES

1285

Chatterjee, P. (2008). Critique of popular culture. Public Culture, 20(2), 321-344. Dorfman, A., & Mattelart, A. (1991). How to read Donald Duck. New York, NY: International General. Ebert, T. (2009). The task ofcultural critique. Urbana-

Champaign: University ofIllinois Press. REFERENCES

Abu-Lughod, L. (2005). Dramas of nationhood: The politics of television in Egypt. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press. Adorno, T. W. (1991). Culture industry reconsidered. In T. W. Adorno (Ed.), The culture indus-

try: Selected essays on mass culture (pp. 98-106). London, UK: Routledge.

Adorno, T. W., & Horkheimer, M. (2002). The culture industry: Enlightenment as mass deception. In T. W. Adorno & M. Horkheimer (Eds.), The

dialectic of enlightenment: Philosophical fragments (pp. 94-136). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Ang, I. (1985). Watching Dallas: Soap opera and the melodramatic imagination. London, UK: Methuen. Ang, I. (2013). Feminist desire and female pleasure. InJ. Storey (Ed.), Cultural theory and popular cul-

ture:Areader (pp. S81-S90). Oxon, UK: Routledge. Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: Cultural dimensions ofglobalization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press Arnold, M. (1932). Culture and anarchy (J. Dover Wil-

Eco, U. (1997). Towards a semiological guerrilla warfare. In U. Eco (Ed.), Travels in hyperreality

(pp. 135-144). New York, NY: Picador. Fiske, J, (1989a). Reading the popular. London, UK: Unwin Hyman. Fiske, J. (1989b). Understanding popular culture. London, UK: Unwin Hyman. Frith, S. (1998). Performing rites: On the value ofpopular music. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Gilroy, P. (1990). It ain't where you're from, it’s

where you're at... : The dialectics of diasporic identification. Third Text, 13(Winter), 3-16. Gledhill, C. (2013), Pleasurable negotiations. In J.

Storey (Ed.), Cultural theory and popular culture: A reader( pp. 98-110). Oxon, UK: Routledge. Gokulsing, M., & Dissanayake, W. (2011). Popular culture in a globalised India. Delhi, India: Routledge.

Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks. New York, NY: International Publishers.

son, Ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Excerpted in J. Storey (Ed.), Cultural theory

Gramsci, A. (1985). Selected cultural writings. London, UK: Lawrence and Wishart. Guha-Thakurta, T. (2004). From spectacle to “art.” Art India, 9(3), 34-56. Guins, R., & Cruz, O. Z. (Eds.). (2005). Popular culture: A reader. London, UK: SAGE.

and popular culture: A reader (2013, pp. 6-11).

Hall, S. (2005). What is this “Black” in Black popu-

Oxon, UK: Routledge.

lar culture? In R. Guins & O. Z. Cruz (Eds.), Popular culture: A reader (pp. 285-293). London, UK: SAGE. Hall, S. (2013a). Notes on deconstructing the popular. In J. Storey (Ed.), Cultural theory and popu-

Barthes, R. (1973). “Myth today.’ In Mythologies. London, UK: Jonathan Cape. Bennett, T. (2013). Popular culture and the “turn to

Gramsci.” In J. Storey (Ed.), Cultural theory and popular culture: A reader (pp. 81-87). Oxon, UK:

lar culture: A reader (pp. S0O8-S18). Oxon, UK:

Routledge. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Routledge. Hall, S. (2013b). The “rediscovery” of ideology: Return of the repressed in media studies. In J. Storey

De Certeau, M. (2005). Walking in the city. In

(pp. 11-141). Oxon, UK: Routledge. Hebdige, D. (1979). Sub-culture: The meaning of style. London, UK: Routledge.

R. Guins & O. Z. Cruz (Eds.), Popular culture: A

reader (pp. 449-461). London, UK: SAGE.

(Ed.), Cultural theory and popular culture: A reader

1286

»«

POSTHUMANISM

Hoggart, R. (2013). The full rich life and the newer mass art: Sex in shiny packets. In J. Storey (Ed.), Cultural theory and popular culture: A reader (pp. 26-31). Oxon, UK: Routledge. Jain, K. (2003). More than meets the eye: The circu-

lation of images and the embodiment ofvalue. In S. Ramaswamy (Ed.), Beyond appearances? Visual practices and ideologies in modern India (pp. 3370). New Delhi, India: SAGE. Jameson, F. (1979). Reification and utopia in mass culture.” Social Text, 1(Winter), 130-148. Leavis, F. R. (2013). Mass civilization and minority culture. In J. Storey (Ed.), Cultural theory and popular culture:Areader (pp. 12-20). Oxon, UK: Routledge. Lowenthal, L. (1961). Literature, popular culture and

society. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Macdonald, D. (2005). A theory of mass culture. In R. Guins & O. Z. Cruz (Eds.), Popular culture: A reader (pp. 39-46). London, UK: SAGE. McGuigan, J. (2013). Trajectories of cultural popu-

Schudson, M. (2013). The new validation of popular culture: Sense and sentimentality in academia. In J. Storey (Ed.), Cultural theory and popu-

lar culture: A reader (pp. $S6-S63). Oxon, UK: Routledge.

Storey, J. (2013a). Cultural theory and popular culture: An introduction (7th ed.). Oxon, UK: Routledge. Storey, J. (Ed.). (2013). Cultural theory and popular culture: A reader (4th ed.). Oxon, UK: Routledge. Thompson, E, P. (2013). Preface from The making of the English working class. In J. Storey (Ed.), Cultural theory and popular culture: A reader (pp. 41-44). Oxon, UK: Routledge.

Thompson, E. P. (1991). Introduction: Custom and culture. In E. P. Thompson (Ed.), Customs in common

(pp. 1-15). Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin. Tomlinson, J. (1991). Cultural imperialism: A critical introduction. London, UK: Continuum.

Triece, M.

(2001). Protest and popular culture:

lism. In J. Storey (Ed.), Cultural theory and popu-

Women in the US labor movement, 1894-1917. Boulder, CO: Westview.

lar culture: A reader (pp. 606-617). Oxon, UK:

Uberoi, P. (1990, April 28). Feminine identity and

Routledge. McRobbie, A. (1994). Postmodernism and popular

national ethos in Indian calendar art. Economic

culture. London, UK: Routledge.

and Political Weekly, 25(17), Women’s Studies Supplement, 41-48.

McRobbie, A. (2001). The aftermath of feminism:

Vasudevan, R. (2011). The melodramatic public: Film

Gender, culture and social change. London, UK:

form and spectatorship in Indian cinema. New York,

SAGE.

NY: Palgrave Macmillan; and Ranikhet, India: Permanent Black.

Morley, D., & Brundson, C. (1999). The nationwide

television studies. London, UK: Routledge. Morris, M. (1990). Banality in cultural studies. In P. Mellencamp (Ed.), Logics of television: Essays in cultural criticism (pp. 14-43). Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Nowell-Smith, G. (1987). Popular culture. New Formations, 2(Summer), 79-90. Pinney, C. (1998). Camera indica: The social life of Indian photographs. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Webster, D. (2013). Pessimism, optimism, pleasure:

The future of cultural studies. In J. Storey (Ed.), Cultural theory and popular culture: A reader (pp. 591-605). Oxon, UK: Routledge.

Williams, R. (2003). Adorno on popular culture. London, UK: Routledge.

Young, R. J. C. (1995). Colonial desire: Hybridity in theory, culture Routledge.

and

Pinney, C. (2004). Photos of the gods: The printed

race.

London,

UK:

M. Madhava Prasad

image and political struggles in India. London,

UK: Reaktion Books.

Prasad, M. (1998). Ideology ofthe Hindi film: A historical construction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

POSTHUMANISM

Radway, J. (1987). Reading the romance. London, UK: Verso.

Rajadhyaksha, A. (2003). The Bollywoodization of Indian cinema: Cultural nationalism in a global arena. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, 4(1), 25-39.

POSTHUMANISM

AS A TERM

The term posthumanism emerged in humanities oriented disciplines in the late 20th century,

POSTHUMANISM

«

1287

along with other “post” movements. As such,

nonhuman environmental influences in ways

scholars writing about posthumanism share many assumptions with scholars writing about postmodernism (e.g., Baudrillard, 2013), post-

that humanism typically ignores.

structuralism (e.g., Derrida, 1978), and postcolonialism (e.g., Spivak, 1999); in particular,

posthumanism shares their critiques about the historical and theoretical inconsistency of the category “human.” Posthumanism surfaced as a response to the centralization of humanity and claims of human exceptionalism in Western lay thought and academic scholarship. Many communication studies subfields discuss posthumanism and use this philosophical perspective to shape the creation of scholarship, including rhetorical studies, media studies, and organizational communication. As a

philosophical perspective, posthumanism has structured the way scholars conduct research in both the humanities and social sciences. Communication scholars influenced by posthumanist ways of thinking utilize research methods that align with posthumanist assumptions about human communication and

The invention of the term posthumanism is a response to social and intellectual trends of the late 19th and 20th century. As a result, it is similar to other “post” terms that also emerged during this time period. Posthumanism most closely shares features with and is at times indistinct from postmodernism. However, increasingly these terms are used separately and made distinct. In short, postmodernism refers to critiques of objective reality, cultural progress, universal

truths, and oversimplified

explanations of knowledge production identified with modernism, and posthumanism refers to critiques of human exceptionalism, freedom of choice, individual autonomy, and

communication environments. In the field of communication, a scholar

oversimplified explanations of social change identified with humanism. Since issues of knowledge production, humanity, and social change frequently overlap, many of the same scholars are referenced in postmodernist and posthumanist literatures. Although the term posthumanism is a relatively recent invention, posthumanist sentiments and theories are evident throughout the

employing a posthumanist perspective will

communication tradition, including with the

conceptualize communication through a variety of complex relationships between humans and nonhumans. This perspective assumes that both humans and nonhumans create change and influence behaviors in different combinations and to varying degrees. Rather than focus on how humans solely control, constrain, and create change—characteristics of a humanist

emergence of rhetoric in Ancient Greece. Both humanism and posthumanism have roots in Ancient Greek rhetorical pedagogy and theory, even though the terms humanism and posthumanism emerged sequentially in history. Ancient Greek texts have been used to explain both philosophical perspectives. The prefix “post” of posthumanism, insinuating “after,” does not mean that a posthumanist conception

perspective—a posthumanist perspective con-

siders a wide variety of environmental factors that affect change in combination with human action, including cultural, technological, bio-

logical, and physical influences. The amount of attention paid to conscious human social action versus other environmental consider-

ations has oscillated throughout history, across disciplines, and between scholars. Posthumanist scholarship attempts to account for

of the human emerged after humanism; rather,

it indicates that posthumanist perspectives of humanity exist in tension with humanist perspectives. The entangled histories of humanism and posthumanism are not linear, as noted by Katherine Hayles’s famous assertion

that “we have always been posthuman” (Hayles, 1999, p. 291). In other words, the term posthumanism has arisen to organize ideas

1288

¢

POSTHUMANISM

into a coherent philosophical perspective that have been present throughout the history of communication studies. While these ideas are not necessarily new, the term posthumanism arose in contemporary humanities fields as a way to critique perceived inadequacies of a humanist perspective. Additionally, there is notable historical variety with regard to forms of humanism and posthumanism. Therefore,

the distinction between posthumanism and humanism often arises as scholars of one perspective distill the other for the purposes of critique.

THE EMERGENCE OF HUMANISM

The term humanist surfaced during the Renaissance in the 14th century. Renaissance Human-

ism, which spanned three centuries leading up to the Enlightenment, was sparked by an interest in the study of Ancient Greco-Roman scholarly writings, particularly those of Plato, Aristotle,

and Cicero. The earliest humanists were part of an elite class of devout Christians in Italy who collected and translated ancient manuscripts for pleasure. These interests later expanded into an educational movement that existed alongside scholasticism, the dominant form of education

during the Middle Ages. While rhetoric was a primary subject of education during classical

antiquity, after the fall of the Roman Republic it was not readily accessible to the public due to the feudalistic Dark Ages, except for a few elites through their relationships with the Catholic Church (Kelley, 1991). Humanist scholars during the Renaissance sought to recover ancient Greco-Roman literary and oratorical texts that were only accessible to Byzantine intellectuals (Reynolds & Wilson, 1968). New translations of these texts

made the classical works accessible to a broader audience and created a revival in the study of rhetoric with particular emphasis on human ingenuity (Kelley, 1991). What developed out

of this recovery was an interest in “the perfection of civil societies” as achieved through the individual orator’s command of language, “the primary medium of agency” (Stormer, 2004, p. 257). Renaissance Humanism maintained an “innate commitment to truth, reason, and

civic virtue, [which] established the modern civic precedent that one’s humanity is defined by the moral and socially virtuous application of one’s rhetorical abilities” (Vivian, 2003, pp. 6-7). Renaissance Humanism also inspired

great cultural achievements in art and literature that now characterize a group of

subjects that have been institutionalized in colleges and universities as the humanities. This group of subjects—‘the humanities’—is distinguished from the sciences, which also

expanded considerably during the Renaissance and Enlightenment. With the expansion of the sciences during

the Enlightenment, humanism and scientific philosophy were increasingly at odds. But by the 20th century, humanism acquired meanings from both the Greco-Roman tradition and ones derivative of scientific methods based on Cartesian rationality, though these meanings were diverse and even in conflict with one another. For example, while the GrecoRoman tradition emphasizes the virtues of civil responsibility through the artistic merit of eloquence in rhetoric, Cartesian rationality emphasizes reason as the only necessary component of persuasion and casts rhetoric as aesthetics that is prone to confuse or obscure fact from falsehood. Because of these cultural and intellectually disparate directions, humanism has taken on diverse meanings to

laypeople and scholars alike. Humanism has been articulated in different historical contexts to have surprisingly different meanings

(Davies, 2008). Foucault (1984) contends, “at least since the seventeenth century, what is called humanism has always been obliged to lean on certain conceptions of man borrowed

POSTHUMANISM

«

1289

from religion, science, or politics” (pp. 4344). Contemporary understandings of human-

the human are infused throughout Western

ism tend to be secular, replacing the Christian theology infused in writings during the Renaissance with the scientific method. The effect of this more secular understanding of humanism is that it became infused with a narrative of (scientific) progress based on rationalism and the scientific method. This emphasis on rationality and science as the basis for progress belies the belief that humans are uniquely capable of reason and therefore are the pinnacle of advancement or progress.

binary in which human culture is distinct from

philosophy and reinforce a nature/culture rather than a part of nature.

THE EMERGENCE OF POSTHUMANISM Theories of posthumanism emerged with humanism during classical antiquity, and as a result they share some similarities. Posthumanist scholars are interested in many of the same issues from Renaissance

Humanism,

However, despite these diverse meanings

including ethics, reason, civic action, and ed-

of humanism, humanism consistently empha-

ucation; however, they approach these subjects from less human-centric perspectives than humanist scholars. In this way, posthumanism

sizes human interests and human free will and

foregrounds the exceptionalism of the human subject. Notable Greco-Roman rhetorical scholars claim this specialness emerged from

the unique human abilities of communication. As Isocrates (2000) insists, “the power to persuade” through “the art of discourse” is

is not a dismissal of Renaissance Humanism,

which emerged ina particular historicalmoment to revive classical forms of education related to rhetoric. Without Renaissance Humanism rhetoric might have become “mere technique

what distinguishes humans from “other living creatures” that would otherwise be better in “swiftness and in strength and in other re-

without content or memory, an endless trail of uninspiring handbooks, or a tool for decon-

sources” (p. 253). These sentiments carried

p. xvii). Posthumanism, then, is a response to

over two centuries later, as Cicero (1923)

a perceived overemphasis on humanity and the individual's capacity to create change that is typical of humanist scholarship. Posthumanists continue to “think about the ways in which

pronounced that “men excel beasts” through

their “splendid possession” of speech (1.4.5). It was argued that without a system of lan-

guage democracy would not be possible, and it is through rhetoric that humans

could

decide how to live together, found cities, make laws, and establish institutions, to organize in ways that were seen as superior to

other living creatures.

Given this tradition, humanism is typically portrayed as a diverse collection of works that together understand the human as: (a) uniquely capable of and motivated by speech and reason, (b) autonomous from and able to control nature as a result of the mind’s intellectual faculties, and

(c) an exceptional animal that is superior to other creatures. Humanist assumptions concerning

structive language games” (Crusius, 2001,

human beings have lived, do live, might live together in and on the world,” as the humanist

tradition initiated, but they situate the human within and as a part of complex environmental systems (Davies, 2008, p. 141). Whereas a humanist perspective frequently assumes the human is an autonomous, conscious, and intentional actor with exceptional

capabilities, a posthumanist perspective assumes the human’s ability to act is distributed across a dynamic set of relationships that the human participates in but does not completely intend or control. The “post” indicates a rethinking of the individualism and superiority

1290

»«

POSTHUMANISM

of the human in our worldly relations, a

posthumanist perspective of agency affirms

position that is both intrinsic to many ancient and contemporary understandings of rhetoric and increasingly critiqued in contemporary communication studies. Posthumanist philosophy conceptualizes the human as: (a) moved to action through a variety of environmental

“a decentering of the all-powerful, choice driven, radically free subject and an attention

interactions, affects, habits, and sometimes

reasons; (b) physically, chemically, and biologically formed by and dependent on their envi-

ronment; and (c) possessing no attribute that is uniquely human, but is instead made up of a larger evolving ecosystem. There is not consensus in posthumanist scholarship about the degree to which a conscious human subject can actively create change, but posthumanist scholars agree that human participation assists in the creation of change. These assumptions regarding the human are evident in early writings of or about rhetoric. Many of the same canonical materials used to inspire Renaissance Humanism also

include posthumanist conceptions of the communication process and of the human. This is most apparent in discussions of agency and invention, two prominent concepts in rhetor-

ical studies. Rhetorical Agency. ‘The topic of agency has been debated throughout the rhetorical tradition. A general definition of agency is the ability to create change. Conversations regarding agency discuss the degree to which free will and freedom of choice exist and to what extent human action is constrained and facilitated by larger human structures and nonhuman relationships with humans. Humanist conceptions of agency assume a speaking subject can independently move others toward action using traditional rhetorical techniques of reason,

to the larger structural, material, or discursive

objects that limit and/or constitute the subject” (Gunn & Cloud, 2010, p. $4). Both perspectives consider the human, but differ in terms of emphasis. Rhetorical materials portraying posthumanist conceptions of agency date back to Homeric writings, four of which are explained below: Homer’s epic poems document communication as the sharing of the body, demonstrating that humans are not autonomous individuals; Mentor/mentee relationships in Ancient pedagogical practices understood the transference of virtuosity through erotic physical practices; Plato’s aversion to writing attributes power to nonhuman subjects such as ink, scroll, and alphabets; and Longinus's

philosophical thesis on the sublime constructs rhetoric as a mode of displacing the self through ecstatic experiences.

Posthumanist agency is embedded in our earliest Western portrayals ofthe communication process by conveying an intimate relationship between body and expression. Communication was not always conceptualized as guided by reason or rationality; it was also described as a physiological transference among bodies. The Iliad and Odyssey document this archaic communication process through two words that appear most frequently in the texts and that are difficult to translate, phrenes and thumos. In the Iliad and Odyssey, communication appeared to take “place when one person breath|ed] their words [thumos] into the phrenes ofanother... the passage of words physically—

bodily” (Wiseman, 2007, p. 15). Phrenes were

consideration of demands placed on them by

likely situated in the chest and were the locations where thumos were trapped. Thumos were a “substance frequently ‘poured’ into the phrenes” (Wiseman, 2007, p. 8). Thumos shares similar features with breath

exigencies and audiences. In juxtaposition, a

and blood, was an instigator of action and

passion, and character (Geisler, 2005; Leff,

2003). This perspective champions free will, freedom of choice, and autonomy to act with

POSTHUMANISM

a source of solutions. In the Iliad, it is Ajax’s thumos that desires confrontation, “mine own

thumos to war Hector “Listen

also within my breast is the more eager and do battle” (Iliad 13: 73-74) and who follows the impulse of his thumos, to me, you Trojans and strong-greaved

Acheans, while I speak what the thumos within

my breast urges” (Illiad 7: 67-68). These notions of communication were heavily reliant on corporeal experiences, with the body as a vessel through which communication,

more

than linguistic, was physically passed to other bodies and acted independently of rather than dictated by the human. This model appeared to have been in “widespread use” in not only Greek culture, but “other cultures of the same period” (Wiseman, 2007, p. 16). The body was not perceived as a totality that was controlled by the human mind; it was “an aggregate of organs and limbs” which seemed to possess autonomy and even in some cases an agency of their own (Wiseman, 2007, p.

9). Descriptions of what might today be called emotions were physiological sensations occurring in different organs of the body. Rob Wiseman (2007) calls these processes of com-

munication “an aspect of a larger, integrated set of beliefs about the make-up of the human body, the way it functions, and the life-substances

supposed to animate it” (p. 59). In a similar process, it is speculated that physiological transferences of arete occurred through erotic relationships between mentors and mentees. Arete, the ancient Greek word

for virtuosity, “was thought to be transmitted

from erastes [man or senior partner] to eromenos [boy] by way of semen” (Hawhee, 2004, p. 107). Akin to the physical sense of thumos, bodily fluids appeared to contain an agential quality separate from human control that transferred virtuosity from an older, wiser Athenian male to a younger one. This relationship, called pederasty, was one of generous friendship, painful discipline and hierarchized eros. As a corporeal style of education, it transformed

«

1291

bodies by forging alliances with other bodies, becoming more than their mere combination: a phusiopoietic emergence of flesh (Hawhee,

2004, p: 191).

We are exposed to these relational pairings in Plato’s Phaedrus, where Socrates flirts with the younger Phaedrus. It is also here, and in the Seventh Letter, where Plato notes his firm op-

position to documenting “in written symbols” that which one’s “reason has contemplated” (343a). Plato’s personal letters indicate his belief that once one puts their thoughts into writing, they are unable to control how the writing is received. He fears the agency of language generally, but specifically when words fall “into the hands of those who have no concern with it” or when those words “are unable... to argue in their own defense when attacked” (Phaedrus 27Se). The communication cannot

adapt to the reader to appropriately guide their soul (Seventh Letter 343a). The inability to attend to who is being addressed “or whom to avoid” influences the person’s behaviors through nonhuman force (Phaedrus 27Se). Like thumos, written communication acts on

its Own.

This posthumanist form of communication is consistent with a sublime conception of rhetoric that is typically attributed to Cassius Longinus of the lst century cE, but officially unknown. In the writing Peri Hypsous, which is “literally translated On Height, but more

commonly On the Sublime,” sublime rhetoric is described as an ecstatic phenomenon, something that cannot be proven or reasoned (O’Gorman, 2004, p. 71). It is a desirable

experience that humans are unable to resist. When successfully enacted, the sublime decenters a human sense of self. The sublime relies on ekstasis, an etymological parent of ecstasy, which creates the experience of displacement. Through ecstatic experiences, the audience is moved beyond logos through

“rhetorical height (hypsos), nature (physis), and desire” (O’Gorman, 2004, p. 72). Sublime

1292

»«

POSTHUMANISM

requires requires not only the human's participation but also nature's participation to be experienced.

themes, taxonomies, images, and arguments to be deployed in a rhetorical exchange. The ancient Greeks refer to these common constellations as topoi or commonplaces. The

In experiencing an ecstatic movement, language, reason, and a sense of autonomy are

literal Greek translation of topos is spot, loca-

lost and given over to “a capability and force

tion, position, or a place (Mortensen, 2008;

which, unable to be fought, take a position high

Rubinelli, 2006). For students of rhetoric, a

over every member of the audience” (Longinus, 1991, p. 4). This style of communication is

arguments” in the mind of the rhetor (Cintron,

achieved through the audience's

2010, p. 100). Summarizing its different per-

elevation

topos is a place to find something, “seats for

beyond their sense of self. In true sublimity, Longinus (1991) writes, “our soul is naturally uplifted ...; we receive it as a joyous offering” (p.

mutations, Rickert (2007) states that topoi

10). There are no rules to govern or judge this experience through reason. The communication

inventions are generated and conceptualized outside of nature (p. 251). What is invented through pure human genius gets remembered in the mind’s commonplaces for future utterance, similar to how an object could be placed in a designated location for its later retrieval. This perspective of topos highlights humanism's tendency toward human exceptionalism and separation from nature. It is the human's unique mental capacity for invention that enables rhetorical possibility, and this capacity is independent from nonhuman influences. From a posthumanist perspective, however, invention occurs through complex relationships between the human and the material world. It is generated from a receptacle of “complex ecologies of systems and information” (Rickert,

becomes detached from accuracy, practicality, and the human. Sublime rhetoric presents a desired experience that the body cannot resist and a compulsory encounter that transcends

the subject. Rhetoric as sublime transcendental logos contrasts a rhetoric grounded in argumentation and intension. O’Gorman (2004) acknowledges that the sublime’s treatise is “something more than an articulation of the humanist tradition” since rhetoric has an autonomy of its own, “an end in and ofitself” (pp. 74-75). This posthumanist form of communication is consistent with the Homeric thumos and phrenes, the transference of aréte through eros, and the ungovernable written word. Early com-

munication processes were portrayed as more than humanity’s reasonable and intentional use of language, offering more nuanced acts

of agency than traditional humanist perspectives of intentional and autonomous human action. Within rhetoric’s classical tradition, the

nonhuman shapes and participates in rhetorical action, and also in invention processes. Rhetorical Invention.

Traditionally, hu-

manist scholars have configured the rhetorical canon of invention as a discursive art. The

mind develops common constellations of

are often understood as “nonbiological” constructs, a perspective that assumes

human

2007, p. 253). Rickert (2007) proposes chora, an ancient concept of place and change developed in Plato’s Timaeus and theorized by contemporary rhetorical scholars, as an alternative to topos. Chora was also a common term for place in Ancient Greece; rather than being a spot, chora referred to a territory that was constantly changing, similar to a mother’s womb. Chora, asa rhetorical form of invention, indicates a “movement to invention,” emerging

“in and through space” (Rickert, 2007, p. 270). Chora shifts our attention from a mental,

language-centered notion of invention—indicative of a humanist perspective—to a mind/

POSTHUMANISM

body/environment notion of invention. This perspective of chora is posthumanist in that it recognizes humans as enmeshed within and influenced by their environments, as opposed to humanist perspectives that recognize humans as distinct from and superior to their environments, particularly through linguistic capacities of invention. In short, posthumanism recognizes rhetorical invention as a capacity emerging from interactions between human and nonhuman agents, while humanism rec-

ognizes rhetorical invention as a uniquely human capacity. A posthumanist perspective of rhetorical invention is enacted through sophistic Kairos, Athenian pedagogical practices, and the

invention

«

1293

is generative of the situation’s

contingencies or possibilities, rather than a

capacity of the mind or psyche. Whereas a humanist perspective might characterize humans as distinct from an environment to be surveyed as a resource for rhetorical inven-

tion, this posthumanist perspective characterizes the environment as a participant in—

not mere resource for—rhetorical invention.

Athenian educational systems cultivated kairotic timing in students through imitation and habit. In the process of becoming citizen-

actors, young male Athenians would learn rhetoric along with athletic exercises. “Pedagogi-

cally,” Hawhee (2004) explains, rhetoric and athletics “shared modes of knowledge produc-

peripatetic tradition of philosophers. Kairos is a rhetorical concept that emerged around 4th century BCE and is attributed to

tion, an attention to timing, and an emphasis

the sophists, traveling teachers ofrhetoric. It

A ready wit is created through bodily habit,

refers to the ability to adapt to contingent circumstances during rhetorical performances. The earliest uses of kairos reference it as a

not a mode of the mind. Isocrates (2000)

on habituation, imitation, and response” (p. 6).

physical quality, such as an overloaded wag-

emphasizes this point in his Antidosis, stating that physical training and philosophy are “corresponding and united” and should be “coor-

on’s “weight, density, and porousness,” “a crit-

dinated together” pedagogically (pp. 180-183).

ical, fatal spot on the body” pursued by the

Such was the case in ancient gymnasiums,

archer’s arrow, and in weaving “the place where

the site of citizenship production. Gymnasiums were the locations of Athenian education and provided a space for a variety of activities. The width of the colonnades allowed both the practicing of gymnastics and the instruction of philosophy and rhetoric. Rhetoricians often walked around the periph-

threads attach to the loom ... a woman who weaves... [and] that which is tightly woven”

(Hawhee, 2004, pp. 66-67). Kairos “as opening, as weaving, as timing, and...

as critical,

delimited places on the body” highlight rhetoric as a somatic blending in constantly shifting conditions (Hawhee, 2004, p. 67). A person does not merely adapt their arguments to audiences; the environment must also co-adapt. As Rickert (2004) explains, “time, situation,

and environment are all co-adaptively en-

meshed” (p. 904). In this sense, kairos becomes “an experience or encounter” (p. 912). The

environment is not a determining force of rhetorical possibilities, but participates in rhetorical possibilities: “one invents and is invented,

ery of the building during their lectures, so as

not to “collide with runners or javelin throwers practicing their form’ (Hawhee, 2004,

p. 122). The ancient practice of walking demonstrates the importance of the thinking-body in motion. Through motion, the thinking-body interacts with diverse environments and enables diverse rhetorical possibilities. Environments influence human thought.

one writes and is written, constitutes and is con-

The history of walking is well documented in the Greek philosophical tradition. This

stituted” (Hawhee, 2002, p. 19). Kairotic

activity is how Aristotle’s Peripatetic School

1294

+

POSTHUMANISM

received its name. Aristotle gave his lectures walking up and down the colonnades of the Lyceum, and his successors were named the Peripatetic Philosophers. The sophists, too, were well known for their mobility, not only

labels this medium theory, as derived from the work of Harold Innis and Marshal McLuhan. In our known Western history, there have been three dominant forms of media: oral, print, and electronic.

in contemplation through walking, but also in

Oral cultures, such as Archaic and Ancient

traveling from town to town to acquire work. Their fluid exposure to heterogeneous spaces

Greece, require one’s physical presence in the majority of communication acts, and these acts privilege sound and sight. In oral cultures, memory primarily functions through the physical body of the person rather than through written or photographic techniques that can externally document a person’s thoughts or historical experiences. In addition to drawing, painting, and sculpture, oral rhetoric primarily assists a person's ability to remember. If a message is presented in a compelling way, such as through poetic rhythms, rhymes, repetition, vivid description, and mythic nar-

allowed them different modes of thought;

walking is an intelligence-generating motion that shapes the intellect through the various places that are visited. This practice demonstrates that the environment where one moves provides potential rhetorical possibilities and resources for invention. Peripatetic philosophers enact posthumanist sensibilities by using movement to influence their rhetorical capacities

MEDIA STUDIES

rative, a person will be more likely to remem-

ber it. While some elite classes of people in Archaic and Ancient Greece could read and write, the majority of people living in these oral cultures were illiterate. Knowledge was rarely different from person to person because new ideas were difficult to think and recall. This created a strong sense of collectivism and a weak sense of individual autonomy. These oral cultures were more likely to attribmunication is between at least two things, ute social and environmental changes to divine and the medium shapes the message. Media beings incarnate in nature rather than through scholars argue that how communication takes their own actions (Vico, 1968). This also creform and is delivered is just as important, if ated slow cultural and intellectual change. Posthumanist communication scholars pay attention to human and nonhuman relationships, which take on different communicative forms. Media scholars participate in this tradition by studying the way communication is formed and delivered, not merely what message is communicated. Historically, the word media has meant “medium” or “between.” Com-

not more, than the message itself because the

When it exists as the dominant cultural form,

form of the message also influences patterns of behavior. Different forms of media encourage specific ways of thinking and acting, thus enabling and constraining rhetorical possibility. Media are not passive channels through which humans communicate, but actively influence the communication process. Media affect the characteristics and patterns of how people interact and think of themselves in relationship to others. Joshua Meyrowitz (1994)

the medium of orality privileges collectivism as opposed to individual autonomy, which is more typical of print cultures. Print cultures are formed when reading and writing are the dominant form of mediation. Print cultures shape patterns of interaction through the visual and linear, rather than oral and immersive, forms of message com-

munication. Whereas in oral culture there is a lack of exposure to materials that can be read,

POSTHUMANISM

«

1295

print culture utilizes technologies like the

the salience of the straight line—in thinking,

printing press, which was invented during the Renaissance, to create a wider distribution of

in literary narrative, in human-made spaces

materials to read. Increased access to reading materials creates increased literacy. When more people read and write, more public and personal forms of communication are carried over large distances. This exposes people to different ways

tures, people tend to develop associative and spatial patterns of thought; they can make decisions and adapt to different environments at a quicker pace than other mediated cultures;

of thinking and living, and allows for memory to be extended by externalizing it in written

or habits, that become nonconsciously performed by bodies; people can become exposed to different ways of thinking and behaving more rapidly, creating the opportunity for more flexibility and contingency with regard to belief

form. During the enlightenment, the expansion

of memory to writing created the opportunity for self-reflection and the linear documentation of ideas supported the rise of logic. More complex thought and accounts of history were preserved, and with the printing press, their mass distribution (Meyrowitz, 1994). Because human communication no longer necessitated

a physical congregation of people and because of growing literacy rates, the print culture of the Enlightenment contributed to the emergence

and organizations” (p. $8). In electronic cul-

electronic media instill instinctual behaviors,

systems (Hansen, 2000; Ott & Mack, 2010).

Media studies scholars are attentive to the way electronic media shape nonconscious human

action; human action is never fully controlled, conscious, or rational, as a humanist perspective suggests.

The all-encompassing form and diversity of electronic media make it more obvious that

of individualism, autonomy, and intellectual

human communication patterns are shaped

authorship that is typical of humanism. Currently, the majority of the West is living in an electronic culture—described as the third wave of media. Electronic media take

by nonhumans, and this has impacted the way posthumanist scholars understand the human body. Many posthumanist scholars of media do not see media as a tool of the human but instead see media as incorporated into the technology of the body. Electronic tools and machines are not just external in nature but are rather “extra organs growing into existence” with the human body, problematizing “the distinction between subject (organism) and objects (environment)” (Amin & Thrift, 2002, p. 78). The human body is conceptualized as cyborgian, a hybrid of biological and technological forms that extend beyond physical flesh. The posthuman cyborg is understood “in terms of complex, structurally embedded semiosis with many ‘generators of diversity’ within a counter-rationalist (not irrationalist) or hermeneutic/situationist/constructivist discourse”

various forms, such as televisions, phones,

and computers. Similar to orality, these media engage the aural senses and, with digital technologies, increase the tactile senses (Hansen,

2000). As Meyrowitz (1994) shares, “[w]hile written and printed words emphasize ideas, most electronic media emphasize feeling, appearance, [and] mood” similar to oral culture

(p. 58). However, as opposed to oral culture, with electronic media neither space nor time exists as a constraint in the distribution of information. Messages can be sent over vast

distances instantaneously, archived immediately, and redistributed as quickly as they are dispersed. Media scholars argue that Enlightenment logic is not as effective in contempo-

(Haraway, 1991, p. 213). In electronic cul-

rary society because thought processes are systemic rather than linear: “There is a decline in

tures, humans become aware of how they are enmeshed in networks, and this troubles

1296

«

POSTHUMANISM

humanist configurations of time, place, and purpose. Whereas humanist conceptions of

time and place rely on the measurablity and distinction of time and movement in space, electronic media can act simultaneously and collapse these distinctions. Electronic media guide human action through nonrational forces, such as affects, and challenge human-

istic ideals of rational purpose. In short, media scholars demonstrate how media participate in the production of human “knowledge.” For posthumanist scholars of communication, media are extensions of the human rather than tools that the autonomous human uses to express independent ideas.

of women,

the common

separation of nature

and culture, and dualisms more generally, including those between “mind and body, human

and animal, idealism and materialism” (p. 153). By drawing from feminism, socialism, and materialism, Haraway argues human identity

cannot be essentialized because the human is “a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of machine and organism, a creature of social reality as well as a creature of fiction” (p. 149). The

cyborg is both a biological animal and a built machine, with biological, cultural, and tech-

nological differences that trouble unified understandings of self. As cyborgs, humans function through both social and biological networks, such as the World Wide Web or

THE POSTHUMAN

BODY

Donna Haraway’s (1991) famous “Cyborg Manifesto” is a landmark piece in posthumanist literature that positions the human body as a technology that is both organism and machine. It was written in an electronic culture as humanities disciplines were increasingly engaging issues of power, particularly as they related to oppressed people. Haraway writes that a common mode of feminist scholarship essentializes identity categories in order to critique the oppressive treatment of nonwhite, middle- to upper-class, heterosexual men. She argues this type of feminism is guilty of “unreflective participation in the logics, languages, and practices of white humanism”

the body’s veins and arteries. Previous schol-

ars have made similar arguments concerning dualisms and networks, but Haraway’s prose and timing during the late 20th century, when Western cultures were becoming increasingly

dependent on electronic media, was particularly timely. Haraway’s writing became a rallying point for a Renaissance of posthumanism and conceptions of the posthuman body. The posthuman body has been theorized in a variety of ways, but the work of French theorist Gilles Deleuze and his collaborations with Felix Guattari have been particularly resourceful in contemporary conceptualizations. Deleuze and Guattari (1987) understand the body as an evolving machine. The

body is not a discrete object or singularly bound

(p. 159). Feminists and other humanities

unified being; it is impressionable, techno-

scholars who essentialize identity are critiquing oppressive power structures and belief systems by conceptualizing the human as cultural. These scholars treat human beliefs as active cultural creations, while nature is passive and malleable. Haraway is critical of the tendency

logical, and fluid. Summarized by Elizabeth Grosz (1994), a material feminist scholar, Deleuze and Guattari’s notion of the body

to position humans as separate from, superior

to and able to control nature. Haraway’s (1991) “Cyborg Manifesto” presents an argument that critiques the essentialism

is “a discontinuous, nontotalizable series of processes, organs, flows, energies, corporeal

substances, and incorporeal events, speeds and durations” (p. 164). Deleuze and Guattari (1987) describe the body as a space that is simultaneously smooth and striated. Smooth spaces are associated with

POSTHUMANISM

open potential and free movement, while striated spaces are associated with limited possibilities and restricted movements. Smooth spaces are unpredictable in how they circulate with the body, and they disrupt a sense of selfhood; whereas striated spaces have de-

«

1297

differently than what is socially expected of them, it is a sign that the gendered striated

spaces have become too rigid and habitual. Gender does not become striated through the body's sex (a problematic term on its own), but through other striated spaces such

fined boundaries, closed intervals, and rela-

as those related to family, work, religion, and

tively predictable patterns. They subordinate the smooth. Smooth spaces can become occupied by striated spaces through organization,

recreation. As bodies navigate between the disciplines enforced through striations of gender and the possibilities offered by trans-

structure, and order. Striation regulates the

gressing these striations, they negotiate how

free-flowing movement into mapped territory that can be measured, positioned, and made

they become subject. The posthuman body is not who we are but what we are becoming, what spaces—forces, knowledges, and potentials—we participate in

property. Smooth nomadic motion becomes

striated by arrangements of space—the more regulatory and repetitive the interactions, the tighter the striation. Some striation is needed for communication to function and a sense of selftobe maintained. There is a productive tension that exists between smooth and striated spaces: “Perhaps we must say that all progress is made by

that are available in our surroundings (Deleuze,

and in striated space,” explain Deleuze and

1995). In this way, the posthuman body is not an autonomous subject, but an amalgamation of subjectivities that are constantly changing depending on interactions in space. Bodies move through spaces shaped in locally specific ways out of the physical forces, cultural beliefs and values, and technological possibilities made

Guattari (1987), “but all becoming occurs in

available in a rhetorical process, “an art of living”

smooth space” (p. 486). The posthuman body

(Vivian, 2000, p. 317). As bodies in motion, the spaces that we move through—simultaneously

evolves through interactions with smooth spaces and is able to communicate through striated interactions. The striation is a “subjection of free action” but also a rendering intelligible (p. 491). Bodies that become repetitively disciplined by striated spaces may end up blocking new intensities and flows or assimilating into the same striation. The posthuman body is a mixture of both smooth and striated spaces where some movements are suppler and others more rigid. How the body plays and is disciplined is integral to the process of becoming a subject. As an example, it is widely accepted that gender becomes stabilized through the reproduction of norms (Butler, 2004). Bodies are intelligible through the striations that shape both their physical display and behavioral performances.

However, if bodies cannot perform gender

physical, cultural, and virtual—offer different opportunities to perform selfhood, what Judith Butler (2004) describes as “improvisation

within a scene of constraint” (p. 1). Working from the writings of Benedict de Spinoza, Gilles Deleuze (2005) suggests that

the body should be understood in terms of its relationship to movement and rest, “by the affects of which it is capable” (p. 59). The

body grows with and adapts to the different phenomena with which it interacts. Bodies are constantly affecting and being affected by their interactions. Affect emerges from the event of relational intensity—an event that is intensely felt and shaped by interactive experiences (Massumi, 2002). Affects are shaped in part by our body’s participation in the rhythms of their surroundings,

1298

«

POSTHUMANISM

in standard routines and their disruptions. Bodily rhythms of breathing, heartbeats, sleeping, seasonal changes, and larger astronomical

processes are smooth rhythms of time, while mechanical clocks, cyclical economic patterns, work, religion, and health-related events, among others, are striated rhythms of time. As smooth

and striated rhythms intersect, they create affects that are resources for reason. Richard Rogers (1994) uses a neurological perspective to describe how these rhythms affect the body: “rhythms become encoded in the pathways of the brain and nervous system. Neural pathways provide the biological basis for consciousness; the harnessing and repression (canalization) of the body’s drives constitutes

the subject” (Rogers, 1994, p. 234). No rhythm

with increased technological developments of the late 20th and early 21st century. As digital technologies evolve in complexity and availability, particularly in medicine and health fields, science fiction authors and scholars alike

are imagining how the human body might be understood as technological, revising no-

tions of the human body as discrete. Science fiction has popularized the idea of the cyborg as body modification and imbued the term cyborg with a sense of human improvement. In contrast to Haraway’s (1991) cyborg, this trend intensifies humanist themes of human superiority through narratives of social progress. Narratives of human improvement recentralize conceptions of the logically minded human that can create and control technol-

exists on its own: “our individual rhythms, and

ogy for human benefit. Indeed, the idea of

rhythms in general, clash with, merge with, and influence others, sometimes reinforcing, ing, sometimes fragmenting, and sometimes

humans surrendering their agency to sentient technology, such as artificial intelligence, is a common theme of science fiction and lay discourse that exemplifies anxieties and

destroying other rhythms” (Dawes, 2005, p. 58).

fears of humans losing control (Rushing &

These rhythmic patterns and practices shape the contours of our affective experiences. A posthuman body and its capacity for reason, then, is constituted by the spaces with which it interacts and the rhythms that create its affects. These interactions form premises for what comes to be understood as reasonable. Different patterns of interaction form different logics, and what is perceived as knowledge can be different across groups of people. From a posthumanist perspective bodies are more affective than they are rational, and they rarely behave according to their rationalized interests. This contrasts humanism’s tendency to overemphasize the ability of rational thought to shape future action.

Frentz, 1989). The perspective that technology will enhance social progress and advance humanity is often called transhumanism. The “trans” in transhumanism describes an evolutionary “beyond” of the human, as in “beyond-human.” The humanist tendencies embedded within transhumanism distinguish it from posthu-

sometimes diminishing, sometimes augment-

POSTHUMANISM VERSUS TRANSHUMANISM The growing body of posthumanist scholarship regarding the body and technology coincides

manism, and because of their simultaneous

popularization, there is a coinciding overlap of vocabulary, as with different understandings of the word “cyborg” (Keeling, 2012). Both early posthumanist and transhumanist scholarship use the terminology “posthuman,’ however, with different emphases. While posthumanists use posthuman to refer to a more diffuse understanding of human bodies, transhumanist scholars also have used it to mean an evolved kind of human and a more technological, advanced, improved humanity. As a result, many conflate transhumanism with posthumanism. However, posthumanism attends

POSTHUMANISM

to the dispersion of human agency, whereas transhumanism attends to the concentration of it (Wolfe, 2010). Because of the conflation of many key terms and perspectives, as well as the diversity of

perspectives within both posthumanism and humanism, criticism of humanist or posthumanist scholarship is not uniform. Scholars critiquing posthumanism may actually be addressing scholarship that leans toward transhumanism. Shared terminology and a lack of

consensus among posthumanist, transhumanist, or humanist scholarship can lead to conflating perspectives and generalizations of specific ideas to broader perspectives. For these reasons, studying and responding to these perspectives should be highly contextualized. POSTHUMANISM IN CONTEMPORARY RHETORICAL STUDIES Contemporary rhetorical scholars attend to posthumanist forms of agency and invention through Marxism, psychoanalysis, technology studies, and feminism, the latter discussed in

the section “The Posthuman Body.” A Marxist approach to agency emphasizes how a capitalist economic system produces systemic forms

«

1299

are at least three other emerging areas of posthumanism within rhetorical studies: aesthetics, animals, and affect.

Aesthetics. In the late 20th century, many rhetorical scholars were conceptualizing rhetoric as epistemic, that is, as a process that creates knowledge. These rhetorical scholars sought to demonstrate that the pursuit of foundational knowledge and universal truths was misguided. They argued that knowledge could not be found because it was rhetorically produced (Scott, 1967). However, the claim that “rhetoric is epistemic,” is itself an epistemological claim: a foundational knowledge claim about how knowledge is rhetorical. Responding to this oversight, Steve Whitson and John Poulakos (1993) asserted that epistemic understandings of rhetoric overemphasized language and failed to account for the sensuous elements that appear to be knowledge. Working from writings of Nietzsche, they argued that “the epistemic endeavor is a derivative of something greater: primordial desires, irrepressible passions, and_ blind drives, all of which characterize, more than

anything else, the make-up and the life of human beings” (p. 132).

of income inequality and oppression that

Whitson and Poulakos (1993) suggest that

restrict opportunities for social movement

aesthetics, meaning sense, is a different way to reject foundationalist pursuits of truth and knowledge. Knowledge and the language it depends on are artistic illusions formed by human needs and desires. These needs and desires temporarily “satisfy the perceptual appetites or aesthetic cravings of audiences”

(Greene, 1998; Gunn & Cloud, 2010). A psychoanalytic approach demonstrates how choice is never fully conscious. A person does not always—or perhaps ever—behave because of a conscious decision-making process. Most behaviors are unconscious habits, desires, and

drives. Conscious explanations about behav-

(p. 136). Eventually these cravings are forgot-

iors are created after the actions, rather than

ten and language begins to appear as though it accurately reflects reality, rather than it being a participant in reality. Claims of truth are therefore demonstrations of the power of illusions rather than a validation of an epistemological certainty. Whitson and Poulakos (1993) encourage scholars to expand purely epistemological understandings of rhetoric,

before them (Gunn & Treat, 2006; Lundberg

& Gunn, 2005). A technological approach to agency shows how technology participates, directs, and constrains human action. Various

nonhuman participants come to shape human possibility through habits and kinetic energy (e.g., Anderson, 2004; Miller, 2007). There

1300

»«

POSTHUMANISM

replace the concept of truth with art, and con-

a purely human experience. In his pursuit

sider the “unrecognized aesthetic impulses”

to find “some universal rules of the rhetorical

that epistemology relies upon (p. 132).

In the new

millennium,

the study of

sensation has received increased attention,

from an interest in food to sound to touch. Debra Hawhee (2015) offers an overview of the communication field’s history with the topic of sensation. From a posthumanist perspective, the study of sensation collectively seeks to understand how sense influences action and creates the appearance of knowledge. This study recognizes how one’s senses (or lack

thereof) enable and constrain one’s perception of what is real or true. Scholars studying sensation acknowledge that nonhuman animals may have other senses such as the ability to detect electromagnetic fields, chemicals in their

atmosphere, or temperature that enable different perceptions of reality and knowledge-—

code,” he argues that rhetoric is a form of

energy driven by a basic instinct to survive (p. 3). Using physics and evolutionary biology, Kennedy argues that all animal life that can adapt to changing environments participates in rhetoric. The rhetorical energy of adaptation can be found in emotional, physical,

encoded, and experienced (decoded) commu-

nication practices of human animals as well as nonhuman animals. Kennedy (1992) offers eight theses to support his posthumanist definition of rheto-

ric: (1) “Rhetoric is prior to speech” both historically and biologically (p. 4). Rhetoric existed before the human species and is present in all animal life. It is genetically transmitted and open to cultural variation.

perceptions that may be inaccessible or even

(2) Rhetorical intentions do not determine interpretations, though they can guide them.

incomprehensible to humans. As Chiew (2014)

(3) Rhetoric exists prior to intentionality. The

notes, because posthumanism “aims to destabilize the basic premises of human exceptionalism . . . human ways of knowing and being in the world do not have privilege or priority over the myriad variety of ways that nonhuman entities—such as computers, ani-

ability to communicate is basic to rhetoric, but an understanding of the communication

mals, plants, microorganisms, minerals, and

fossils—encounter and apprehend the world”

(paz):

comes after rhetoric. (4) “The function of rhetoric is the survival of the fittest” (p. 10). Rhetoric is used to adapt to environmental

changes. All species share the ability to adapt to their surroundings for survival. This commonality creates the parameters of a general rhetoric: “what nature has favored in particular environments” (p. 9). (S) Rhetoric

Animals. Nonhuman animals have been present in discussions of rhetoric and rhetorical education since antiquity (Hawhee, 2017). However, the discussion of nonhuman ani-

mals as capable of enacting rhetoric did not receive pronounced attention in the contemporary study of rhetoric until the publication of George Kennedy’s (1992) “A Hoot in the Dark.” In this essay, Kennedy challenges the human-animal boundary of communication practices and the assumption that rhetoric is

is constantly evolving through

“selective

variation” based on mistakes, novel combinations, chance, and play. An animal is

either more or less successful at adapting to environmental changes. (6) The rhetorical canon of delivery is prior to the other four rhetorical canons: invention, arrangement,

style, and memory. Whereas in traditional thetoric delivery refers to “facial expression, gesture,

and tonal

inflection,”

the Latin

derivative of delivery is actio, meaning

POSTHUMANISM

«-

1301

action: “Physical motion in response to some exigence occurs in the earliest and most primitive forms of life” (p. 12). Movement and sensation happen simultaneously to create

language and by locating rhetoric in nature, rhetoric is not viewed as the sole domain of the human.

feelings and then these lead to invention, arrangement, style, and memory. (7) Rhetoric is

terest in the contemporary study of rhetoric

Animal studies is an emerging area of in-

(Doxtader, 2011; Gordon, Lind, & Kutnicki,

prior to marking. Markings include written

2017). This body of work attempts to under-

symbols, bodily scents, and the marking of terri-

of a presence. An energy must impel a marking

stand the animality of the human and the ethics that emerge from human-animal relationships. From a posthumanist perspective,

into existence. Finally, (8) the rhetorical canons “are phenomena of nature and prior to speech”

it is unclear how fully we can understand the communicative practices of species that pos-

(p. 14). They are found in nonhuman animal

sess different sensibilities. Nonhuman animals may have ethical insights unbeknownst to humans. By crafting built-environments based solely on human interests, humans destroy

tory, among other forms. Marks are the imprints

communication

as well as human

animal

communication. Animals invent ways to adapt

to their environments, arrange rituals, develop aesthetic sensibilities related to fitness and sometimes beauty, and share this knowledge with future generations, whether explicitly or genetically. In sum, the study of rhetoric is “distinct from the study of speech or language” because it is a prior phenomenon (p. 20).

In these eight theses, Kennedy (1992) provides detailed examples from ethologists— animal behavior scientists—of how animals, to varying degrees and across species, fulfill each of these principles. Animals of all kinds share in the rhetorical process, which

Kennedy labels a natural phenomenon— not a distinctively human one. Kennedy understands rhetoric as prior to, but leading toward, meaning and language. This is signifi-

cant because rhetoric and language have only recently been a central focus of rhetorical scholars. It was not until the height of the Enlightenment in the 17th and 18th centuries that language became “the core of rhetoric” and retained this position into the late 20th century through “the view of literary theorists that rhetoric is a quality of the use of language” and in theories of public discourse “in

which cultural and political values find expression” (p. 1). By distinguishing rhetoric and

entire ecosystems that both humans and nonhuman animals depend on.

Affect.

Diane Davis (2010) joins Kennedy

(1992) in theorizing the rhetorical process as prior to human meaning. She similarly removes the human-centered imperative in rhetoric. However, rather than think about rhetoric as

a kind of energy, Davis (2010) understands rhetoric as the imperative to respond, or re-

sponse-abilities: “an originary (or preoriginary)

rhetoricity—an affectability or persuadability” (p.2). In other words, Davis understands rhetoric as an obligation to respond, to be affected, and, by extension, to be persuaded.

Persuasion often works without cognitive action because there is always a prior rhetoricity built into our relationships—what she calls our solidarity. She exemplifies this affective notion of rhetoric through the concept of identification as theorized by Kenneth Burke (1969). Burke (1969) was influenced by the work of

psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud in his writings on identification; however, Burke departs

from Freud in his assumptions about human identity. Burke portrays humans as naturally

1302

«

POSTHUMANISM

discrete individuals, separate from one another from birth. For Burke, identities are the

affected by others, and this prior rhetoricity is nonhuman. Rhetoric is possible between any creatures that have the ability to be affected

product of symbolic interaction between humans. Identification happens when two people have a shared world view. Freud, on

by each other (Keeling, 2017).

the other hand, argues there is “already an

the concept of affect in her review of critical

affective identification with the other... who

affect studies (CAS) for rhetorical scholars.

is not (yet) a discrete object or image or form”

CAS is the interdisciplinary study of affect and its power in everyday life. Affect is an experience that is prior to meaning. Rice (2008) argues that rhetorical scholars should attend to affects because they can become attached to meanings and used politically in ways that may be injurious, devastating, or fallacious to both humans and nonhumans.

(Davis, 2010, p. 125). So, while Burke understands identification as a function of shared meaning, Freud understands it as a condition

for shared meaning. Agreeing with Freud, Davis

(2008) suggests that identification depends on a pre-symbolic “primary identification,” an affective identification that precedes the symbolic (p. 125). Davis refers research on mirror

neurons

to demonstrate

her point.

Mirror neurons are what prepare the body for its next movement in a motor sequence:

What's so interesting about them is that they act as both sensory and motor neurons, firing in association not only with the execution but also with the observation of an action. This means that the same mirror neurons fire in my brain whether I actually grab a pencil myself or I see you grab one, indicating no capacity to distinguish between my grasping hand and what is typically (and hastily) described as a visual representation of it: your grasping hand.

(Davis, 2008, p. 131) Through the example of mirror neurons,

she suggests an affective identification already precedes the symbolic representation of actions. “The ‘centrality’ of each individual nervous system can hardly be characterized as ‘divisive,” Davis explains, “when it doesn’t manage consistently to distinguish between self and other” (pp. 131-132). Identification exists before any sense of autonomy. Humans are always exposed, open, and able to be

Jenny Edbauer Rice (2008) elaborates on

For example, affect is often used in commercial campaigns to support a capitalist economy

and attitude toward consumption. The global economy is shaped by our desire to consume, and we become dependent on this way of life. Attention to affects offers

a more complex

understanding of pathos, emotional appeals. These appeals do not come from individual humans, but from our interactions and envi-

ronments, both natural (ecological) and built

(technologies). INTERDISCIPLINARITY

Posthumanism typically invites interdisciplinary research. The “post” references the way humanism extends beyond its traditional domain of arts, letters, philosophy, and history by combining humanist and traditionally nonhumanist subjects of study. Posthumanism increasingly indicates the consideration of and collaboration between the humanities and nonhumanities, such as economics, sciences,

engineering, and mathematics. In the modern study of communication, scholars have been interested in how nonhumanities fields communicate with each other and to the public, but increasingly, contemporary communication

scholars are interested in how theories of

POSTHUMANISM

these fields can inform an understanding of communication as more nuanced and complex than mere human-to-human interaction.

Additionally, this interdisciplinary emphasis encourages communication scholars to become attentive to questions of scale, including human

spatial and temporal scales, and to contribute to discussions of, for example, global warming and the microtemporality of computation. By attending to the more-than-human—such

«

1303

Davis, D., & Ballif, M. (Eds.). (2014). Extrahuman rhetorical relations: Addressing the animal, the

object, the dead, and the divine [Special issue]. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 47(4), 346-472.

Derrida, J. (2009). The animal that therefore I am. New York, NY: Fordham University Press. Doyle, R. (2000). Uploading anticipation, becomingsilicon. JAC: A Journal of Rhetoric, Culture, and Politics, 20(4), 839-864.

Gamble, C. N., & Hanan,J.S. (Eds.). (2016). Figures

as the environment, nonhuman animals, and

of entanglement [Special issue]. Review of Communication, 16(4), 265-373.

technology—posthumanist scholars attempt to understand the complex material relations

Gordon, J. G., Lind, K. D., & Kutnicki, S. (Eds.). (2017). A rhetorical bestiary [Special issue].

that produce communication. Posthumanist scholarship accounts for the ways in which

human agency is constrained and created through relationships—ways that are not accounted for by humanist scholarship. A posthumanist ethic contextualizes the human as a co-participant in, as opposed to creator, curator, and master of, a “real” world. By understanding the human and agency as disperse, diffuse, networked, and nonconsciously influ-

Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 47(3), 215-291. Gouge, C., & Jones,J.(Eds.). (2016). Wearables, wearing, and the rhetorics that attend to them [Special issue]. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 46(3), 199-283. Gunkel, D. J. (2000). Hacking cyberspace. JAC: A Journal of Rhetoric, Culture, and Politics, 20(4), 797-823.

Harold, C. L. (2000). The rhetorical function of the abject body: Transgressive corporeality in Trainspotting. JAC: A Journal of Rhetoric, Culture,

and Politics, 20(4), 865-887.

enced by nonhuman participants, a posthu-

Hawk, B. (2007). A counter-history of composition:

manist perspective is useful for recognizing

Toward methodologies of complexity. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.

the agency of nonhumans in shaping human experiences, as well as for establishing an accountability among humans to nonhumans

in their ethical relations.

Mays, C., Rivers, N. A., & Sharp-Hoskins, K. (Eds.), (2017). Kennenth Burke + the posthuman. Univer-

sity Park: Pennsylvania State University Press. McGreavy, B., Wells, J.. McHendry,

G. F,, Jr, &

Senda-Cook, S. (Eds.). (2018). Tracing rhetoric and material life: Ecological approaches. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave-Macmillan. FURTHER

READING

Ballif, M. (1998). Writing the third-sophistic cyborg: Periphrasis on an [in]tense rhetoric. Rhetoric

Society Quarterly, 27(4), 1-72. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement ofmatter and meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Brooke, C. G. (2000). Forgetting to be (post) human:

Media and memory in a kairotic age. JAC: A Journal of Rhetoric, Culture, and Politics, 20(4), 775-795.

Muckelbauer, J., & Hawhee, D, (2000). Posthuman rhetorics: “It’s the future, Pikul.” JAC: A Journal of Rhetoric, Culture, and Politics, 20(4), 767-774. Nealon, J. T. (2000). Nietzsche’s money! JAC: A Journal of Rhetoric, Culture, and Politics, 20(4), 825-837.

Ott, B., & Keeling, D. M. (2011). Cinema and choric connection: Lost in Translation as sensual experience. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 92(4), 363-386. Stormer, N., & McGreavy, B. (2017). Thinking ecologically about rhetoric’s ontology: Capacity,

1304

«

POSTHUMANISM

and

Deleuze, G. (1995). Negotiations: 1972-1990 (M.

Walsh, L., Rivers, N. A., Rice, J., Gries, L. E., Bay,

Joughin, Trans.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. (Original work published 1990.) Deleuze, G. (2005). Ethology: Spinoza and us. In

vulnerability, and resilience. Rhetoric, SO(1), 1-25.

Philosophy

J. L., Rickert, T., & Miller, C. R. (2017). Forum: Bruno

Latour

on

rhetoric.

Rhetoric

Society

Quarterly, 47(S), 403-462.

M. Fraser & M. Greco (Eds.), The body: A reader (pp. S8-61). New York, NY: Routledge. (Original work published in 1992.) Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand pla-

teaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (B. Massumi, REFERENCES

Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota

Amin, A., & Thrift, N. (2002). Cities: Reimagining the urban. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Anderson, D. (2004). Questioning the motives of habituated action: Burke and Bourdieu on practice. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 37, 255-274. Baudrillard, J. (2013). The intelligence of evil, or the lucidity pact (C. Turner, Trans.). London, UK: Bloomsbury. Burke, K. (1969). A rhetoric ofmotives. Berkeley: University of California Press. Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. New York, NY: Routledge. Chiew, F. (2014). Posthuman ethics with Cary Wolfe and Karen Barad: Animal compassion as transspecies

entanglement.

Theory,

Culture,

and

Society, 31(4), 51-69. Cicero, M. T. (1923). Cicero: Orations (N. H. Watts, Trans.).Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Cintron, R. (2010). Democracy and its limitations.

In J. M. Ackerman & D. J. Coogan (Eds.), The public work of rhetoric: Citizen-scholar and civic engagement (pp. 98-116). Columbia: University of South Carolina Press. Crusius, T. W. (2001). Forward. In E. Grassi (Ed.), Rhetoric as philosophy: The humanist tradition (pp. xi-xviii). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Davis, D. (2008). Identification: Burke and Freud on who you are. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 38, 123-147.

Davis, D. (2010). Inessential solidarity: Rhetoric and

Press. (Original work published 1980). Derrida, J. (1978). Writing and difference (A. Bass,

Trans.).Chicago , IL: University of Chicago Press. Doxtader, E. (201i). Forum: Addressing animals. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 44, 79-80.

Foucault, M. (1984). What is enlightenment? (C. Porter, Trans.). In P. Rabinow (Ed.), TheFoucault reader (pp. 32-50). New York, NY: Pantheon. Geisler, C. (2005S). How ought we to understand

the concept of rhetorical agency? Report from the ARS. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 34, 9-17. Gordon, J. G., Lind, K. D., & Kutnicki, S. (2017).

A rhetorical bestiary. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 47(3), 222-228. Greene, R. W. (1998). Another materialist rhetoric. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 1S, 21-41.

Grosz, E. (1994). Volatile bodies: Toward a corporeal feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Gunn,J., & Cloud, D. (2010). Agentic orientation as magical voluntarism. Communication Theory, 20, $0-78. Gunn, J., & Treat, S. (2006). Zombie trouble: A

propaedentic on ideological subjectification and the unconscious. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 91, 144-174.

Hansen, M. (2000). Embodying technesis: Technology

beyond writing. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Haraway, D. (1991). Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. London, UK: Free Association Book.

foreigner relations. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Hawhee, D. (2002). Kairotic encounters. In J. M.

Davies, T. (2008). Humanism (2nd ed.). New York,

torical invention (pp. 16-35). Knoxville: Univer-

NY: Routledge. Dawes, M. (2005). Our lives as a complex of rhythms.

sity of Tennessee Press. Hawhee, D. (2004). Bodily arts: Rhetoric and athletics in Ancient Greece. Austin: University of Texas Press.

ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 62, 57-61.

Atwill, & J. M Lauer (Eds.), Perspectives on rhe-

POSTHUMANISM

Hawhee, D. (2015S). Rhetoric’s sensorium. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 101, 2-17. Hawhee, D. (2017). Rhetoric in tooth and claw: Animals, language, and sensation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Hayles, N. K. (1999). How we became posthuman:

Virtual bodies in cybernetics, literature, and infor-

matics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Isocrates. (2000). Antidosis. In Isocrates (G. Norlin,

Trans.) (Vol. 2; pp. 179-365). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1929.) Kelley, D. R. (1991). Renaissance humanism. Boston,

MA: Twayne Publishers. Kennedy, G. (1992). A hoot in the dark: The evolution of general rhetoric. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 25, 1-21.

Keeling, D. M. (2012). History of (future) progress: Hyper-masculine transhumanist virtuality. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 29(2), 132-148.

Keeling, D. M. (2017). Feral rhetoric: Common sense animals and metaphorical beasts. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 47(3), 229-237. Leff, M. (2003). Tradition and agency in humanistic rhetoric. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 36, 135-147. Longinus. (1991). On great writing (on the sublime)

(G.M.A. Grube, Trans.).Indianapolis, IN: Hackett. Lundberg, C., & Gunn, J. (2005). “Ouiji board, are there any communications?” Agency, ontotheology, and the death of the humanist subject, or, continuing the ARS conversation. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 3S, 83-105. Massumi, B. (2002). Parables of the virtual: Movement,

affect,

sensation.

Durham,

NC:

Duke

University Press. Meyrowitz,J. (1994). Medium theory. In D. Crowley & D. Mitchell (Eds.), Communication theory today

(pp. S0-77). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Miller, C. R. (2007). What can automation tell us about agency? Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 37, 137-157. Mortensen, D. E. (2008). The loci of Cicero. Rhetorica, 26, 31-S6. O’Gorman, N. (2004). Longinus’s sublime rhetoric, or how rhetoric came into its own. RSQ: Rhetoric

Society Quarterly, 34, 71-89. Ott, B. L., & Mack, R. L. (2010). Critical media studies. Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons.

«

1305

Reynolds, L. D., & Wilson, N. G. (1968). Scribes and

scholars: A guide to the transmission ofGreek and Latin literature. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Rice,J.E. (2008). The new “new”: Making a case for critical affect studies. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 94, 200-212. Rickert, T. (2004). In the house of doing: Rhetoric

and the kairos of ambience. JAC: A Journal of Rhetoric, Culture and Politics, 24, 901-927. Rickert, T. (2007). Toward the chora: Kristeva, Derrida, and Ulmer on emplaced invention. Phi-

losophy and Rhetoric, 40, 251-273. Rogers, R. (1994). Rhythm and the performance of organization. Text and Performance Quarterly,

14, 222-238.

Rubinelli, S. (2006). The ancient argumentative game: 7o7rovand loci in action. Argumentation, 20, 253-272. Rushing, J. H., & Frentz, T. S. (1989). The Frankenstein myth in contemporary cinema. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 6, 61-80. Scott, R. L. (1967). On viewing rhetoric as epistemic. Central States Speech Journal, 18, 9-17.

Spivak, G. C. (1999). A critique ofpostcolonial reason: Toward a history ofthe vanishing present. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Stormer, N. (2004). Articulation—A working paper

on rhetoric and taxis. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 90, 187-184.

Vico, G. (1968). The new science (T. Bergin & M. Fisch, Trans.). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Vivian, B. (2000). The threshold of the self. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 33, 303-318.

Vivian, B. (2003). Being made strange: Rhetoric beyond representation. Albany: State University of New York Press. Wolfe, C. (2010). What is posthumanism? Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Wiseman, R. (2007). Metaphors concerning speech

in Homer. In R. T. Craig & H. L. Muller (Eds.), Theorizing communication (pp. 7-18). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. (Original work published 2003.) Whitson, S., & Poulakos, J. (1993). Nietzsche and the

aesthetic of rhetoric. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 79, 131-145.

Diane Marie Keeling and Marguerite Nguyen Lehman

1306

»«

POST-STRUCTURALISM

poststructuralism simply comes after structuralism; it is a form of relativism; it

POST-STRUCTURALISM

INTRODUCTION

As the name implies, poststructuralism is that which is arrived at after passing through and going beyond “structure.” Post-structuralism is neither a kind of primitivism that celebrates some mythic state of nature when human beings were without structure nor a kind of nihilism that simply rejects the existence or legitimacy of all structures whatso-

celebrates the death of the subject; it is a postmetaphysical form of inquiry that has utterly displaced the idea of truth: it is stylistically obtuse; it refuses all claims to normativity; and it transforms critical

practice into textual play (2013, p. 2). On the other hand, the criticisms of poststructuralism are as follows:

ever. Rather, post-structuralism represents

It is empirically insightful but norma-

a set of attitudes and a style of critique that

tively confused; unable to perceive the

developed in critical response to the growth and identification of the logic of structural relations that underlie social institutions— whether they exist in terms of politics, eco-

performative contradictions of its own

nomics, education, medicine, literature, or

often portray poststructuralism, it is a form of dogmatic thought in league with

the sciences. Post-structuralism should therefore not be thought of as a distinct philosophy

that

exists

separately

as

its own

analyses; it lacks emancipatory potential and has lost sense of the central role of critical agency; and, as some Marxists

the consumerist society of late capitalism (p. 2).

“structure’—a proposition that would under-

existing structures and, as a set of attitudes,

Yet according to Dillet et al., its postcard summary and its simplistic critiques do not “capture the complexity of its emergence nor its current position in the Academy and

helping us better understand, interpret, and

beyond” (p. 2). Indeed, Dillet et al. prefer to

alter our social environment by calling established meanings into question, revealing the

discuss post-structuralist not as a system of thought but as an “intellectual and institutional event” that “opened a new critical practice that focused on the limits of existing

mine its most fundamental attitudes. Rather,

post-structuralism should be thought of as developing or arising only in response to pre-

points of ambiguity and indeterminacy inherent in any system, rejecting the rationalistic piety that all systems are internally coherent and circle around

an unchanging

center,

showing how discourses are carriers of power capable of turning us into subjects, and placing upon us the burden of ethical responsibility that accompanies the acceptance of freedom. As with all broad and fashionable terms for intellectual movements, however, post-

structuralism cannot avoid being reduced to a

knowledge” (pp. 4-S). In this way, poststructuralism carried with it a kind of rhetorical ethos, a deployment of words arising in a specific situation to disrupt and transform an established way of thinking, talking, and being. Narrowly defined, post-structuralism can be described as an “event” centered around the period in France that gave rise to thinkers such as Jacques Derrida, Roland Barthes, Jacques

few essential features that elicit familiar criti-

Lacan, Julia Kristeva, Michel Foucault, JeanFrancois Lyotard, Michel Serres, Giles Deleuze,

cal reactions. According to Dillet, Porter, and Mackenzie, on the one hand,

and Jean Baudrillard. They wrote in a postwar context in a nation that had experienced Nazi

POST-STRUCTURALISM

occupation and whose structure of power was supported by ideological and genocidal propaganda that seemed to be based on nothing other than the lust for power. May 1968 then initiated a period of civil unrest in France punctuated by demonstrations and culminating in general strikes and the occupation of universities and factories which brought the economic and political order of the country to a halt. According to Williams (2014): May 1968 can be interpreted as showing that a different kind of resistance and revolution is possible: a revolution that works through different structures and bodies, opening them up to new possibilities free of set ideological directions and political logic. As an heir to 1968, poststructuralism advocates spontaneity, fluidity and openness and political move-

«+

1307

the natural philosophies of philosophers like Thales, Anaxagoras, Parmenides, and Empedocles, all of whom wrote texts called “On Being”

in order to identify the center of all Being, Gorgias penned a masterful and playful parody titled “On Not Being” in order to mock the entire notion of locating any essential center in nature. Specifically, he makes three arguments that turned conventional ideas on their heads: (1) that nothing exists, namely because existence requires permanence and anything that changes therefore either comes from nothing or goes into nothing, which is impossible;

(2) that even if it existed, it is unknowable, namely because the ideas in the mind never completely match the external world; and (3) that even if Being existed and could be known,

it could not be communicated because words are not thoughts, things, colors, or tastes, but

simply words: “therefore, if anything is know-

ments of resistance; the revolution of the

able, no one could make it evident to another

folding in of limits extends into revolu-

because things are not words and because no

tionary structures and goals. (p. 20)

one has the same thing in mind as another”

(199Sb, p. 209). It is based on these resoPost-structuralist French thought can thus be seen as a philosophical and literary movement that paralleled the political disruption of France as it sought to challenge and transform the entire social structure of the country not by imposing a new structure but by continually holding open new possibilities for action and reinvention. However, post-structuralism can also be more broadly defined as a set of attitudes

toward communication that has a much longer history than that confined to a few decades in France at the end of the 20th century. Many traditions locates it origin with Friedrich Nietzsche's rejection and criticism of Enlightenment rationalism in the 19th century, but one might go even farther back and make an argument that the ancient Greek Sophist Gorgias was the first recognizable “post-structuralist” despite the fact that he lived in the early part of the Sth century BCE in Greece. In reaction to

nances between classical and contemporary thought that McComiskey has argued that “Sophistic doctrines have been useful in the development of post-structuralist and pragmatist rhetoric of public discourse” (2002, p. 66). Whether or not Gorgias should or should not be called a “post-structuralist” is not the point; it is rather to demonstrate that poststructuralism, as a set of attitudes, has had a

long prehistory. Furthermore, showing how post-structuralist thought resonates with Sophists like Gorgias emphasizes the degree to which post-structuralism and communication overlap. Gerald Greenberg writes that “post-structuralism is a broad and varied school of thought that has much to say about language, its use, the mean-

ings created by it, and the power attached to it—all of which has proved to be of interest to a wide variety of humanities and social science scholars including communication researchers”

1308

«

POST-STRUCTURALISM

(2002, p. 150). But this “interest” is complicated by the fact that post-structuralist thought tends to be highly critical of traditional theories of communication grounded either in the humanistic presumptions of autonomous agents or in the social scientific presumptions about the ability for language to accurately explain or describe human relationships with some degree of universality. Indeed, as Greenberg observes, the critical attitude that pervades post-structuralism leads many to assume “that post-structuralists do not view anything as capable of being effectively communicated”

(2002, p. 150). But just as the Sophist Gorgias was a teacher of rhetoric who also argued that it is impossible to communicate ideas perfectly between two minds using words, post-structuralists take a critical stance toward communication as a starting point for new communica-

tive possibilities and actions. FROM STRUCTURALISM TO POST-STRUCTUALISM

To understand the how post-structuralism approaches communication, one must first un-

derstand the structuralists’ approach to language to which they responded. Structuralism took as its starting point the insights of French linguist Ferdinand Saussure and his Course in Gen-

eral Linguistics published in 1916. Although Saussure produced his work many decades before structuralism emerged as a distinct form of thought, his innovations in our understand-

ing of language provided the basis for structuralism. Specifically, Saussure developed a theory of the sign that reacted against the positivism of his day, which understood the basis of all meanings to reside in the “positive” relationship that specific terms have with definable empirical objects or events. Positivism thus formed the basis of early philosophy of science which was skeptical of abstract terms or nonmathematical languages in which relationships

between words were not grounded in any

matter of fact. In contradistinction, Saussure

argued that “in the language itself, there are only differences,” and that “even more important than that is the fact that, although in general a

difference presupposes positive terms between which the difference holds, in a language there

are only differences, and no positive terms” (1989, p. 118). For Saussure, then, language was not something that developed piece by piece,

as if individual words were developed to refer to individual phenomena and only later gathered together into a coherent language system. Quite the opposite, “a language is a system in which all the elements fit together, and in which

the value of any one element depends on the simultaneous coexistence of all the others” (Saussure, 1989, p. 113). And even more radically, Saussure argued that our entire sign system of language is completely arbitrary and thereby has no real connection with a world

outside of itself. Every language is thus its own “structure” in which all the parts hang together by arbitrary relations and whose most notable feature is a system of binaries and hierarchies that define terms through difference. Saussure’s linguistics was to reject traditional approaches to studying language—that is, a diachronic, historical study of how indi-

vidual words came to refer to actual objective things or events—and move toward a new,

synchronic approach that looked at how the entire system of any language functions at any point in time. The focus of the study would thus fall not on what Saussure called parole, or the specific, purposive, and situated speech acts by individual actors, but on langue, or

the internal arrangement and relationship of rules understood by a social group which was responsible for giving words their meanings. Saussure thus distinguished between the signifier, which was the sound pattern of a word

that made it recognizable as a sign, and the signified, which was the concept or meaning

POST-STRUCTURALISM

«+

1309

of the word that existed as an idea and not an actual object. Langue was thus the system of rules and relations that established the relationship between signifier and signified in any culture. And important for understanding post-structuralist thought, Saussure made very strong claims concerning the degree to which

Archeology ofKnowledge, he sought to reveal the structure of what he called an episteme, bywhich

any langue was coherent, fixed, and deterministic. Saussure argued that the signifier “is fixed, not free, with respect to the linguistic com-

he meant “the total set of relations that unite, at a given period, the discursive practices that give rise to epistemological figures, sciences,

certain space and time, some structure exists

within a community that determines its language use and corresponding behavior. Michel Foucault, for instance, was fully within the tradition of structuralist thought when, in the

munity that uses it. The masses have no voice

and formalizable systems” and which exist as

in the matter, and the signifier chosen by lan-

“the totality of relations that can be discovered,

guage could be replaced by no other... [The]

for a given period, between the sciences when

community itself cannot control so much as

one analyzes them at the level of discursive regularities” (1972, p. 161). Although Foucault ex-

a single word; it is bound to the existing language” (1989, p. 71). To pursue a study of

structural linguistics was thus to study how the existing language is structured and in turn regulates the usage in any linguistic community at the level of an unconscious awareness that becomes second nature. Structuralism developed out of this approach within a postwar environment that understood structures of language to also be carriers of power. Saussure had written that “a particular language-state is always the product of histori-

plicitly rejected the “structuralist” label, his presumption that any study could reveal a “total set of relations” that unite all “discursive practices,’ establish clear binaries and

hierarchies, and which is largely arbitrary, is wholly consistent with structuralist methods. Post-structuralism develops out of this structuralist position not by rejecting structure per

se but by challenging many of its rationalistic and totalizing presumptions. Structuralism was attractive because it presumed to account for

cal forces, and these forces explain why the sign

everything. Any set of practices, beliefs, and

is unchangeable” (1989, p. 65). Structuralism

events, no matter how apparently contradictory

studied how a language state came into existence through historical forces and developed a langue based on binaries and hierarchies to

or diverse, could be reduced to an explanation

regulate the thoughts, behaviors, and practices

of some underlying structure that brought everything into a unity. The attraction of Freudian or Marxist explanations, for in-

of an entire language community. Structuralism

stance, can be attributed to their structuralist

is today most associated with the anthropology

confidence in providing a universal account of human behavior or historical events while also providing some method for leveraging

of Claude Lévi-Strauss, who pushed struc-

turalist assumptions to their limit by proposing, through his study of myth, “the universal laws which make up the unconscious activity of the mind” (1967, p. 64). But as Peter Caws points out, structuralism does not require “the view that there exists some objective or deep generating structure of which the structures

change in the future. Post-structuralism shares with structuralism much of its desire to study language and discourse as well as some of his reformist goals, but it rejects structuralisms rationalism and universalism. The great discov-

it studies are transformations” (1988, p. 1).

that the very structuralist analyses that purported to reveal a total and coherent set of

It simply requires the presumption that, at a

ery of post-structuralism, in other words, was

1310

+

POST-STRUCTURALISM

relations actually revealed the opposite—that all so-called structures are in fact riddled with inconsistencies, contradictions, and incoherencies. Moreover, post-structuralism asserted

that these gaps are not simply the result of an incomplete system but are the outgrowth of the very nature of language itself. Whereas structuralists like Saussure had simply assumed that it was possible for langue to exist as a perfect set of internally coherent relations and thereby saw speech acts of parole as exceptions to the rule or departures from the norm, post-structuralists like Derrida viewed parole, in all its eventfulness, as more representative of

the nature of language which always escapes our ability to completely limit its scope. For post-structuralists, then, the study of parole reveals the systematic presumptions of langue not only to be illusory but also to be at the heart of its power. Post-structuralism thus does not reject the structuralist belief that discourse is the carrier of power; what it does is to say that that power derives, in part at least, from the myth of its totalizing character than from in its actual ability to completely deter-

(Butler, 1990, p. 40). The next sections will explore the basis and significance of this recognition by examining particular works by three of the major representative theorists of post-structuralism—Jacques Derrida, Roland Barthes, and Michel Foucault.

JACQUES DERRIDA AND THE DECENTERING OF DISCOURSE

One of the founding events of post-structuralist thought was the 1966 lecture by Jacques Derrida titled “Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences.’ This lecture introduced many terms now familiar in poststructuralist discourse—event, rupture, pres-

ence, composition, paradox, bricoleur, play, supplement, and difference—but its most important contribution was to clearly distinguish poststructuralist from structuralist thought by its attitude toward the “center.” Specifically, Derrida argued that the defining characteristic of structuralism had been “a process of giving it a center or referring it to a point of presence, a fixed origin,” and that “the function of the

mine meanings and direct behavior. Judith

center was not only to orient, balance, and or-

Butler, for instance, identifies post-structural-

ganize the structure—one cannot in fact con-

ism as the rejection of “the claims of totality and universality and the presumption of binary structural oppositions that implicitly operate to quell the insistent ambiguity and openness

ceive of an unorganized structure—but above all to make sure that the organizing principle of the structure would limit what we might call

of linguistic and cultural signification” (1990,

Against this position, post-structuralism proposes an act of “decentering.” What this meant was to “begin to think that there was no center, that the center could not be thought in the form of a being present, that the center had no

p. 40). For Butler, the difference between structuralism and post-structuralism is found in their respective approaches to signification. Structuralism asserts that the relationship between signifier and signified can be completely and fully determined by a culture’s linguistic structure. In contradistinction, post-structuralism sees this relationship as always fluid and subject to play: “As a result, the discrepancy between signifier and signified becomes the operative and limitless différance of language, rendering all referentiality into a potentially limitless displacement”

the freeplay of the structure” (1991, p. 278).

natural locus, that it was not a fixed locus but a function, a sort of non-locus in which an infi-

nite number of sign-substitutions came into play” (Derrida, 1991, p.280). Post-structuralism thus did not simply turn structuralism on its head and eliminate and idea of the center; what

it did was to denaturalize the center by redefining as a function that was constantly changing and often difficult to hold in one place.

POST-STRUCTURALISM

The structuralist notion of a “center” can

be easily understood in communicative terms by associating it with the whole tradition of “god terms” in rhetoric. For instance, Richard

Weaver defines a god term as “that expression about which all other expressions are ranked as subordinate and serving dominations and powers, and which “fixes the scale by which

degrees of comparison are understood” (1985, p. 212). Weaver's position is an entirely struc-

turalist one. In explaining the notion of center, for instance, Derrida basically lists a series of God terms, arguing that

it would be possible to show that all the names related to fundamentals, to

principles, or to the center have always designated the constant of a presence— eidos, arché, telos, energeia, ousia (essence, existence, substance, subject) aletheia, transcendentality, consciousness,

or conscience, God, man, and so forth

(1991, p. 280).

Moreover, he argues that the purpose of these terms is to regulate free play by creating those theories of dominations, subordinations,

and limits that emanate in concentric circles around the god terms. Thus for Derrida, any flexibility within a system is nonetheless “constituted upon a fundamental immobility and a reassuring certitude, which is itself beyond the reach of the free play” (1991, p. 279). Weaver's subsequent complaint against what he calls “charismatic terms” is indicative of this anxiety about what occurs when a discourse lacks a center. Weaver writes that charismatic terms “seem to have broken loose

somehow and operate independently of ref-

-

1311

of statements that surround a clearly defined center—an ultimate term—thus expresses the tendency ofall structuralist thought to see the universe as a linguistic totality. It is less to deny the desirability of such an ethics than to refute its very possibility that Derrida performs a close reading of the structuralist writings of Lévi-Strauss to show

this structuralist dream of a complete and organized totality to be an illusion. Moreover, characteristic of post-structuralist criticism

generally, Derrida does not argue his case from a counterphilosophical position relying on his own imported presumptions. Rather, he occupies the discourse of Lévi-Strauss to show, from an internal critique, how the latter’s structuralist assumptions breakdown within his very own writing. Throughout his work, according

to Derrida, Lévi-Strauss relies on a dichotomy between nature and culture in which “that belongs to nature which is universal and spontaneous” while that belongs to culture “which depends on a system of norms regulating society and is therefore capable of varying from one social structure to another” (Derrida, 1991,

p. 283). In his inquiry into myth, Lévi-Strauss sought to use structural method to reveal the center not only of any particular culture’s mythological structure but the universal center of all such structures that emanated from a single natural essence. Yet when Lévi-Strauss en-

countered the incest-prohibition, the simple dichotomy between nature and culture seemed to break down. On the one hand, Derrida

writes, “the incest prohibition is universal; in this sense one could call it natural. But it is also a prohibition, a system of norms and interdicts; in the sense one could call it cultural”

(1991, p. 283). Whereas Lévi-Strauss saw this

erential connections,’ and that “the charis-

as an exception to the rule, however, Derrida

matic term is given its load of impulsion without reference, and it functions by con-

vention” (1985, pp. 227-228). His appeal for an ethics of rhetoric grounded on a com-

sees it as exemplifying what is in fact a characteristic of all structures—the fact that there is no such absolute center, privileged reference, or natural presence regulating the whole system;

pletely coherent and self-sustaining system

any system of language and discourse is fraught

1312

-«

POST-STRUCTURALISM

with contradictions, exceptions, and unex-

pected events that become readily apparent when one looks closely at its utterances. The result of Derrida’s “decentering” of the structuralist “center” is not to do away with all structure but rather to loosen the jangle of the multiple structures which we use and in which we inhabit—to encourage what he calls

“freeplay.’ In the structuralist understanding, “the organizing principle of the structure would limit what we might call the free play

of the authors that produced them. In “The Death of the Author,’ Roland Barthes (1977) announces not the death of individuals who write—for certainly many texts are physically

produced by a single hand—but rather the death of the author as that romantic ideal of

an individual genius wholly responsible for unrolling a work of brilliance out of their private

consciousness and whose meaning can only be found in relationship to that consciousness. For Barthes, “the author is a modern figure, a

of the structure” (Derrida, 1991, p. 278). That is

product of our society insofar as, emerging from

to say, new possibilities might be entertained,

the Middle Ages with English empiricism,

but only insofar as they were safely contained

French rationalism and the personal faith of

inside the limits of the total form as understood as emanating from an established and natural

the Reformation, it discovered the prestige of

core. But once the center is seen to be multiple, mobile, and often indeterminate, the estab-

lished relationships between center and limit are seen to be constantly in motion. Freeplay

the individual” (Barthes, 1977, pp. 142-143). The rise of the author in recent times has also

been aided by what he calls a “capitalist ideol-

ensemble’—that is to say an ability to constautly

ogy, which has attached the greatest importance to the ‘person’ of the author” as one might imagine in the intersection between copyright law and marketing (p. 143). The result of the rise of the author was an interpretive method

combine and recombine a finite number of signs

whereby everything that was encountered in

and symbols to create new and unpredictable

the text ultimately had to be traced back to its

events and utterances within a bounded lin-

new “center’—the author himself or herself. Barthes observes that “the author still reigns in histories of literature, biographies of writers, interviews, magazines,’ and that “the image

emerges in a decentered structure as a “field of infinite substitutions in the closure of a finite

guistic system (Derrida, 1991, p. 289). Poststructuralism as an attitude thus represents an

embrace of freeplay, an acceptance of the fact that our structures are never fixed and constantly changing, and an eagerness to challenge struc-

of literature to be found in ordinary culture is tyrannically centred on the author, his person,

turalist assumptions of a “center” wherever they

his life, his tastes, his passions” (p. 143). In this

are still maintained in our discourses, whether

model of interpretation, freeplay is almost eliminated and the limits of interpretation are strictly controlled by this tyrannical center.

they be ideological, scientific, philosophical, political, religious, literary, or historical.

ROLAND BARTHES AND THE DEATH OF THE AUTHOR

Another significant contribution that poststructuralism made to our understanding of

communication—specifically the method of interpreting texts—is to challenge the notion that the basis for that interpretation is the biography, contexts, thoughts, and intentions

When Barthes announced the death of the author, however, it is important to note what

characterized his position as uniquely poststructuralist as opposed to structuralist. For structuralism, too, might declare the death of the author in its own way while retaining a “center” in language itself. For instance, Barthes notes that “Mallarme was doubtless the first to see and to foresee in its full extent the ne-

cessity to substitute language itself for the

POST-STRUCTURALISM

person who until then had been supposed to be its owner. For him, for us too, it is language which speaks, not the author” (Barthes, 1977,

p. 143). Yet this comment might easily be reconciled with the structuralist position insofar as individuals are seen as simply individual emanations of a cultural linguistic structure which largely determines what can be said. But this simply moves the center from the author's biography to the language which that author inhabits. For a structuralism focused on langue, one might easily kill the author but retain a method of interpretation that might speak of “French literature” as the foundation for criticism and meaning. Barthes, however, goes past the structur-

alist move to embrace a total decentering of interpretation—both in its production and its interpretation. On the one hand, the death of the author does not negate the act of writing itself. It simply locates writing within the moment of writing rather than in the biography or intentions of an author that preceded the text. Consequently, “the modern scriptor is born simultaneously with the text, is in no way equipped with a being preceding or exceeding the writing, is not the subject with

-

1313

creative production and creative interpretation are avoided in the points of encounter between an individual and a text that is not determined (though it may be influenced) by any larger structure outside of that moment. However, the impact of this post-structuralist attitude toward the author is clearly on the side of interpretation. The death of the author effectively challenged the authority of centuries of established interpretations of classical works grounded in detailed knowledge of history, language, biography, philosophy, and psychology. In Barthes’s position, however, these

interpretations are simply one set of an infinite number of different encounters of readers with texts—which themselves consist of nothing other than many writings and readings. Barthes writes that “a text is made of multiple writings,

drawn from many cultures and entering into mutual relations of dialogue, parody, contestation” (Barthes, 1977, p. 148). The effect of all of this is to proliferate interpretations and encounters and give authority to the reader as the source of all meaning. Barthes concludes that “there is one place where this multiplicity is focused and that place is the reader, not, as was hitherto said, the author. The reader

tached from this productive act and decentered in a multiplicity of readers who encounter a

is the space on which all the quotations that make up a writing are inscribed without any of them being lost; a text’s unity lies not in its origin but in its destination” (p. 148). In short, post-structuralism encourages critics of texts not only to develop their own interpretations but to rediscover the unique interpretations of others in history that may have been overlooked or suppressed by dominant interpre-

work in their own present moments. He writes

tations. With the death of the author, new voices

that “every text is eternally written here and now,’ namely by locating the meaning of the work neither in the author nor in the author's native tongue but rather in the individual reader

of new readers are encouraged to come forward to engage in dialogue, parody, or contestation.

the book as predicate; there is no other time

than that of the enunciation and every text is eternally written here and now” (Barthes, 1977, p. 145). The author is thus replaced with

a scriptor who represents simply a string of utterances created in an ongoing present. On the other hand, the meaning of the work is de-

who encounters a work (p. 145). In short, Barthes argues that “its source, its voice, is not

the true place of the writing, which is reading” (p. 147). With the death of the author, both

MICHEL FOUCAULT AND THE ECONOMY OF POWER

Perhaps the most significant way that poststructuralism has influenced the study of

1314

«

POST-STRUCTURALISM

communication has occurred with respect to the study of power. From the origin of the study of language with the Sophists and later with Plato and Aristotle, power has been a central concern. Returning to the work of Gorgias, in this case his Encomium of Helen, written as

a mock defense of Helen ofTroy, the Sophists argued that Helen should be excused from blame for fleeing to Troy because ofthe irresistible influence of the speech (logos) of Paris. Gorgias argued that “speech is a powerful master and achieves the most divine feats with the smallest and least evident body,’ that “the power of speech has the same effect on the disposition of the soul as the disposition of drugs on the nature of bodies,” and that persuasion

create a history of the different modes by which, in our culture, human beings are made

subjects” (1994, p. 126). In the Encomium of Helen, for instance, Gorgias explains the way

in which Helen was made a “subject” by the logos of Paris, persuading her to accept a new identity as his wife and also as one who betrayed the trust of the Greeks. Foucault pursues a similar inquiry but at the level of discourse, disciplines, and society. His interest is to study “the way in which systems of objective finality and systems of communication and power can be welded together” for the purposes of constituting forms of subjectivity that are seen to be necessary for the social order (p. 136).

Crucial to understanding Foucault's position,

“has the same power, but not the same form as

however, is to distinguish it from a structuralist

compulsion” (1995a, pp. 192-193). This power

interpretation. If Foucault were a structuralist (as he was often accused of being in his early work), he might posit that there exists at any time a coherent and organized “discourse” with a clearly defined center that operates below the level of conscious awareness and anywhere and everywhere determines our

derives not only from its ability to manipulate emotions, but also from its ability to create “illusions of the mind and delusions of judgment” which replace the complex and chaotic world in which we live with a false illusion of clarity

and order generated by words (p. 192). It was precisely this presumption that language has power (without necessarily being a bearer of

truth or virtue) that inspired the desire in Plato to identify a new center of order in the Forms. The work of Michel Foucault in many ways harkens back to the position of Gorgias, but with one major difference. Gorgias, as a Sophist, approached logos as a single persuasive act— an oration—that could overwhelm its listeners in the moment because of its sheer

thoughts, actions, and identities. In his words,

this approach would analyze “power from the point of view ofits internal rationality” and then would reveal how that rationality emanates throughout an entire structure (Foucault, 1994,

p. 129). However, as a post-structuralist, Foucault rejects the idea that any discourse operates according to the dictates of some internal rationality that is always coherent and consistent. Although he argues that “power relations

persuasiveness. Foucault, in contradistinction,

are rooted in the whole network of the social,”

is more interested in logos as a discourse whose power is not located in a single act but a whole network of strategies and relations that func-

this is “not to say, however, that there is a primary and fundamental principle of power which dominates society down to the smallest

tions to organize societies, cultures, and insti-

detail” (p. 141). Rather, “the forms and the spe-

tutions. As Foucault explains in his essay “The Subject and Power,” his goal has not been to study specific texts in order to show how it attains power over specific audiences, as might a Sophist; rather his objective “has been to

cific situations of the government of some by others in any given society are multiple; they are superimposed, they cross over, limit andin some cases annul, in others reinforce, one another”

(p. 141). Consistent with post-structuralist

POST-STRUCTURALISM

presumptions, there are always multiple centers in any system of power relations and struc-

tures of discourse. Moreover, “every power relationship implies, at least in potentia, a strategy of struggle, in which the two forces

are not superimposed, do not lose their specific nature, or do not become fully confused”

(p. 142). Power thus always stands in relationship to some form ofresistance with which it is struggling. The relationship between communication and power in Foucault is thus not simply a matter of analyzing speech acts and determining their immediate persuasive effects. It is a matter of studying, in any given society, the relationship among power relations, relationships of communication, and objective capacities. By objective capacities, Foucault means “the field of things, of perfected technique, work, and the transformation of the real”

through some combination of physical activity

and technological force (Foucault, 1994, p. 13S). Legs and arms have objective capacity, as do automobiles, telephones, weapons,

«

1315

power. However, a casual threat made against another person—using communication to

make clear one's possession of objective capacity and the willingness to use it for violence— may act upon future actions by making them do or not do certain things in the awareness of what might happen to them. Similarly, laws combined with police enforcement and surveillance allow a state to exert power not by directly arresting a criminal but rather by regulating the possible actions of an entire population and making them “subject” to the law. The study of communication must therefore be situated within these complex relations between communication, power, and objective capaci-

ties in order to understand its unique function. The method that Foucault proposes to study communication is based on what he calls a “new economy of power relations, a way that is more empirical, more directly related to our present situation, and one that implies more relations between theory and practice” (Foucault, 1994, p. 128). In this new economy of power relations, old methods of studying com-

and cameras. By relationships of communica-

munication as individual speech acts, either

tion, he means “that of signs, communication,

by intentional agents in discreet situations or

reciprocity, and the production of meaning” that arises through the sharing of signs and which allows two or more people to understand

ternal rationality of some political party, ide-

one another's purposes, goals, meanings, identities, emotions, or beliefs (p. 135). Power

relations then are restricted to mean “the domination of the means of constraint, of inequity

and the action of men upon other men’ (p. 13S). Specifically, Foucault means by power “a mode of action that does not act directly and immediately on others,” but rather “acts upon their actions: an action upon an action, on possible or actual future or present actions” (p. 137). Power thus “is a set of actions on possible ac-

as a systematic structural inquiry into the inology, institution, state, or social movement,

are largely rejected—the former because it isolates the speech act from its larger context of power relations and strategies and the latter because it imposes a structural rationality on a constantly changing and decentered structure. Instead, research “consists in taking the forms of resistance against different forms of power asa starting point,’ using “this resistance as a chemical catalyst so as to bring to light power relations, locate their position, find out

their point of application and the methods

tions; it incites, it induces, it seduces, it makes

used” (p. 128). In other words, the study of

easier or more difficult” (p. 138). For instance, the physical abuse of another individual is an application of objective capacity, not of

power first requires some specific act of resistance in order to then study how power is exercised upon that resistance at a specific

1316

Ȣ

POST-STRUCTURALISM

point, using these observations as material to trace out “power relations through the an-

goal is not to understand any particular individual, event, or speech act but rather to use

tagonism of strategies” as they emerge (pp.

these as material to understand the power re-

128-129). For instance, instead of simply looking at the speech acts of an individual (Paris) as he attempts to persuade a specific audience (Helen), the flight of Helen to Troy would be seen as an act ofresistance that set in motion

a whole sequence of power relations in the aristocracy of Greece culminating in the campaign against Troy. The entire structure of the Iliad—particularly insofar as it dramatizes the way in which the characters negotiate their own subjectivities as women and men ina time of war—would thus be a more appropriate artifact for post-structural analysis than any single speech by Paris. The study of communication within this system thus always situates our thoughts, actions, and utterances within a network of power

relations and confrontation strategies that often strive for stability and yet cannot ever eliminate what he calls “the free play of antagonistic reactions” (Foucault, 1994, p. 142). And the goal of such research is not to study how specific choices are made but how general subjectivities are formed and resisted. For instance, in the study of educational institutions, one might look at how

lations of the entire system. And consistent with the ethics of post-structuralism gener-

ally, the end goal of this type of inquiry would be to “liberate us both from the state and from the type of individualization linked to the state,’ thus promoting “new forms of sub-

jectivity through the refusal of this kind of individuality that has been imposed on us for several centuries” (p. 134). As with all poststructuralist endeavors, Foucault seeks to reveal the possibilities of freedom and free

play within a structure that seeks to cover up these possibilities and limit novelty to a safe zone surrounding an identifiable center. CONCLUSION

Although post-structuralism by its very nature as a set of attitudes denies any attempt at comprehensive definition, this brief analysis of three works by three major post-structuralist thinkers identifies at least three important consequences for the study of communication. First, following Derrida, post-structuralist thought invites a critical deconstruction of any discourse which presents itselfascompletely coherent, centered, and rational. Post-structuralist

activity to ensure learning and the acquisition of aptitudes or types of behavior works via a whole ensemble of regulated

approaches thus do not argue against a position by harnessing counterarguments drawing on a

communications (lessons, questions and answers, orders, exhortations, coded signs of obedience, differential marks of the

occupies that discourse and exposes the gaps,

‘value’ of each person and of the levels of knowledge) and by means of a whole series of power processes (enclosure, surveillance, reward and punishment, the pyramidal hierarchy) which in turn rely on the possession and use of certain technical capacities (buildings, cameras, busses, computers)

(p. 136). The

different discourse. Rather, post-structuralism

contradictions, paradoxes, and deferments that reveal its established hierarchies, bina-

ries, logical conclusions, and principles to be far more loosely structured and poly-vocal than it wishes to present itself. Second, following Barthes, post-structuralism refuses to locate any single point of origin of any text that can ground its meaning—in particular the ground of the author. Although not denying that writers exist, Barthes refuses to iden-

tify the meaning of a text with the author’s

POST-STRUCTURALISM

«

1317

biography and intentions and instead invites

contract) must be shattered in order to

multiple interpretations from the perspective of individual readers who encounter the text as a unique event. Therefore, just as discourses

give way to free play of negativity, need, desire, pleasure, and jouissance, before

themselves do not have a unified structure,

being put together again, although temporarily and with full knowledge of what

neither do individual texts. Lastly, following

is involved. (p. 230)

Fouacult, post-structuralism invites an inquiry into how discourses, texts, and acts of com-

munication are always implicated in relations

of power that act upon possible actions. Following the first two propositions, struc-

turalism does not analyze these relations of power as completely structured and determinate, however. Power relations are always within a dynamic relationship to acts of resistance, thereby constantly leaving space for freedom and possibility. From this perspective of post-structuralism, one can see its resonance with the sophistical attitudes of Gorgias, for whom lan-

Gorgias anticipated this sort of ethics in his Encomium ofHelen when he attempted to upend traditional Greek characterizations of her immoral character simply for the pleasure in doing so. Post-structuralist thought invites this attitude toward all established discourses wherever they are found in a celebration of constant transgression and unlimited possibility.

DISCUSSION

OF THE LITERATURE

In communication

and rhetorical studies,

post-structuralism came to have an impact be-

guage is on the one hand a vehicle for power but on the other hand always contingent, relative, playful, and open to possibility. The

Early essays on structuralism and French thought

Sophists, of course, did not have a modern

Warnick (1979), Harvey (1985), and Harlos

understanding of structure. This is why it is anachronistic to call Gorgias a post-structuralist despite his echoing some of its attitudes. Post-structuralism moves beyond the Sophists insofar as it looks at all speech acts from the point of view of a decentered structure that is but one of many in a diverse global environ-

by Biesecker (1989; 1992), Blair (1992), Charland (1991), Cooper (1988), Desilet (1991), Ellis (1991), Foss and Gill (1987), Hariman (1991), McKerrow (1989), Ono and Sloop (1992), Sholle (1988), Rahim (1989),

ment. Also, the Sophists, while cosmopolitan for their day, nonetheless widely accepted

Greek norms as universal. In modern poststructuralism, all of this is called in question. Julia Kristeva (2000) gives us a succinct sum-

mary of the ethical implications of poststructuralist thought. She writes that ethics used to be a coercive, customary manner of ensuring the cohesiveness of a particular group through the repetition of the code—a more or less accepted apologue. Now, however, the issue of ethics

crops up wherever a code (mores, social

ginning in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

appeared by Sanders (1981), Hall (1985), (1986). But it was within a few years that essays

and Zulick (1991) established the language

and attitudes of post-structuralism in communication. Since then, post-structuralist themes have emerged in work in communica-

tion by Crick (2014), Dahlberg (2014), Dillon (2000), Dow (1995), Greenberg (2002), McNamara (2012), and Posner (2011). Many post-structuralist notions that were controversial in the 1990s have now become established

discourses in the 21st century. PRIMARY

SOURCES

The main post-structuralist theorists and works include those of Barthes (1972, 1975, 1977),

1318

+

POST-STRUCTURALISM

Baudrillard (1981, 1988a, 1988b), Bourdieu (1977, 1984), Butler (1990), Deleuze (1987, 1990), Deleuze and Guattari (1983), Derrida (1976, 1978, 1991, 1992, 1994, 2007), Foucault

(1970, 1972, 1980, 1984, 1990), Kristeva (1986, 2000), Lacan (1977), Latour, (1987), Lévinas (1969, 1981 ),Lyotard (1984, 1988, 1989), Nancy (1991), and Serres (2007).

FURTHER

READING

For basic introductions, one can draw from re-

views by Belsey (2002), Palmer (2007), and Sarup (1993).

Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the

subversion of identity. New York, NY: Routledge. Caws, P. (1988). Structuralism: The art of the intelli-

gible. London, UK: Humanities Press International.

Charland, M. (1991). Finding a horizon and telos. The challenge to critical rhetoric. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 77, 71-74. Cooper, M. (1988). Rhetorical criticism and Foucault's philosophy of discursive events. Central States Speech Journal, 39, 1-17. Crick, N. (2014). Rhetoric and events. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 47, 281-272.

Dahlberg, L. (2014). The Habermasian public sphere and exclusion: An engagement with poststructuralist-influenced critics. Communication Theory, 24, 21-41.

Deleuze, G. (1987). A thousand plateaus. Minneapolis: REFERENCES

Barthes, R. (1972). Mythologies. New York, NY: Hill and Wang. Barthes, R. (1975). The pleasure of the text. New York, NY: Hill and Wang. Barthes, R. (1977). Image-music-text (S. Heath, Ed.). New York, NY: Hill and Wang.

Baudrillard,J. (1981). For a critique ofthe political economy ofthe sign (C. Levin, Trans.). Saint Louis, MO: Telos. Baudrillard,J.(1988a). America (C. Turner, Trans.). London, UK: Verso. Baudrillard, J. (1988b). Jean Baudrillard: Selected writings (M. Poster, Ed.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Belsey, C. (2002). Post-structuralism: A very short introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Biesecker, B. (1989). Rethinking the rhetorical situation from within the thematic of difference. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 22, 110-130. Biesecker, B. (1992). Michel Foucault and the question

ofrhetoric. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 25, 351-364. Blair, C. (1992). Contested histories of rhetoric. The politics of preservation, progress, and change. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 78, 403-428. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of

the judgment of taste (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

University of Minnesota Press. Deleuze, G. (1990). The Logic of Sense (M. Lester & C. Stivale, Trans.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1983). Anti-Oedipus. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Derrida, J. (1976). Of grammatology (G. C. Spivak,

Ed.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Derrida, J. (1978). Writing and difference (A. Bass, Trans.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Derrida, J. (1991). A Derrida reader (P. Kampuf, Ed.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Derrida, J. (1992). Acts of literature (D. Attridge, (Ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. Derrida, J. (1994). Specters ofMarx: The state of the debt, the work ofmourning, and the new international (P. Kamuf, Trans.). New York, NY: Routledge. Derrida, J. (2007). Jacques Derrida: Basic writings (B. Stocker, Ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. Desilet, G. (1991). Heidegger and Derrida: The conflict between hermeneutics and deconstruction in the context of rhetorical and communication theory. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 77, 182-175. Dillet, B., Porter, R., & Mackenzie, I. (Eds.). (2013). The Edinburgh companion to post-structuralism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Dillon, M. (2000). Post-structuralism, complexity and poetics. Theory, Culture, and Society, 17, 1-26. Dow, B. J. (1995). Feminism, difference(s), and rhetorical studies. Communication Studies, 46, 106-117.

POST-STRUCTURALISM

Ellis, D. G. (1991). Post-structuralism and language. Non-sense. Communication Monographs, 58, 213-224.

Foss, S. K., & Gill, A. (1987). Michel Foucault’s theory of rhetoric as epistemic. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 51, 384-401. Foucault, M. (1970). The order ofthings: An archaeology of the human sciences. London, UK: Tavistock.

Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge (S. Smith, Trans.). New York, NY: Pantheon Books. Foucualt, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977 (C. Gordon, Ed.). New York, NY: Pantheon. Foucault, M. (1984). The Foucault reader (P. Rabinow, Ed.). New York, NY: Pantheon.

Foucault, M. (1990). The history ofsexuality. Vol. 2: The uses of pleasure (R. Hurley, Trans.). New York, NY: Vintage.

Foucault, M. (1994). The subject and power. In P. Rabinow & N. Rose (Eds.), Essential Foucault:

Selections from the essential works of Foucault (pp. 126-144). New York, NY: The New Press. Gorgias. (199Sa). Encomium of Helen. In M. Gagarin

& P. Woodruff (Eds.), Early Greek political thought from Homer

to the sophists (pp. 190-195).

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Gorgias. (199Sb). On not being. In M. Gagarin &

P. Woodruff (Eds.), Early Greek political thought from Homer to the sophists (pp. 207-209). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Greenberg, G. S. (2002). CBQ review essay: Poststructuralism and communication: A review of the literature, 1990-2001. Communication Booknotes

Quarterly, 33, 150-163. Hall, S. (1985). Signification, representation, ideology. Althusser and the post-structuralist debates. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 2, 91-114.

Hariman, R. (1991). Critical rhetoric and postmodern theory. Quarterly Journal ofSpeech, 77,67—70. Harlos, C. (1986). Rhetoric, structuralism, and figurative discourse. Gerard Genette’s concept of thetoric. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 19, 209-223.

Harvey, I. E. (1985). Contemporary French thought and the art of rhetoric. Philosophy and Rhetoric,

18, 199-215. Kristeva, J. (1986). The Kristeva reader (T. Moi, Ed.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

¢

1319

Kristeva, J. (2000). The ethics of linguistics. In

D. Lodge & N. Wood (Eds.), Modern criticism and theory: A reader (pp. 230-239). Harlow, UK: Pearson.

Lacan,J. (1977). Ecrits: Selections (A. Sheridan, Trans.). New York, NY: Norton. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Lévinas, E. (1969). Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority (A. Lingis, Trans.). Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press. Lévinas, E. (1981). Otherwise than being: Or beyond essence (A. Lingis, Trans.). Boston, MA: Nijhoff. Lévi-Strauss, C. (1967). Language and the analysis

of social laws. In C. Jacobson & B. G. Schoepf

(Eds.), Structural anthropology. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Lyotard, J. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge (G. Bennington and B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Lyotard, J. (1988). The differend: Phrases in dispute (G. Abbeele, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Lyotard, J. (1989). The Lyotard reader (A. Benjamin, Ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

McComiskey, B. (2002). Gorgias and the new sophistic rhetoric. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. McKerrow,

R. (1989). Critical rhetoric: Theory

and praxis. Communication

Monographs,

S6,

91-111.

McNamara, T. (2012). Post-structuralism and its challenges for applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 33, 473-482.

Nancy, J. (1991). The inoperative community (P. Connor, L. Garbus, M. Holland, & S. Sawhney,

Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Ono, K. A., & Sloop, J. M. (1992). Commitment to telos—A sustained critical rhetoric. Communication Monographs, 59, 48-60.

Palmer, D. D. (2007). Structuralism and post-structuralism for beginners, Westminster, MD: For Beginners Books.

Posner, R. (2011). Post-modernism, post-structuralism, post-semiotics? Sign theory at the fin de siécle. Semiotica, 183, 9-30.

1320

-«

POST-TRUTH

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

Rahim, S. A. (1989). Post-structuralist concepts in cul-

industrial and postindustrial; traditional and

ture and communication. Communication Yearbook,

post-traditional). It is sometimes interpreted

12, 427-434.

as a time beyond, after or without truth, which

Sanders, R. E. (1981). The interpretation of discourse. Communication Quarterly, 29, 209-217. de Saussure, F. (1989). Course in general linguistics.

La Salle, IL: Open Court. Sarup, M. (1993). An introductory guide to post-

structuralism and postmodernism. New York, NY: Pearson Education. Serres, M. (2007). Parasite. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Sholle, D. J. (1988). Critical studies: From the theory of ideology to power/knowledge. Critical Studies

in Mass Communication, S, 16-41.

Warnick, B. (1979). Structuralism vs. phenomenology.

Implications

for rhetorical

criticism.

Quarterly Journal of Speech, 65, 250-261. Weaver, R. M. (1985). The ethics of rhetoric. Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press.

Williams, J. (2014). Understanding post-structuralism. New York, NY: Routledge.

Zulick, M. D. (1991). Pursuing controversy: Kristeva’s split subject, Bakhtin’s many-tongued world. Argumentation and Advocacy, 27, 91-102. Nathan A. Crick

POST-TRUTH AND CRITICAL COMMUNICATION

could not be farther from the truth. Posttruth’s historical and cultural aspect related to shifting power relations and strategies make it an especially fertile subject for critical communication study. How can PT be empirically known? It can be recognized in constant discursive obsession with and accusation of dishonesty, especially lying, and by the public anxiety and distrust it generates. It lies in the frequency and volume of the increasing amounts of labor to produce and attempt to debunk or clarify inaccurate or deceptive statements, the proliferation of “fact-checking” and rumor or hoax debunking businesses lies in the Cherubini,

organizations, usually individual or wings of news organizations; it market for them, too (Graves & 2016). It lies in numerous interna-

tional surveys measuring distrust (of multiple institutions and actors). It lies ina culture

saturated with artifice and promotionalism. It lies in the material impact of false or intentionally misleading claims and the emotionalized public opinion they generate, from demands to and then release of a president’s full birth certificate, to rumors of a candidate’s child sex slavery ring in a Washington, DC, pizza

parlor, resulting in armed confrontation. It

Post-truth (PT) is a periodizing concept (Green, 1995; Besserman, 1998) that refers to a histor-

ically particular public anxiety about public truth claims and authority to be a legitimate public truth-teller. However, the term is po-

tentially misleading for at least two major reasons. First, it pertains to two different but

related forms of truth: honesty, on the one hand, and factuality and knowledge (justified belief), on the other. Second, PT presents

definitional problems similar to other grand periodizing concepts (e.g, modernity and modernism, postmodernity and postmodernism;

lies in the documentation of politics and business built around the deception of artifi-

cial intelligence (bots), whose armies present the mirage of popularity or of supporters who sear their targets with brands of repugnance and chimerical flaws. It also lies in the industry of political consulting (now heavily informed by cognitive science and big data analytics, corresponding to emotionally pinpointed, demographically microtargeted influence strategies and practices). These are a few of the ways that one empirically encounters what is being named as PT, though scholars

POST-TRUTH

are only beginning to provide the important critical analytical and theoretical work to explain how it is shot through with power relations and struggles.

CRITICAL THEORETICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRECEDENTS Overall, while some themes and a tradition of

critique toward authoritative truth claims from the Enlightenment to its critics in Marxism and postmodernism are consistent with many aspects of PT sociopolitical conditions and theory, they differ in major ways with regard to who or what is the subject and

object of (dis-)trust in the authority to (re-)present truth and use it for political purposes. They also differ greatly in their explanations for shifts in dynamics of authority, trust, and truth-telling/-believing, PT being closely associated with cognitive scientific, technological,

and ethical explanations.

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

«

1321

political, religious, aesthetic or philosophic’—

while those forms are also the stuff of great illusionists (Marx, 1978, p. 5; Williams, 1976,

p. 156). In addition, the Marxist critique of reason and Enlightenment issuing from the Frankfurt School, with a heavy emphasis on the role of entertainment culture and 20th-century media technology, anticipates some PT themes. Horkheimer and Adornos influential Dialectic of Enlightenment posited that “culture industries” served the colonization of reason (including science) for capitalist exploitation, and anodyne mass media contents largely served a broad veil of socioeconomic

deception, a

point developed by Guy Debord in Society of the Spectacle (see also Edelman, 1988, 2001). However, PT has a particularly political, informational, and rhetorical emphasis less

central to these earlier critical theories. What is more, those previous accounts broadly viewed the category of masses (the majority

Enlightenment thought, in both its ration-

of citizen-consumers, nonelite without great

alist and empiricist strands, critiqued power-

policy decision-making power) as passive to the realities reported and views offered by news media and political figures. Post-truth, in stark

ful traditional institutions

of truth-telling,

which it viewed as highly superstitious, yet having a monopoly on means to enforce their theories and (rationally indefensible) truth

claims. Their targets of critique ranged from the relationship ofreligious truth to theories of human potential for thinking and political practice associated with critiques of mon-

contrast, emphasizes discord, confusion, polarized views, and understanding, well- and misinformed competing convictions, and elite at-

tempts to produce and manage these “truth markets” or competitions. In PT, the idea is not that lay citizens see the world falsely

archy and aristocratic class systems (Bristow,

through the ideology of ruling-class thinkers,

2017; Israel, 2001). In its questioning and politicizing of repre-

but that “popular” conceptions of reality have become confusing or suspicious because of the saturation of reality representation with games of expertly researched and thus exclusive strategic deception—of pan-partisan nature. This is an instrumentalization of

sentations of reality, the Marxist tradition of ideological critique also resonates with PT theory and the world that it describes. This tradition, which runs through influential theorists such as Louis Althusser, Roland Barthes, Stuart Hall, and Slavoj Zizek, among

others, takes as a starting point Marx's idea that people become aware of class conflict in capitalism through its broad cultural forms—‘legal,

representation, of reality given new media tech-

nologies of surveillance and emotional message targeting as never before. While there may be points of intersection, the overall driving questions, material conditions that

1322

-

POST-TRUTH

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

surround them (not the least media technological and economic ones), and sets of

power relations cannot be rigorously viewed as identical. Jurgen Habermas's historical account of the structural transformation of the bourgeois public sphere (1989), despite the many

criticisms of it, also has several key ideas that remain pertinent to theories and critiques of PT. The most important is his account of reason and public deliberation being gradually colonized by the state and staged in news media, offered for public opinion for-

mation without deliberation by citizens who would identify the issues or problems in the first place. Habermas warned of professional political communication and polling that elites used to legitimate their hold on power through the production of public opinion. As with other precursors, from ideology critique to postmodern theory, the structural transformation of the public sphere is an important predecessor but does not capture the different historical facets of the PT condition and its analyses.

Postmodernism. Despite some claims that PT politics and society are the product of postmodern theory (McIntyre, 2018), PT

only shares with it a general concern about knowledge, truth, and reality. Regarding common themes, some aspects of Jean Baudrillard’s critical theory resonate more strongly with PT, especially Baudrillard’s notion, similar to Debord's “spectacle,” that social life and subjectivity had become consumed by a techno-consumerist flood of images, simulations and hyper-reality, more real than reality (and having no necessary relationship to it) (1983). Baudrillard’s position that “illusion is the fundamental rule” resonates with PT (2001). However, his theory of causation does not stress problems of competing trust, authority, bias, political

polarization, algorithmically customized experiences with perceptual and epistemic repercussions and other topics at the heart of PT conditions and theory. Nor is there across work labeled postmodern, with rare exceptions, anything like the contemporary influence of the cognitive or neurosciences in PT. For example, the neuro-

philosophical turn associated with Antonio Damasio and colleagues comes in the 1990s (Damasio’s Descartes’ Error, 1994), and has only more recently come to have interdisciplinary and increasingly broad public impact. Differences between PT and postmodern thought are more pronounced yet when considering PT as a condition.

A POST-TRUTH CONDITION?

Speaking of a PT condition echoes Lyotard’s influential “report on knowledge,” The Postmodern Condition (1979) and recalls its consequent public intellectual and academic panic; however, Lyotard’s focus was more on shifts regarding overarching narra-

tives that justified knowledge claims (knowledge authorized by the Enlightenment’s residual “grand narratives” of progress, science, Marxism, and so forth). Lyotard em-

phasized the collapse of these metanarratives associated with a modern period, and the proliferation of less ambitious, nontotalizing explanations and justifications for knowledge (petits récits). In contrast, a PT condition is not simply about the fragmentation of justifying stories for truth claims, but one beset by suspicion of truth-tellers as dishonest. Post-truth especially refers to a sociopolitical condition perceived as rifer than ever before with dishonesty and distrust, inaccuracies or false knowledge,

all corresponding to a crisis of shared trusted adjudicating authorities. Systematic deception

POST-TRUTH

and lack of authority are furthermore reproduced by and contribute to a problem of dis-

trust (Stoker, 2017, pp. 35-36). In sum, the public problems for which PT is shorthand are epistemic (false knowledge, competing truth claims); fiduciary (distrust of society-wide authoritative truth-tellers, trust in micro-truth-

tellers); and ethicomoral

(conscious disre-

gard for factual evidence—bullshitting— or intentional, strategic falsehoods/lying—

dishonesty), the latter of which is often bracketed or abstracted into institutional logics of

political strategy (Harding, 2008). Citizen-audiences are fragmented in liberal democracies (Napoli, 2011 ),where thanks es-

pecially to competing truths and truth-tellers or prevalent nondialogue between them, political polarization ensues (Doherty, Kiley, & Johnson, 2017). Contemporary liberal democracies are said to lack common

authorities,

discourses, and institutions that may eftectively suture these competing knowledges and authorities and reform populations into national identities that necessarily supersede partisan and ideological particularities (McCoy & McEvers, 2017). It is not farfetched then to

speak of PT as a potential twilight of the stable liberal democratic nation-state and institutions that held it together, which partly explains the heightened discourse of panic from some quarters of popular politics and academia (Bennett & Livingston, 2018). THE GROWTH OF POST-TRUTH IN POPULAR AND ACADEMIC DISCOURSE

Post-truth appears to have first been used in academic and public discourse in the early

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

.

1323

refers. In The Post-Truth Era, Ralph Keyes

argued mass dishonesty had arrived. The same year, in his book When Presidents Lie (2004), Eric Alterman coined the term “post-

truth presidency,” with reference to the Bush II presidency. The following year, 2005, the Princeton philosopher Harry Frankfurt published a best-selling book On Bullshit, the latter of which, unlike lying, he said, demon-

strated a simple disregard for the factuality of one’s truth claims. It was originally published as an essay in 1986 but attracted renewed interest in the new political and media context of the early 21st century. Like 2004, 2012 was a major year for reflections on the crisis of truth and facts. James Fallows wrote about the “Post-truth media,” while Farhad Manjoo,

later a New York Times technology columnist, announced the arrival of “post-fact society” in True Enough.’ All of these seminal popular works emphasized rampant lying as the primary driver of PT politics and society. However, critical communication scholars have identified other forces at work in the production of PT.’ There has been a recent outpouring of communication research on PT, almost entirely from quantitative methodological approaches, reflecting what some critical communication researchers describe as a neopositivist dominance in the field (Fuchs, 2017). These studies usually originate from well-funded quantitative and big-data-centered institutes and think tanks, government (e.g., the EU), or, alternately, from an experimental methodological individualist side, cross-fertilizing with cognitive science

(cognitive biases, motivated

reasoning, etc.). While the studies provide important empirical data, deeper theorization is scarce, critical theorization even scarcer

1990s, but its use increased 2,000% between

(e.g., see Kavanagh & Rich, 2018; European

2015 and 2016 (Oxford Dictionaries, n.d.). Two popular American books from 2004 drew attention to the anxiety about public trust and knowledge to which PT now commonly

Commission, 2018). These studies frequently end up reproducing a kind of panicked realism, nostalgia for the mass communication age, especially for journalistic gatekeeping,

1324

-«

POST-TRUTH

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

and result in prognostic guides for media literacy and journalistic fact-checking. The few critical communication treatments of PT point to more complex historical and structural explanations, and thus solutions.° Critical scholarly attention to shifts in public knowledge or belief and trust have been developing since the turn of the millennium (though their citational practices show that they often

developed unbeknownst of one another). John Hartley was perhaps first to have employed PT in the communication field, in his book The

Politics of Pictures (1992a), and he also proposed the idea of journalism as a truth “regime”

Colbert's satirical coinage “truthiness,’ what is felt to be true (Jones, 2009). However, thus

far, the scholarly emphasis on truth, media and politics, dominant and subjugated knowledges and power did not identify a conjunctural shift with regard to public truth and trust and had not begun to explore in depth the multiple, converging mechanisms behind such a thesis. The Bush II administration’s propaganda apparatus and confusion around Iraq—alQaeda links and Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction was also a turning point for early PT scholarship. Scholars began to theorize cultural shifts issuing from causal syner-

in Tele-ology (1992b). However, he necessarily

gies (Harsin, 2006; Jones, 2009). Jones saw

refers to a specific mass broadcast era— certainly pre-Web 2.0 and in most places preInternet (1992a, p. 137). He nonetheless anticipates later PT theory by focusing on blurring of fact/fiction boundaries in popular media (namely, television). While a regime generates and polices boundaries between fact and fiction (not the least in journalistic professional codes; he cites the Australian Journalists

truthiness as emblematic of a shift from a journalistic regime of truth, based on “truth in fact,” to one where a mix of groups (citizens, politicians, journalists, satirists) creates

“believable fictions.” He drew on a notion of “truth in essence,’ which pervaded a range of popular media forms (see also Jones & Baym, 2010).* These scholars stressed the waning of

journalism’s privileged institutional role as

Association), hierarchies of truth and regimes are contested. Publishing and TV, he argues, are “incommensurate regimes of truth” (1992b,

truth-teller or mediator; its role was contested and, by default, shared—which resulted in lib-

p. 46).

ical establishment, and academia.

Scholars in the 1990s had begun to discuss popular culture in the context of legitimate and illegitimate knowledges as well as trust in authority, dramatized by TV series such as the X-Files (Bellon, 1999; Lavery, Hague, & Cartwright, 1996). Working on the popular fascination with “conspiracy culture,’ Dean (1998) was already speaking of American society as characterized by “fugitive truth” at the turn of the 21st century. A small group of scholars continued to pursue questions of popular knowledges and politics through Foucault’s concepts of truth regimes and subjugated

Other scholars placed far more causal emphasis on digital technology and how especially right-wing political actors used it in tandem with populist emotional rhetorical styles and the attempt to discredit institu-

eral democratic panic, in journalism, the polit-

tions and experts (Van Zoonen, 2012). Van

Zoonen described a new “i-pistemology,’ where questions of knowledge are approached “from

the basis of I (as in me, myself) and Identity, with the Internet as the great facilitator” (2012,

p. 60). Harsin (2014, 2015, 2018) expanded

spiracy theory and gossip (Birchall, 2006;

the theory that truth regimes embedded in a digital capitalist attention/information economy were in such conflict or competition that “truth markets” (profit-seeking partisan in-

Bratich, 2008) as well as through Stephen

formation brokers, on the one hand; and

knowledges, with particular emphasis on con-

POST-TRUTH

rumor debunking and fact-checking businesses from Snopes.com to the Washington Post, on the other) were proposed within an emergent regime of PT (see also Mukherjee, 2017).

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

.

1325

Post-truth is thus not simply about lies and false beliefs but also, perhaps even especially, about confusion amid a surfeit of information and influential appeals, the difficulty in discerning one from the other, the constant

POST-TRUTH MISINFORMS AND DISINFORMS: RUMOR BOMBS, FAKE NEWS, AND LIES

Post-truth appears through a repertoire of forms bearing political (mis-)use of false statements or a disregard for or misrecognition of facts,

and a corresponding false belieforconfusion (Andersen, 2017; Ingraham, 2016). While the larger cultural precondition, a widespread distrust of institutions that could be respected as truth-tellers across a wide ideological audience spectrum, will be explored more in-depth momentarily, one can first say that PT is associated with several major types of communication, statements or narratives, all of which are sub-

selective use and presentation of information and appeals for strategic political (and business) ends, and the incessant public disputes about what is (in-)accurate and (dis-)honest. Some inaccurate statements of fact are made innocently, if unethically and cavalierly (ie, what is called bullshit, without regard for knowledge of true or false [Frankfurt, 2005 ]).

But a great deal of it is deliberate, strategically aimed at disinforming as a way to manage opponents and/or govern by capturing attention. Analytically speaking, the forms PT takes are often not well distinguished. Lies, rumors,

fake news, spin, propaganda are used synonymously. Much of what is perceived as PT

commercial communication (advertising and

communication is a form of two general categories of communication (in lieu of simple information, which never appears without a communication context): disinformation and misinformation. Stahl (2010) explains a common distinction between misinformation and disinformation (though some tend

public relations). All can be said to be forms of

to interchange the two).

classes of deceptive communication: misinformation, fake news, rumor bombs, and lying. Disinformation, rumor bombs, and fake news have mass communication era antecedents in

both war and security (gray propaganda) and

strategic communication

and not mere acci-

dental or innocent misstatements of facts. Deliberate misstatement (disinformation) is hard to prove definitively, yet one can assume that many ambiguous, misleading, or partly false political statements are deliberate, given the fact that this genre of communication is

highly professionalized and mediatized (Serazio, 2017). These strategic misstatements or inno-

Misinformation, on the one hand, is the

spreading of inaccurate or false information

while mistakenly thinking one is sharing accurate information

(in reality, the person or

organization spreading it is misinformed). On the other hand, disinformation is seen as de-

liberately spreading false or inaccurate information. In practice, the two are closely linked. One can spread a false statement that

cent misstatements that attract receptive au-

one took to be true, which was originally

diences then generate a political economic response by journalism and new businesses in fact-checking and rumor debunking (sup-

produced to misinform. Disinformers may produce misinformers. In terms of ethics, in-

which is why they may be understood liter-

tention and effect, misinform corresponds to inaccuracy, a false statement, but not a falsehood. If the recipient of misinformation be-

ally as truth markets (Harsin, 2015).

lieves it, takes it as fact or true, then he or she

ported by advertising or, less often, donors),

1326

«

POST-TRUTH

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

is misinformed but not manipulated for strategic ends of the misinformer. Disinformation, however, is closer to lying, as both are dishon-

est. The producer of disinformation knowingly utters falsehoods, not just false statements. In between, perhaps, is the bullshitter, who, according to Frankfurt’s influential account,

makes statements that may be false; the point is that he/she does not care (2005). Rumor Bombs. While deliberate rumors (just like lies) in politics are ancient, the fact that they have become core issues with clear effects in public culture appears new, if not unprecedented. No US president before Obama felt forced to release his long-form birth certificate in response to constantly weaponized rumors that he was not born in the United States; the rumor was used to “bomb”

the news agenda and preoccupy Obama's communication professionals to respond defensively. The fact that majorities do not believe it is all the more proof ofits efficacy (Dimock,

July 1S, 2008). Influential in the history of rumor scholarship, Shibutani (1966) argued that rumors were “improvised news,” a nonprofessional form of news-telling in conditions of information scarcity. However, in 2lstcentury media and politics, rumors flourish in

the opposite condition: information overload

(Andrejevic, 2013), fragmentation of attention, and decline of culture-wide authorities

or truth-tellers (Harsin, 2006, 2014, 2015). Political rumors were thriving in contemporary conditions marked by a public knowl-

edge (epistemic) and trust (fiduciary) crisis. Yet, they were not traditional rumors. Rumor bombs correspond to fake news and strategic political communication developments, which helped distinguish them from simple rumors and as a counterpart to other contemporary

Rumor bombs referred to the core definition of rumor as a statement whose veracity is unknown or unprovable and to communication bombs as longtime forms of information warfare migrating from military to politics as “war by other means” (Caplow, 1947). Iraq—alQaeda links, John Kerry lied about Vietnam, Obama is a Muslim, and former French

President Francois Hollande was supported by over 700 mosques—all are rumor bombs

professionally operationalized in popular po-

litical struggles (Conason, 2004; Kessler, 2014; Harsin, 2018a).

Rumor bombs normally differ from fake news in the sense that rumors may turn out to

be true. Fake news is false news, though its

core propositions may be contextualized by facts (for example, Hillary Clinton is a real person, and Comet Ping Pong is a real pizzeria in Washington, DC, neither fact of which makes true the associated false claim that she ran a child sex slavery ring in the basement of the said pizzeria). Furthermore, rumor bombs tend to use deliberately ambiguous or strategically polysemic claims to generate not just belief but conflict and disagreement or debate. For example, what does “links” mean in the claim there were Iraq—al-Qaeda “links” or “ties”? The claim may be more influential when “links” is not defined and left to the audience's imagination. A rumor bomb may be accompanied by a story, attempting to provide evidence for the core claim. That evidence usually is not fake; it is just an example of poor reasoning: Obama’s name is not Christian; he has been

photographed in what appears to be Muslim clothing; therefore, Obama is Muslim. The

conflict and disagreement that rumor bombs produce in turn produces confusion or disorientation—a structure of feeling deep in the core of PT.

communication bombs (google bombs and twitter bombs, for example, which were vari-

ous ways of “bombing” the field of attention).

Fake News. Fakenewsisaterm of American origin, whose first use appears briefly in 1992

POST-TRUTH

with regard to video news releases, news seg-

ments produced by public relations then broadcast by television news as content journalists had produced through reporting procedures (Rampton, 2005). It seems to have

had no regular public use before 1999, at which point it became associated with selfidentified comedy news shows, such as the Daily Show, Saturday Night Live’s Weekend Update, and The Colbert Report, which had origins in satirical “news” publications such as

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

1327

characterized by a core falsehood surrounded by factual statements or details. Reuters Digital News annual report for 2017 notes that “definitions of ‘fake news’ are fraught with difficulty and respondents frequently mix up three categories: (1) news that is ‘invented’ to make money or discredit others; (2) news

that has a basis in fact but is ‘spun’ to suit a particular agenda; and (3) news that people don't feel comfortable about or don’t agree with.” Meanwhile, the Oxford Institute for the

Study of Computational Propaganda defines

The Onioninthe United States (Harsin,2018a). By 2015S, it took on a globalizing negative twist

fake news as “misleading, deceptive or incor-

of connotations associated with PT, bound

rect information, purporting to be real news

up with geopolitical propaganda and artificial intelligence (AI), or “bots” (Chen, 2015;

about politics, economics or culture” (Hazard Owen, 2018). Though many definitions of fake news attribute an intent to deceive for political ends, some fake news producers have intent to deceive only to make money through the atten-

Riotta, 2017). In an even more recent global-

izing trend, “fake news” has become a popular ad hominem for discrediting any unfavorable news coverage or criticisms from opponents.

Fake news was deemed such an important recent cultural form of PT that it was named and then recognized as a 2017 word of the

tion and circulation the fake news receives,

year by Collins Dictionary (following PT as the Oxford Dictionary’s 2016 word of the year),

fects, through exploitation by more strategic partisans who aim to spread disinformation, may have a secondary level of effects, political ones—and the secondary agent may have no interest in financial profit. Conversely, some fake news producers originally aim to deceive only for political ends. Either way, news organizations, which legitimate the fake news by making it real news that titillates large audi-

in an infotaining development of dictionaries to self-promote by breaking a “word of the year” that generates discussion and profits (Flood, 2017). Fake news is, like rumor bombs, a sub-category of disinformation, alternately called “false news” and “junk news.” Unlike rumor bombs, fake news is not usually a mix of interpretive ambiguity and fact, but it includes core false statements (things that did not happen, that do not even exist), and there-

fore are sometimes wrongly referred to as lies. Consider also the difference between fake news and lies. One may assume that fake/false

news is at base mere lies. But a lie is, technically, a deliberately false statement (Mahon, 2016). A lie is not a series of statements, but fake news

suggests a story, an article, all statements contained in which are unlikely to all be false, as lies or inaccuracies. Fake news is often

even while it can have expected political effects (belief, confusion, agenda-setting). Those ef-

ences, will profit from it. American CBS news

executive Warren Moonves underlined this point when speaking about Trump's 2016 rumor-bombing candidacy: “It may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS”

(Bond, 2016; Pickard, 2017). Fake news is usually the presentation of new events where the event is presented as a discovery of something hitherto hidden (Obama's fake birth certificate allegations; al-

legations that Clinton sold weapons to ISIS). While in the era of citizen journalism, fake

1328

+»

POST-TRUTH

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

news could appear rather unadorned, thanks to easily accessible photo-editing software and web page templates, it may also appear in the style of news organizations with high production values, such as the New York Times, Le

Monde, and CNN. Mimicking the style of professional journalism is the way fake news produces its credibility for some audiences; it

is even reflected in web addresses (URLs), which imitate recognized news sites by inserting the words “news” or “report, or more

partisan-comforting brand names: worldnewsreport.com, winningdemocrats.com, conserva-

tivestate.com (McClain, 2017; Silverman, 2016).

Lying. All of these previously discussed forms of PT misinformation can contain lies. Yet there is a difference between them. What is lying? According to Mahon, “The most widely accepted definition of lying” is Isenberg’s: “a statement made by one who does not believe it with the intention that someone else shall be led to believe it” (Isenberg in Mahon, 2016). Post-truth is perhaps most saliently marked by an emphasis on lying, constant accusations of lying (without proof) and revelations of

the commonplaceness of dishonesty in the history of modern presidential communication and to signal something of a historic shift in the Bush regime. It is of little wonder that a public discourse heavy with accusations, perceptions, and documentations of lying could have effects on political trust and motivation.

Political communication and news practices and values have shifted in a way that favors even banalized lying, whereby “honesty is a novelty” (Corner & Pels, 2003, p. lL). The very conditions for being considered honest and truthful have been reconfigured thanks to processes of mediatization and celebrification in politics, the internalizing of entertainment genre expectations and values in their political performances as a perceived requirement for gaining attention.

Yet, while claims of increased lying appear constantly (Manjoo, 2008), it would be almost impossible to prove such claims convincingly. If PT’s forms can be recognized as having particular qualities, the question remains: what are the mechanisms that have brought it about now? It is argued that multiple agents syner-

lying (with convincing proof). While it is

gized more recently in ways previously not

nearly impossible to prove definitively that there are more lies or liars today than in the past, there is clearly an observable discourse

possible.

about lying, which claims that there are more,

that people perceive or feel there must be more, because there is also so much empiri-

cally verifiable distrust and documentable dishonesty (a quintessential example: fake news). In his book When Presidents Lie (2004), Eric Alterman discusses what he argues were major lies of US presidents from FDR to JFK, Johnson to Reagan. For the George W. Bush

FOUR SYNERGISTIC AGENTS

Thus, while aspects of PT communication and its context have existed before (if not always) new forces have converged with old, creating a

communications environment unlike anything seen before. Later theorists have referred to mediatization as a macro-category describing the way mediation has engulfed all institutions instead of, in the predigital mass com-

administration, Alterman coins the term “post-

munication era, these institutions having some

truth presidency” to describe the general mode of dishonesty that he saw pervading the quotidian White House communications. Alterman is correct both to emphasize

separation from media as an institution itself

(Couldry & Hepp, 2016; Hepp & Krotz, 2014, p. 2; Livingstone, 2009 ). Yet while the gen-

eral concepts of mediatization, hybrid media

POST-TRUTH

systems (Chadwick, 2013), or mixed media culture (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 1999) are useful starting points for thinking about the causes

of PT communication practices, critical approaches must further examine and theorize the historically and culturally specific mechanisms of PT within the new highly datafied capitalist

communication

structure.

Four

major historical agents synergistically structure PT communication forms and practices, while having particular national conjunctural specificities, themselves deeply mediating these changes. Face 1: Technology and Attention Economy(SpeedandCognition). Tech-

nology is treated as a category of influence here, but with important qualifications, since it does not exist outside political economic, cultural, and other contexts and forces. Consid-

erations of technological agency in PT production must include the fact that they do not exist free of human agency or goals. In fact, the digital mediascape is the grounds for

an economy embedded in communication technology as never before, which restructures

the way communication can be produced, circulated, used, and received. Strategic political

communication in PT is thus inevitably parasitic on and structured by attentional capitalism. Attentional habits are then structured through the programming of apps and plat-

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

.

1329

trust and truth (surveys showing little trust in digital platforms or the Internet generally, thus also suggesting users’ cynical disavowal). Mostly overlooked in the discussions of PT is the fact that the digital communication infrastructure, though identified by many citizens as a source of political news and means for political speech, is not designed to suit democratic political communication or trustworthy information but, rather, to suit recent forms of consumer capitalism, “the attention

economy.” In this sense the Internet, and especially social media, in places like the United States has quickly become economically structured in a way it took American broadcast journalism years to succumb to, as Marc Gunther noted in 1999: “Twenty years ago, there was no network news ‘business. The Big Three broadcast television networks—ABC, CBS and NBC—all covered news, but none gen-

erally made money doing so. Nor did they expect to turn a profit from news programming” (1999). However, it is not simply the economic embeddedness of platforms that need attention in a discussion of PT but also technologies that have enabled or “democratized” cultural production. Part of the new production and broadcast technologies include accessible photo and audiovisual editing software, as well as plat-

forms for mass publication or broadcast. Yet the capacity to “jam” and “hack” original con-

forms and their algorithms. At the same time,

tent, altering it while retaining an aura of au-

various forms of digital technology have enabled a dizzying amount of cultural production (user-generated content) and social media

thenticity, has enabled a near constant stream of deceptions (to which AI developers are responding with “reverse image search” by

platforms have permitted their potentially broad diffusion as mass self-communication (Castells, 2009).

Google Image or TinEye).° Technological developments also include

However,

the constant strategic uses of

and attempts to manage the spaces of mass self-communication (big data analytics, mi-

the powerful influence of algorithms in structuring fields of perception and trust. Algorithms structured for networking, marketing, and con-

bots, trolls)

stant “participation” become useful for political PT ends. Thus, repetition and illusory truth

likely help explain the subsequent effects on

(more repeated, more likely to be judged true)

crotargeting,

neuromarketing,

1330

-«

POST-TRUTH

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

is extremely important in algorithmically constructed publics, polarized politics, and filter bubbles, evidenced by studies concluding that “top fake election news stories generated more total engagement on Facebook than top election stories from 19 major news outlets combined” in the US 2016 presidential campaign (Silverman, 2016). Furthermore, some PT commentary and

research has put considerable causal and explanatory emphasis on algorithmic ideologi-

with other agents) leads to solutions also often embedded in capitalism (self-regulation of service providers, fact-checking businesses and apps to buy—the commodification of truth). Face 2: Journalism.

Changes in journal-

ism, such as downsizing staff while accelerat-

ing the publication pace (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 1999, 2010), invited inaccuracies and vulner-

abilities to hoaxes (later fake news); partly

(especially confirmation bias) (Bear, 2016;

issuing from “citizen journalism,” by which everyone is now a journalist (the opposite of the progressive promise of networked journalism

Dieguez, 2017; Kavanagh

& Rich, 2018).

[Russell, 2011]) and which brings not just

However, few approaches to PT so far have seen

packs of watchdogs but also armies of rumor bombers and fake news purveyors. As Harwood notes, “[g Jossip, rumor and fact, truth and falsehood (with rare exceptions) have equal stand-

cal filtering (echo chambers) and cognitive bias

the attention economy's techno-infrastructure as itself creating conditions unfavorable to more deliberative forms of cognition when consuming digital content (such as fake news headlines and rumor bombs). Not only is the digital communication infrastructure oriented toward profit, instead of toward dissemination of factual information, it is built

for speed and constant individual movement and attention shifting, which research suggests has an impact on perception, inter-

est, temporal reasoning, and knowledge (Carr, 2010; Manjoo, 2013; Harsin, 2014). Tech-focused cognitive scientists are beginning to argue that this techno-economic structure (they do not base their analyses in the structures embeddedness in capitalism) has effects on reasoning, long-term memory, and thus knowledge acquisition (Atchley & Lane,

2014). Cognition in the attention economy is typically fast, emotional, and targeted with dis-

ard under the law and, in practice, universally

coexist in the unending ‘news’ stream saturating the environment” (Harwood, 1999). The

latter was partly explained by market pressures to grab readers’ and viewers’ attention, partly resulting in trends of infotainment and tabloidization, and politainment allowing for the repetition of rumors and disinformation as agenda-setting topics themselves (Thussu, 2009; Riegert & Collins, 2015). Market pressures are also blamed for significant amounts of public relations material that appear un-

identified in news products (Bennett, 2003, p. 175; Lewis, Williams, & Franklin, 2008).

Finally, new apps (e.g., Bulletin) allow quick posting of citizen journalist content, while critics have warned about a “high potential for abuse,’ especially for producing “fake news”

tractions. Such an “information ecology” is not,

(Kaufman, 2018). Citizen journalism app ex-

it is argued, conducive to more deliberative po-

periments are complemented on the professional end by robot (also called automated or algorithmic) journalists (Carlson, 2015), which risk being recuperated for strategic communication purposes, just as had been the case with human “fake reporters” under the Bush II administration (Rich, 2005).

litical participation, thus posing challenges to

proposed PT solutions, such as the necessarily slower and colder cognition required by proponents of media literacy. Technology identified as a primary cause (instead of as a secondary cause embedded in capitalism and synergizing

POST-TRUTH

In a culture of multiple institutional and professional trust deficits, journalism’s traditional credibility is threatened. If for decades, journalism relied on “authorized knowers” (Fishman, 1980), officials in government, busi-

ness, and political organizations who were deemed knowledgeable (Epstein, 1973), then “webs of facticity” (Tuchman, 1978) become undermined in PT, for such sources, as well

as their journalist-intermediaries are seen as illegitimate by millions of people. The web of facticity comes to be perceived as a web of deception that news organizations and their

sources weave. If journalism has lost authority to tell and distinguish truth, while news has a proliferating and competing cast of truth-tellers, pro-

motional culture applies cultural pressure to journalism, politics, and everyday social relations. Its agency in PT synergy cannot be

ignored. Face 3: Promotional Culture. Promotional culture is another factor of PT cultural synergy that has been almost completely absent from public intellectual and recent computationally driven PT analyses (Harsin, 2017; Hearn, 2017). Promotional culture stud-

ies argue that culture and social relations have been powerfully transformed by the role of communication in new forms of consumer

capitalism—the latter’s hyperpromotional stage, with no small effects on perceptions of honesty, truth claims, and trust-granting. According to Alison Hearn, one of promotional culture’s primary theorists:

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

1331

expressive intent or determine what is truth as opposed to a lie, what is authentic as opposed to “spun.” In a population so acclimatized to the constant sell, how can we recognize or construct legitimate

authority? What is the impact of the generalized public acceptance of “spin” and promotional politics on the democratic process?... [T]he logic of commodities and their promotional signs, also known as advertising and marketing, comes to

dominate and structurally condition all other forms of political expression and power relations. (Hearn, 2011)

Promotionalism’s relationship to truth has thus always been more like Harry Frankfurt’s (2005) notion ofbullshit—it is agnostic toward truth in its strategies to promote attention and consumption. Promotional culture scholars view bullshit-friendly communication as having become accepted in a wider and wider array of human practices, not in the least politics (see also Davis, 2013). Professional bullshitters are essential to contemporary consumer

economies and politics. One rarely hears about promotionalism in causal explanations of PT (and one has almost never heard of counterattacking its origins—consumer capitalism— as a logical solution to such a powerful form of causation). Just as the very infrastructure of contemporary communication practices, the digital attention economy, leans toward PT, so does professionalized political communication, with its modern roots in mass electric communi-

Promotionalism names the extension of market values and commodity relations in all areas of life....Aswe increasingly come to see our selves, relationships, po-

cation and mass democracy at the turn of the 20th century.

litical candidates, and social issues in

munication. Promotionalism’s relationship to PT was also anticipated by Hannah Arendt in her well-known reflection “Lying

terms of this logic of promotion, we can no longer determine, or read, genuinely

Face

4: Professional

Political

Com-

1332

POST-TRUTH

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

society” (p. 8). This importation from con-

and political sector. A passage from Daniel Boorstin’s influential The Image is illustrative on this point. Boorstin discusses one of the most influential theorist-practitioners of public influence in the 20th century, Edward Bernays, by way of Napoleon (indicating a cross-fertilization of military, political, and commercial communication). Of the public relationsproduced realities he calls “pseudo-events,’

sumer society to politics was problematic, ac-

Boorstin writes:

in Politics,” spurred by the release of The Pentagon Papers (1971). She spoke of a “recent variety” added to “the many genres in the art oflying developed in the past: the apparently innocuous one ofthe public-relations managers in government whe learned their trade from the inventiveness of Madison Avenue.” Arendt noted that their “origin [lay] in the consumer

cording to Hannah Arendt, for public relations

“deals only in opinions and ‘good will, the readiness to buy, that is, in intangibles whose

concrete reality is ata minimum’ (p. 8). The promotionalism that Arendt regarded as a threat to democracy has been discussed in political communication textbooks for several decades now as “professionalization,’ a trend in elite political communication that since the onset of TV has put “image-making” at the center of politics (Lilleker, 2014; McNair, 2017). This professionalization is marked by the growth of political marketing, using highly strategized forms of influence employed by cognitive science-oriented commercial and military communication (Alic, Branscomb, Brooks, Epstein, & Carter, 1992; Lees, Stromback, & Rudd,

The power to make a reportable event is thus the power to make experience. One is reminded of Napoleon’s apocryphal reply to his general, who objected that

circumstances were unfavorable to a proposed campaign: “Bah, I make circumstances!” The modern public relations counsel—and he is, of course, only one of many

twentieth

century

creators

o pseudo-events—has come close to fulfilling Napoleon's idle boast. “The counsel on public relations,” Mr. Bernays explains, “not only knows what news value is, but knowing it, he is in a position to make news happen. He is a creator of

events.” (1992, pp. 10-11)

2010). One may recall here that Arendt’s influential account of lying in politics ends by emphasizing the spread of promotional communication orientations to politics, resulting in a propensity for lying, and thus contributing to PT (Arendt, 1972).

Roughly 80 years after Bernays’s confident declaration, Karl Rove, George W. Bush’s leg-

9/11 Bush regime’s sophisticated propaganda as

endary spin doctor and strategist, bragged that journalists naively belonged to a “reality-based community,” while strategists like him “create our own reality,” which they (journalists) are free to “study.” Journalists will be left “to just

a turning point in contemporary state communication. It is important to note that the con-

study what we [strategists] do” (Suskind, 2004). The arrogance aside, of course, com-

junctural conditions of communication were and still are quite different than those of preInternet times, while the practice of strategic

munication strategists are sometimes forced to respond to journalist-produced events, and perhaps more often, to events opponents publicize with the assistance of news organizations. They nonetheless lead by misleading,

Several PT commentators point to the post-

political communication, aiming at creating

its own realities to which it can respond to achieve its goals, is a staple of modern mass

Indeed, the Bush regime’s communication

communication influences, in the commercial

strategists ushered in the shifting signification

POST-TRUTH

of fake news registers from largely comedic to more traditional political communication (Rich, 2005). The Bush team used “fake reporters” and fake broadcast segments (video news releases dutifully broadcast by local newscasts) over a decade prior to the term becoming a “word of the year.” In the New York Times,

Frank Rich made the crossover explicit: “The White House Stages Its ‘Daily Show,” he wrote

(February 20, 2005). Writing a year before, but looking back at 2003, Naomi Klein dubbed it

the “year of the fake” in a Nation column. She wrote that 2003 was, for starters, “a year that

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

communication.

It is systematic,

«

1333

strategic,

highly organized. There is a structural incitement to deception. American democracy, like most if not all contemporary liberal democracies, has been,

among other things, an evolving competition of fakery. This is not to suggest it fails by comparison to some essential, purely honest democratic utopia (a fantasy, of course) but is rather to emphasize the massive scale of organization and systematicity. Now fakery is embedded in everyday commercial promotionalism as well as in mass self-communication (individual

waged open war on truth and facts and celebrated fakes and forgeries ofall kinds...: fake

broadcasting) amid historic levels of distrust;

rationales for war, a fake President dressed as

fects would be felt more intensely to the point of PT today. Meanwhile panics around PT disavow how embedded promotionalism and

a fake soldier declaring a fake end to combat and then holding up a fake turkey.’ Nieman Reports spoke not just of an episode but of an “Age of Pseudo-reporting,’ citing a “spate of media infamies known by the names Armstrong Williams, Maggie GallagherJeff , Gannon, and Karen Ryan” (Greve, 2005). Recently,

the use of big-data-driven political marketing (even neuropolitical marketing), bots and trolls (human and non-), and censorship in several countries, contribute mightily to PT synergy (Bulut & Yoriik, 2017; Harsin, 2015, 2018a, 2018b).

As Arendt foresaw, organized, systematic

thus, it is understandable that deceptions ef-

deception is in 20th—21st-century liberal democratic

political communication

practices,

which may suggest that such panics are a fundamental symptom of PT itself.

(POST-)TRUST The foundation of popular truth, often taken for granted in the heyday of mass communication and journalism’s monopoly on gatekeeping and authoritative truth (re-)telling, has come into greater relief in the PT moment:

lying, or, more easily proven, deceptions, the

(dis-)trust. The sociologist Georg Simmel

bread and butter of consumer capitalism and the communications wing of the state secu-

argued that trust is actually a “weak form of

inductive knowledge,’ and “very few relation-

rity apparatus, have come also to be the orga-

ships would endure if trust were not as strong

nizing force of mediated political life. Thus, when analysts shrug skeptically at claims that there is more lying now than before, they are looking at lying and deception through a lens too methodologically individualist to comprehend the production side of it. Both consumer capitalism, deeply embedded in everyday life, and elite liberal democracy, as its

as, or stronger than, rational proof or personal

observation” (2004, p. 179). Understanding shifts in the communicational mechanisms

of trust may be seen as key to understanding the epistemic problems often discussed separately.

What is the evidence for widespread and

apparatus has been struc-

increasing distrust? Consider, for example, declining numbers of voters in presidential

tured for over 100 years, demand deceptive

and parliamentary elections across the West,

communication

1334

«

POST-TRUTH

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

where similar techniques of strategic political communication, among other things, are imitated. Countries such as the United States, the

United Kingdom, and France have seen participation dips by 30 percentage points over the last 50 years (International IDEA, n.d.). Compare the decline in voter turnout with

the rise of self-identified disenfranchised movements and new parties in the very same countries. On the right, one sees the Front National in France, the UK Independence Party, Ger-

many’s AFD (Alternative for Germany), and even the insurgent democratic socialist challenge to the US Democratic Party by Bernie Sanders. Meanwhile, left “prefigurative” social-

political movements such as les Indignados in Spain, Occupy in the United States, and Nuit Debout in France have stressed their alienation from liberal democracy’s lack of choices and means for a real hearing of grievances, a

critique realized in their own performances of direct democracy. Distrust is also widely self-reported. Edelman’s Trust Barometer study for 2017 featured a provocative headline announcing a “Global Implosion of Trust.’ Some of their highlights across 43 countries include the following: CEO credibility at lowest point ever; trust in media fell and is at lowest point ever in 17 countries; trust in government dropped (at 41%) in 14 countries, being the least trusted

in institution in half of the countries surveyed. Categories of leaders dropped in trustworthiness across the board: an all-time low of 37% for CEOs and government leaders are the least credible ofall, at 29% (“2017 Edelman Trust Barometer,’ 2017). The news media in particular suffers significant distrust, across the United States and Europe. Just over half of Americans in a 2017 survey said they trust

own choice of news media. Post-truth thus thrives in this context of political polarization. Perceptions of widespread cynicism of course also have effects on trust. As Sissela Bok notes in her classic examination of lying in public life and a discussion of Hannah Arendt's influential comments on public lying, “Even when the substitution of falsehood for truth is not total, but seems random or partial to the deceived, or when it affects matters they consider crucial, such a state of cynicism may result. For this reason, the many forms of international deception which are assumed to be merely a ‘part of the game’ by governments can have far-reaching effects on both internal

and external trust” (1978, p. 150). Speaking primarily of governments, she adds, in 1978,

that “there is a growing evidence that the world audiences to which propaganda is directed are becoming more distrustful.... As a result, citizens the world over have less confi-

dence that they can influence what governments do” (p. 150). She was of course writing before the Bush administration's strategic communication efforts to promote the Iraq War, and before the financial crisis of 2008,

among other major events in a cultural slide toward generalized distrust. If, as Simmel and others argue, trust is a kind of crude knowledge, which may be closest to the kind of knowledge citizens exercise on public issues, pervasive deficits thereof would likely lead to not just any kind of epistemic but public epistemic instabilities. As

Longino explains, “[m]uch of what passes for common knowledge is acquired from others. We depend on experts to tell us what is wrong or right with our appliances, our cars, our bodies. Indeed, much of what we later come

more trust in ‘my’ media than ‘the’ media,”

to know depends on what we previousiy learned as children from our parents and teachers. We acquire knowledge of the world through the institutions of education, journalism, and sci-

2017). However, people have more trust in their

entific inquiry” (para 9, 2015). Consequently,

information from the news media “some,”

while about 15% trusted it “a lot” (“People have

POST-TRUTH

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

«

1335

“we do not know most of what we think we know.” While 1980s and 1990s postmodern theory already flagged scholarly preoccupations with epistemic skepticism, legitimacy and reality, the contemporary focus on lying and dishonesty distinguishes PT discourse from its 1990s

of PT favor highly emotional communication, and that this is partly the way many subjects identify with truthful communication. This turn to emotion and affect is not based

forerunner (Lyotard, 1984). Post-truth’s epi-

rophilosophy over the last 30 years, which holds that there is no actual separation be-

stemic crisis is really an ethicofiduciary one. Its epistemic crises are the effect of distrust and dishonesty crises regarding systematic widespread deception. It is worth noting that, in this critical synergy theory of PT, the panic about irrational duped citizens appears misplaced. Given these conditions from public relations- and hoaxinfiltrated journalism, resource rich strategic political communication using sophisticated data

analytics, deceptive AI (bots and trolls), cognitive scientifically informed microtargeted messages, and a widespread promotional culture of exaggerated claims and games of fakery for profit—it could be said that people would be irrational not to be highly skeptical of truth claims. The question, of course, is what kind of performances and communication successfully produce trust and truth in this climate. Trust and Emotional Truth. Anthony Giddens (1994) has argued that modern and traditional societies differ importantly in terms of trust-granting, and that late modern soci-

on a traditional rational/irrational, reason/

emotion dualism. On the contrary, it builds on revolutions in cognitive science and neu-

tween emotion and reason. However, they insist that the conceptual distinction be maintained since there are different degrees of emotion in reasoning, even shown to be located in

different parts of the brain (Damasio, 1994; Kahneman, 2011; Westen, 2008). While promotional industries and political communica-

tion have for some time used this research to produce strategies (hoping especially for quick manageable affective responses), journalism is now visiting this research in order to manage visitor attention online (and probably in what remains of print and broadcast) (Song, 2013). Resource-rich political and economic actors using big data analytics and sentiment analysis target audiences emotionally, hoping not simply to produce beliefs (ideological effects) but to modulate cognition, emotion, and attention, via quick likes/dislikes, shares,

before moving on. In a culture of speed and attention scarcity, of exigencies and expecta-

tions of faking or exaggeration (promotionalism), slower, perhaps “quieter” civil forms of

eties underwent a shift from “passive trust” toward social institutions and their experts to

communication are suspicious to some audi-

general distrust and fleeting, “active trust”

appears “authentic,” which seems to periodi-

ences. These audiences are attracted to what

cally escape the exigencies of promotional culture (Banet-Weiser, 2012). These fleeting moments have been described as emotional truth and “emo-truth” (Harsin, 2017, 2018a). Emotional/emo-truth theory argues that If trust amid PT is short term and, if there are parallels in reality TV and popular politics regarding the way truth and trust is maintained, constantly renewed, how is active public trust performed and earned today? performed and granted. The theory is based One argument is that the synergistic agencies on insights from audience studies of melodrama today. Trust-granting appears to have taken

even more intensely restricted roles, based much of the time on performativity (rhetorical devices to produce credibility), ongoing “facework.”

1336

+

POST-TRUTH

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

genres (Ang) and “fact-based” programming's (i.e., reality TV) audiences (Hill, 2007, p. 141;

Grindstaff, 2008):

SOLUTIONS TO POST-TRUTH AS PERCEIVED PROBLEM

Emo-truth is truth where emotion serves

If critical communication studies have offered preliminary theories of PT as a histori-

as inference (prime or indexical sign, emotional or unconscious affective re-

cal and cultural phenomenon, from such a diagnosis, what kind of prognosis may it offer,

sponse, and presto: truth). It is felt (though not necessarily consciously),

while shedding a critical light on popular solutions proffered less critical PT theories? The main solutions proposed thus far (mostly from the computational and cognitive scientific sides of communication study) can be

not accompanied by long temporal reasoning. It is akin to what reality TV audience scholarship has documented as trust in perceived authenticity (i.e. truth) of moments where participants lose con-

summarized as the following: techno-curatives, such as AI filtering of PT claims/stories;

trol, get angry and aggressive, bully, or,

human fact-checking, especially rooted in jour-

conversely, cry. It is a variant of what

nalism; strategic human responses to cognitive

Laura Grindstaff in her landmark work on sensational talk shows called “the

bias; more vigorous self-regulation by social media providers; and media literacy initia-

money shot.”

tives (Kavanagh

(Harsin, 2018b, p. 45)

Commission, 2018). Each misses the entire synergy of historical and cultural causation,

With such pervasive, systematic, strategic artifice in PT society and politics, it is these ephemeral moments of emo-truth that connect with some citizen-audiences, which helps

to explain the success of aggressive emo-truth

& Rich, 2018; European

and therefore will not likely achieve the curative ends for which they aim. The problems viewed from a critical perspective are not all acknowledged from other perspectives, and thus lead to very different calls for change.

masculinities, fond of insulting, spectacular claims, and of attacking political correctness, of

perceived problem of filter bubbles and fake

figures such as US's Donald Trump, Philippines’

news circulation (misinformed citizens), call-

Roderigo Duterte, and the UK’s Boris Johnson,

ing for AI tagging and suppression of false information. These problematizations and solutions overlook that the marketing structure of social media veers toward birds-of-a-feather networks, easier for big data analysis to aggregate (construct) into markets. The bracketed

among others in varying degrees of the style

(Harsin, 2017). Not all PT political performance is emo-truth; and not all of its per-

formers do it as virtuosically or constantly. The key is that the connection of trust, the lack of concern with the falsity of some truth

Techno-curative solutions respond to the

ethics of attentional capitalism are overlooked,

claims, is explained by an emotional, not rational connection, and perhaps for the angriest most distrustful citizens, emo-truth’s anger

and the general structure is unlikely to be overcome. Getting attention has apparently inspired fact-checking organizations to use info-

and aggression is most appealing. Emotional truth and emo-truth political communication also show signs of the normalization of celebrity politics and its games of authenticity and

taining categories of evaluation. When they

appeal (Street, 2004).

rate statements as lies (“pants on fire”! or “five Pinocchios”!) but cannot prove deliberate

statement of falsehood instead of inaccuracy or bullshit, they paradoxically undermine

POST-TRUTH

their purported task (pointing again to the informational and attentional embeddedness in

capitalism) and may simply trigger the stubborn ire of those citizens they aim to correct. Techno-curative solutions in AI also overlook the problem that many people distrust the service providers to be truth arbiters, and this is even more the case when companies like Facebook attempt to “team up” with already extant fact-checking businesses (Snopes.com

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

.

Ns yax7/

what interpretations are more in accord with facts and which more errant—who is trusted enough to fulfill this role? Given the attention economy, who will engage with this necessarily longer and patience-demanding content? A recent report by academics and journalists, sponsored by the European Union, touches upon what have become common policy recommendations (one can imply their diagno-

ses of cause from these proposed solutions):

or the Washington Post, for example, or Le

Monde’s “Décodeurs”

in France)

(“Voters

1. enhance transparency of online news,

Don't Trust,” 2016). These brands are already ideologically contaminated, distrusted. Unless widely perceived partisan providers are to team up with more mainstream old “trustee journal-

involving an adequate and privacy-com-

pliant sharing of data about the systems that enable their circulation online;

ism’ organizations, the victims of disinforma-

2. promote media and information literacy to counter disinformation and

tion are unlikely to see the debunking (be-

help users navigate the digital media

cause of customized content) or trust the post’s AI tag. Posts would have to be suppressed, rais-

environment;

ing concerns of freedom of speech in countries like the United States (Fisher, 2017). While experiments on cognitive bias are hopeful that misinformed users gradually change opinion and perception with repeated exposure to debunkings, these experiments do not account for the fact that the structure of the attention

3. develop tools for empowering users and journalists to tackle disinformation and foster a positive engagement with fast-evolving information technologies;

4. safeguard the diversity and sustainability of the European news media ecosystem. (European Commission, 2018)

economy is, again, not one aimed at microtar-

geting repeated debunkings. The debunker (trusted/distrusted) is also crucial—who do people trust with such a role, seeing as how

they are distrustful of most macro-truth-tellers? Finally, deceptive forms of PT communication are built into the culture of liberal de-

mocracy, mediatized and dependent on highly professional strategists and practices. Few diagnoses consider this problem, and thus solutions will likely overlook and reproduce different versions of PT. Relatedly, strategic political communication produces PT forms that elude easy logical-positivist-type judgments of true or false, because they are often deliberately ambiguous. This means they require longer cognitive and critical analyses to explain

Compare their solutions to these alternatives, which follow from the critical PT theory articulated in this article. If one bears in mind the fact that majorities of citizens in many countries report that they distrust news media, corporations, gov-

ernment, democracy, capitalism and other major institutions and traditional accepted sacred organizing discourses of social life, at the most fundamental level “fixing” PT would first of all mean recovering social trust by radically transforming:

1. consumer capitalism (propelled by PT communication

strategies

and

tactics—

promotional culture) and its deep mediatization

1338

-«

POST-TRUTH

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

in an attention economy, since the latter must be made to serve ends beyond attention capture and data harvesting for marketing, i.e. corporate profit and state surveillance; 2. journalism’s slide into PT infotainment,

even when ostensibly trying to extinguish PT via (infotaining and polarizing rhetoric of) fact-checking; and a debate about how it should be financed and what it can and should do under current conditions of communication and culture;

3. the unequal resources of professional political communication used to study, quantify, construct, and control pseudopublics instead of turning such communication channels and tools over to more democratic actors,

albeit with strong emphasis on ethics; 4. education, teaching the history of antidemocratic elite forces that from the onset of mass communication commandeered scientific knowledges, immense communication

resources, and strategic skills to manipulate and control the demos, with varying degrees of success.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

My thanks go to Ergin Bulut and Jack Bratich for conversations that contributed to the development of this article.

FURTHER

READING

Arendt, H. (1972). Crises of the Republic: Lying in politics; Civil disobedience; On violence; Thoughts on politics and revolution. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Bok, S. (1978). Lying: Moral choice in public life. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.

Cloud, D. L. (2018). Reality bites: Rhetoric and the circulation of truth claims in U.S. political culture. Columbus: Ohio State University Press. D’Ancona, M. (2017). Post truth: The new war on truth and how tofight back. London, UK: Ebury. Davis, E. (2017). Post-truth: Why we have reached peak bullshit and what we can do about it. London, UK: Little, Brown.

Edelman, M. (2001). The politics of misinformation. Cambridge, UK; University Press.

New

York, NY:

Cambridge

Fuller, S. (2018). Post-truth: Knowledge as a power game. London, UK: Anthem Press.

Unlike popular and liberal-academic approaches, critical communication approaches to PT eschew nostalgia for earlier periods of

Harsin, J. (2015). Regimes of posttruth, postpoli-

pseudodemocratic opinion and perception

Keyes, R. (2004). The post-truth era: Dishonesty and

management, and aim to avoid reactionary

deception in contemporary life. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.

(cloaked in the rhetoric of progressivism) calls to restore liberal democracy, itself catastrophically recuperated by neoliberal failures of growing economic inequality, continual post-colonial exploitation, patriarchal backlashes, and the destruction of the environment.

A PT cultural condition generates panics about truth that necessarily misrecognize the deeper origins of the condition. Critical approaches to PT wrestle with PT’s nascent roots in the scene of 20th-century mass democracy/ communication and consumer capitalism, while assisting with theory and critique to build a more socially just world.

tics, and attention

economies.

Communication,

Culture, and Critique, 8(2), 327-333.

Lilleker, D. G. (2014). Political communication and cognition. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave. Manjoo, F, (2008). True enough: Learning to live in a

post-fact society. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Maras, S. (2013). Objectivity in journalism. Cambridge, UK; Malden, MA: Polity Press.

Plato (2004). Gorgias. London, UK, and New York, NY: Penguin.

REFERENCES

2017 Edelman trust barometer reveals global implosion of trust (2017, January 16). Edelman online. Retrieved from https://www.prnewswire.com

POST-TRUTH

/news-releases/2017-edelman-trust-barometer

-reveals-global-implosion-of-trust-300391117 -html Alic, J. A., Branscomb, L. M., Brooks, H., Epstein, G. L., & Carter, A. B. (1992). Beyond spinoff:

Military and commercial technologies in a changing world. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press. Alterman, E. (2004). When presidents lie: A history of official deception and its consequences. New York, NY: Viking.

Althusser, L. (1978). Lenin and philosophy and other essays. New York: Monthly Review Press. Andersen, K. (2017, August 7). How America lost its mind. The Atlantic. Retrieved from http://www

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

«

1339

Bennett, W. L. (2003). News: the politics of illusion.

New York, NY: Longman. Bennett, W. L., & Livingston, S. (2018). The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European Journal of Communication, 33(2), 122-139. Besserman, L. (1998). The challenge of periodization: Old paradigms and new perspectives. Speculum, 73(3), 923. Bilton, N. (2014, April 20). Friends, and influence, for sale online [blog article]. New York Times. Retrieved from https://bits.blogs.nytimes.com /2014/04/20/friends-and-influence-for-sale -online/ Birchall, C. (2006). Knowledge goes pop: From conspiracy theory to gossip. Oxford, UK, and New York, NY: Berg.

.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09 /how-america-lost-its-mind/534231 Andrejevic, M. (2013). InfoGlut: How too much information is changing the way we think and know. New York, NY: Routledge. Arendt, H. (1972). Crises of the republic. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Bok, S. (1978). Lying: Moral choice in public life. New

Aronczyk, M. (2015). Understanding the impact of the transnational promotional class on political communication. International Journal of Com-

Reporter. Retrieved from http://www.hollywood

munication, 9, 2007-2026.

Atchley, P., & Lane, S. (2014). Cognition in the at-

tention economy. In The Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 61). Waltham, MA: Elsevier/Academic Press. Banet-Weiser, S. (2012). Authentic TM: The politics and ambivalence in a brand culture. New York, NY: New York University Press.

Barthes, R. (1983). Mythologies. London, UK:

York, NY: Pantheon Books.

Bond, P. (2016, February 29). Leslie Moonves on Donald Trump: “Tt may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS” The Hollywood reporter.com/news/leslie-moonves-donald

-trump-may-871464

Bradshaw, S., & Howard, P. (2017). Troops, trolls and troublemakers: A global inventory of organized social media manipulation (Working Paper No. 2017.12). Oxford, UK: Project on Computational Propaganda. Bratich,J.Z. (2004). Regime-of-truth change. Cultural Studies Critical Methodologies, 4(2), 237-241. Bratich, J. Z. (2008). Conspiracy panics: Political

rationality and popular culture. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Granada. Baudrillard, J. (1983). Simulations. New York, NY:

Bristow, W. (2017). Enlightenment. In E. N. Zalta

Semiotext Columbia University. Baudrillard, J. (2001). Impossible exchange. London,

(Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia ofphilosophy (Fall 2017). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford

UK: Verso. Bear, B. (2016, December 8). 10 cognitive biases

University. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford .edu/archives/fall2017/entries/enlightenment/ Bulut, E., & Yoriik, E. (2017). Mediatized populisms

explain why we fall for fake news. Medium. com. Retrieved from https://medium.com/@ BenWBear/10-cognitive-biases-explain-why -we-fall-for-fake-news-c5c489995c73 Bellon, J. (1999). The strange discourse of The X-Files: What it is, what it does, and what is at stake. Critical Studies in Mass Communication,

16(2), 136-154.

Digital populism: Trolls and political polarization of Twitter in Turkey. International Journal of Communication, 11(0), 25. Caplow, T. (1947). Rumors in War. Social Forces, 25, 298-302. Carr, N. G. (2010). The shallows: What the Internet is doing to our brains. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

1340

+

POST-TRUTH

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

Carlson, M. (2015). The robotic reporter. Digital Journalism, 3(3), 416-431. Castells, M. (2009). Communication power. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Castillo, C. (2016). Big crisis data. London, UK: Cambridge University Press. Chadwick, A. (2013). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Chen, A. (2015, June 2). The Agency. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes .com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html

Conason,J.(2004, May S). Smear boat veterans for Bush. Salon. Retrieved from http://www.salon

.com/2004/05/05/swift_4 Corner,J., & Pels, D. (2003). Media and the restyling of politics: Consumerism, celebrity and cynicism. London, UK: SAGE.

Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2016). The mediated construction of reality: Society, culture, mediatization. Cambridge, UK: Polity. Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York, NY: Putnam.

Drogin,

B. & Goetz, J. (2005, November

20).

How U.S. fell under the spell of “curveball” Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://www latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-na-curve

ball20nov20-story.html Edelman, M. J. (1988). Constructing the political

spectacle. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Edelman, M. J. (2001). The politics ofmisinformation. Cambridge, UK; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Epstein, E.J. (1973). News from nowhere: Television and the news. Chicago, Il: Ivan R. Dee.

European Commission. (2018). A multi-dimensional approach to disinformation: Report of the independent high level group on fake news and online disinformation.

Retrieved

from

https://www.cato

.org/publications/policy-analysis/risky-business

-role-arms-sales-us-foreign-policy Fallis, D. (2014). The varieties of disinformation. In

L. Floridi & P. M. Illari (Eds.), The philosophy of information quality (pp. 135-162). Cham, Switzerland;

Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.

D’Ancona, M. (2017). Post truth: The new war on truth and how to fight back. London, UK: Ebury. Davis, A. (2013). Promotional cultures: The rise and spread of advertising, public relations, marketing and branding. Cambridge, UK: Polity.

Fallows,J.(2012, August 31). Three “post-truth” related items. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https:// www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive

Dean, J. (1998). Aliens in America: Conspiracy cultures from outerspace to cyberspace. Ithaca, NY:

Attempts to ban it are worse. Vox.com. Retrieved

Cornell University Press. Debord, G. (1995). The society of the spectacle.

/7/5/15906382/fake-news-free-speech -facebook-google Fishman, M. (1980). Manufacturing the news.

London, UK; New York, NY: Zone Books. Dieguez, S. (2017). Post-truth: The dark side of the brain. Scientific American Mind, 28(S), 43-48. Dimock, M. (2008, July 15). Belief that Obama is Muslim is durable, bipartisan—but most likely to sway democratic votes. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewresearch.org/2008/07/1S /belief-that-obama-is-muslim-is-durable-bipartisan

-but-most-likely-to-sway-democratic-votes/ Doherty, C., Kiley, J., & Johnson, B. (2017, October

S). The partisan divide on political values grows even wider. People Press. Retrieved from http:// www.people-press.org/2017/10/05/the-partisan

/2012/08/three-post-truth-related-items

/261853/ Fisher, A. L. (2017, July 5). Fake news is bad. from

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017

Austin: University of Texas Press. Flood, A. (2017, November 2). Fake news is “very

real” word of the year for 2017. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com /books/2017/nov/02/fake-news-is-very-real -word-of-the-year-for-2017 Frankfurt, H. G. (1986). On bullshit. Raritan, 6 d 81-100. Frankfurt, H. G. (2005). On bullshit. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Fuchs, C. (2017). From digital positivism and admin-

-divide-on-political-values-grows-even

istrative big data analytics towards critical digital and social media research! European Journal of

-wider/

Communication, 32(1), 37-49.

POST-TRUTH

Giddens, A. (1994), Living in a post-traditional society. In U. Beck, S. Lash, & A. Giddens (Eds.),

Reflexive modernization: Politics, tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order (pp. 56-109). Cambridge, UK: Polity. Graves, L., & Cherubini, F. (2016). The rise offactchecking sites in Europe. Reuters Institute. Retrieved from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk

/our-research/rise-fact-checking-sites-europe

Graves, L. (2017). Deciding what's true: The rise ofpolitical fact-checking in American journalism. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Green, W. A. (1995). Periodizing world history.

History and Theory, 34(2), 99-111. Greve, F. (2005S, June 15S). Journalism in the age of pseudoreporting. Nieman Reports. Retrieved from http://niemanreports.org/articles/journalism -in-the-age-of-pseudoreporting/

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

.

1341

and cognition. JAIC Journal of Argumentation in Context, 3(1), 7-34. Harsin, J. (2015). Regimes of posttruth, postpolitics, and attention

economies.

Communication,

Culture, and Critique, 8(2), 327-333. Harsin,J.(2017). Trump l’ceil: Is Trump’s post-truth communication translatable? Contemporary French and Francophone Studies, 21(S), 12-522. Harsin, J. (2018a). Post-truth populism: The French anti-gender theory movement and cross-cultural similarities. Communication, Culture, and Critique, IPG) 35=S2: Harsin,J.(2018b). A critical guide to fake news: From comedy to tragedy. Powvoirs, 164(1), 99-119. Hartley, J. (1992). The politics ofpictures: The creation of the public in the age of popular media. London, UK; New York, NY: Routledge, Chapman & Hall. Harwood, R. (1999, June 15). Searching for facts in

Grindstaff, L. (2008). The money shot: Trash, class, and the making of TV talk shows. London, UK:

a sea of speculation. Nieman Reports. Retrieved

University of Chicago Press. Gunther, M. (1999, June 15). The transformation

-for-facts-in-a-sea-of-speculation/ Hazard Owen, L. (2018, January 26). Google pilots Bulletin, an app for sharing hyperlocal “stories” on the open web. Nieman Journalism Lab. Retrieved

of network from

news.

Nieman

Report. Retrieved

http://niemanreports.org/articles/the

-transformation-of-network-news/

from http://www.niemanlab.org/2018/01/google

Hall, S. (1977). Culture, the media and the ideological

effect. London, UK: Arnold in association with the Open University.

Harding, J. (2008). Alpha dogs: The Americans who turned political spin into a global business. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Harsin,J.(2006). The rumour bomb: Theorising the convergence of new and old trends in mediated US

politics. Southern

Review:

Communication,

Politics, and Culture, 39(1), 84. Harsin, J. (2008, December 11). The rumor bomb: On convergence culture and politics. Flow. Retrieved

from http://flowtv.org/2008/12 /the-rumor-bomb-on-convergence-culture-and

-politics-jayson-harsin-american-university-of -paris/ Harsin, J. (2010). Diffusing the rumor bomb: “John Kerry is French” (i.e., haughty, foppish, elitist, socialist, cowardly, and gay). The Diffusion ofSocial Movements:

Actors, Mechanisms, Effects, 163-183.

from https://niemanreports.org/articles/searching

and Political

Harsin, J. (2014). Public argument in the new media ecology: Implications of temporality, spatiality,

-pilots-bulletin-an-app-for-sharing-hyperlocal -stories-on-the-open-web/

Hearn, A. (2011). Promotional

culture. In D.

Southerton (Ed.), Encyclopedia of consumer culture. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Hearn, A. (2017). Confidence man: Breaking the

spell of Trump the brand. Soundings: A Journal of Politics and Culture, 66, 79-89. Hepp, A., & Krotz, F. (2014). Mediatized worlds: Culture and society in a media age. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hill, A. (2007). Restyling factual TV audiences and news, documentary and reality genres. New York, NY: Routledge. Horkheimer, M., Adorno, T. W, & Cumming,J.(2001). Dialectic ofenlightenment. New York, NY: Continuum. Independent/Sunday Mirror May 2016 Poll. (2016, May 14). ComRes. Retrieved from http://www .comresglobal.com/polls/independent-sunday -mirror-may-2016-poll/ Ingraham, C. (2016, December 7). Why conservatives

might be more likely to fall for fake news. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost

1342

«

POST-TRUTH

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

C.

.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/12/07/why

Lees-Marshment, J., Stromback, J., & Rudd,

-conservatives-might-be-more-likely-to-fall-for

(2010). Global political marketing. London, UK and New York, NY: Routledge. Lewis, J., Williams, A., & Franklin, B. (2008). Four rumours and an explanation. Journalism Practice,

-fake-news/

International IDEA. (n.d.). Voter turnout. [Online survey]. Retrieved from https://www.idea.int /data-tools/question-countries-view/521/295/ctr

Israel, J. 1. (2001). Radical enlightenment: Philosophy and the making of modernity 1650-1750. Oxford,

UK: Oxford University Press. Jones,J.P., & Baym, G. (2010). A dialogue on satire

news and the crisis of truth in postmodern political television. Journal of Communication Inquiry,

34(3), 278-294. Jones,J.P. (2009). Entertaining politics: New political television and civic culture. Lanham, MD: Rowman

& Littlefield. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Macmillan. Kaufman, M. (2018, January 26). Google’s new app

has a questionable purpose: Letting anyone be a reporter. Mashable. Retrieved from https://mashable .com/2018/01/26/google-bulletin-app-for

-hyperlocal-news-reporting/ Kavanagh, J., & Rich, M. D. (2018). Truth decay [Product page]. Retrieved from https://www .rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2314.html

Kessler, G. (2014, July 17). The Cheneys’ claim of a ‘deep, longstanding, far-reaching relationship’ between al-Qaeda and Saddam. Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com /blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/07/17/the-cheneys

-claims-of-a-deep-longstanding-far-reaching -relationship-between-al-qaeda-and-saddam/

21),27-45,

Livingstone, S. (2009). On the mediation of everything: ICA presidential address 2008. Journal of Communication, 59(1), 1-18. Longino, H. (2016). The social dimensions of scientific

knowledge. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2016). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.

Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Mahon, J. E. (2016). The definition of lying and deception. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford ency-

clopedia ofphilosophy (Winter 2016). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Manjoo, F, (2008). True enough: Learning to live in a

post-fact society. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Manjoo, F. (2013, June 6). You won't finish this arti-

cle. Slate. Retrieved from http://www.slate.com /articles/technology/technology/2013/06 /how_people_read_online_why_you_won_t _finish_this_article.html Marinucci, C. (2004, February 20). Doctored Kerry photo brings anger, threat of suit/Software, Net

make it easy to warp reality. Retrieved from http:// www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Doctored -Kerry-photo-brings-anger-threat-of-suit-2820976

php

Keyes, R. (2004). The post-truth era: Dishonesty and

Marx, K. (1978). Contribution to the critique of

deception in contemporary life. New York, NY: St. Martin's Press. Kovach, B., & Rosenstiel, T. (1999). Warp speed: America in the age of mixed media. New York, NY: Century Foundation Press.

political economy. In R. C. Tucker (Ed.), The Marx-Engels reader (pp. 3-6). New York, NY:

Kovach, B., & Rosenstiel, T. (2010). Blur: How to

know what's true in the age of information overload. New York, NY: Bloomsbury.

W.W. Norton.

McClain, C. R. (2017). Practices and promises of Facebook for science outreach: Becoming a “Nerd of Trust.” PLOS Biology, 15(6), e2002020.

Krugman, P. (2011, December 22). The post-truth

McCoy, J., & McEvers, K. (2017, April 5). Political science professor warns of dangers of polarized

campaign. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/23/opinion /krugman-the-post-truth-campaign.html Lavery, D., Hague, A., & Cartwright, M. (1996). Deny all knowledge: Reading The X Files. Syracuse,

politics. NPR. Retrieved from https://www.npr .org/2017/04/05/522756774/political-science -professor-warns-of-dangers-of-polarized -politics McIntyre, L. C. (2018). Post-truth. Cambridge, MA:

NY: Syracuse University Press.

MIT Press.

POST-TRUTH

AND

CRITICAL

COMMUNICATION

.

1343

McNair, B. (2017). Introduction to political communication. New York, NY: Routledge. Mejia, R., Beckermann, K., & Sullivan, C. (2018).

Roudakova, N. (2017). Losing Pravda: Ethics and the

White lies: A racial history of the (post) truth.

Russell, A. (2011). Networked: A contemporary history

Communication

of news in transition. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Serazio, M. (2017). Branding politics: Emotion, authenticity, and the marketing culture of American political communication. Journal of Consumer

15(2), 109-126.

and

Critical/Cultural

Studies,

Mukherjee, R. (2017, March 27), Power-knowledge in a “post-truth” world. Flow. Retrieved from https: //www.flowjournal.org/2017/03/post -truth-world/ Napoli, P. M. (2011). Audience evolution: New tech-

nologies and the transformation of media audiences. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Oxford Dictionaries. (n.d.). Word of the Year 2016 is ... Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries .com/word-of-the-year/word-of-the-year-2016 People have more trust in “my” media than “the” media. American Press Institute (2017, May 24).

Retrieved from https://www.americanpressinstitute .org/publications/reports/survey-research /my-media-more-trusted-than-the-media/

Pickard, V. (2017, November 28). The big picture: Misinformation society. Public Books. Retrieved from http://www.publicbooks.org/the-big-picture -misinformation-society/ Rampton, S. (2005, March 26). Fake news? We told you so, ten years ago. PR Watch. Retrieved from https: //www.prwatch.org/news/2005/03/3518 /fake-news-we-told-you-so-ten-years-ago Reuters toughens rules after altered photo affair.

(2007, January 18). Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL1867 8707

Rich, F. (2005, February 20). The White House stages its “daily show.’ New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2005/ 02/20/washington

/arts/the-white-house-stages-its-daily-show whtm] Rider, S., & Peters, M. A. (2018). Post-truth, fake news: Viral modernity and higher education. In Post-truth,

fake news (pp. 3-12). Singapore: Springer. Riotta, C. (2017, June S$). Trump’s Twitter bot army isa fake news machine obscuring facts. Newsweek. Retrieved from http://www.newsweek.com/donald -trump-twitter-bots-fake-followers-trolls-army -white-house-propaganda-621018 Riegert, K., & Collins, S. (2015). Politainment. In The

international encyclopedia ofpolitical communication. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

press in post-truth Russia. Cambridge, UK; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Culture, 17(2), 225-241.

Shane, S. (2017, December 22). From headline to photograph, a fake news masterpiece. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes .com/2017/01/18/us/fake-news-hillary-clinton -cameron-harris.html Shibutani, T. (1966). Improvised news a sociological study of rumor. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill. Retrieved

from http://catalog.hathitrust.org /api/volumes/oclc/255983.html

Silverman, C. (2016, November 16). This analysis shows how viral fake election news stories outperformed real news on Facebook. Buzz Feed News. Retrieved from https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman /viral-fake-election-news-outperformed-real

-news-on-facebook Simmel, G., (2004). The philosophy of money. London, UK; New York, NY: Routledge.

Simpson, C. (1996). Science ofcoercion: Communication research and psychological warfare, 1945-1960. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Song, S. (2013, November 15). Sharing fast and slow: The psychological connection between how we think and how we spread news on social media. Nieman Journalism Lab. Retrieved from http://www niemanlab.org/2013/11/sharing-fast-and-slow -the-psychological-connection-between-how-we -think-and-how-we-spread-news-on-social-media/ Stahl, R. (2010) Militainment, Inc.: War, media, and popular culture. New York, NY: Routledge. Stoker, G. (2017). Why politics matters: Making democracy work. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Street, J. (2004). Celebrity politicians: Popular culture and political representation. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 6(4), 435-4582. Suskind, R. (2004, October 17). Faith, certainty and the presidency of George W. Bush. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes .com/2004/10/17/magazine/faith-certainty -and-the-presidency-of-george-w-bush.html

1344

«

POWER

AND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION

Thussu, D. K. (2009). News as entertainment:

The

rise of global infotainment. Thousand Oaks, CA:

SAGE. Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news: A study in the

STUDIES

as a construct in experiments about truth and lying), and those refer to the popular uses of the term, especially “post-truth” as Eric Alterman (2004, “post-truth presidency”), Ralph Keyes

construction of reality. New York, NY: Free Press.

(2004, “post-truth era”) and Paul Krugman (2011,

Zoonen, L. van. (2012). I-pistemology: Changing truth claims in popular and political culture. European Journal ofCommunication, 27(1), 56-67.

“post-truth campaign”) use them. 3. One of the most misleading false starts has been to locate PT’s origins in 1980s and 1990s academic theories of postmodernism. Despite some vigorous boxing with the theoretical fads of the

Voters Don't Trust Media Fact-Checking—Rasmussen

Reports®. (2016, September 30). Retrieved from http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content

/politics/general_politics/september_2016 /voters_don_t_trust_media_fact_checking Westen, D. (2008). The political brain: The role of emotion in deciding the fate of the nation. New

1980s and 1990s, these accounts offer little more

than their enduring distaste for the fashion of a bygone era. They document the wide academic fascination with the sprawling body of thought associated with it, but they provide no empirical evidence

Studies, 1(1), 100-119. Zimmerman, H., & Eddens, A. (2018). Governing the liberal self in a “post-truth” era: Science, class

that it had any major effects on public life, on the way citizens orient themselves to politics and the way journalism and politicians communicate to or with them: a correlation of alleged epistemic relativism a causation does not make (D’Ancona, 2017). Post-truth has far more obvious historical and contemporary causes, and more compelling evidence from which one can speculatively theorize. 4. Zelizer (2004) also offered an important challenge to critical cultural approaches to re-engage

and the debate over GMOs. Cultural Studies, 1-22.

with the nuances of journalism’s “god terms”: facts,

Zizek, S. (1989). The sublime object of ideology.

truth, and objectivity. As this overview shows, there was an increasing attempt to do that. S. The flow of photographic or audiovisual deceptions since 2000 is impressive, and they range from fake photos about John Kerry with Jane Fonda at

York, NY: PublicAffairs.

Williams, R. (1976). “Ideology.” In Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society (pp. 126-130). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Zelizer, B. (2004). When facts, truth, and reality are God-terms: On journalism’s uneasy place in cultural studies. Communication and Critical/Cultural

London, UK: Verso. NOTES

1. Ina2012 Atlantic column, James Fallows covered the emerging claims to the term’s origin. In terms

of books, Alterman and Keyes originate the term in 2004.

2. Before Harsin’s attempt to theorize it as periodizing concept with a strong communication component in 2015, the Foucauldian-inflected “re-

Vietnam War protests (Marinucci, 2004) to fake

photos of Israeli military in its Lebanon conflict in 2006 (“Reuters Toughens Rules,” 2007). Jayson Harsin

gimes ofpost-truth” in 2015, there is scarcely any academic mention of the term, and no mention

of the term in communication and media journals (Google Scholar; Communication and Mass Media database, October 15, 2017). The exceptions refer mainly to the South African “Truth and Reconciliation Commission.’ Between 1994 and 2014, one finds only two instances of “posttruth” in the full text of communication and media journal articles, and they use it loosely, in passing, without defining it (three others use the term but

POWER AND CONTROL IN COMMUNICATION STUDIES

Power as a concept is rooted in Marxist theory that explored the economic bases of inequality in society and the ways in which inequality is perpetuated through cultural forms that are rooted in economics (Marx, 1977). In one of the earliest classics on power, The Power Elite,

POWER

AND

CONTROL

C. Wright Mills (2005) describes power in

IN COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

1345

terms of the inequalities in American society. Situating power in the realm of decision-

contexts of the neoliberal transformation of the globe that has resulted in some of the most pronounced forms of domination in the

making, Mills notes a hierarchy that differen-

reproduction of global inequalities (Harvey,

tiates between what he calls ordinary men and the power elite: “The powers of ordinary men are circumscribed by the everyday worlds in which they live, yet even in these rounds of

2005).

job, family, and neighborhood,

they often

POWER, STRUCTURE, AND MATERIALITY

seem driven by forces they can neither under-

Power is located within material structures,

stand nor govern” (p. 3). The lack of owner-

on one hand deriving its legitimacy from the economic formations that constitute them

ship and the invisibility of decision-making processes that govern everyday life resonate throughout the work of Mills, drawing close attention to the communicative nature of

power. Inherent in the concept of power is

(Marx, 1977; Marx & Engels, 1989), and on the other hand, working to legitimize the

(re)production of these material structures. Power is embedded in the inequalities of

the nature of decision-making processes that

social, political, economic, and cultural life,

shape the contours of relationships, roles, and the negotiations of everyday life.

and at the same time gives meaning to these inequalities, forming the web of taken-forgranted assumptions that offer sense to the structures (Dutta, 2011). At the root of power is the capitalist organizing of society, with the work of power to organize production processes that generate profits through the exploitation of labor. The legitimation of inequality in the distribution of power upholds

The relationship between power and decision-making is also evident in the book Community Power Structures: A Study ofDecision

Makers by Floyd Hunter (2017). In his description of the decision-making structure in a

city, Hunter attends to the authority in the hands of select groups of men to make and implement policy that impacts the lives

the structures of power. In communication

of other men and women.

In other words,

studies, approaches to power broadly reflect

Hunter describes power as the “acts of men

Marxist, neo-Marxist, and post-structuralist

going about the business of moving other men to act in relation to themselves or in rela-

commitments, situating power differentially in its relationship to the communicative and the material (Mumby, 1997, 2004). Rooted in Marxist approaches to organizing, power is conceptualized as a key feature

tion to organic and inorganic things” (p. 3). Power, thus is both episodic and agent-centered, as seen in the conceptualization of power offered by Weber (1978), and relational and constitutive, as evident in the works of Foucault

of capitalist organizations, where capital and

labor are continuously organized in contesta-

(1980) and Bourdieu (1979). Moreover, power

tion (Marx, 1977; Marx & Engels, 1989).

plays out both as a framework for understanding domination (Horkheimer & Adorno, 2006) as well as a framework for recognition and resistance (Habermas, 1984; Honneth, 1996).

Such work is rooted principally in the premise that the capitalist organization rests on a structural contradiction between the priva-

In this review of power, I offer a brief historical overview of power that plays out in different strands of scholarship on power, followed by an in-depth exploration of the various

tized accumulation of value, on the one hand,

and the socialized nature of its production

(through work), on the other. Capitalist efforts to intensify the labor process through management of work are thus countered by

1346

«+

POWER

AND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

worker attempts to resist such intensification efforts in order to maintain a degree of autonomy and control over the labor process

hegemony is the “common sense” that guides the everyday understanding of and participa-

(Marx, 1977). Inherent in notions of power

He theorizes civil society as the sphere where

tion in the world (Gramsci, 1971, 1992, 1996).

and control, therefore, are the resistive capac-

consent and consensus are generated, with

ities of communities at the margins of capital to reimagine societal and cultural life on the

the state securing its legitimacy through the various structures, associations, and processes

basis of transformative narratives. Marxist ac-

of civil society. Educational, political, religious,

counts of power examine the economic bases of communicative structures and the ways in which these economic bases constitute modes, forms, and possibilities of communication. Social class is seen as the basis for the reproduction of social power, medi-

journalistic, economic, and electoral activities

ated through the cultural production

of

knowledge. Ideology explains how subordinated classes take for granted as stable and unchangeable the forms of exploitation. The Frankfurt school explains the nature of cultural reproduction that maintains capitalist control, noting and further unpacking the concept of ideology (Adorno, 2005; Horkheimer & Adorno, 2006). Ideology

here constitutes the dominant ideas of a society and reflects the interests of the dominant ruling classes of society (Marx, 1977). Dominant culture does the ideological work through the circulation of the myth that capitalist organizing is the only and unchangeable mode of production. Ideology maintains the power and control of the ruling classes over the subordinate classes without the necessity for deploying violence. Althusser discussed the concept of the ideological state apparatus to conceptualize the various instruments of control such as educational systems, hospitals, and courts that maintain the control of the state without the necessity of violence. Drawing on a Marxist commitment

and

building on his experiences working in and leading the Communist Party of Italy as part of Lenin’s Communist International, Antonio

Gramsci offers the concept of hegemony to explain the working of power. For Gramsci,

take place within the realm of civil society, which work to reproduce the hegemonic formations through a wide array of cultural activities.

In contrast, a Foucauldian reading of power understands power as imbricated with knowledge. The power-knowledge relationship suggests that any claim to knowledge is tied to positions of power, and power constitutes the ambits of knowledge claims. In this sense,

knowledge loses its position of innocence and neutrality, instead being intertwined with power. Thus, power is constituted through language. Post-structuralist concepts of power build on this constitutive role of language

to suggest that material objects are produced through language (Foucault, 1981). Moreover, for Foucault, power is relational. He writes, “Power is not something that is acquired, seized or shared, something one holds on

to or allows to slip away” (Foucault, 1981, p. 94). The emphasis here then is on the communicative processes, techniques, and technologies through which power is produced through relationships, attending to how power is produced.

Power and Communication. Power is intertwined with position and is fundamentally communicative in nature (Castells, 2007). A Marxist reading of power attends to ideology, the dominant ideas of a society that are the ideas of the ruling economic classes, foregrounding the economic foundations of ide-

ology (Marx, 1977). Drawing on a historical

POWER

AND

CONTROL

materialist approach, Marxist theory argues that social consciousness is founded on material reality (Marx, 1977; Marx & Engels, 1989). Marx depicts this nature of ideology as a form

of false consciousness that enables and perpetuates the exploitation of workers. He notes:

IN COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

1347

cultural industries, mass culture reproduces ideology through the homogenization of audiences, erasing their class positions. This is also the thrust of the writings of Marcuse,

who attends to the culture machine that reproduces culture on a mass scale and dissemi-

nates it widely. What flows backtothe worker in the shape of wages is a portion of the product he himself continuously reproduces. . . . The illusion created by the money form vanishes immediately if, instead

of taking a single capitalist and a single worker, we take the whole capitalist class

and the whole working class. The capitalist class is constantly giving to the working class drafts, in the form of money, on

a portion of the product produced by the latter and appropriated by the former. The workers give these drafts back just as constantly to the capitalists. ... The trans-

action is veiled by the commodity-form of the product and the money-form of the commodity. (Marx, 1977, pp. 712-713)

Marx's use of “illusion” refers to the role played by the commodity form and money as ideological tools that secure the willing participation of the working classes in their own exploitation and subjugation. Power is thus enacted in the economic ownership of the capitalists of the means of production. The neo-Marxist approach of the Frankfurt School further refined ideology as a conceptual framework to understand the workings of power, depicting the ways of thought through which the oppressed participate in their own

oppression (Mumby, 1997). Media systems, as systems of communication held in the hands of those with power, shape the ideologies that are circulated among the working classes, securing their consent in their domi-

nation. In Adorno’s (2005) discussion of the

By extension, and in contrast, a post-struc-

turalist approach to power foregrounds the role of communication by arguing that power is brought into being through communication (Alvesson & Deetz, 1999; Mumby, 1997). Discourse is seen as the site where power is constructed, negotiated, and resisted (Mumby, 1988). Inherent in the conceptualization of

power is the inequality in the relationship between the powerful and the powerless, between those who govern and those who are governed; in this sense, power is relational

and is constituted through discourse. Power determines and constitutes the landscape of material flows and interventions. Power is also tied closely with how communication is constructed, what is formulated as acceptable forms of communication, and the terrains within

which communication is practiced (Alvesson, 2013; Alvesson & Deetz, 1999; Mumby, 1997). For instance,

communicative

constructions

of appropriate codes of participation and communication are deeply embedded within the power formations of society and in turn perpetuate specific power formations (Dutta,

2011). The realms of appropriateness and civility thus are guided by the agendas of those in power. Exactly how and with what goals communication is deployed are tied to the agendas of the dominant power formations

in society (Kisselburgh & Dutta, 2009). Feminist readings of power attend to the ways in which gender serves as a site for reproducing dominant power relations, constructing identities and actions through the circulation of specific scripts embedded in hegemonic masculinity (Mumby, 1988). Examining the

1348

»«

POWERAND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION

ways in which the organizing of power in society reproduce the political, economic, social, and cultural subjugation of women, feminist communication theory attends to the stories, discourses, and representations (Clair, 1998;

Martin, 1990). Communication studies of organizations, for instance, attend to the ways in

which gendered organizational practices are reproduced through the stories told in organi-

zations (Dougherty, 2006). Similarly, feminist readings of media power point to the ways in which the representation of gender reproduce the subjugation of women (Ross, 2010). In the realm of race, power constitutes the

racist structures of subjugation, acquiring the legitimacy of oppression through the circula-

STUDIES

embody the colonial power in the constructions of the Third World margins as the passive targets of modernist interventions from global centers of knowledge production, eras-

ing the claims to knowledge produced at the subaltern margins (Dutta, 2010). The subaltern studies collective engaged with postcolonial commitments noted the erasure of the subaltern classes through the production of

dominant knowledge claims (Guha, 1996). Indigenous movements for knowledge production seek to re-center indigenous methods of knowledge generation and indigenous knowledge claims, resisting the devaluing of indigenous knowledge that forms the struc-

tion of racist ideologies (Hall, 2000). Power

ture of the mainstream (Smith, 2013). Communication mediates the reproduc-

is intertwined with the ways in which domi-

tion of power. Writes Hunter, “The method of

nant races present their control over mate-

handling the relatively powerless understruc-

rial resources as normal while also justifying the various forms of oppressions carried out

ture is through ... warnings, intimidations, threats, and in extreme cases, violence” (Hunter,

on minority races. Studies on whiteness, for instance, depict the ways in which taken-forgranted notions of what is normal works to disenfranchise minority communities. Similarly,

nication work toward exerting the force of power while also constructing the powerless as the subject of elite interventions. Whereas

2017, p. S). These various forms of commu-

in Chinese-majority Singapore, the racism ex-

communication typically works through em-

perienced by Indians and Malays is silenced through a hegemonic culture that deploys the

bedded threats, warnings, and intimidations

In contemporary India, where Hindutva logics

that exercise the workings of power, in extreme forms of power, violence is directly enacted on the subjects of interventions. The

hold the national imagination, the narrative

threat of violence then works as a strategic

of a Hindu India is systematically deployed to disenfranchise Muslim minorities and to feed hate. Postcolonial studies draw our attention to the ways in which discursive bina-

tool for keeping the powerless in check and for perpetuating the power of the elite. The police and military are two examples of institutionalized structures of violence that carry

narrative of harmony (Dutta & Shome, 2018).

ries of primitive/modern, underdeveloped/

out the agendas of dominant actors. Moreover,

developed are deployed to reproduce colonial power (Parry, 2004; Shome & Hegde, 2002).

the everyday use of discursive tools to keep the powerless under control is legitimized

Communicative practices circulate the image

through the arrangements of communication

of the passive and backward Third World in

in everyday life (Van Dijk, 2008). The sym-

need of intervention, intertwined with the

bolic and the material are intertwined, with

production of communication knowledge that is inherently colonial. Dominant articula-

power in the realm of the symbolic being rooted in the material formations in society

tions of health communication, for example,

(Cheney & Cloud, 2006).

POWER

AND

CONTROL

Power and Discourse. Discourses constitute power (Alvesson, 2013; Van Dijk, 2008).

Various forms of discourses perpetuate the control of power and are written into the communicative structures that constitute everyday life. Discourses of the nation-state, societal life, community norms, organizational life,

and everyday relationships are embedded in positions of power and power differentials. Through these discourses, normative relationships are defined, thus maintaining the

inequalities in the distribution of power. Discourses, in other words, are deeply intertwined with the legitimation of power, making

IN COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

«

1349

inequalities in the distribution of power in a societal system. Similarly, who will get to be the recipient of decisions made by those in power, how the decisions will be passed down, the opportunities for challenging the decisions,

the availability of communicative channels in organizing processes, and the opportunities for articulation for the margins are all situated within the dominant structures of power and the inequalities that characterize them. Moreover, discourses constitute power within

organizations, lending legitimacy to specific formations of identities, relationships, rules,

and roles (Alvesson, 2013).

the production of power acceptable to the majority of members of a community (Mumby,

Control in Social, Cultural,

2004). In various forms of classed, gendered,

and Political Spaces.

and raced inequalities in the distribution of power, discourses legitimize these inequalities, making them appear normative, as the acceptable standards of societal organizing.

“to ‘control’ means to constrain work processes, human activity, and environmental events so that the organization creates value.” Power is organized in differentials on a global scale as

Mumby (2004) draws our attention to the

well as within the differentials in community life. In this sense, power is embodied in in-

ideological critique strand of communication studies that examines the ways in which dominant forms of making meaning reproduce existing power relations and simultaneously foreclose possibilities of resistance. Power and Organizing.

Thearrangement

of structures in social systems is guided by the everyday principles of organizing, which are themselves embedded in inequalities in the distribution of power (Mumby, 2004). Who gets to be the decision maker and who gets to be the recipient of decisions is tied to the inequalities in the distribution of power. Certain forms of organizing in societies along the lines of raced, gendered, and classed in-

equalities are rendered meaningful through the circulation of communicative logics. Com-

Economic,

ForBarker (2008),

equalities within societies, putting forth specific configurations of material difference that

are justified through techniques of control. Control is fundamentally communicative as it works to limit the possibilities of agentic expression through various forms of struc-

tures that are put into place. These normative limits are communicated to individuals and communities, and are further established through communication. Various structures establish control through communicative resources and constraining the access to these resources. These structures constrain the ca-

pacity of individuals, groups, and communities to participate in everyday processes. Moreover, the structures establish as norma-

munication rules, roles, and practices are fun-

tive specific forms of participation, setting the terms within which participation is con-

damentally embedded in these inequalities. For instance, who will get to speak at what point in what context is tied to the overarching

World Bank-led programs of participation that are pitched as sites of cultivating democracy

stituted. Take, for instance, the growth of

1350

-»

POWER

AND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION

while also working within the very procapital reform logics mandated by the Bank.

COMMUNICATION

AND POWER

Strategies of power and control are constituted and reproduced through communication (Alvesson, 2013). Communicative practices

and processes serve to carry out the agendas of those in power, working through communication to create sites of enactment of power. Whereas, on one hand, communication works to render the workings of power invisible, on the other hand, communication serves as the

very tool through which power is legitimized. Communicative

STUDIES

the positions of power are maintained through the work of communication. Similarly, discourses work within these sites of power and control to render as common sense the workings of power. Discursive claims are positioned

within the agendas of the power elite, making as common sense the logics that ensure elite control over resources and sites of communication. The strategic deployment of discourses within dominant sites of power and control is directed therefore toward further consolidating power in the hands of those with power. Control is exercised by those in power through the strategic manipulation of discursive resources to serve elite agendas.

practices render as neces-

sary the relationships of power and control.

Communication

Various forms of gendered, raced, and classed

inequalities are inherent in the linear transmis-

as

Strategic.

Power

oppressions are accorded legitimacy through

sion model of communication, with commu-

the role of communication in constituting relationships and in defining the normative

nication from the sender seeking to generate the intended effect on the recipient. The notion of communication as a strategic tool is fundamentally embedded in the concept that communication can be deployed through systematic processes in order to achieve intended effects in the target audience. The concept of effects is tied to the power of the sender.

guidelines for relationships. Consider, for example, the inequalities of social class in contemporary capitalist organizations. These

class-based inequalities in distribution of resources and in ownership of means of production are rendered legitimate through communication. The inequalities in the distribution of communicative opportunities and resources are embedded in inequalities in distribution of power, which in turn then generate discourses that normalize the inequalities in distribution of power in social systems.

Communicative practices are constituted

fundamentally in terrains of inequality, drawing upon the very notion that a small section of the elite with access to power define the scope and textures of these practices. What is communication, what defines the rules and roles of communication, and what are the ac-

ceptable practices of communicating are established in fundamentally unequal sites of distribution of power, in turn ensuring that

Those with access to economic resources own

the communicative channels and the sites of strategic message production, thus seeking to generate effects through these messages they disseminate. The implicit definition of the sender and the recipient in the communicative process is tied to inequalities in the flow of power, with those in power having the resources to invest into strategic communicators to generate optimum impact on the target au-

dience. The formation of the communicative industries as private organizations is fundamentally built on this inequality, with the owners of capital controlling communicative content through advertising revenues as well as through specific strategic messages with predefined persuasive intent. The nature of

POWER

AND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION STUDIES

.

1351

persuasion in strategic communication is there-

(Guha, 1996). The consolidation of power in

fore built on the hegemonic control over com-

tion precisely to put forth the opposite of

the hands of the global elite through the accelerated promotion of neoliberal policies has also meant that communicative infrastructures have been fundamentally erased, with limited or no opportunities for the margins to participate in these infrastructures. The accelerated penetration of transnational capital across global spaces has led to the systematic erasure of the opportunities for commu-

materiality. For instance, the discursive frame

nities to participate in communicative spaces,

“the poor are lazy” is often a communicative inversion, fundamentally inverting the materiality of the everyday lived experiences of the

erasure of democratic possibilities, and the co-optation of democratic sites of participation within elite structures. Communicative infrastructures, the very resources of communication where voices may be heard, are systematically erased through a wide range of policies built on the manufacturing of the threat. The “new subaltern” in the networks of global capital is at once the site of profiteering and simultaneously erased from sites and spaces of articulation. Unlike the tradi-

munication processes by the power elite.

Communicationas Inversion.

Inherent

in the conceptualization of communication as strategic is the concept of communicative

inversion (Dutta, 2017). Communicative inversions are the deployment of communica-

poor.

Such communicative

inversions

are

deployed systematically by the power elite in order to maintain inequalities in the distribution of symbolic and material resources. Communicative inversions are tools of con-

trol as they obfuscate materiality, fundamentally reproducing symbolic resources that legitimize various forms of oppressive and exploitative practices. The neoliberal transformation of the globe is fundamentally propped up on a wide range of communicative inver-

sions that circulate concepts of freedom and liberty tied to ideas of the free market even as they fundamentally push a wide range of oppressive practices that threaten freedom and human agency. The erasure of democratic spaces across the globe is carried out often under the label of promoting freedom. Similarly, the discursive trope of security is often circulated to reproduce insecure conditions for large cross-sections of populations even as symbolic and material spaces are con-

solidated into strategies of elite power and control. Communication as Erasure. Accompanying the communicative inversions deployed by the power elite are the communicative erasures, the erasures of the symbolic spaces for articulations from the global margins

tional definition of subaltern as being cut off from frameworks and processes of mobility, the “new subaltern’ is incorporated into global capital as a resource for profiteering. Control is thus enacted through the erasure of the opportunities to communicate. Culture,

Difference,

and

Power.

Difference is the site of working of power, with communication working from the position of power to erase difference, offering homogeneous and monolithic categories of the elite structures as universals. The universal values of human aspiration and desire that are articulated within power structures are the values of those with power, embedded within the dominant societal structures. Meanings are imbibed with the values of the power elite and are disseminated through communication channels, serving as anchors to the symbols that are reproduced in dominant structures. These meanings and their culturally rooted

1352

-«

POWER

AND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION

inscriptions are erased from the discursive spaces. Terms such as “development,” “modernization,’ and “growth” are inscribed with

the agendas of the power elite and are disseminated through communication channels. These meanings then serve as the bases for a wide range of material practices. Culture in this sense offers possibilities for resisting the dominant meanings, drawing from trans-

STUDIES

claims to culture and heritage, and communi-

cative constructions of the heritage and culture industries clearly emerge as tools through which the power elite enact their power and control within societies.

Difference, paradoxically articulated in the language of the margins set in opposition to Western/Eurocentric hegemony, manifests as a tool for serving the power and control of

formative sites of meaning production to challenge the logics of dominant actors in positions of power. ‘This resistive capacity of culture, however, is increasingly coopted within the

the elite. Difference, therefore, is strategically

neoliberal logics of capital, with claims to cultural policy, cultural marketing, and heritage

oppression, working to serve the agendas of

marketing serving as tools for reproducing the agendas of the dominant structures. Culture, married to the metrics of the free market, is

catalyzed to push forth elite agendas. Cultural extraction is legitimized as a tool of neoliberal profiteering. In global circuits of capital, culture is often put forth by the power elite as an anchor for

difference to reproduce elite power, offering communicative justifications for strategies for capitalist control. Claims to cultural difference and context are offered up as the narrative accounts that render as legitimate the strategies of erasure and oppression that serve the goals of those in power, simultaneously working to consolidate the power and control of the owners of capital. Cultural logics are put forth as logics of difference, which are simul-

taneously deployed as justifications for a plethora of oppressive practices that enable the extraction of wealth and exploitation of labor. For instance, communicative claims to Asian pragmatism, communitarianism, or il-

liberal pragmatism are served up as sites for articulating Asian values, which then are de-

ployed precisely as tropes for justifying authoritarian repression and the erasure of the opportunities for democratic participation as the margins within Asia. Cultural articulations,

deployed precisely as a category for enabling the global circulation of capital, adapted to the specific strategies of local exploitation and the local power elite. Cultural studies claims within these contexts of difference can paradoxically work toward the reification of power and control, making essentialist culturalist

claims and context-based articulations as the bases for the legitimation of elite power and control. MEDIATED SITES OF POWER AND CONTROL Media, as tools of global capital, serve the

agendas of the power elite through the circulation of agendas, frames, and narratives that

legitimize elite rule and the consolidation of wealth in the hands of the power elite (Mills,

2005). The conceptualization of media pluralism within the scope of private profit-making situate media structures in the hands of the owners of private capital (Herman & Chomsky,

2010). Mediated constructions thus push forth capitalist logics that justify the consolidation of wealth and power in the hands of the global elite. The globalization of media, depicted in terms of the global movements of mediated images across spaces, is intrinsically tied to the global hegemony of the capitalist logic, tied to the unfettered obsession with the free market as the panacea to global challenges. Cultural differences narrated through these

POWER

AND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

«

1353

mediated images are embedded in transnational elite logics of wealth consolidation. The

ble to the working classes as tools of ideolog-

free market narrative is pushed through a

ical control. Horkheimer and Adorno (2000)

music, movies, and books, and readily availa-

wide range of media, framing the free market

describe the “culture industry” as a homoge-

in narratives of cultural diversity and plural-

nizing tool for disseminating ideology, con-

ism. Even as cultural artifacts are circulated as

sites and tropes of difference, such as in the

stituting homogeneous consumers that are devoid of their class positions, cultivating

examples of Asian difference, they are em-

perceptions of individually tailored cultural

bedded within global capitalist logics, push-

opportunities

ing the neoliberal status quo. Asian media narratives, for instance, become the narratives

class mobility as a matter of luck, and undermining opportunities of resistance to the unequal power relationships that form the sub-

of consumption, commoditization, and aspirations, albeit voiced through the presence of Asian bodies in the discursive space.

for participation,

projecting

stance of capitalism. In One-Dimensional Man,

Marcuse (1991) discusses the one-dimensional society produced by the mass culture

News Media and Elite Control. The increasing consolidation of power in the hands of the elite is evident in the accelerated trans-

and the scientific-technological tools that, on the one hand, improve standards of living of

formation of news media spaces and sites.

matrix and, in doing so, on the other hand, re-

News media are increasingly privatized on

produce the consent of the working classes to capitalist exploitation.

the basis of profit-driven models of circulation, with the ownership of news media nar-

the working classes based on a commodity

rowing down to a small set of transnational

The values of global entertainment are shaped by the agendas of transnational capi-

corporate actors that are deeply connected

tal, disseminating market ideology, commod-

to a range of extractive, energy, defense, and

itization, and accelerated consumption as forms of participation. The identity of the en-

other industries (Van Dijk, 1995). The frames and structures of news thus are constituted within

the elite agendas of transnational capital, narrating events through the lens of power. The global flow of news is shaped within the neoliberal articulation of news as a structure for disseminating the values of elite power. Constructions of threats and crises drive news flows, in turn

shaping the discursive sites of public participation within the boundaries of elite power and control. Entertainment Media and Power Structures. For Adorno (1991), media constitute the cultural industries that shape the ideologies that constitute human experience. This argument forms a key thread of the Frankfurt School, noting the role of “mechan-

ically reproduced” (Benjamin, 1968, p. 218) cultural artifacts disseminated through radio,

tertainment audience is shaped within the structures of private capital seeking to generate profits (Hollands & Chatterton, 2003). The cultural differences and varieties in entertainment programs globally are situated within an overarching capitalist logic that flows across spaces. The identities, opportunities, and roles for audience members are situated within the dominant logics of entertainment media, consti-

tuted within an all-inclusive neoliberal ideology of market promotion. The sense of diversity of programs is constituted within a comprehensive

ideology of promoting the global free market. Digital Media and Power. New media are sites of profiteering and therefore are fun-

damentally tied to logics of power and control (Mansell, 2004). The framing of digital

1354

-«

POWER

AND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION

media as emancipatory technologies of resistance and democracy is juxtaposed in the backdrop of the role of digital media as corporate-controlled tools of influence through surveillance and strategies of large-scale data gathering (Mansell, 2004). Digital media tools amass large-scale data on users, turning

these data into smart interventions guided by strategies of influence. Participants turned into commoditized users are constituted in global networks of flow, tied to agendas of

profiteering. The large-scale data gathered on users is deployed toward generating profits for transnational capital. Weaponized as tools of influence, social media have been deployed within networks of power and control. Media structures, including digital media structures,

are closely intertwined with politics, with political actors leveraging digital media structures as the key tools of influence (Chadwick,

STUDIES

logics of elite control. For instance, in response to the legal framework that guarantees indigenous communities rights over decision-making processes in the context of their land in India, elite mining companies collaborate with local and state political elites to co-opt the decision-making processes (Padel & Das, 2010). Similarly, across the globe, the rationalities of indigenous communities regarding collective ownership of land are systematically erased by large-scale mining operations working under the logics of wealth extraction (Kirsch, 2014). Across indigenous spaces, appearances of dialogue coopt the resistive capacities of indigenous movements seeking to assert indigenous rights. Rather than build opportunities for subaltern communities to participate, performances

of participation are directed precisely to enable the elite to consolidate their power and con-

2017). Gathering data on the digital practices

trol. Communicative processes thus are em-

of audiences as consumers participating in round-the-clock uses of technologies, seg-

bedded within the dominant societal logics, replicating and extending sites and mechanisms of control. Similarly, the dominant races within societal formations create and reproduce various forms of control that carry out the exploitation and oppression of minorities. The marking of minorities as lazy or incapable works toward legitimating the privileges of the dominant races. The absence of access to education, employment, housing, and food is justified under dominant logics that render as normal the processes and frameworks of exclusion.

menting audiences based on these practices,

and targeting audiences through smart messaging techniques depict the role digital technologies play in consolidating power in the hands of the elite (Kreiss, 2016). From directed efforts of propaganda to state-directed projects of behavior change directed by big data, social media have been constructed as tools to serve the agendas of power, constituted within the profiteering agendas of the technopower elite.

Furthermore, the incarceration and crimi-

SOCIETAL SITES OF POWER AND CONTROL

nalization of minority races within dominant structures of power and control is legitimized through the deployment of

In societies, the elite exert power and control through the ownership of communicative

communication.

resources,

Communicative

processes,

and

decision-making processes. The nature of decision-making processes is tied to the profitmaking logics of capital, with decision-making platforms organized under the overarching

Social Inequalities and Space.

Social

inequalities are expressed in the inequalities in the distribution of and access to spaces (Valentine, 2008). Various forms of differences are legitimized through the deployment

POWER

AND

CONTROL

of communication, working to mark certain

spaces as sites of power accumulation, whereas other spaces are marked as the margins of power. The margins are marked as sites of extraction, subject to various forms of interventions carried out by the state—capital nexus. The construction of space as illegitimate is tied to the marginalization of space, the enactment of tools of power, and the control of space.

IN COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

-«

1355

colonizing rules and logics through which the worker is disciplined into practices of

workplace participation (Deetz & Mumby, 1990; Mumby, 2008). The very organizing of the workplace is driven by the underlying logics of power and control, with workers subjected to an array of normative codes, organizational scripts, and organizational guidelines for behavior. The organization thus colo-

For instance, marking indigenous land as ex-

nizes the lifeworld, scripting it into specific

tractable space, constituted in the logics of capital, becomes the very basis for large-scale displacement of indigenous communities from their sources of livelihood. Similarly, the communicative construction of the rural-urban divide becomes the basis for the deployment of material resources toward urban accumulation even as the rural is marked as a target for displacement through projects of urbanization and growth.

realms of performance dictated by those in

Power and Interpersonal Relationships.

Power is embedded in the ways in which interpersonal communication is constituted, set-

ting up the normative expectations of communication

(Lannamann,

1991). Consider,

for instance, the expectations of civility in the dominant configurations of power that impose normative concepts of civility on minority

communities, simultaneously obfuscating the opportunities for critiquing the dominant structural configurations. In such cases, civil-

power (Deetz & Mumby, 1990). The structures of organizations are connected to material inequalities.

State and Totalitarian Control.

States

are often constituted as the instruments of exerting power

and control

(Earl, 2006).

Totalitarian states justify control through techniques of communicative circulation that prevent oppositional thoughts and ideas. The totality of control is achieved through the deployment of material and symbolic resources to the service of the state’s agendas. The state is organized as the administrative structure for the power elite, working to reproduce elite control. Paradoxically, although they are formed through the participation of citizens in electoral processes, contemporary democracies often adopt these totalitarian strategies as mechanisms of control. Increasingly, under the neoliberal transformation of nation-states, state structures and processes

ity codes serve to reproduce the agendas of dominant racial/ethnic groups while also rendering erased the voices of the margins. The gendering of interpersonal relationships is constituted in the extent of gendered

have been reorganized to enable the accumulation of private capital, often through the deployment of police, military, and other state institutions to catalyze such ac-

power differentials, rendering as norma-

cumulation (Zhao & Chakravartty, 2007;

tive specific expectations performance.

Sassen, 1999).

Organizational

Sites

of

of gendered

Power

and

Control. One of the most pervasive sites of working of power in contemporary society is the organization, establishing an array of

State Surveillance. Various technologies are deployed by states as instruments of surveillance, placing citizens as security threats to be continually under control. The placement of technologies of surveillance in public

1356

-»

POWER

AND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

spaces at once privatizes these spaces and

deployed as strategies for control. New media

serves the agendas of the state in serving the

technologies including social media are cata-

interests of private capital. The accelerated pri-

lyzed toward enacting control in the hands of

vatization ofglobal resources is accomplished through the various forms of state-driven violence that are enabled by technologies ofsur-

police and military forces. These forces are

veillance. The citizen as the surveiled subject is continuously monitored, with every breath,

sites of resistance that challenge the oppressions carried out at the intersections of the state-capital nexus.

step,

and

movement

under

observation

often deployed precisely with the goal of controlling mobility, particularly in controlling

(Abe, 2006). The regulation of dissent and protest is achieved through techniques of surveillance working toward serving the

agendas ofthe elite. The depiction ofnational security as a crisis is often deployed precisely to enable the large-scale adoption of techniques of surveillance. The presence of cameras, automatic recording devices, tools for smart face recognition, and so on in public spaces serves to legitimate various techniques of control in the hands of the state. The invention of new categories of “smart,”

“intelligent,” and “innovation” are deployed toward serving the agendas of power and control. The geosecurity threat of potential

Embodied Control. Various forms of state-market control play out through everyday forms of repression that are carried out

on the body (Dutta, 2006). The body of the citizen is turned into a site for marking and working on through various technologies of control (Davenport, 2007). Take, for instance, the Aadhaar card in India that is de-

ployed by the state as the technology for universal identification (Dutta, 2017). The body under surveillance of state apparatus is constructed as the site for generating profits for the global free market. What bodies count,

terror attacks is often manufactured as a stra-

how bodies count, and the ways in which bodies are counted into the structure of data-

tegic tool for carrying out various techniques

fication are tied to the logics of power and

of smart repression, including drone-enabled

control. Although certain bodies lend them-

murders of potential security threats. The

selves to mattering, other bodies are excluded

communicative construction of the “other”

from systems of accounting and are erased from the symbolic and material spaces.

is tied to the ways in which threat is manufactured as a tool to enable the techniques of surveillance.

Whereas the language of universal access is

projected as the basis for technological interventions, technologies work precisely to

Subjects of the

exclude the margins from the processes of

state are reproduced as targets of control. The movement of subjects is brought under techniques of control through a wide array of technologies of surveillance and monitoring. Technologies demarcate spaces of movement and the forms of access to mobility. Although some bodies can move through spaces and gain

mattering. The material access of the margins to resources is tied to the organizing of technologies. In other words, control and exclusion work hand in hand. Moreover, forms of

Mobility

of Subjects.

from such movements, other bodies have lim-

ited or no access to spaces of mobility. Laws of marking, demarcation, and separation are

repression percolate through the tissues and cellular networks of the state fabric that are

expressed on the body of the individual subject. The citizen as subject of repression experiences forms of state control at the level of the organization of the cell.

POWER

AND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

«

ISS7

DEVELOPMENT, POWER, AND SOCIAL CHANGE

under the ambits of propaganda were consolidated in the United States under the Committee of Public Information (CPI), which was

The dominant ideas of development commu-

set up to exert power through means of com-

nication have been central to the global work-

munication. The CPI, created by Woodrow

ings of power, the reproduction of inequalities through the promotion of the free market, and the opening of globally disparate spaces to transnational capital, often under the guise of aid offered by global development organi-

Wilson in 1917, set out to generate public support for the war and to address the problem

zations (Wilkins, 2000). Various forms of power configured in the form ofinternational development agencies, global foundations, and transnational nongovernmental organi-

notions of modern communication then were tied to the agendas of dominant actors to generate spaces and sites for support for the dominant concepts while also suppressing dissent

zations have been integral to the reproduction of global capital. The very notion of develop-

and/or resistance. The work of the CPI, or

ment in social change communication has been tied to the promotion of the moderniza-

of George Creel, created and disseminated

tion paradigm, obfuscating the deeply cultural

new stories, films, educational instruction, and speeches. Communication as strategy was

and value-based anchors of the paradigm, instead framing modernization as a universal science. Inherent in the fundamental framing

of communication is the belief in the power of communication as a tool for change, erasing the inequalities that form the bases for

how communication is conceptualized, implemented, and evaluated. The very ideas of communication in the discipline are tied to the positions of power that constitute the

fundamental concepts of communication. Influence, Development, and Power. The dominant idea of communication is embedded in the characterization of communication as influence. Influence itself is embedded in inequalities in the distribution of power in the flow of communication. Influence flows from the dominant sites of producing commu-

nication to the recipients of communication and is a key feature of how communication is

conceptualized in the military paradigm, with the earliest concepts of communication as influence tied to the military agenda. The examination and deployment of influence

of dissent domestically from the threats of socialism, anarchism, and labor unionism (Glander, 2000). Note here that the earliest

of the Creel Committee under the leadership strategic communication materials through

inherently embedded in power differentials. This deployment of communication as an instrument of influence during wartime was juxtaposed to the backdrop of the repression of dissent through the deployment of the Espionage Act. Propaganda as a tool for shaping human behavior was deployed by the Nazi government to shape its global image and carried out by Ivy Lee, who carried out public relations activities for John D. Rockefeller. These ideas of influence were transformed internationally into the scope of communi-

cation for social change, or what is termed development communication, with the underlying notion that communication can be categorically used in transforming the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs of target audiences. Power, then, is intrinsic to the idea of communication, drawing from military strat-

egy and connecting to development communication strategy.

In the scope of social change, the originary ideas of US-centric communication were tied to techniques of coercion, thus developing a

1358

-«

POWER

AND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION

“science of coercion” (Simpson, 1994). The science of communication was embedded in the agendas of power and dominance. The World War II era saw the continued deployment of mass media toward behavior change,

with the Office of War Information (OWI) and Office of Strategic Services (OSS) gath-

ering a wide array of social scientists deployed toward intelligence gathering and intelligent message design (Glander, 2000). The questions of security and national interest shaped the framing of the work of social scientists interested in the deployment of mass media toward social change, catalyzing news reports, publications, radio, and film toward propaganda. The very conceptual basis of communication is embedded in power differentials. The Cold War period offered the basis of the development of communication concepts built around the fundamentals of strategic influence, marrying the agendas of capitalism and propaganda. The progress of science is tied to propaganda and embedded in the deployment of communication toward achieving influence. The science of communication thus is very much a militarized model of communication occupied with strategic influence.

The current preoccupation of nation-states and practitioners of influence with nudge (Sunstein, 2014) through harvesting of big data reproduces the Cold War ideology of communication.

Development

Communication

and

Power. ‘The war paradigm that formed the basis for communication as influence transformed into development communication as a strategic tool for transforming the newly decolonized nations (Dutta, 2011). The formulation of development communication, communication for development, and com-

munication for social change (terms that are utilized interchangeably) is rooted in the production of development knowledge that

STUDIES

universalizes the Eurocentric pathway of development as the normative and preferred route to development, grounded in the capitalist notion of technology as the driver of economic growth. Inherent then in the production of development knowledge is the marking of the “developed” and the “undeveloped/underdeveloped.” The role of knowledge of development is tied to the production of practices of development, tied to the strategies of US-driven development interventionism globally to produce markets for USbased capital. Rooted in modernization theory, the mainstream framework of social change communication conceptualized social change as a planned activity that would bring about de-

velopment in traditional societies (Peet & Hartwick, 2015). Essential to the framework of modernization is the categorization of traditional and developed societies, offering a deficit-based framework to account for the underdevelopment of traditional societies. In other words, traditional societies are de-

scribed as societies lacking in certain characteristics (of development, characterized as

capitalism and democracy) that define a modern society. Industrialized societies of the West were defined as modern, developed societies, and development was marked as the linear movement of traditional societies to the markers of the developed, industrialized societies. The economist Bert Hoselitz

launched the journal Economic Development and Cultural Change in 1952 to examine the social structural and cultural characteristics underlying the development process. The knowledge of development thus produced was actively deployed for the purposes of US propaganda and military interventionism in the Third World. The deep-seated relationship between Cold War US militarism and the production of development knowledge is evident, for example, in the way in which the economic historian

POWER

AND

CONTROL

Walt W. Rostow, one of the founding theo-

rists of the modernization paradigm, was one of the key architects and defenders of the US imperialist invasion of Vietnam (ReidHenry, 2013; Stevenson, 2017). Rostow’s The

Stages ofEconomic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto (1960) charted out the pathway of development, encompassing the following stages: (a) from traditional societies, which had limited production, primitive technologies, and a spiritual worldview; to (b) preconditions for take-off, where traditional methods

still prevailed, but education started expanding, manufacturing plants started developing, mobilities increased, financial activities

appeared, and the degree of commerce increased; to (c) take-off, where new industries

rapidly expanded, the class of entrepreneurs grew, and urban industrial employment increased; to (d) the active drive toward maturity, where modern technology spread across the country, widespread technical and entrepreneurial skills resulted in innovative solutions to new and emerging problems, and economic growth outdid population growth; to (e) high mass consumption, where the con-

IN COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

-

1359

as a technique for applying psychological pressure, what came to be formalized as the Rostow thesis (Stevenson, 2017).

Modernization theory formed the crux of the early development communication framework and practice, and continues to shape the landscape of development knowledge, albeit packaged in neoliberal narratives of individual freedom, self-help, and market-based par-

ticipation. One of the earliest articulations of development communication emerged in the work of Daniel Lerner (1958), reflected

in the book The Passing of Traditional Society: Modernizing the Middle East. Lerner reproduced the traditional/modern dichotomy that lies at the crux of the modernization paradigm, framing the role of mediated technologies as catalysts of modernization. Development communication efforts locate individual attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors as the locus of

the problem, and therefore interventions are targeted at Third World societies within the top-down framework of persuasive communication interventions, with the goal of chang-

ing individual behaviors that are seen as barriers to the development of these societies.

sumer goods and services industries prevailed, rise in real income allowed a large section of people to consume more than needed, and the nature of work changed to urban skilled and

Lerner’s (1958) interest in the role of modern communication in transforming traditional societies into pathways of development was

office work. Rostow’s categorization scheme was universal and placed countries in cate-

Mass Media and National Development: The Role of Information in Developing Countries, and Everett Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations. Inherent in the modernization paradigm was the role accorded to communication as an enabler of change in the pathway of development. Whether it is the traditional framework of diffusion of innovations that conceptualizes development in terms of disseminating tech-

gories, mapped them in their trajectories of movements, and then offered prescriptive solutions for movement from tradition to modernity. Note in the title of the book its overarching ideological commitment in framing development as an antidote to communism.

The ontological mapping Rostow envisioned also became the basis for the overarching rationale for violent US interventionism in Vietnam he offered, arguing that the Vietcong were a barrier to South Vietnam’s take-off,

therefore advocating for military intervention

also reflected in the works of Wilbur Schramm,

nologies of progress (seeds, fertilizers, dams, computers, fortified food, mobile phones,

Internet, etc.) or the social psychological framework of behavior change through persuasion (such as family planning, condom

1360

-«

POWER

AND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION

usage, immunization promotion, etc.), the messages of development originate from the senders in the developed world, and the

target audiences are recipients in the underdeveloped world (Lerner, 1967, 1968; Schramm, 1964; Schramm & Lerner, 1976; Thomas & van de Fliert, 2014). Modernization became the framework for Westernization, carried

out through the explicit agendas of Western funding agencies, primarily the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and Department for International Development (DfID) (Melkote & Steeves, 2001). The flow of communication from the sender to the recipient, therefore, is constituted within this

broader agenda of seeking to bring about changes in the cultural patterns of target cultures that are seen as primitive and lacking in the necessary agency for modernization, understood in a linear framework of development that moves from a primitive state to a state of modernity. Development communication was organized in the post-World War II climate, conceptualizing communication technology as an instrument of development, dissemination, and diffusion (Dutta, 2011; Melkote, 1991; Shah, 2011). Development emerged as a rhe-

torical trope to reposition the colonizing and imperializing forces of the West, primarily the United States and United Kingdom, of-

fering a neutral-sounding Western hegemony in the global climate dominated rations and desires, and countering the popular ance movements

language to assert post-World War II by Cold War aspicrafting spaces for anticolonial resist-

that were emerging across

the Global South (Dutta, 2006). Based on the

principles of liberal democracy, development came to embody taken-for-granted Westcentric assumptions about the desirable models of economic, political, social, and cultural or-

ganizing, and the universally prescribed pathways of growth formulated in linear trajectories

STUDIES

of capitalist transitions as the basis for democratization. Capitalism was seen as intrinsic to

the conceptualization of democracy, and democracy promotion initiatives funded by the USAID disseminated the values of capitalism through a variety of symbolic resources such as television programs, radio entertainment,

and news programs. Communication technologies played a pivotal role in development, both as instruments of persuasion as well as instruments of organizing global political economy on market principles (Dutta, 2006).

Articulations of communication technology were framed in Western imaginations of liberal democracy, universalizing Western cultural assumptions through the technologies of dissemination and simultaneously erasing the possibilities of popular cultural participation grounded in subaltern rationalities in the Global South. One of the key elements of the dominant framework of social change communication was the push toward opening up countries in the Global South to transnational corporations (TNCs), located in the

United States and United Kingdom. The precursor to the global promotion of neoliberalism therefore was a global development model that was very much like its successor in leveraging the power of the state to push for reforms in the recipient countries of the Global South that would open up markets for TNCs based in the North. Agendas of planned transformations in agriculture and health were closely tied to the agendas of the market (Dutta, 2010).

TECHNOLOGIES OF POWER AND CONTROL

Throughout the dominant development paradigm, technologies were configured into the agendas of serving power and control (Dutta, 2011 ).Technologies emerge in global capitalist configurations as instruments for upholding

POWER

AND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION STUDIES

1361

and perpetuating power, serving as the conduits for opening up new markets. Technological solutions projected as solutions of development are pushed into spaces in the Global South, simultaneously driving opportunities

ways in which these inequalities render cer-

for new markets (Dutta, 2016). The seamless-

tain bodies disposable in digital circuits of

ness

innovation.

of new

communication

technologies,

captured in smart and slick devices that obfuscate the power differentials in the production of these technologies, works toward perpetuating technological capital, often framing technology paradoxically as the solution to underlying inequalities. The techno-determinism of development is integral to the production of global inequalities, consolidating power in the

hands of techno-capital. The vast differences in the distribution of material resources across the globe is tied to the global reproduction of techno-seductive solutions that continue to fundamentally create and reproduce conditions of vast inequalities. The techno-seductive discourse works, however, to obfuscate

these inequalities in the fundamental production and reproduction of technologies. Raw Materials and Technologies.

‘The

flow of raw materials in the production of communication technologies and the exploitative nature of the extractive industries fundamentally underlie the nature of contemporary global inequalities in the digital industries and the accompanying societal transformations (Taffel, 2012). The extractive industries that generate these raw materials reflect the poor working conditions, subjecting underpaid and often bonded workers to poor health condi-

overarching logics of global capital. Critical interrogations of this seamless logic of global flow of innovations attend to the fundamental nature of material inequalities and the

Labor

and

Techno-Production.

The

global mobility of technology production is tied to the production of precarious working conditions for the global poor, working in technology manufacturing and assembling units (Qiu, 2017). With limited or no labor protections, often working in authoritarian environments that strictly erase opportunities for collective organizing, workers experience a wide range of threats to their health and well-being, and are limited in their opportunities for experiencing and expressing freedom. Techniques of authoritarian control imposed on the bodies of workers are integral to the production processes in assembly lines. The absence of collective bargaining processes and the neoliberal attack on unions at sites of global techno-production ensure that the owners of techno-capital assert their power. Disposal of Technologies.

The burdens

of technology disposal are disproportionately borne by communities in the Global South without access to sites of power (Iles, 2004).

The toxicity of the technologies is expressed on the bodies of the global poor while the profits from these technologies accrue to those in power at global sites of technology consump-

tions and exposures to various forms of risks

tion (Taffel, 2012). Inequalities of power

(Dutta, 2017). These risks borne by workers in

2016). The production of communication that

play out in the distribution of the health impacts of these technologies, manifested in the effects on the body. The discursive frames around technologies that position themselves as global solutions to challenges of develop-

obfuscates these fundamental inequalities in

ment obscure the inequities in exposure to tox-

the circulation of technologies is tied to the

icities that are produced by the technologies.

the mining industries feeding techno-capital accompany the displacements that are produced by the extractive industries (Fuchs,

1362

-

POWER

AND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION

Questioning the flow of communication in

STUDIES

Alvesson, M. (2013). Communication, power and or-

dominant structures of global capitalism dis-

ganization (Vol. 72). Berlin, Germany: Walter de

rupts the strategic obfuscation of the inequal-

Gruyter. Alvesson, M., & Deetz, S. (1999). Critical theory and postmodernism: Approaches to organizational

ities in the distribution of the material effects of technologies.

CONCLUSION

studies. In S, R. Clegg & C. Hardy (Eds.), Studying organization: Theory and method (pp. 185-211). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Barker, J. R. (2008). Control and authority in

In conclusion, power and control drive the

organizations. In W. Donsbach (Ed.), The inter-

contours of modern life, played out and reproduced through communication. Communication is constituted by the terrains of power and is played out in inequalities in the distri-

national encyclopedia of communication (pp. 980984). Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell. Benjamin, W. (1968). The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. In H. Arendt (Ed.), Illuminations (pp.214-221). London, UK: Fontana.

bution of resources. In turn, communication

is constitutive of power and control, ensuring

the differentials in society. The various forms of power and control, ranging from individ-

ual to societal levels, depict the everyday work of communication in the reproduction of power and control. Amid the rapid globalization of capital, the transformation of communication as a tool of elite power and control is salient. In this backdrop, resistance is enacted in the struggles for recognition and human dignity among the global margins, seeking to

Bourdieu, P. (1979). Symbolic power. Critique of Anthropology, 4(13-14), 77-85. Castells, M. (2007). Communication, power and counter-power in the network society. International Journal of Communication, 1(1), 29.

Chadwick, A. (2017). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Cheney, G., & Cloud, D. L. (2006). Doing democ-

racy, engaging the material: Employee participation and labor activity in an age of market globalization. Management Communication Quarterly, 19(4), 501-540.

invert the material dispossessions produced by neoliberalism by reclaiming and building

Clair, R. (1998). Organizing silence: A world of possi-

communicative infrastructures (Dutta, 2011).

bilities. Albany: State University of New York

Understanding power in relationship to the accelerating global inequalities, ever-expanding reach of capital, and new forms of exploitation requires ongoing engagement with Marxist

theory, albeit in ways that seek to explain the digital forms, spaces, and processes of extraction.

Press.

Davenport, C. (2007). State repression and political order. Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 1-23.

Deetz, S., & Mumby, D. K. (1990). Power, discourse, and the workplace: Reclaiming the critical tradition. Annals of the International Communication Association, 13(1), 18-47.

Dougherty, D. S. (2006). Gendered constructions of power during discourse about sexual harass-

REFERENCES

Abe, K. (2006). Technologies of surveillance. Theory, Culture, and Society, 23(2-3), 265-267. Adorno, T. (1991). The schema of mass culture (Vol. 79). London, UK: Routledge. Adorno, T. W. (2005). The culture industry: Selected essays on mass culture. New York, NY: Routledge.

ment: Negotiating competing Roles, 54(7-8), 495-507.

meanings.

Sex

Dutta, M. J. (2010). The critical cultural turn in health communication: Reflexivity, solidarity, and praxis. Health Communication, 25(6-7), 534-539. Dutta, M. J. (2011). Communicating social change:

Structure, culture, and agency. Abingdon, UK: Taylor & Francis.

POWER

AND

CONTROL

Dutta, M. J. (2016). Neoliberal health organizing: Communication, meaning, and politics. New York,

NY: Routledge.

Dutta, M. J. (2017). Imagining India in discourse. In M. J. Dutta (Ed.), Imagining India in discourse:

Meaning, power, structure (pp. 1-23). Singapore: Springer. Dutta, M. J. (2017). Migration and health in the con-

IN COMMUNICATION

STUDIES

1363

Hall, S. (2000). Racist ideologies and the media. Media Studies: A reader, 2, 271-282.

Harvey, D. (2005). Neoliberalism: A brief history. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Herman, E. S.,& Chomsky, N. (2010). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media. New York, NY: Random House.

Bangladeshi workers in Singapore. International Journal ofEnvironmental Research and Public Health,

Hollands, R., & Chatterton, P. (2003). Producing nightlife in the new urban entertainment economy: Corporatization, branding and market segmentation. International Journal of Urban and

Dutta, M. J. (2006). Theoretical approaches to en-

Regional Research, 27(2), 361-385. Honneth, A. (1996). The struggle forrecognition: The

tertainment education campaigns: A subaltern critique. Health Communication, 20(3), 221-231. Dutta, M. J. & Shome, R. (2018). Mobilities,

moral grammar ofsocial conflicts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Horkheimer, M., & Adorno, T. W. (2000). Dialectic of

struction industry: Culturally centering voices of

14(2), 132.

Communication, and Asia| Mobilities in Asia—

enlightenment, Stanford, CA: Stanford University

Introduction. International Journal of Commu-

Press. Horkheimer, M., & Adorno, T. W. (2006). The culture industry: Enlightenment as mass deception.

nication, 12, 19,

Earl,J.(2006). Introduction: Repression and the social control of protest. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 11(2), 129-143. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977. New York, NY: Pantheon Books. Foucault, M. (1981). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977. New York, NY:

Pantheon. Fuchs, C. (2016). Digital labor and imperialism. Monthly Review, 67(8), 14. Glander, T. (2000). Origins of mass communications

research during the American Cold War: Educational effects and contemporary implications. New York, NY: Routledge.

Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (Q. Hoare & G. N. Smith, Trans.) New York, NY: International Publishers. Gramsci, A. (1992). Prison notebooks (Vol. 1). (J. A. Buttigieg, Trans.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Gramsci, A. (1996). Prison notebooks (Vol. 11). (J. A. Buttigieg, Trans.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Guha, R. (1996). The small voice of history. Subaltern Studies, 9, 1-12.

Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action (Vol. 2). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

In M. G. Durham & D. M. Kellner (Eds.), Media

and cultural studies: Keyworks (pp.41-72). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Hunter, F. (2017). Community power structure: A

study of decision makers. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

Iles, A. (2004). Mapping environmental justice in technology flows: Computer waste impacts in Asia. Global Environmental Politics, 4(4), 76-107. Kirsch, S. (2014). Mining capitalism: The relationship between corporations and their critics. Berkeley: University of California Press. Kisselburgh, L. G., & Dutta, M. J. (2009). The con-

struction of civility in multicultural organizations. In P. Lutgen-Sandvik & B. Davenport Sypher (Eds.), Destructive organizational communication:

Processes, consequences, and constructive ways of organizing (pp. 121-142) New York, NY: Routledge.

Kreiss, D. (2016). Prototype politics: Technologyintensive campaigning and the data of democracy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Lannamann, J. W. (1991). Interpersonal communi-

cation research as ideological practice. Communication Theory, 1(3), 179-203. Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Knupfer, G. (1945). Communications research and international cooperation. In R. Linton (Ed.), The science of man in the world

1364

«

POWER

AND

CONTROL

IN COMMUNICATION

crisis (pp. 465-495). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Lerner, D. (1958). The passing of traditional society: Modernizing the Middle East. New York, NY: Free Press.

Lerner, D. (1967). International cooperation and communication

in national

development.

In

STUDIES

Mumby, D. K. (2008). Organizational communica-

tion: Critical approaches. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Padel, F., & Das, S. (2010). Cultural genocide and the rhetoric of sustainable mining in East India. Contemporary South Asia, 18(3), 333-341. Parry, B. (2004). Problems in current theories of colo-

D. Lerner & W. Schramm (Eds.), Communication

nial discourse. In B. Parry (Ed.), Postcolonial stud-

and change in developing countries, (pp. 103-125). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Lerner, D. (1968). Modernization: social aspects. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences,

ies: A materialist critique. London, UK: Routledge. Peet, R., & Hartwick, E. (2015). Theories of develop-

10, 386-395.

Marcuse, H. (1991 [1964]). One-dimensional man: Studies in the ideology of advanced industrial society. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Martin, J. (1990). Deconstructing

organizational

taboos: The suppression of gender conflict in organizations. Organization Science, 1(4), 339-359.

Mansell, R. (2004). Political economy, power and new media. New Media and Society, 6(1), 96-105. Marx, K. (1977). Capital: A critique of political economy (Vol. 1) (B. Fowkes, Trans.). New York, NY: Vintage Books. Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1989). Excerpts from the German ideology. In L. S. Feuer (Ed.), Basic writ-

ings on politics and philosophy (pp. 246-261). New York, NY: Anchor Books.

Melkote, S. R. (1991). Communication for development in the Third World: Theory and practice. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE. Melkote, S. R., & Steeves, H. L. (2001). Communi-

cation for development in the Third World: Theory and practice for empowerment. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Mills, C. W. (2005). The power elite. New York, NY:

Oxford University Press. Mumby, D. K. (1988). Communication and power in organizations: Discourse, ideology, and domination. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Mumby, D. K. (1997). Modernism, postmodernism, and communication studies: A rereading of an ongoing debate. Communication Theory, 7(1), 1-28.

Mumby, D. K. (2004). Discourse, power and ideology: Unpacking the critical approach. The Sage Handbook of Organizational Discourse, 2, 37-258.

ment:

Contentions,

arguments,

alternatives.

New

York, NY: Guilford Publications. Purvis, T., & Hunt, A. (1993). Discourse, ideology, discourse, ideology, discourse, ideology. British

Journal of Sociology, 44, 473-499. Qiu,J.L. (2017). Goodbye iSlave: A manifesto for digital abolition. Champaign: University of Illinois Press.

Reid-Henry, S. M. (2013). Humanitarianism as liberal diagnostic: humanitarian reason and the political rationalities of the liberal will-to-care. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 39(3),

418-431. Ross, K. (2010). Gendered media: Women, men, and identity politics.

Lanham,

MD:

Rowman

&

Littlefield. Rostow, K. (1960), The stages of economic growth: A non-communist

manifesto.

Cambridge,

UK:

Cambridge University Press. Said, E. W. (1979). Orientalism. New York, NY: Vintage Books. Smith, D. E. (1990). The conceptual practices of power: A feminist sociology of knowledge. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press. Sassen, S. (1999). Losing control? The state and the new geography of power. Global Dialogue, 1(1),78. Schramm, W. (1964). Mass media and national develop-

ment: The role of information in the developing countries (Vol. 25). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Schramm, W., & Lerner, D. (Eds.). (1976). Communication and change, the last ten years—and the next. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Shah, H. (2011). The production of modernization: Daniel Lerner, mass media, and the passing of traditional society. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

PROGRESSIVE

SOCIAL

Shome, R., & Hegde, R. S. (2002). Postcolonial approaches to communication: Charting the terrain,

engaging

the intersections.

Communi-

cation Theory, 12(3), 249-270.

MOVEMENTS

AND

THE

INTERNET

1365

PROGRESSIVE SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND THE INTERNET

Simpson, C. (1994). Science of coercion: Communi-

cation research and psychological warfare. Oxford,

UK: Oxford University Press. Smith, L. T. (2013). Decolonizing

methodologies:

Research and indigenous peoples. London, UK and

New York, NY: Zed Books Ltd. Stevenson, J. (2017). The cold warrior who never

apologized. New York Times. https://www.nytimes .com/2017/09/08/opinion/vietnam-walt -rostow.html Sunstein, C. R. (2014). Why nudge? The politics of

libertarian paternalism. New University Press.

Haven,

CT: Yale

Taffel, S. (2012). Escaping attention: Digital media hardware, materiality and ecological cost. Culture Machine, 13, 1-28. Thomas, P., & van de Fliert, E. (2014). Interrogating

the theory and practice of communication for social change: The basis for a renewal. New York, NY: Springer.

Valentine, G. (2008). Living with difference: Reflections on geographies of encounter. Progress in Human Geography, 32(3), 323-337. Van Dijk, T. A. (1995). Power and the news media. Political Communication and Action, 6(1), 9-36. Van Dijk, T. A. (2008). Discourse and power. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Vasquez, C., & Plourde, M. C. (2017). Materiality and organizing. The International Encyclopedia of Organizational Communication. Wiley Online Library. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline

of interpretive

sociology

(Vol.

1). Berkeley:

University of California Press. Wilkins, K. G. (2000). Accounting for power in devel-

opment communication. In K. G. Wilkins (Ed.), Redeveloping communication for social change: Theory, practice, and power (pp. 197-210). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Zhao, Y., & Chakravartty, P. (Eds.). (2007). Global communications: Toward a transcultural political economy. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Mohan Jyoti Dutta

SOCIAL MOVEMENTS IN COMMUNICATION STUDIES Communication scholars have offered significant insight and provocation to the study of social movements. The praxis that results from the application of critical theory to the study of communication and social change allows scholars to document the role of rhetoric, symbols, media, and other communicative tools in social control, stagnation, protest, and revolution (Bowers, Ochs, Jensen, &

Schulz, 2009). Early scholars of critical theory including Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno of the Frankfurt School highlighted the way economic and political elites control and limit the terms of debate in the public sphere through control of language and media (Boikos, Moutsoulas, & Tsekeris, 2014; Durham & Kellner, 2009). These scholars

observed that communication plays a central role in the cultural and political hegemony that prevents the masses from collectively overthrowing those in power. Through dominant communication and the resulting natu-

ralization of dominant ideologies, the masses consent to social hierarchies and inequalities. While this work draws heavily from Karl Marx’s 19th-century observations of class exploitation and Antonio Gramsci’s subse-

quent theorizations of cultural hegemony, they continue to be applied by communication scholars to understand a range of questions related to power and inequality in late-capitalist societies.

Critical communication scholars also highlight the potentials of political resistance

made possible through communication and developed analytical frameworks for theorizing power and counterpower. For example,

1366

-«

PROGRESSIVE

SOCIAL

MOVEMENTS

language and symbols have been identified as important tools of resistance by scholars documenting the way ordinary people negotiate and oppose the ideological apparatuses of the state. Key to this resistance is the agency of everyday people to reject, appropriate, and redefine dominant narratives (Durham & Kellner, 2009). For example, on the power

of language, Del Gandio (2008) details how something as simple as a citizen using profane

or dehumanizing language to publicly namecall a member of the establishment can subvert the socially sanctioned authority the latter carries and act as an expression of freedom in the face of repression that limits other forms of protest. Similarly, in her discussion of the use of “sister” and “sisterhood” by feminists in the 1970s, Beins (2010) details the way the interpellation of women as feminist subjects worked toward building the collective identity and solidarity needed in a social movement that required its base to subvert the social power they had previously learned to consent to. Cisneros (2011) has documented how rhetoric and visual symbols work alongside one another in expanding definitions of political and cultural citizenship in the case of USbased immigrant rights protest. Symbols are polysemic and can be appropriated by activists to make persuasive political arguments outside the boundaries of traditional political discourse—the American flag as taken up by migrant rights activists speaks to this phenomenon. Cisneros details how the waving of the American flag in mass mobilizations by immigrants works to expand the civic imaginary wherein those mobilizing symbolically expand the terms of belonging to an American identity beyond binary definitions of citizenship relied upon by the law. In openly balking antimigrant forces that use the embrace of the flag to reject multiculturalism, migrant rights activists insist through symbol that migrants can simultaneously hold affinity to

AND

THE

INTERNET

the culture of their home countries and enact citizenship practices in their new one. Visual communication and embodied argumentation then, like rhetorical argumen-

tation, is well studied by social movement scholars who have documented the way organizations such as AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (Act Up), People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Earth First!, and others

use bodily argumentation to create compelling and easily distributed “picture bombs” that become emblematic of larger political arguments about identity, health, family, the environment, and science (Christiansen & Hanson, 1996; Del Gandio, 2008; DeLuca, 1999; Taylor, Kimport, Van Dyke, & Andersen,

2009). In the cases of activist organizations making cultural claims that are perceived as radical, the visibility and behavior of bodies themselves make symbolic and polysemic arguments that are accessible to a wider range

of the public than only traditional argumentation would allow. For example, the kiss-ins of Act Up allowed people living with AIDS (PWAs) to make claims about the normalcy of their identities vis-a-vis the romantic kiss,

which is a widely celebrated representation of love, loyalty, and family among heterosexuals. Likewise, the extremely vulnerable physical positions taken on by Earth First! activists in efforts to prevent deforestation compellingly communicate that nature and natural life is as valuable as human life. The physical occupation of space has also long been used by activists to make political demands for access to the public sphere. From the barricades of the French Revolution to the reoccupation of lands by the Indigenous people from whom they were stripped, spatial disruption by activists advances political demands by challenging the material power of the state (Wetzel,

2009).

Finally, mass media exploitation and the creation of alternative media are central to social

PROGRESSIVE

movement

SOCIAL

communication. Alternative media

created by movements is a well-documented strategy, as mass dissemination of activist mes-

saging is crucial to promulgation and basebuilding efforts. Given that like other elite institutions mainstream media often reflect

MOVEMENTS

AND

THE

INTERNET

1367

about themselves and the world at large differently, a cultural change-centric strategy

that can work alongside strategies focused on change in the sphere of traditional politics and policy. Ultimately, all local and global struggles

the needs and worldviews of the powerful,

for equality are tied to struggles over commu-

various groups have created their own tools of mass communication as challenges to the

nication messages and technology. Because mass media is the primary location of political deliberation in the contemporary public sphere, the potentials of activist media must be treated with nuance and caution as nation

mainstream.

From

abolition to movements

against lynching, segregation, and police brutality, African Americans have produced media

with the explicit goal of making the case for their full political and social inclusion (Condit & Lucaites,

1991; Jackson,

2014;

Squires,

2002). The feminist press similarly plays a critical role in making the developing culturally sent, and organizing who might otherwise

case for womens rights, resonant frames of discollectives of women be isolated from social

change networks (Endres, 2009). During the antiapartheid movement, and well before the creation of the Internet, activists devel-

oped a global network that challenged the racial hegemony of South African. This included the creation and distribution of films, books, newspapers, posters, buttons, art, and

other multimedia texts and often required the coordinated smuggling of information out of the apartheid state (Downing, 2005). This activist media influenced the demand of institutional divestment from South Africa by

university students throughout the world and pressure on global institutions like the International Olympic Committee to exclude South Africa from participation. One of the most well-known activist strategies, culture jamming, makes use of media and other social movement

communication

strategies to critique and subvert, or “jam,” the dominant messages of consumer culture

(DeLaure, Fink, & Dery, 2017). Culture jamming and activist art more generally, then, take up the work of helping the public to think

states, corporations, and elite institutions con-

tinue to have disproportionate access to media creation and dissemination. Likewise, particularly wealthy and powerful countries, especially those in the Global North, dominate much of the global movement of media, fur-

ther limiting the potentials of the global civil society envisioned byactivists (Sparks, 2005). It is these conditions that activists have responded to as two-way communication net-

works via the Internet have made possible new formations of activist media and influenced the everyday workings of social movement organizing and implementation.

THE RISE OF ONLINE ACTIVISM

As Hall (2011) has outlined, scholars began to imagine and theorize about the possibility and potentials of a society connected through widespread technological networks unbound by traditional delimitations of space and time long before the Internet came to exist. By the time early personal computers (PCs) became available in the 1980s, and the World Wide

Web became increasingly accessible in the early 1990s, the Internet age had arrived. Although the technological infrastructures of the Internet look very different in the early 21st century than they did in the 1980s and 1990s, and certainly reach a larger number of people at much lower cost, activists

1368

PROGRESSIVE

SOCIAL

MOVEMENTS

AND

THE

INTERNET

immediately understood the importance of

indigenous Mexicans via online allies who

peer-to-peer communication

in an increas-

sent this content to major newspapers across

ingly globalized and neoliberal context. Groups facing the challenge of developing communication strategies that might be effective in the context of the privileged media access enjoyed by the governments and multibillion-dollar corporations they critiqued were among early adopters of Internet technology. The most

the globe; journalists who only a few short months before had paid no consideration to questions of indigenous human rights in Central America had a story.

notable social movement campaigns to take early advantage of the Internet were the 1994

Zapatista uprising in Mexico and the global justice protests at the 1999 World Trade Organization (WTO) meeting in Seattle. Long before the Internet was a highly populated space centering the horizontal sharing of content, the Zapatista Army of National Liberation, a small group of indigenous Mexican revolutionaries, successfully built

a global network of communication for the online promulgation of their literature and

demands (Wolfson, 2012). The use of the Internet by the Zapatistas was an act of desperate creativity in a national and international

media landscape that held up dominant neoliberal narratives that justified the North American Free Trade Agreement (which the Zapatistas saw as a form of genocide). The Zapatistas engaged in fully armed revolution, an act that given their underdog status in the face of a brutal, well-funded Mexican na-

tional army helped to gain the sympathies of

Two years later, in 1996, the Zapatistas

used this same network to call a meeting on developing strategies to fight neoliberal economic policies in the tiny province of Chiapas that was attended by thousands of people from over 40 countries (McCaughey & Ayers, 2003). Ultimately, the successful public campaigning of the Zapatistas, which did not exist in a vacuum but carried with it the cost of many lives and responded proactively to the history and needs of the Mayan people remaining in Chiapas, illustrated that global

networks of contention and the dissemination and speed of global political debates has been radically changed by the capabilities of the Internet. While many have since attempted to directly apply the Zapatista model to other social movements, Wolfson (2012) argues that attempts to exactly replicate the strategy must take into consideration that the Zapatista reliance on Internet technology “emerged dialectically, through a series of confrontations,

and was/is a fluid response to material conditions of struggle in Mexico” (p. 156). Thus the

Indymedia network subsequently inspired by Zapatista activism struggled with questions of

activists, hackers, and nongovernmental or-

replicating, reforming, or creating new strate-

ganizations (NGOs) across the globe. After the initial negotiation of a ceasefire with the

gies as the technologies used by the Zapatistas also evolved to enable new applications. The Indymedia network, which included anarchist and prodemocracy hackers across the globe, helped to organize and report on what would come to be known as “the Battle

Mexican government, it was through an online network of these activists and allies, including

the Association for Progressive Communications that the Zapatistas made their case against neoliberal economic policy and for indigenous rights in Mexico. For example, Zapatista spokesperson Subcomandante Marcos successfully communicated editorial content detailing the plight and demands of

in Seattle” (Kahn & Kellner, 2004). When global justice activists descended on the Seattle meeting of the WTO in 1999, the me-

somobilization made possible by the Internet was widely credited with the size and impact

PROGRESSIVE

SOCIAL

MOVEMENTS

AND

THE

INTERNET

1369

of the protests. Online networks, for exam-

and possibilities like live-streaming and going

ple, were used to foster political coalitions between seemingly varied activist groups like

viral, fraught with the clashing needs of

unions and environmentalists, and the use of

by social movement actors (Lee Kyung, 2015; McChesney, 2006; Thorburn, 2014). Further,

this technology alongside other developing personalized technologies like mobile phones allowed on-the-spot coordination among ac-

state power and the counterpower sought

media corporations actively learn from and appropriate activist uses of Internet technol-

tivists (Bowers et al., 2009). The use of the

ogy; former hackers were hired to help develop

Web by Indymedia hackers for citizens reporting from the streets of Seattle was keenly observed by mainstream journalistic organizations who later moved to further develop and monetize technologies for street-level reporting (Kperogi, 2011). Just as significant as the successes and innovations of these early cases of Internet

Web platforms like Yahoo, and corporations

activism is how establishments responded to them. By facing off with more technologically savvy agitators, establishments quickly learned about the power of the Internet to shape protest narratives and political contention across geographical boundaries (de Jong, 2005). In

response to the Seattle WTO protests, for example, the US government passed legislation creating “protest zones” at high-profile events that ensured activists, regardless of the efh-

ciency and flexibility of their coordination, could not get close to political event venues (Starr & Fernandez, 2009). Such constraints

have been legally and extralegally imposed by governments across the globe in response to the ability of activists to rapidly organize street protests with the help of technology and are seen by activists and their allies as encroachment on freedoms of speech and assembly. Thus while the technological infrastructures and uses of Internet technologies were in part developed in response to democratic projects, they also developed in response to the more powerful political and economic demands of nation-states and corporations. The origins of the Web itself are tied to government projects of militarism and surveillance, thus making the evolution of Web technologies,

have works to monetize activist content, for

example running advertisements for revenue during YouTube videos of police suppression of activist efforts (Costanza-Chock, 2008).

Scholars responding to this history and context have studied both the ever-evolving technology of the Internet and its contextual uses. Specific characteristics of the Internet, including its temporality, rapidly changing infrastructures, and individualized nature, have

led scholars to explore new definitions of collective action, the public sphere, and political

power. CHARACTERISTICS OF ONLINE ACTIVISM

One notable challenge to studying the role of the Internet in social movements is the rapidly changing nature of Internet technology

itself. Early scholarship considering the role of the Internet in social movements focused on infrastructures like bulletin boards, elec-

tronic mail (email), listservs, websites, and electronic forums because it was these that

were used by the Zapatistas, the WTO protesters in Seattle, and other early mobilizations. However, the technological infrastructures

of the 1990s and early 2000s are nearly unrecognizable in the context of latter Internet browsers, social media networks, and web-

casting, video, and livestreaming sites. Even those that remain popular, like email, have

evolved significantly, and the shift from dial-up on PCs to wireless and cloud technology on

1370

-«

PROGRESSIVE

SOCIAL

MOVEMENTS

smartphones has shifted how scholars both define and theorize the uses ofInternet technology (Coopman, 2011; Donk, Loader, Nixon, & Rucht, 2004; Poell, 2014). Internet activism does not and cannot exist in a bubble but rather responds to the larger media and activist ecologies of specific histor-

ical and technological moments. The study of transmedia mobilization—or the ways in which activists simultaneously make use of multiple old and new media platforms—has been crucial in illustrating new media ecol-

ogies. McKinney (2018), for example, has traced the role of HIV/AIDS activists in the 1980s as a significant cohort of early users of online bulletin board technology. Members of the PWA community who had the privilege of early access and literacy for Internet use printed the text files of medical research shared over bulletin board systems and ran them in the printed newsletters of activist organizations like Act Up and Critical Path to give PWAs lacking the same access this information. This helped to build movement solidarity between PWAs with and without access to medical trials and online networks and contributed to building the underground network of illegal drug trials that many PWAs used to stay alive during the worst of the AIDS epidemic. Likewise, Costanza-Chock (2014) has detailed how immigrant rights activists, who are

often located in positions of particular precarity in relation to the state, have developed a “critical digital media literacy” that combines offline organizing and consciousness-raising

strategies with digital media workshops to strengthen the ability of low-wage migrant workers and other members of their communities to participate in the public sphere. Importantly, these activists find Spanishlanguage radio most useful for galvanizing mass mobilizations and thus direct much of their online media strategy toward gaining

AND

THE

INTERNET

the support and attention of radio, television, and print journalists and personalities who can help legitimize migrant rights frames and demands. Ganesh and Stohl (2013) have similarly argued that the seeming ubiquity of digital communication has not caused an abrupt or wholly new shift in activist organizing but rather has become one important part of a hybrid activist toolkit. Thus there is no disagreement that offline actions that take up space, make claims with bodies, engage in civil disobedience, organize individuals into

communities, and perform collective acts of public resistance remain crucial to social movements in the Internet age. From Guatemala to Egypt, and on issues from abortion rights

to racial profiling, transmedia ecologies contribute to crucial offline acts of resistance (Bivens & Cole, 2018; Graeff, Stempeck, & Zuckerman, 2014; Harlow, 2012; Lim, 2012;

Tufekci & Wilson, 2012). Rapid shifts in technology and protest ecologies have led some observers to question the efficacy of Internet-fueled social movements to fully engage participants. In particular, the seemingly disorganized and increasingly individualized nature of activism in the Internet age led to public mediations on “clicktivism” and “slacktivism” and arguments that “armchair activists” have been lulled into a false sense of agency and impact wherein they opt to click “like” or reblog content online as a substitute for participating in offline organizing and street protests that more effectively agitate establishments. However, researchers

have debunked this idea, noting that social movements have always been, and largely remain, rooted in public spaces and formal locations of public debate by those who are able and willing to put their time and bodies on the line. Rather than debilitating offline activism, these scholars argue, Internet tech-

nology has enabled a “critical periphery” of participants who do not, and might never,

PROGRESSIVE

SOCIAL

engage in the same ways as those who partic-

MOVEMENTS

AND

THE

INTERNET

1371

ipate in both on and offline actions, but via

autonomy; temporality and geographic flexibility; and perhaps most importantly ques-

entrée into social movement

tions of how to define social transformation,

conversations

online members of this periphery serve as important promulgators of activist messages to new networks (Barberé et al., 2015). Further,

disability studies scholars have noted that many celebrated offline forms of social movement action have been exclusionary to those with physical disabilities or other access barriers—thus the Internet has challenged ableist definitions of political “action” and made it easier for those long excluded from public space to make their demands known (Trevisan, 2016). While much of the literature on social movements and the Internet discussed thus far draws on critical and post-structuralist theories in some way, several scholars have issued calls to more clearly and deeply locate questions about resistive identities, globalization, the public sphere, and transmediated space in online activism within preexisting Marxist and post-structuralist frameworks for understanding power and resistance (Bratich, 2014;

Brunner,

2013).

2014;

Fuchs

& Dyer-Witheford,

CRITICAL INSIGHTS ON SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND THE INTERNET

The theoretical and methodological questions connected to the study of social movements and the Internet have been taken up most prominently by Castells (2007, 2012), Bennett and Segerberg (2011, 2013), Papacharissi (2010, 2014), and Fenton (2008, 2016). These scholars and others have engaged a lively and theoretically complex debate on the role of Internet technology in a diversity of 21stcentury social movements. In this body of work are questions related to the role of affect; collective versus connective action and community building; personalization, individuation, and

power, and politics in the digital age. Castells (2012) considers the role of online activism in Tunisia, Iceland, Egypt, Spain,

and the geographically unbound but USrooted Occupy movement. In documenting

how individuals and organizations committed to a range of demands, from the overthrow of a dictator to financial regulation, come to form social movement networks, Castells

argues that social movements in the Internet age are now typified by individuation and autonomy, a multiplicity of networks and spaces, and collectively nurtured affect. Castells contends that the movements occurring on and through online networks “embody the fundamental project of transforming people into subjects of their own lives by affirming their autonomy” (p. 230). He views the structures of the Internet as uniquely enabling a decentralized, leaderless, and polysemic politic that

allows individuals who feel invisible in mainstream political institutions to articulate their needs and experiences in a structure that then allows the freedom to build online community with similarly minded people. This is supported by later work by Funke and Wolfson

(2017), who argue that the connections between various Internet-enabled movements from the Zapatistas to Podemos in Spain rep-

resent a new “epoch of struggle” that is characterized by a heterogeneity of issues and definitions of politics. Such work suggests that ultimately cultural change—or the change of collective imagination—is the most measur-

able impact of the uses of the Internet by global activists as they explore new forms and expressions of individual autonomy alongside visions of collective freedom. Bennett and Segerberg (2013) likewise take up the question of what they term the “personalization” the Internet has enabled as well as

1372s

PROGRESSIVE

SOCIAL

MOVEMENTS

the multiplicity of communication networks— online and offline, organizational and crowd-

sourced—that make up contemporary social movements. Yet they caution against sweep-

ing claims that the Internet and the social movement communication it enables can be directly replicated in different contexts and offer the significant contribution of distinguishing between connective and collective action and frames in online social movement communication. Specifically, Bennett and Segerberg note that prior to the evolution of the Internet, social change communi-

cation was primarily studied through theories of collective action that posited that successful movements required supporters to share collective repertoires of dissent and shared methods and analysis for social change. Collective action also revolved around organizations, leaders, and other structures that

set the terms of politics and then worked to create solidarity around those politics. This collective tool box, they argue, has been upended by the connective logics of the Internet that allow personal engagement and individual stories to vary widely as activist work is taken up in a wide range of spaces and methods. Work by Neumayer and Valtysson (2013) has similarly illustrated this phenomenon as they trace how networked publics centered variously on antifascist activists, NGOs, and ordinary German citizens overlap to protest

Nazism despite experiential and methodological differences. Notably, connective action as defined by

AND

THE

INTERNET

networks who envision meaning and articulate politics through personalization. They conclude that “connective and collective action logics do not compete; rather, they complement one another and extend the range of analysis” (p. 196). This, and work by Conover, Ferrara, Menczer, and Flammini (2013), ac-

knowledges the limitations of technologically enabled networks and personalized frames of contention; without the building of some

collective identity, individualization of activism makes social movements more vulnerable to loss of support and interest based on personal whims.

Papacharissi (2014) similarly centers the uniqueness of connective action in Internet-

enabled social movements (as opposed to traditional interrogations and theorizations of collective action) and notes the importance of individual and personal investment in digital-era politics. Innovatively, Papacharissi offers an intervention into other work on the Internet and social movements by insisting on the centering of affect and storytelling in understanding how individuals “feel their place” is the new era of nonlineal and nonhierarchical social movements (p. 131). Papacharissi argues that any theorization of politics that centers or privileges rationality fails to take into consideration how connective ties are built through an embrace of personal politics, individual stories, and “dig-

itally afforded affect” that build political ties not through collective agreement on specific definitions of politics or demands but senti-

Bennett and Segerberg (2013) still requires

ment and authenticity (p. 8). Papacharissi sug-

face-to-face and street-level engagement in activism but depends on values of selfmotivation, individual creativity, technological skills, and personal action frames. Thus

gests that the networked public sphere and any democratic potentials it extends must consider the conditions of affective narrative. Fenton (2016) also sees the value of affect and the ways in which discourses of contestation have moved across time and space from the Zapatistas, to Seattle, to the Arab Spring,

effective

contemporary

social

movement

discourse such as “Another World Is Possible” or “We Are the 99%” is intentionally broad and polysemic—responding to connective

to Occupy and others. Yet Fenton strongly

PROGRESSIVE

SOCIAL

cautions against the impulse she reads in other scholarship on the Internet and social movements to assume that digital networks are inherently liberatory, or even political, simply because they allow for a greater number of stories to be told. She argues that technologies are “never neutral” but “enmeshed with the systems of power in which they exist” so that just as various Internet platforms may be useful in mobilization, personal politics, the

expression of affect, and the building of connective ties, they also are widely used in neoliberal projects of global capitalism and hyper-commercialization that forgo and distract from social change (p. 162). Thus Fenton largely rejects the contention of scholars who have argued that the introduction of ideas, cul-

tural disruptions, and reappropriations that envision a more equal and democratic society are alone political, insisting instead that for social movements to make real and lasting radical change they must engage with formal institutions of political power. Fenton argues that for “critical democracy” and a more democratic public sphere to exist scholars and activists should spend more time planning policy interventions and less time preoccupied with the sweeping hopes of technologically determined revolutions. In response to this call,

communication scholarship that directly examines how activist demands and calls for more inclusive democracy are translated through grassroots organizations that work specifically to influence electoral politics and policy advocacy is of interest (see Carty, 2010;

Karpf, 2012). Together, these scholars agree on several important characteristics of social movements in the Internet age. First, the Internet has col-

lapsed the limitations of time and space that drove social movement logics in a predigital era, making it possible for citizens and activists to rapidly share real-time information as they go about offline organizing and protest

MOVEMENTS

AND

THE

INTERNET

1373

activities. Second, the immediacy of posting online and across borders also means that activists no longer must wait for the attention of

the traditional news cycle and structures that have historically mediated activist communi-

cation for the public to become aware oftheir grievances and claims. This does not mean the mediation and frames of elite news organiza-

tions are no longer crucial to global politics but that traditional coverage of social movements exists in a media ecosystem that includes a larger range of content and more accessible alternative frames. Third, direct communication from activists has taken on a far more varied nature as individuals with assorted levels of social movement engagement and a wider range of organizations from radical to tradi-

tional social movement organizations speak around and to one another’s networks.

IDENTITY, POWER, AND ACTIVISM ONLINE Scholarship on the Internet and social movements arises from a diverse set of theoretical

frameworks and methodological approaches within and overlapping the field of communication. Critical scholarship has documented networked social movements, traced infrastructures and uses of digital technology, and offered debates about the measurable role of the Internet in challenging and remaking po-

litical power. Communication scholars have also extended debates about the role of the

Internet in social transformation by drawing on feminist, queer, postcolonial, and critical race frameworks.

For example, scholars have found that longexisting political critiques grounded in indigenous, black, and other axes of racially

marginalized experience do important cultural and political work online and that digital networks extend the building of identities de-

fined by marginalization and offer new entry

1374

«

PROGRESSIVE

SOCIAL

MOVEMENTS

AND

THE

INTERNET

(2014) details, websites created by black ac-

made policy, governance, and socioeconomic demands while also building a strong global network of non-Indigenous allies. Vats (2015), and Petray and Collin (2017) demonstrate that hashtag activism on social networking sites need not be only serious in nature to perform important cultural interventions. In the case of sarcastic and ironic commentary in online networks that target the everyday mundaneness of colonialist and white supremacist logics on topics ranging from food cul-

tivists are playing an important role in recon-

ture to student financial aid, online activism

textualizing neoliberal political narratives of the past that have rendered radical politics and radical reorganizations of social power invisible. Florini argues that the intertextual nature of Internet hypertext plays the role of consciousness-raising and public education for those both experienced in and newly arriving to black radicalism.

continues to draw from activist histories of culture jamming and détournement.

points for alliances. For example, racial justice hashtags like #BlackLivesMatter and #Ferguson have become not only important sites for long-existing counterpublics to spread narratives that challenge white supremacist violence online but have worked virally with offline actions to infiltrate mainstream media and political debates in the United States (Freelon, Mcllwain, & Clark, 2018; Jackson

& Foucault Welles, 2016). Further, as Florini

Activists in Canada, South Africa, and Australia, using hashtags to bolster networks

of dissent on issues of institutionalized white supremacy and settler colonialism, have found the language and tactic of hashtags useful for speaking to both very local contexts and larger networks of dissent. For example, in

the case of the youth-led Rhodes Must Fall (#RMEF) campaign in South Africa, the Twitter-facilitated collective project of challenging the celebration of colonist Cecil John Rhodes played an important role in the larger political ecosystem of the postapartheid state’s

Likewise, feminist and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer activists, who often

overlap with networks engaging racial justice activism, have used the technological infra-

structures of the Internet to stake claims of civic and social belonging and to build what in some cases are life-saving networks of sup-

port. For example, transgender and queer communities have used their liminality to build supportive websites, blogs, digital zines, dictionaries, video content, and cross-platform

social media networks largely outside the cultural and political spaces in which their identities are disciplined and punished (Bailey, 2016; Cavalcante, 2016; Jackson, Bailey, &

Foucault Welles, 2017). This online trans and queer world-making contributes to a larger queer politics of developing collaborative and experimental political projects while also con-

debates about race, racism, coloniality, and

tributing to shifting media, medical, and

reconciliation. Despite the realities of the digital divide and the limited Internet access of many South African citizens, #RMEF also contributed to a “new biography of citizenship”

(2017) found that long-standing indigenous cultural values and histories were translated

political narratives through collective representational demands (Hundley & Rodriguez, 2009; Rawson, 2014). Likewise, in her study of feminist cyberactivism in Spain, Nufez Puente (2011) finds that online collectives preserve a sense of feminist agency that strengthen offline action and make space for a diversity of feminist positionalities within

into the logics through which #IdleNoMore

activist praxis.

for South African youth (Bosch, 2017). In Canada, Raynauld, Richez, and Boudreau

PROGRESSIVE SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND THE INTERNET

In fact, some argue that the Internet has

opened up new possibilities for the practice of feminist intersectionality politics as overlapping networks insist on speaking to multiple issues of marginalization and oppression at once while also facing new challenges of hyper- and invisibility and commodification (Jackson, 2016; Mann, 2014; Squires, 2016). Like other work detailed here, this scholar-

1375

have evolved alongside wider interrogation of the role of the Internet in society; commu-

nication approaches, in particular, have offered important critical interventions into the study of the Internet in fields such as network science, computer science, science and technol-

ogy studies, and digital humanities. Central

to studying the Internet and social movements through a communication framework

ship recognizes the ongoing importance of the convergence between online and offline activism and the reality that just as offline activist spaces are often mired in and struggling through the reproduction of identity-based

ways social movement actors have come to

power hierarchies and inequalities, online ac-

engage the Internet.

tivist spaces also risk replicating these (Fischer, 2016). Further, scholars drawing on postcolonial theory and black feminist thought also caution that Internet-enabled Western femi-

REFERENCES

nist activism can reproduce imperial fantasies of the other that work, often through the pro-

duction of affect, toward a reinscription of colonial ideologies of civility and saviorism (Khoja-Moolji, 2015; Loza, 2014). Others

call attention to the precarity of digital feminism in neoliberal contexts that confine the demands of feminist politics to narratives of individual choice and empowerment (Baer, 2016). Here then, we see that many of the

same ideological constraints faced by offline activists are replicated online, where liberatory narratives and the development of radical political interventions exist alongside the general commodification of resistance and the specific consumption of narratives drawn from the most marginal communities.

are questions regarding culture and political power, the public sphere and civil society, collective and individual identities, and the ongoing role of the social hierarchies in the

Baer, H. (2016). Redoing feminism: Digital activism, body politics, and neoliberalism. Feminist Media Studies, 16(1), 17-34. Bailey, M. (2016). Redefining representation: Black trans and queer women's digital media production. Screen Bodies, 1(1), 71-86. https://www.researchgate

net/publication/299998524 Redefining _ Representation _Black_Trans_and_ Queer _Women%27s_Digital_Media_ Production Barbera, P., Wang, N., Bonneau, R., Jost, J.T., Nagler, J., Tucker, J., & Gonzalez-Bailén, S. (2015). The

critical periphery in the growth of social protests.

PLOS ONE, 10(11), e0143611. Beins, A. (2010). Sisterly solidarity: Politics and rhetoric of the direct address in US feminism in the 1970s. Women: A Cultural Review, 21(3), 292-308. Bennett, P. W. L., & Segerberg, D. A. (2013). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2011). Digital

CONCLUSION

media

and the personalization

of collective

action. Information, Communication, and Society,

In sum, communication scholars have led the historical, theoretical, and methodologi-

Bivens, K. M., & Cole, K. (2018). The grotesque pro-

cal development of the study of the Internet

test in social media as embodied, political rheto-

and social movements. These contributions

ric. Journal ofCommunication Inquiry, 42(1), 5-25.

14(6), 770-799.

1376

«

PROGRESSIVE

SOCIAL

MOVEMENTS

Boikos, C., Moutsoulas, K., & Tsekeris, C. (2014). The real of the virtual: Critical reflections on Web 2.0. TripleC (Cognition, Communication,

Co-Operation): Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society, 12(1), 405-412. Bosch, T. (2017). Twitter activism and youth in South Africa: The case of #RhodesMustFall. Information, Communication, and Society, 20(2), 221-232. Bowers, J. W., Ochs, D. J., Jensen, R. J., & Schulz,

D. P. (2009). The rhetoric of agitation and control (3rd ed.). Long Grove, IL: Waveland. Bratich,J.(2014). Occupy all the dispositifs: Memes, media ecologies, and emergent bodies politic. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies,

11(1), 64-73. Brunner, E. (2014). Asking (new) media questions: Thinking beyond the Twitter revolution. Explo-

AND

THE

INTERNET

Critical Studies in Media Communication, 28(2), 183-172.

Costanza-Chock, S. (2008). The immigrant rights movement on the net: Between “Web 2.0” and Comunicacién Popular. American Quarterly,

60(3), 851-864. Costanza-Chock, S. (2014). Out of the shadows, into the streets! Trans media organizing and the immigrant rights movement.

Cambridge,

MA:

MIT

Press.

de Jong, W. (2005). The power and based international oppositional study: The Brent Spar conflict. M. Shaw, & N. Stammers (Eds.),

limits of mediapolitics—a case In W. de Jong, Global activism,

global media (pp. 110-124). Ann Arbor, MI: Pluto Press. DeLaure, M., Fink, M., & Dery, M. (Eds.). (2017).

Culture jamming: Activism and the art of cultural

Carty, V. (2010). New information communication

resistance (reprint ed.). New York: New York University Press.

technologies and grassroots mobilization. Informa-

Del Gandio, J. (2008). Rhetoric for radicals: A hand-

rations in Media Ecology, 13(3-4), 269-283.

tion, Communication, and Society, 13(2), 1SS—173.

Castells, M. (2007). Communication, power and counter-power in the network society. International Journal of Communication, 1(1), 29.

Castells, M. (2012). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Polity. Cavalcante, A. (2016). “I did it all online”: Transgender identity and the management of everyday life. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 33(1), 109-122. Christiansen, A. E., & Hanson, J.J.(1996). Comedy

as cure for tragedy: Act Up and the rhetoric of aids. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 82(2), 1S7-170. Cisneros, J. D. (2011). (Re)bordering the civic imaginary: Rhetoric, hybridity, and citizenship

in La Gran Marcha. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 97(1), 26-49. Condit, C. M., & Lucaites,J.L. (1991). The rhetoric of equality and the expatriation of AfricanAmericans,

1776-1826. Communication Studies,

4X1), 121, Conover, M. D., Ferrara, E., Menczer, F., & Flammini,

A. (2013). The digital evolution of Occupy Wall Street. PLOS ONE, 8(5), e64679.

Coopman, T. M. (2011). Networks of dissent: Emergent forms in media based collective action.

book for 21st century activists. New York, NY:

Pomegranate Press.

DeLuca, K. M. (1999). Unruly arguments: The body rhetoric of Earth First!, Act Up, and Queer Nation. Argumentation and Advocacy, 36(1), 9-21. Donk, W. van de., Loader, B. D., Nixon, P. G., &

Rucht, D. (2004). Cyberprotest: New media, citizens and social movements.

New York, NY:

Routledge. Downing, J. D. H. (2005S). Activist media, civil society and social movements. In W. de Jong,

M. Shaw, & N. Stammers (Eds.), Global activism, global media (pp. 149-164). Ann Arbor, MI: Pluto Press.

Durham, M. G., & Kellner, D. M. (2009). Media and cultural studies: Keyworks. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley. Endres, K. (2009). In their own voices: Women redefine and frame Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. American Journalism, 26(1), 55-80. Fenton, N. (2008). Mediating hope: New media, politics and resistance. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 11(2), 230-248.

Fenton, N. (2016). Digital political radical. Information Communciation, and Society, 21(12), 1796-1798.

Fischer, M. (2016). #Free_ CeCe: The material convergence of social media activism. Feminist Media Studies, 16(5), 755-771.

PROGRESSIVE

SOCIAL

Florini, S. (2014). Recontextualizing the racial present: Intertextuality and the politics of online remembering. Critical Studies in Media Communi-

cation, 31(4), 314-326. Freelon, D., Mcllwain, C., & Clark, M. (2018). Quantifying the power and consequences of social media protest. New Media

20(3), 990-1011.

and Society,

Fuchs, C., & Dyer-Witheford, N. (2013). Karl Marx

MOVEMENTS

AND

THE

INTERNET

1377

Jackson, S. J., & Foucault Welles, B. (2016). #Ferguson is everywhere: Initiators in emerging counterpublic networks. Information, Communication, and Society, 19(3), 397-418. Kahn, R., & Kellner, D. (2004). New media and Internet activism: From the “Battle of Seattle” to blogging. New Media and Society, 6(1), 87-95. Karpf, D. (2012). The MoveOn effect: The unexpected

Funke, P. N., & Wolfson, T. (2017). From global

transformation of American political advocacy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Khoja-Moolji, S. (2015). Becoming an “intimate publics”: Exploring the affective intensities of hashtag

justice to Occupy and Podemos: Mapping three stages of contemporary activism. TripleC:

Kperogi, F. A. (2011). Cooperation with the corpo-

@ Internet studies. New Media and Society, 15(S),

782-796.

.

Communication, Capitalism, and Critique: Open

Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society, 15(2), 393-403. Ganesh, S., & Stohl, C. (2013). From Wall Street to

Wellington: Protests in an era of digital ubiquity. Communication Monographs, 80(4), 425-451. Graeff, E., Stempeck, M., & Zuckerman, E. (2014). The battle for “Trayvon Martin”: Mapping a media controversy online and off-line. First Monday, 19(2). http: //firstmonday.org/article/view/4947/3821

Hall, W. (2011). Network theory: The ever evolving web: The power of networks. International Harlow, S. (2012). Social media and social movements: Facebook and an online Guatemalan justice movement that moved offline. New Media and Society, 14(2), 225-243. H.

L., &

Rodriguez,

ration? CNN and the hegemonic cooptation of citizen journalism through iReport.com. New Media and Society, 13(2), 314-329. Lee, K. (2015). When Big Brother uses Twitter, too: Productive forms ofpolicing and the role of media in the Seoul G20 protests in South Korea. Communication, Culture, and Critique, 8(3), 376-394. Lim, M. (2012). Clicks, cabs, and coffee houses:

Social Media and oppositional movements

J. S. (2009).

Transactivism and postmodernity: An agonistic analysis of transliterature. Communication Quarterly,

57(1), 35-50. Jackson, S. J. (2014). Black celebrity, racial politics,

in

Egypt, 2004-2011. Journal of Communication, 62,

231-248.

Loza, S. (2014). Hashtag feminism, #Solidarityls ForWhiteWomen,

Journal of Communication, S, 14.

Hundley,

feminism. Feminist Media Studies, 15(2), 347-350.

and the other #FemFuture.

ada, S. Retrieved from https://adanewmedia org/2014/07/issueS-loza/

Mann, L. K. (2014). What can feminism learn from new media? Communication and Critical/Cultural

Studies, 11(3), 293-297.

McCaughey, M., & Ayers, M. D. (Eds.). (2003). Cyberactivism: Online activism in theory and practice. New York, NY: Routledge.

McChesney,

R. W. (2006). The Internet and

and the press: Framing dissent. New York, NY: Routledge. Jackson, S. J. (2016). (Re)imagining intersectional

U. S. communication policy-making in historical andcritical perspective. Journal of Communication,

democracy from black feminism to hashtag ac-

McKinney, C. (2018). Printing the network: AIDS activism and online access in the 1980s. Continuum: Journal ofMedia and Cultural Studies, 32(1), 7-17.

tivism. Women’s Studies in Communication, 39(4),

375-379. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs /10.1080/07491409.2016.1226654?journalCode =uwsc20

Jackson, S.J., Bailey, M., & Foucault Welles, B. (2017). #GirlsLikeUs: Trans advocacy and community building online. New Media and Society, 20(S), 146144481770927.

46(1), 98-124.

Neumayer, C., & Valtysson, B. (2013). Tweet against Nazis? Twitter, power, and networked publics in anti-fascist protests. MedieKultur: Journal of Media and Communication Research, 29( 55), 3-20. Nufiez Puente, S. (2011). Feminist cyberactivism: Violence against women, Internet politics, and

1378

»

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

Spanish feminist praxis online. Continuum: Journal ofMedia and Cultural Studies, 25(3), 333-346. Papacharissi, Z. (2010). A private sphere: Democracy in a digital age (1st ed.). Cambridge, UK;

Thorburn, E. D. (2014). Social media, subjectivity, and surveillance: Moving on from Occupy, the rise of live streaming video. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 11(1), 52-63.

Malden, MA: Polity Press. Papacharissi, Z. (2014). Affective publics: Sentiment, technology, and politics (1st ed.). Oxford, UK;

Trevisan, F. (2016). Disability rights advocacy online: Voice, empowerment and global connectivity.

New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Petray, T. L., & Collin, R. (2017). Your privilege is trending: Confronting whiteness on social media. Social Media + Society, 3(2). Poell, T. (2014). Social media and the transformation of activist communication: Exploring the

social media ecology of the 2010 Toronto G20 protests. Information, Communication, and Society, 17(6), 716-731.

Rawson, K. J. (2014). Transgender worldmaking in cyberspace: Historical activism on the Internet. QED: A Journal in GLBTQ Worldmaking, 1(2), 38-60. Raynauld, V., Richez, E., & Boudreau Morris, K.

(2017). Canada is #IdleNoMore: Exploring dynamics of Indigenous political and civic protest

Oxfordshire, UK: Taylor & Francis. Tufekci, Z., & Wilson, C. (2012). Social media and the decision to participate in political protest: Observations from Tahrir Square. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 363-379.

Vats, A. (2015). Cooking up hashtag activism: #PaulasBestDishes and counternarratives of southern food. Communication and Critical/ Cultural Studies, 12(2), 209-213. Wetzel, C. (2009). Theorizing Native American land seizure: An analysis of tactical changes in the late twentieth century. Social Movement Studies, 8(1), 17-34.

Wolfson, T. (2012). From the Zapatistas to Indymedia: Dialectics and orthodoxy in contemporary social movements. Communication, Culture, and Critique,

5(2), 149-170.

in the Twitterverse. Information, Communication,

and Society, 21(4), 626-642.

Sarah J. Jackson

Sparks, C. (2005). Media and the global public sphere: An evaluative approach. In W. de Jong, M. Shaw, & N. Stammers (Eds.), Global activism,

global media (pp. 34-49). Ann Arbor, MI: Pluto Press. Squires, C. (2016). Making visible victimhood,

bringing intersectionality to a mass shooting: #SAYHERNAME, black women, and Charleston. In C. Squires (Ed.), Dangerous discourses: Feminism, gun violence, and civic life (pp. 121-144). New York, NY: Peter Lang. Squires, C. R. (2002). Rethinking the black public

sphere: An alternative vocabulary for multiple public spheres. Communication Theory, 12(4), 446-468. Starr, A., & Fernandez, L. (2009). Legal control and resistance post-Seattle. Social Justice—San Francisco, 36(1), 41-60. Taylor, V., Kimport, K., Van Dyke, N., & Andersen,

E. A. (2009). Culture and mobilization: Tactical repertoires, same-sex weddings, and the impact on gay activism. American Sociological Review, 74(6), 865-890.

PSYCHOANALYTIC METHODS AND CRITICAL CULTURAL STUDIES

CRITICAL AND CULTURAL STUDIES, PSYCHOANALYSIS, AND RHETORIC Critical and cultural studies (CCS)

often

finds itself at odds with the theory and practice of psychoanalysis. Whereas CCS scholars often seek to advance a theory of gender, psychoanalysts as frequently cling to one or another theory of sex. Whereas advocates for CCS may repudiate the concept of repression on Foucauldian grounds, psychoanalysts insist on its conceptual utility. The CCS perspective similarly scorns psychoanalytic terms ofart such as hysteria and the phallus

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

as historicolinguistic residues of systematic sexual violence coded as pseudoscientific epistemology. Psychoanalysts, in opposed fashion, have sought to expand the signification of psychoanalytic terminology beyond the level of individual diagnosis, seeking instead to de-

scribe the broader movements of collective discourse. At loggerheads from the very start, CCS must encounter psychoanalysis by way of a mediating third term: rhetoric. “Psychoanalysis itself... is a rhetorical enterprise,’ write Bender and Wellbery (1990,

pp. 32-33). The study of rhetoric is indeed useful to the practicing psychoanalyst. It is “designed to provide renewed experience of coherence and continuity leading to renewed spontaneity and capacity for personal satisfaction [in the patient or analysand|” (Cohler

& Galatzer-Levy, 2007, p. 570). Rhetoric (in the restricted sense of narrative construction)

is also how the analyst guides the analysand to process their traumas. Rhetoric is crucial for understanding not only what stories an analysand recounts but also how such tales are told. The psychoanalyst who wishes to become attuned to the borrowed weight of their analysands words requires an understanding of rhetoric—insofar as understanding the truth at stake in analysis depends upon a compelling interpretation of how the analysand is situated within the plot of their own discourse. Psychoanalysis is as rhetorical (i.e., figural

and literary) in its practice as it is in theory. Across his many writings, Sigmund Freud's metaphors for the unconscious range “from hydraulics and photographs to reservoirs, in-

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

+

1379

successors in psychoanalytic theory, Jacques Lacan, also invokes rhetoric frequently and explicitly. In Ecrits, Lacan (2006) cites Plato’s Gorgias as a reason why scholars have been driven away from the study of rhetoric (p. 10S), and reformulates the prisoner's dilemma as a thought experiment in psychoanalytic identification, labeling it “a remarkable sophism, in the classical sense of the term”

(Lacan, 2006, p. 163). Elsewhere in the same text, he offers a laundry list of tropes (including ellipsis, hyperbaton, syllepsis, repetition, apposition, metaphor, catachresis, allegory, metonymy, and synecdoche) as organizing principles of the dream text (Lacan, 2006,

pp. 221-222). Finally, he formulates his famous “metaphor of the subject” as a response to a public talk on argumentation by Chaim Perelman (Lacan, 2006, p. 755). Rhetoric is never far from psychoanalysis—in theory or in practice.

Suffice it to say that an excursus about psychoanalysis and CCS could assume many foci, and there are several roads not taken that deserve mention. For instance, this entry could have taken as its focal point CCS scholars’ criticism of the rhetoric of neuromedicine. Such criticisms would, for instance, encom-

pass Herbert Simons’s (1989) claim that psychotherapeutic placebos demonstrate that the “Teal’ causes of benefit from psychotherapy are

mere rhetoric” (p. 114) and Jenell Johnson's (2014) historical claim that psychoanalysis is the disciplinary precursor and competitor to the emergent, mid-20th century technique of

lobotomy (p. 96). It also could have posed

2012, p. 264). Louis Althusser (1972) explained that Freud often relies upon “imported concepts . . . borrowed from thermody-

and answered the question of whether psychoanalysis constitutes a science of communication capable of elaborating “the systemic conditions of discourse that produce auto-

namic physics[,] ... political economy, and the

matic thoughts” (Lundberg, 2015, p. 179).

biology of his time” as well as literary texts

It could have pursued the close association between psychoanalytic and media theory,

oculations, battlefields, and x-rays” (Galison,

by “Sophocles, Shakespeare, Moliere, [and] Goethe” (p. 133). One of Freud's prominent

which ranges from Kaja Silverman’s (1988) The

1380

-«

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

Acoustic Mirror to Friedrich Kittler’s (1999)

Gramophone Film Typewriter. It may, finally, have discussed the relevance of psychoanalysis for theories of embodiment, which is

played out in the conflict between the discursive theory of gender and the psychoanalytic theory of sexuality. Instead, the focus of this entry is psychoanalysis’s long-standing and changing relationship to rhetoric. Conceived within the history, theory, and practice of rhetoric, psychoanalytic methods offer conceptually rich insights tethered to the concepts of the unconscious, the signifier, and the drive (among others) that enable the aims of CCS scholars. The sections that follow offer a brief survey of psychoanalysis in rhetorical and CCS before and after the linguistic turn. The latter section, which comprises the bulk of this entry, re-

views the four fundamental concepts of psychoanalysis, the registers of the unconscious,

and the “Seminar on “The Purloined Letter.” PSYCHOANALYSIS LINGUISTIC TURN

BEFORE THE

Psychoanalysis is a therapeutic practice rooted in Sigmund Freud's epistemology for analyzing the private discourse of his mostly bour-

CULTURAL

STUDIES

and to the progress of the treatment; it is the resistance that ‘finally brings the work to a halt’ To start with, Freud tried to overcome this obstacle by insistence (application of a countervailing force

to the resistance) and persuasion, but then he realized that resistance was itself a means of reaching the repressed [unconscious] and unveiling the secret of neurosis. (Laplanche & Pontalis, 1974, p. 39S)

What “finally brings the work to a halt” is whatever point at which the analysand is no longer answering or speaking to the analyst's prompts but rather defaults to something else to deflect the analyst’s stare. Freud is drawn to this point in the analysis: where the resistance (evidence of the unconscious drives) takes

over the analysand’s speech to protect it from what must not be thought. An important variant of the resistance in analysis is the transference, which describes a stage of psychoanalytic treatment in which “infantile prototypes reemerge and are experienced with a strong sense of immediacy,’ causing the analysand to develop libidinal attachments to the ana-

lyst (Laplanche & Pontalis, 1974, p. 455). Transference is a kind of resistance because it

geois analysands (Gay, 2006, p. 10). Contrary

also “brings the work to a halt,” staging the

to power- and institution-oriented understandings of resistance (Armstrong, 2008) such as “a pre-existing foundation which escapes or eludes the powers that bear down on it

analyst-analysand relationship as the immediate material to be negotiated in analysis. The concept of the transference (particularly

from the outside” (p. 5) or a prevailing force “generated by the very power it opposes,” (Armstrong, 2008, p. 19) the concept of

resistance first occurs to Freud in analysis, taking the form of the analysand’s parapraxes: their stumbling speech, slips of the tongue,

and other embodied tics.

Resistance was first discovered as an obstacle to the elucidation of the symptoms

its variant, the countertransference) is also

dicey for the legitimacy of psychoanalysis and its practitioners because it implicates the analyst for whom the objective is to motivate or induce the transference (i.e., to provoke a sexual attachment) as predatory and unethical. Ideally, moving past this stage of analysis is experienced as a net gain of agency for the analysand, who becomes able to speak about their transference as transference. The analysand’s ability to mark the establishment,

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

modalities, and resolution of the transference—

as well as a lessening of their symptoms—are the foundation of Freud’s talking cure. In Freud’s terms, psychoanalytic theory refers primarily to the study of the unconscious. In its noun form, the unconscious “only really acquires its meaning in [Freud's] first topo-

graphical theory,’ which separates the psychical apparatus into three subsystems with distinct characteristics/functions: the unconscious, the preconscious,

and the conscious

(Cassin,

Rendall, & Apter, 2014, p. 1181). In this model, the thoughts not present to the conscious mind

are split between the unconscious and the preconscious. Whereas preconscious thoughts are merely unthought and therefore capable of becoming conscious with minimal energy, unconscious thoughts are inadmissible to con-

sciousness because they have been repressed. Later in his career, Freud proposed a second tripartite topography consisting of the Id, ego, and superego. In this model, the conscious ego mediates between the Id, which

houses the unconscious

drives (controver-

sially translated byJames Strachey as “instincts” or “instinctual drives”), and the superego, which executes the functions of censorship and prohibition (Cassin, Rendall, & Apter, 2014, p. 1182). Here, “unconscious” appears

chiefly in its adjectival form and is split between the distinct unconscious functions (e.g.,

the unconscious Id/superego) (Laplanche & Pontalis, 1974, p. 474). These changing topographies demonstrate how the unconscious, like others in Freud’s oeuvre, transforms at various stages in his writing. The topographies also illustrate how the unconscious is split, beginning with Freud’s initial theorization: it is divided from the conscious mind, between the agencies of the unconscious, and

across these separate models for the psyche. Unconscious thoughts only ever find their way to the analysand’s conscious circuitously, by way ofan encrypted and clandestine route.

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

1381

Freud explains the attendant difficulty of bringing unconscious thoughts to the conscious ego with his distinction between the pleasure principle and the reality principle. The pleasure principle describes the motivational structure of the infantile subject in which “the whole of psychical activity is aimed at avoiding un-pleasure and procuring pleasure” (Laplanche & Pontalis, 1974, p. 322). For this “polymorphously perverse” infantile subject, the pleasure principle has no predetermined object: “there is no ‘pregiven natural order’ to the sexual drive” (Gunn, 2018, p. 169). The pleasure principle is limited by the reality principle. If the pleasure principle privileges “seek|ing |satisfaction via the shortest route,”

then the reality principle curbs this impulse by restricting the infantile subject’s pleasure and forces them to take a longer path to arrive at the pleasure/reduction of un-pleasure they seek (Laplanche & Pontalis, 1974, p. 324). Once the reality principle is in force, the subject’s immediate attachment to the pleasure object is partially confined to the unconscious, and the subject instead pursues substitute objects that allow them some of their lost satisfaction. In the contentious Oedipal staging of these concepts, the infant’s relationship to the mother is governed by the pleasure principle insofar as she is a source for pleasure and the reduction of discomfort. The introduction of the father as a sexual competitor for the mother’s affections imposes the reality principle, and the infantile subject's ability to

seek pleasure/reduce displeasure by way of the mother must thenceforth be gotten partially from the protracted process of sexual maturation. The pleasure principle and its moderation by the reality principle therefore constitute one scenario in which unconscious thoughts finally make their way to the conscious mind—by way of a long detour and the encryption of objects that substitute for what is lost to the early infantile relation.

1382

«

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

Freud also discusses the circuitous path from the unconscious to the conscious mind in terms of the repressed thoughts of the dream work. Repressed thoughts are in the broadest sense synonymous with the unconscious of the first topography (i.e., the unconscious, pre-

CULTURAL

STUDIES

dream work to take the form of a text whose protocols dictate the force of the symbols that appear within it. Freud’s unconscious also advances a psychoanalytic theory of the social. In one instance, Freud attributes a social function to the con-

conscious, and conscious), in which it is de-

cept of prohibition. One of his “comparison{s|

fined as “turning something away, and keeping

from the arena of politics,” for instance, brings

it at a distance from the conscious” (Laplanche & Pontalis, 1974, p. 392). Freud later coins

the censorious superego together with the figure of an unruly mob: “a ‘certain small faction’ that ‘obtains command of the press’ and

the return of the repressed to describe the process whereby the unconscious’ indestructible content “tends to reappear, and succeeds in doing so ina distorted fashion” (Laplanche &

Pontalis, 1974, p. 398). How does the re-

pressed return? In “symptoms, dreams, [and] parapraxes” (i.e., verbal tics and slips of the tongue), each presenting a unique text for in-

terpretation (Laplanche & Pontalis, 1974, p. 393). In the dream work, “the most important elements... are represented by insignificant details,” which are governed by two laws: displacement and condensation (Laplanche &

Pontalis, 1974, p. 122). Displacement consists in the encryption or overdetermination

of unconscious thought within the dream work as “symbolic hieroglyphics” (Derrida, 1972, p. 88). Displacement alleviates the unpleasurable excitation associated with the repressed content by substituting the traumatic thought with one that is harmless or banal. Condensation occurs when a displaced element recurs across dream thoughts and “represents several associative chains at whose point of intersection it is located” (Laplanche

manipulates public opinion” (Penney, 2012, p. 32). With this contiguity between the individual and collective superego, psychoanalysis goes social: Freud effectively suggests that the individual subject’s repression of unconscious thought offers a prototype for social behaviors, including feckless prohibitions upon free speech. Freud (2010) also finessed the line between the individual and the social with the incest prohibition, which illustrates how “[the] tendency of culture to set restrictions upon sexual life” generates the repressive social function of the law (pp. 73-74). This concept is derived from Freud’s myth of the primal father who, after exiling his sons and subordinates, claims all the women for his own. This primal father figure, the subject of gratuitous pleasure, is subsequently murdered, and a law prohibiting incest is instituted among the remaining tribespeople. Freud thus installs a repressed sexual motive as a founding social bond:

& Pontalis, 1974, p. 82). By harnessing the

Though the brothers had banded to-

ambiguity between different latent elements

gether in order to overcome their father,

of the dream work, condensation creates a

they were all one another's rivals in regard

nodal point: a singular focus that fuses contradictory elements into a dream thought of special significance. Displacement and condensation constitute two further mechanisms for obstructing the passage of unconscious

to women. Each of them would have wished, like his father, to have all the women to himself. The new organization

thoughts to the conscious mind, allowing the

would have collapsed in a struggle of all against all, for none of them was of such overmastering strength as to be able to

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

1383

take on his father’s part with success.

Early Psychoanalytic Theory in Rhetor-

Thus the brothers had no alternative,

ical Studies.

if they were to live together, but—not perhaps, until they had passed through

tory of American rhetorical studies (RS), the

many

dangerous

crises—to

institute

the law against incest, by which they all alike renounced the women whom

they desired and who had been their chief motive for dispatching their father. In this way they rescued the organization which had made them strong— and which may have been based on

Early in the disciplinary his-

Freudian position was prestigiously associ-

ated with Kenneth Burke’s (1969) theory of identification. According to Diane Davis

(2008), Burke was enamored by Freud's Interpretation of Dreams. In A Rhetoric of Motives, for instance, he glowingly cites “Freud's notion of a dream that attains ex-

pression by stylistic subterfuges to evade the

homosexual feelings and acts, originat-

inhibitions of a moralistic censor” (Burke, 1969, p. 37). Burke, however, also distanced

ing perhaps during the period of their expulsion from the horde.

himself from some of Freud’s more famous pronouncements. Namely, “he ditched the

(Freud, 2010, pp. 178-179)

Oedipal narrative, arguing that the most fun-

Freud's social theory, finally, encompasses his theory of the drives, which culminates with the death drive. With this concept, Freud posits a function that informs all instinctualunconscious behaviors and a master category for the drive and its partial variants. It is “the return to an earlier state and, in the last reck-

oning, the return to the absolute repose of the inorganic” (Laplanche & Pontalis, 1974,

p. 102). The death drive is at work, for instance, when the subject attaches itself to the

mother (the pleasure principle) and subsequent symbolic substitutes (the reality principle) to reduce its un-pleasure, thereby reducing “tensions to zero-point” (Laplanche

& Pontalis, 1974, p. 97). It is also evident in the incest prohibition, wherein the murder of the primal father constitutes a return to an earlier, more peaceful state. In that way, the

death drive specifies a general principle of the unconscious that is equally true of the individual and the social: both follow “a circuitous path to death” in which “the human drives to self-preservation, self-assertion and mastery” ultimately work in the service of returning the subject to an infantile state of quiescence (De Lauretis, 2008, p. 75).

damental human desire is social rather than sexual” (Davis, 2008, p. 124). Whatever their differences, for Burke as for Freud, identifica-

tion happens to a subject who first encounters their identity by way of being dispossessed: “Boy wants Momma, Daddy has Momma, so

boy wants to be Daddy, identifies with him, takes him as the ideal model.” Identity is motivated not by the desire to have what the other has (in this case, the maternal love-

object) but by the desire to become the other who has (or once had) what the subject cannot stop wanting. The fact that the other “has” the (maternal love) object throws the desir-

ing subject’s own dispossession (lack-of-theobject) into relief. Put somewhat differently, identification is not an obsession held in common with another subject but rather how the assumed commonness of obsession enables the subject to put themselves in the other's place. The difference between the iden-

tifying subject (A) and the subject with whom A identifies (B) is prominently featured in Burke's own construction:

A [the subject] is not identical with his colleague, B. But insofar as their inter-

ests are joined, A is identified with B. Or

1384

-«

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

he may identify himself with B even when their interests are not joined, if he assumes that they are, or is persuaded to believe so. (Burke, 1969, p. 20)

Identification is an imperfect and often imagined match between the interests of A and B. When A imagines their interests as

CULTURAL

STUDIES

A second offshoot of early psychoanalytic theory in RS is the rhetorical criticism of archetypes, derived from Carl Jung’s theory of the cultural psyche. The rhetorical criticism of archetypes isolates symbols embedded in widely circulating popular narratives as repressed elements of a collective unconscious. Whereas other (Marxist-historical)

when the distinction between A’s desire and

approaches to psychoanalysis (over)emphasize the degree to which “moral action... can only occur in social praxis,” the Jungian ap-

B's desire is strictly policed (as, for instance, is

proach posits that moral action is also (and

the case in the distinction between boy’s/fa-

more forcibly) conveyed by these potent symbols (Rushing & Frentz, 1991, p. 386). Archetypes resemble the repressed features of dreams; they “represent aspects of the psyche that have been ignored and must be re-assimilated; their function is compensatory”

identical to B’s, they become identified. Even

ther’s desire for the mother), identification consists in the (mis-) recognition of this innate difference as sameness, and the other’s desire as “consubstantial” with one’s own:

While consubstantial with its parents,

(Terrill, 1993, p. 324). Archetypes, in other

with the ‘firsts’ from which it is derived,

words, posit a common and unconscious relationship between the symbol and culture.

the offspring is nonetheless apart from them. In this sense, there is nothing ab-

Consequently, archetypal criticism tends to focus upon literary-cinematic texts (includ-

struse in the statement that the offspring both is and is not one with its parentage. Similarly, two persons may be identified in terms of some principle they share in common, an ‘identification’ that does not deny their distinctness.

ing Jaws, Rocky, The Deer Hunter, and Batman) as exemplars of the cultural psyche: “Film is an art form particularly well-suited to expressing archetypes: It is primarily visual; it is experienced in darkened, dream-like condi-

(Burke, 1969, p. 21)

tions; and, through special techniques, it can

simulate the surrealistic plasticity of dreams” Identification has a final crucial component: the introduction of a mediating third

party. When A identifies with B by imagining themselves in B's place, it is a third party—

the (maternal) object or “some principle they share in common’—that authorizes A to become B while also relegating B to the status of an antagonist or competitor. The Freudian/ Burkean inflection on identification stresses

that there is no identity prior to the subject’s persisting attachment to that which they hold in common. For identification to occur, A must therefore make and break their relationship

to B vis-a-vis the object they both hold dear.

(Rushing & Frentz, 1980, p. 405). Like the masked unconscious of the dream work, the

collective unconscious of the cultural psyche consists of embedded symbols that represent common cultural-moral travails. It also embraces the idea that the “patterns underlying symbol formation in the psyche [that] are

everywhere the same,’ even if the images and symbols that fill these deep cultural narratives vary by geography, population, or context (Rushing & Frentz, 1991, p. 389).

Before the linguistic turn, psychoanalysis was understood primarily as a clinical practice, while the psychoanalytic theory developed

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

1385

by Freud undertook to define the unconscious. The primary theoretical focus of the unconscious regards the specific routes or processes by which unconscious thoughts become con-

Althusser (1972) as exemplars. The linguistic reformulation of Freudian

scious. Reflecting on the many contributions of Freud, CCS scholars might borrow the in-

psychoanalysis is prominently associated with Jacques Lacan, who popularized the notion

sights that identification (removed from the

that the unconscious is structured like a lan-

bounds of the Oedipal triangle) offers a compelling explanation for the subject’s desir-

guage. In “The Function and Field of Speech,”

Tzvetan Todorov (1977), Gerard Genette (1983), Mikhail Bakhtin (1981), and Louis

Lacan (2006) famously revises Ferdinand

that perspective,

de Saussure’s theory of the sign (Figure 1),

the Freudian inflection ofidentification—in which the subject’s desire is always already obstructed by and attached to another subject—should nuance our understanding of collectivizing discourse. Freudian psychoanalysis can also offer CCS scholars a vocabulary for the way that popular symbols appear in public discourse, as well as the way that some “banal” symbols function as nonthreatening symbolic substitutes for a collectively repressed trauma. Moving from the divan to the demos, Freudian psychoanalysis may help CCS to understand how certain modes of identifications and archetype cut across

which theorized the associative relationship between the signifier (the sound-image) and

ous

attachments.

From

the individual/social divide.

the signified (the concept) as the source of meaning for the subject. The revised diagram (Figure 2) removes the association between the signifier and the signified, privileges the autonomy of the signifier, and stresses the role of the bar in sepa-

rating the terms: “The division by which the science of the letter is instituted is finally nothing other than the division introduced (or at least emphasized) in the sign” (LacoueLabarthe & Nancy, 1992, p. 36). The impediment, failure, or split referenced

by the bar of the second diagram is integral to Lacan’s theorizations of the unconscious,

PSYCHOANALYSIS AFTER THE LINGUISTIC TURN

The linguistic turn colloquially refers to a shift in philosophical orientation cutting across traditionally humanistic disciplines at differ-

ent times throughout the 20th century. As popularized by philosopher Richard Rorty (1992) the linguistic turn is a historical con-

ceit rooted in logical positivism and cultivated by the tension between ideal- and ordinarylanguage philosophy. Many Continental philosophers following in Freud’s tradition, however, identify the roots of the linguistic turn in the early-20th-century study of structural linguistics, with such individuals as

Ferdinand de Saussure (2000), Roman Jakobson (1971), Roland Barthes (2012),

peg Figure 1. Ferdinand de Saussure’s diagram of the

sign from The Course in General Linguistics (2000). Source: Lacoue-Labarthe and Nancy (1992).

S c memenaneemmmnmnaiand

5 Figure 2. Jacques Lacan's algorithm from “The Instance of the Letter in the Unconscious” in Ecrits (2006). Source: Lacoue-Labarthe and Nancy (1992).

1386

-«

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

which is frequently divided, bifurcated, and

split from itself. Unlike Freud’s analysand, who employs speech to reveal (perhaps fictive) repressed unconscious thoughts, Lacan's

CULTURAL

STUDIES

sections that follow, Lacan’s major contributions to psychoanalysis are organized according to his four fundamental concepts (unconscious, repetition, transference, and drive), the

subject of the unconscious is one for whom

registers of the unconscious

the bar, split, or gap of the unconscious is

symbolic, and real), and his The “Seminar on

always immanent in their speech. Many Lacanian theorists in RS have been drawn to Lacan's obsession with speech. Speech

‘The Purloined Letter.” This section ends by considering several of the major debates over Lacanian psychoanalysis in RS and how they privilege different elements of Lacan’s

is, paradoxically, among the only media that

registers what is lost with the subject's entry into language. Joshua Gunn (2010) claimed that in the tradition of Lacan and Freud, “psychoanalysts study slips of the tongue, verbal missteps, and seemingly involuntary blurts because uncontrolled speech gives one a glimpse of the unscripted, unconscious self”

(p. 15). Michael Hyde (1980) describes Lacan’s theory of speech in terms of the talking cure, encouraging a view in which the proper combination of words enables “a person [to] become simultaneously the creator and cre-

ated” (p. 107). Barbara Biesecker (1998) contended that what is most interesting about Lacanian psychoanalysis is desire, which constitutes the subject such that no combination of words will relieve the subject of the “irreparable or irreducible split between the ego and the unconscious” (p. 223). In all of the foregoing accounts, Lacan's theory of speech advances the thesis that the subject is constituted by its entry into language vis-a-vis speech. Lacan revised Freud’s theory of the unconscious over the course of 27 seminars, books,

articles, and a two-part television broadcast. Lacan's discourse is often crude, pointed, and

performative. Louis Althusser (1972) wrote that “Lacan’s language [is] unable to live or survive except in a state of alert and accusation,” but also “provides [his audiences] with a dumb show equivalent of the language of the unconscious: the equivalent of the lived experience of their practice, whether as analyst or analysand” (pp. 138-139). In the

(imaginary,

unconscious.

THE FOUR FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS OF PSYCHOANALYSIS

Each of Lacan’s four fundamental concepts, explained in Lacan’s 11th seminar, revives a familiar Freudian formulation and supplements it with novel psychoanalytic insights. The first of the fundamental concepts, the unconscious, resuscitates Freud's first topography to theorize the barred subject and by extension, identification. As Jacques Alain Miller (1994) explains: Lacan revitalizes the Freudian concept of the unconscious, introducing thereby the concept of the subject. Indeed, he introduces the unconscious as a subject, for the subject is not a Freudian concept even if, when Freud says Ich, he is some-

times referring to the subject. When Freud says das Ich, he is often referring to the ego. The subject is a Lacanian concept, a reordering of Freud’s work. ... He chooses to define the unconscious—and it’s only one definition among many— as impediment, failure, split... In a spoken or written sentence something

stumbles. (pp. 9-10) Unlike Freud’s repressed unconscious that must be discovered or unveiled, Lacan’s un-

conscious speaks through the subject with the

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

+

1387

associative logic of “impediment(s], failure[s], [and] split[s].” Lacan famously explains identification as a split in the subject occurring during the mirror stage, the moment a child first recognizes itself in its reflection. Before the mirror stage, the subject “putatively lacks any sense ofitself as an individual, crying when other infants cry, and understanding its body

to be judged. As with the imago of the mirror stage, symbolic identification allows the subject to assume a role in relationship to the illusory completeness of an Other who decides or judges in the subject’s place. The splitting

and motions as unconnected fragments” (Rufo, 2003, p. 120). But when the infant confronts

split” as the core feature of the subject (Miller, 1994, pp. 9-10).

of identification, like the splitting of the signifier from the signified, marks how Lacan's

unconscious privileges “impediment, failure,

and recognizes itself in the mirror’s imago

The second fundamental concept, repeti-

(“the exotic fixity of the child’s reflected image”)

tion, is derived from Freud’s Wiederholen (or

a split appears in the subject's self-perception

“repetition compulsion’) in which the subject

(Rufo, 2003, p. 122). “The image simulates

experiences unwanted symptoms in a continual and insistent manner (Lacan, 1998b,

the idea of an entity entirely independent of herself in a ‘looking glass’ or reflective sur-

face” (Gunn, 2003, p. 43). This passage from putative wholeness to differentiated identity is identification: the process by which the subject recognizes itself by reference to a split in itself. Ultimately, the recognition of the imago is experienced as a loss for the subject, who thenceforth will ceaselessly attempt to “resolve, as I, his discordance with his own re-

p. SO). For Freud, trauma produces the insist-

ent symptom, repeated in dreams and parapraxes (“slips of the tongue, verbal missteps, and seemingly involuntary blurts”) (Gunn, 2010, p. 1S). Lacan insists, by contrast, that repetition is fundamental to the operation of the unconscious: “the unconscious is not merely a gap, but repetition; and through this crosschecking, a network is constituted” (Miller,

ality” (Lacan, 2006, p. 76).

1994, p. 11). He offers the example of the

Lacan elsewhere explains identification as a different sort of splitting, this time between the subject’s attachments in the imaginary

fort-da (gone-here) game to illustrate the re-

and symbolic registers. In imaginary identification, the subject “imitate[s] the other at the level of resemblance, we identify ourselves with the image of the other inasmuch as we are ‘like him” (Zizek, 1989, p. 121). At this level, the subject relates to the other as an ego ideal (or little-o other): the subject that the

infant throws a cotton-reel (or spool) attached to a thread from the side of their crib. The game consists in making the reel disappear and reappear in a way that resembles the mother’s departure from the infant’s side, making up for her disappearance by making himself the agent of the game that simulates it:

subject would (or would not) like to become. At the level of symbolic identification, by contrast, “We identify ourselves with the (big-

O) Other precisely at a point at which he is inimitable, at the point that eludes resemblance” (Zizek, 1989, p. 121). This mode of identification situates the Ideal ego (or big-O Other) as the position of illusory authority from which the subject imagines their actions

petitive-compulsive

cross-checking that is

generative of this network. In the game, the

To this object [the reel] we will later give the name it bears in the Lacanian algebra—the petit a. The activity as a whole symbolizes repetition, but not at all that of some need that might demand the return of the mother, and which would be expressed quite simply in a cry. It is

the repetition of the mother’s departure

1388

«

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

game, fort-da, which is a here or there, and

Nachtriiglichkeit or “afterwardsness”). In Freud’s early version of the concept, retroaction referred to the way that the analysand’s

whose aim, in its alternation, is simply

long-past traumatic experience were experi-

that of being the fort of ada, and the da

enced immanently, as if happening in the here and now. In Lacan’s adaptation of the retroaction, the repetition of a signifier fixes the signification of a previously occurring signifier.

as cause of a Spaltung (splitting) in the subject—overcome by the alternating

of a fort. (Lacan, 1998b, p. 62)

The substitution of the object for the infant-mother relation, as well as the game that

is made possible by this substitution, enlist repetition to achieve mastery over alienation without hope of achieving this goal. Repetition fulfills an epistemological func-

tion for the subject, who long after the fort/ da game copes with reality by acting out in mechanical, habitual, or ritualistic ways. In the analysis, breakthroughs happen belatedly, as a repetition of something that was said at an earlier time. According to Jeremy Grossman

Slavoj Zizek (1989) used Hegel’s example of caesarism, in which Julius Caesar’s power grab

is resignified by the subsequent fall of Rome: In the first instance, Caesar’s consolidation of

personal power signaled a weakening of the Republican form of governance but was perceived as the “arbitrary act” of a single person, something that “could also not have happened” and that was “contrary to the spirit of the Republic” (p. 64). In the second instance,

“the reign of Augustus” heralded the emergence of Caesarism as the paradigmatic substitute

(2017), repetition and the related concept of reduplication fulfill an epistemological

for the prior, Republican way of life: “[In]

function, marking failures ofsignification as

of Caesar fulfilled the task which was. . assigned to it by history: to exhibit the historical necessity by denouncing its own. . . arbi-

irruptions of the unconscious in public discourse. In radio interviews with former New Orleans mayor C. Ray Nagin recorded in the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina,

Nagin evinced repetition by “looping back to a particular object or objects,” returning to similar staccato phrasings and topoi of death and dying across multiple interviews (p. 260). Reduplication, adapted from Julia Kristeva (1984, 2002), is “the repetition of sounds or grammar (‘bye-bye, ‘bric-a-brac’)” as well as a failure to signify, in the sense that language is arrested or seizes upon a sound it cannot relinquish (Grossman, 2017, p.264). Nagin’s discourse “stutters, stops, restarts—reduplicates—as it

attempts to express a political logic of disaster response dislocated from partisan fiscal deliberation and bureaucratic procedures”

(Grossman, 2017, p. 266). A further Lacanian development of repetition is as retroaction (from Freud’s

failing, in missing its express goal, the murder

trary, contingent character” (Zizek, 1989, p.

60). The idea that Caesarism is the fulfillment of a historical destiny relies upon repetition, understood as retroaction. Retroaction is, in

other words, the experience of an immediate

event as meaningful because of its reference to a prior event, which achieves its full significance only after the more recent occurrence. Caesarism, the second event, affirms and con-

solidates the significance and the signification of the earlier moment as a repetition of the same. This repetition operates retroactively, fixing what was once an arbitrary signification after the fact as “an expression of underlying

historical necessity” (Zizek, 1989, p. 61). The third fundamental concept, transference, introduces the Lacanian subject-supposed-toknow (sujet supposé savoir), which describes the position of the analyst as the site where

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

the analysand projects their unconscious attachments. The Lacanian transference defines the transference as a function of the split subject-supposed-to-know: “I am in the transference both when I gamely suppose that the analyst knows the elusive contents of my desire, and when I complain hysterically that the analyst is supposed to know but does not, that both her technique and the knowledge on which it resets are fraudulent or even insidious”

(Penney, 2012, p. 24). Lacan also

offers a solution to Freud’s problematic formulation of the transference as a site where infantile sexual attachments are repeated. By oscillating between the analyst who is supposed to have all the answers and the analyst who is supposed to (but does not) possess such knowledge, “the analyst’s role is simply

to sustain [the analysand’s] desire, to prevent

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

«

1389

the public-supposed-to-believe. Whereas the public-supposed-to-believe is “that subject from whom secrets are kept and in whom a right to know is embedded” (Dean, 2002, p. 18), the-public-supposed-to-know assumes the role of an elite secret keeper: “Something orsomeone stands right outside us, our knowl-

edge and our visibility, withholding our legitimacy from us, preventing us from realizing

the rightness that we claim, that should be

ours” (Dean, 2002, p. 44). The fourth fundamental concept is the drive, which is distinguished from desire and

introduces the objet petit a and jouissance. In the Freudian model, drive is (much to Lacan’s

dismay) often translated as “instinct” and is commonly associated with the Id of the second topography (Lacan, 1998b, pp. 49, 102, 126). Drive is set apart from need, demand, and

this desire from issuing a sign of legitimation with which the patient could reassure him-

desire. In need, the signifier coincides with the

self, secure in the knowledge that the Other

with its need for nourishment). In demand,

has recognized and sanctioned his innermost

the signifier does not coincide with the object

object (e.g., the hungry child’s cry coincides

being” (Penney, 2012, p. 46). In other words,

in the same way. Joan Copjec (1994) in-

the analyst's desire affirms the patient up to the point that the analyst is called upon to affirm the analysand as ifthey were their Other.

formed us that the child who demands milk, for instance, is asking for something more

When

Lacan

(1998a)

first formulated

the transference in 1953, it also broadened

Freud’s definition considerably to encompass intersubjective relationships more generally: “Each time a man speaks to another in an authentic and full manner, there is, in the

true sense, transference” (p. 109). The everydayness of the transference depends, however, on the subject’s construction of the subject supposed to know, who like the Ideal Ego of symbolic identification, assumes a position of mastery or judgment over the subject. One way that the subject-supposed-to-know has been pluralized is through the work of Jodi Dean (2002), who enlists the (analyst’s) position of mastery to describe the distinc-

tion between the public-supposed-to-know and

than is literally stated: “the particularity of the object is here annulled; almost any will satisfy—as long as it comes from the one to whom the demand is addressed” (Copjec, 1994, p. 146). The “something more” that the child asks for is the objet petit a of desire,

which imputes an intersubjective relationship as a surplus of the signifier. The subject of desire is always chasing after their objet petit a, their demand for surplus love from the Other never being fully answered, and

the subject must find substitute objects (e.g., the cotton-reel) to alleviate their stress. The

final term, drive, is explained by way of a childhood game that once again involves a mirror. In direct opposition to desire, the drive will not stop being satisfied and always attains its object.

1390

-

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

In this later version, the child himself functions as the cotton reel; hiding beneath the mirror for a time, he suddenly

of Louisiana demagogue Huey P. Long, whose embodiment of the obsessional/hysteria dialectic closely mirrors the two economies of

jumps up to observe the emergence of

jouissance. Gunn characterizes Huey P. Long,

his mirror reflection. ... In the [fort-da]

capes it. In the second game repetition

the obsessional, as “an eloquent, charming, and sometimes buffoonish outsider” who wielded a polarizing and populist rhetorical style (p. 6). Long’s obsessive style transforms him into the subject of the drive and his audiences into hysteric subjects of desire. Long, the perverse subject-of-drive, “is convinced of his or her completeness and autonomy” (Gunn, 2007, p. 12) but is in fact “fundamentally unfree, compulsively driven to repeat

is driven not by desire but by satisfac-

the same thing” (Gunn, 2018, p. 171). The hys-

tion; some satisfaction is repeated, does

teric subject-of-desire’s erstwhile tendency is to “deny or erase themselves, continually establishing an unsatisfied desire” that only

game it is failure, or desire, that propels the repetition. Something escapes, or to use one of Lacan’s phrases, something “does not stop not writing itself,’ in the

field of representation structured by the game, and so the game is repeated end-

lessly with the hope, but without the possibility, of capturing that which es-

not stop writing itself, in the game. (Copjec, 1994, p. 182)

their Other can provide (Gunn, 2007, p. 13). Desire and drive define the two economies of jouissance, “the subject’s ‘useless’ rep-

etition of its habits of subjectivity” (Lundberg, 2009, pp. 401-402). Whereas desire “perpet-

ually postpones fulfillment, reflexively turning the impossibility of satisfying desire into the desire for unsatisfaction,” the drive is the opposite; “rather than never attaining satisfaction, this subject always gets it; in fact, he

gets it through the very movement of trying

to repress it” (Dean, 2002, p. 117). Whether as “the desire for unsatisfaction” or the achievement of the drive's aim “through the very movement of trying to repress it,” jouissance is the surplus achieved through the ritual pursuit of

the object (Dean, 2002, p. 117). When tethered to the drive, finally, Lee Edelman (2004) reminds us that jouissance always has one final attribute: it “[embodies] the remainder of the Real internal to the symbolic order” and “produces identity as mortification, reenacting the very constraint of meaning it was intended

to help us escape” (Edelman, 2004, p. 25). One example of the desire/drive distinc-

tion occurs in Joshua Gunn's (2007) account

Huey, as the subject of the drive, is embodied

as an apparently “complete” person without the need for listeners and promised them a piece of the perverse satisfaction he is always guaranteed “by claiming to bring order to chaos, thereby representing strength, resolve, and absolute autonomy” (Gunn, 2007, p. 6). Huey also embodied his audiences’ Other, amplifying their demand for satisfaction with the promise of “his impossible perfect people, self-alienated and incapable of satisfying desire” (Gunn, 2007, p. 14). Lacan also preserves some sense of Freud’s death drive throughout his various theorizations of the unconscious. In his early psychoanalytic writings, including “The Function and Field of Speech and Language,” the death drive is associated with the word-as-murder-

of-the-thing (Zizek, 1989, p. 145). As soon as reality is captured by the word, it becomes

“caught in a-symbolic network [in which] the thing itself is more present in a word, in its concept, than in its immediate physical reality.” As with the mirror stage, in which the imago cuts the subject off from its prior being

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

and heralds the indefinite resolution of the ego, the entry into the symbolic is a deathlike cutting off from reality effected by language. In the second period of Lacan's writing, associated with his “Seminar on ‘The Purloined Letter,” “the accent is shifted from the word,

speech, to language as .. . a senseless autono-

mous mechanism which produces meaning as its effect.” Here the death drive is associated with the radically decentering effects of the symbolic order (the locus of the signifier and signification) upon the imaginary (which organizes the experience of the subject as fan-

tasy). In the final period, the death drive is equated with the Real, which is “exactly the

opposite of the symbolic order: [it is] the possibility of the . . . radical annihilation of the symbolic texture through which so-called reality is constituted” (Zizek, 1989, p. 147).

THE REGISTERS OF THE UNCONSCIOUS The imaginary, symbolic, and Real registers of the unconscious correlate roughly with three major stages of Lacan’s career; he began with the imaginary, moved to the symbolic, and closed with the Real. Each register also poses a different relationship to the signifier. In the imaginary, the domain “lying between subject-formation in language and the articulation of demands in speech,” the subject is attracted to or repelled by the signifier (Bush, 2012, p. 283). In the symbolic, the register of

language and signification, the signifier is the agency that organizes the subject's discourse. In the Real, the signifier unravels or undoes the

subject's discursive universe. Calum Matheson (2016) offered a mathematical analogy: “[the] Symbolic might be understood as the struc-

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

1391

Slavoj Zizek (2007) offered the following account of the registers, comparing them to distinct features of a chess game: The rules one has to follow in order to play it are its symbolic dimension: from the purely formal standpoint, ‘knight’ is defined only by the moves this figure can make. This level is clearly different from the imaginary one, namely the way in which different pieces are shaped and characterized by their names (king,

queen, knight), and it is easy to envision a game with the same rules, but with a different imaginary, in which this figure

would be called ‘messenger’ or ‘runner’ or whatever. Finally, Real is the entire complex set of contingent circumstances

that affect the course of the game: the intelligence of the players, the unpredictable intrusions that may disconcert one player or directly cut the game short.

(pp. 8-9) The Imaginary.

‘The imaginary register of

the unconscious is the locus of the image, the

little-o other, and fantasy. It brings together many of Lacan’s early concepts, which are

rooted in a quasi-infantile subject whose subjectivity is cut off from itself (or castrated) in the encounter with the mirror’s imago or language’s signifier. As Lacan (2005) writes,

“We must absolutely define the ego’s imaginary function as the unity of the subject who is alienated from himself” (p. 24). Cinema scholar Christian Metz (1982) surveyed the breadth of concepts that fall under the heading of Lacan’s imaginary as follows:

lending particular value to individual vari-

In the Lacanian sense . . . the imaginary, opposed to the symbolic but constantly

ables, and the Real emerging when the for-

imbricated with it, designates the basic

mula is revealed to be insoluble” (p. 135).

lure of the ego, the definitive imprint of

ture of an equation, the Imaginary relation

1392

-«

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

a stage before the Oedipus complex (which also continues after it), the durable mark of the mirror which alienates man in his own reflection and makes him the double of his double, the subterranean persistence of the exclusive

relation to the mother, desire as a pure effect of lack and endless pursuit, the initial core of the unconscious (primal

repression). (p. 4) The predominant dyad or dialectic of the imaginary register occurs between the subject and their (little-o) other. This relation is sometimes transposed into RS scholarship as

the relationship between speaker (or text) and audience, in which the one holds out an

untenable fantasy of wholeness for the other distraught by a condition of fragmentation or lack. Fantasy, often a synonym for the imaginary register, has at least four major variants.

The first, developed byJoshua Gunn (2004a), extends the idea that as the subject “emerges from the mirror stage, s/he develops a ‘fundamental fantasy’ about his or her origin, a fantasy about the cause of his or her desire” (p. 9). From this perspective, the fundamen-

tal fantasy concerns “the subject’s desire for the desire of the Other” and puts desire into play as nostalgia or yearning whereby “the split or ‘barred’ subject is set in relationship to some cause [i.e. the objet petit a]” (Gunn,

2004a, pp. 10-11). At the level of the imaginary, of the subject’s fantasy is played out by way the ego's attachments to objects situated retroactively as the cause of their desire. In the second version of fantasy, Slavoj

Zizek (1989) equated the imaginary with the subject's routine and unconscious subjection to ideology. Traditionally, this “duped” or “mystified” subject engages in actions that end up

supporting ideology (p. 27). Zizek rewrites this maxim as disavowal: the subject “know[{s] very well how things are, but nonetheless”

CULTURAL

STUDIES

continues behaving in a way that supports the ruling ideological regime. The subject who regularly purchases green-washed products “knows very well” that their consumption actively and wastefully contributes to pollution (or that reuse is a superior option) but

“nonetheless” is content in thinking that they support an eco-friendly ethics through their participation in the rituals of capital. The things with which the subject contents itself are, in this view, objets petit a, partial objects that soothe the subject and defer confronting their complicity with the hegemonic structures that would throw its identity into crisis. The third version of fantasy (or “phantasy”’) is developed by RS scholar Judith Butler, who places it in relation with the little-r real. Butler often enlists Louis Althusser’s (1972) pairing

of the imaginary with the terrain of ideology that precedes and anticipates the individual, who is more or less coercively made to recognize itself as a subject. In “Force of Fantasy: Feminism, Mapplethorpe, and Discursive Excess,” Butler (2003) specifically theorized

how legal discourse overdetermines what counts as a homosexual subject. The theory of fantasy Butler advances is one in which language constructs the discursive world as real by cementing power hierarchies and relations among gendered bodies. As Butler explains, “to say that something is phantasmatic is not to say that it is ‘unreal’ or artificial or dismissible as a consequence. ... Fantasy postures as the real” (p. 187). Butler demonstrates

this principle with the example of Jesse Helms, the North Carolina legislator famous for decrying the nude photography of Robert Mapplethorpe as pornography. Helm’s prohibitive posture projects a fantasy of homosexual perversion that, in the very effort to censor Mapplethorpe, is written into the law as “a figure of homosexuality whose figurings, whose ‘representations, are to be forbidden”

(Butler, 2003, p. 195). Ultimately, Helms’s

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

fantasy realizes a caricature of homosexuality in the form of a prohibition against it. In Butler's account, the imaginary fantasy abides by a paradoxical logic in which Helms’s desire-to-prohibit both anticipates and is fulfilled by Mapplethorpe: Helms operates as the precondition of Mapplethorpe’s enterprise, and Mapplethorpe attempts to subvert that generative prohibition by, as it were, becoming the exemplary fulfillment of its constitutive sexual wish. ... The text encodes and presupposes precisely the prohibition which will later impose itself as if it were externally related to

the text itself.

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

-

1393

The objectivity to which Mulvey is referring, of course, and women cinematic which man

is the status quo in which man are presumed equal. Instead, the screen perpetuates a fantasy in is the de facto bearer of the look,

and woman is conditioned to accept her lot as the passive object of masculine voyeuristic pleasure.

The Symbolic.

The symbolic register of

the unconscious is the locus of language, the

big-O Other, and trope. When Lacan (2005) defined the symbolic, it was often in reference to language and the symbol as the structure of the symptom: “Whether it is a matter of real symptoms, bungled actions, or whatever

we constantly find and re-find, which Freud referred to in its essential reality, it is always

(Butler, 2003, p. 194)

a matter of symbols” (pp. 16-17). Like the The Helms case ultimately offers an answer to “who and what wields the power to define the homosexual real?” (Butler, 2003, p. 199). In this case, it is Helms; he realizes his own

perverse fantasy of antihomosexual violence by writing a prohibition upon so-called obscene photography into law. The fourth understanding of the imaginary fantasy is borrowed

from

cinema

studies,

in which the subject’s confrontation with the screen creates an encounter resembling the mirror stage. As Laura Mulvey (2009) argues,

signifier'’s bar, the function of the symbolic is less to share meaning among subjects than to divide subjects from each other and to place them into relation with one another. As Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen (1991) explained:

Symbolic speech ... seals a pact with the other—a pact that Lacan calls ‘symbolic’ because the subject, by agreeing to exchange speech, agrees to break the

“The cinema has [in common with the mirror

‘sword’ and transform it into a sign of recognition, a symbolic tessera, a sumbulon. Through speech, I recognize the

stage | structures of fascination strong enough

Other (who is not me) as the very locus

to allow a temporary loss of ego while simul-

of truth (and of my truth), since it is ac-

taneously reinforcing the ego” (p. 345). These

tually necessary for me to call on him to

structures, scopophilia (in which “looking itself is a source of pleasure”) (Mulvey, 2009, p. 344) and narcissistic identification (in which the subject perceives their own subjectivity in the

witness the truth of my speech, even if I do this to lie to him and fool him. ... The

image), “pursue aims in indifference to perceptual reality, creating the imagized, eroticized concept of the world that forms the perception of the subject and makes a mockery of em-

contract. (pp. 117-118)

pirical objectivity” (Mulvey, 2009, p. 346).

origin of truth, in other words, is not

imaginary violence but the symbolic

The big-O Other, which receives names including the father, the phallus, and the law, also plays a key role in sealing the symbolic

1394

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

registers intersubjective pact. The names for the big-O Other resemble Freud’s incest prohibition, wherein the primal father, the subject of pure jouissance, is murdered and the tribal relationship is re-sutured by way of a commonly agreed-upon prohibition. In Lacan’s reading, when the primal father is substituted with the social function of a written law, these symbols only bring the tribes-

people together by instituting a limit to their actions. In Lacan’s formulation, the “Law of the Father” never refers to one’s literal (adop-

tive or biological) father. It is rather a placeholder for the subject of gratuitous pleasure whose presence necessitates the in(ter)vention of the symbolic law. As legal prohibition, the symbolic once again has the primary function of division, of separating the subject from other subjects as the basis ofa common bond. Lacan also explains how the symbolic register intervenes in the imaginary with his schema L (Figure 4). As Christian Lundberg (2012) argued, the purpose of the diagram is to highlight the greater importance of the big-O Other relative to the small-o others with whom the subject is usually engaged (p. 62).

CULTURAL

STUDIES

or “the disorganized material, biological and

experiential reality of having a body,” and the

post-mirror-stage ego (lower left), the “image of identity that retroactively imposes both unity

and meaning” onto the subject (Lundberg, 2012, p. 61). On the right side of the diagram, the “receiver” or “addressee” is split between an imaginary little-o other (upper-right), “the

manifest addressee of speech,” and the symbolic big-O Other, the position of Otherness from where the subject is judged and appears likable to itself (lower right) (Lundberg,

2012, p. 63). The mesh of dotted and solid lines between Es, the little-o other, and the

ego illustrate how the subject's ego is always mediated through particular others. The sub-

ject’s (Es) desirous relationship to the little-o other, which is represented by the uppermost dotted line, returns to the subject’s ego as the solid line of the imaginary identification, the subject as they want to be, or as the bearer of a unique lack that is recognized by the little-o

Like the sender/receiver model of communi-

cation (Figure 3), the schema L is split along the vertical axis between the subject (on the

left, represented by “Es” and “ego”) and the O/other (on the right). On the “sender” side, the subject is split along the horizontal axis

between the pre-mirror-stage Es (upper left)

Figure 3. Ferdinand de Saussure’s sender/receiver model of communication as displayed in Course in General Linguistics (2000). Source: Lacoue-Labarthe and Nancy (1992).

@) other

(ego) @)

(A) Other

Figure 4. Jacques Lacan's Schema L diagram as displayed in The Seminar ofJacques Lacan: The Ego in

Freud's Theory and in the Technique ofPsychoanalysis (1988) and The Psychoses (1993). Source: Lundberg (2012).

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

other's speech. The solid lines emanating from the lower right-hand corner of the diagram are indicative of the determinative role played by the symbolic order and the big-O Other. The big-O Other speaks to the subject’s ego most directly via the bottommost solid line, which represents the position in the unconscious from which the subject seeks approval and judges its own acts as worthy of shame or pride. The diagonal solid line marked “uncon-

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

+

1395

dream work (see the section “Psychoanalysis Before the Linguistic Turn”) and the syntag-

matic and paradigmatic axes of language, as ex-

plained by Roman Jakobson (1971). Whereas the paradigmatic axis is the locus of substitu-

tion for any one ofa sentence’s terms, the syntagmatic axis is the locus of word agreement and association among the grammatical cate-

indicates how the ego

gories (i.e., subject/predicate). Lacan’s metonymy will thus resemble both displacement and Jakobson’s paradigmatic axis, and his ac-

has no direct access to the symbolic order. A message from the big-O Other must pass

count of metaphor will resemble condensation and language's syntagmatic rules. Using

through the small-o other, who is the imag-

these basic coordinates, several scholars have

ined cause of the subject’s desire and who the subject in turn personifies as the embodiment of the symbolic order. Lacan explains this idea with the phrase “the letter always ar-

theorized the symbolic register in different ways, equating trope respectively with the

scious, meanwhile,

rives at its destination,’ (Lacan & Fink, 2006,

p. 30) which vis-a-vis schema L, signifies that the big-O Other is a function that allows the unconscious subject to send a message to themselves, the conscious ego, through the medium of the imaginary small-o others they are immanently engaged with. The symbolic order also enables Lacan to establish a distinction between rhetoric and discourse, which terms refer to distinct as-

pects of speech. Discourse refers primarily to speech in its imaginary aspect as the text of fantasy, which emphasizes the subject's immediate intersubjective attachments. Rhetoric, and by extension, trope, describe speech’s formal-

symbolic aspect, to be understood as the organizing dimensions of discourse.’ Trope is

structure of narratives, publics, and populism. The first mode of tropological organization removes rhetoric from the figural level of discourse and instead situates it as the organizing logic of the narrative plot. Whereas rheto-

ric is conventionally understood as stylistic adornment or ornamentation, this reading of

rhetoric privileges the trope’s role as supratextual diegetic patterning: the laws of order that allow a narrative to be recognizable as such. Literary theorist Peter Brooks (1985), for instance, described the coordinates around which narratives cohere by way of metonymy

and metaphor. Metonymy, like displacement, effects the scene-by-scene linkages and substitutions of narrative. Metaphor, like condensation, effects narrative as a “closed and legible [whole],’ and is the product of the

incremental “movement toward totalization”

the logic of association and reassociation;

that metonymy effects at each moment of the

when the big-O Other speaks to the subject (vis-a-vis other subjects), it redistributes discourse for that subject, causing a familiar

plot’s forward motion (p. 91).

set of associations to organize in a new way.

Lacan’s theory of trope, which most often appears as metonymy and metaphor, has two readily identifiable sources: Freud's description of displacement and condensation in the

The second mode of tropological organization comes from Lundberg (2009), who argues that Lacan's tropes are master logics of public formation: “Metonymy describes...any point where signs and representations are articulated to one another as a point of investment producing meaning for a subject,’ while

1396

«

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

“metaphor describes a function whereby cer-

“The name—of a social movement,

tain metonymic connections become partic-

ideology, of a political institution—is always

of an

ularly significant points of investment, exerting a regulatory role on a chain of signifiers by

the metaphorical crystallization of contents whose links result from concealing their met-

retroactively organizing the series of meto-

nymic connections within which the meta-

onymic origins” (p. 80). This theory of trope describes a narrative logic of public forma-

phor is nested” (p. 389). As a logic of public

tion, first as metonymically linked interests

formation, metonymy is conceived as the general contingency by which subjects develop

and then as the consolidation of the slogan as the metaphor of the movement “as a whole.”

attachments to other signifiers, objects, or

The metaphoric name or slogan serves a par-

people. Metaphor occurs when such connections are no longer contingent but become fixed by some particularly important signi-

ticularly important function: it acts as a nodal point that knits the collective together.

fier. Thus, Lundberg can conclude that the

The Real.

film The Passion of the Christ offered an evan-

locus of the jouissance, the death drive, and

gelical public a metaphor by which the visible suffering of Christ was metonymically sutured to viewers’ view of Christianity as itself persecuted: “The overwhelming representations

the objet petit a. The Real is less an ordered

of graphic violence induce and perform the trauma that the film works to establish as a constitutive pole of evangelical identity” (p. 396). As Kurt Zemlicka (2013) cautioned, however, the “infinite” tropological slide from

metonymy to metaphor also creates insular and self-protective publics incapable of deliberation with one another. The third version of tropological organization is borrowed from political theorist Ernesto Laclau (2014), who explained successful pop-

ulist movements in terms of a transition from metonymy to metaphor. In this framework, the contingent connections of metonymy are put in terms of the overlapping interests of separate populist coalitions. Trade unions and racially segregated neighborhoods have separable and distinct aims, but a metonymic relationship between these interests links them together by way of a shared demand. Laclau describes metaphor in terms of the populist slogan that solidifies the contingent bond among allies. Metaphor is active when the slogan names, and thereby retroactively symbolizes, the “whole” of the populist movement.

‘The register of the Real is the

domain than the subversion of order, accessi-

ble only by way of a disruption in the symbolic and/or imaginary. One example of the Real is the object-voice, which separates the voice from its aesthetic and signifying qualities. Drawing upon Mladen Dolar’s (2006)

psychoanalytic account of the object voice, Jason Myres (2016) explained that the voice “names an excessive remainder of the failed articulation between bodies and languages that becomes retroactively transposed into the position of an origin or cause” (p. 162). Myres offers the example of Stephen Hawking, whose voice “is an external mechanical apparatus that threatens us with the prospect of voice reduced to pure mechanical iterability” (Myres, 2016, p. 165). As an object, the voice

is only tentatively connected to an “actual” body, challenging the demand that there be a real person present wherever a voice is heard. This mechanical, rhetor-less object-voice con-

stitutes “an excess of jouissance that escapes, or even threatens, the symbolic order” (Myres,

2016, p. 162).

According to Johnson and Asenas (2013), the Real has five separate functions: it is the void or backdrop for ideology, the “return” (i.e., the “return of the repressed”), the domain

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

-

1397,

of unrestricted jouissance (i.e., before it is

to the meaningless circulation and repe-

captured by the symbolic order), materiality

titions of the drive. (p. 39)

(ie, the reduction of the organism to abject matter), and recalcitrance (i.e., resistance to

symbolization). Lacan puts stress on this final point: although some scholars equate the Real with the representation of a lack, the Real is

defined as that point where symbols and symbolization are both impossible:

Queer identity, in other words, implicitly threatens its fragile heterosexual opposite with the prospect that all its ritualistic worship of the family is nothing more than “going through the motions” and “the meaningless circulations and repetitions of the drives” (Edelman, 2004, p. 39). The threat of queer-

[It] would be a mistake to understand the Real as “that which is beside meaning and in which meaning inscribes itself in order to realize itself”; instead the Lacanian Real “spells from the inti-

mate fault line in the symbolic system.’ The Real is that which, thanks to the symbolic incision, has existence but not substance, an existence discernable

only by virtue of a careful accounting of its (de)structuring effects. (Biesecker, 2010, p. 21)

In contradistinction to the little-r real, which

describes the objective and factual quality of reality as imaginary fantasy, the big-R Real

ness is consequently pitted against the hegemonic symbols of heterosexual reproductive futurity. Without recourse to symbolize its identity except in opposition, queerness is

made to symbolize its status as peripheral by adopting, adapting, and disrupting the existing normative order. THE “SEMINAR ON ‘THE PURLOINED LETTER’” The “Seminar on “The Purloined Letter” is a 1955S lecture delivered by Jacques Lacan that is published in Ecrits (2006). It is noteworthy for the way it draws together an array of psychoanalytic concepts, including repetition, the

objectivity, and the conventional (symbolic)

agency of the signifier, and the registers of the unconscious. The topic of the seminar, Edgar Allan Poe’s (1844) short story “The Purloined

logic of fantasy is unraveled by a new and unwelcome signifier that cannot be subsumed

Letter,” is among the earliest examples of detective fiction. The seminar, which presents

into discourse as is. Lee Edelman (2004), for instance, explained the Real by way of the

a careful analysis of the plot, also anticipates many of the conceptual developments of The Four Fundamental Concepts and is therefore a

describes that point at which the particular

(imaginary) fantasy cannot sustain its mythic

“unwelcome” signifier of queerness, which is restricted to the periphery of normalized

gender identity.

uniquely valuable anecdote for summarizing

how parts of Lacanian theory are interrelated. Poe’s story is split into two scenes:

Homosexuality is thought as a threat to the logic of thought itself insofar as it figures the availability of an unthink-

able jouissance that would put an end to [heterosexual] fantasy—and, with it, to futurity—by reducing the assurance of meaning in fantasy's promise of continuity

The first transpires in a “royal boudoir” where the King and Queen are present. The Queen receives the compromising

letter in the King’s presence, whereupon the Minister D- enters. The Minister quickly recognizes that the Queen is

1398

-

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

keeping a secret, and casually drops a decoy letter on the table. He then steals the dangerous document as the Queen

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

second scene as a version of the first retroactively gives form and meaning to the events in the royal boudoir and organizes the narra-

watches, unable to stop him. The second

tive’s resolution. In the first scene (Figure S),

scene

the King is blind to the letter, the Queen wishes for it to remain hidden, and the Minister

features Poe’s analyst, Auguste

Dupin. At this time, the Queen has commanded the Prefect of the Police to retrieve the letter. Although his officers employ state-of-the-art scientific techniques to find the letter, no amount of searching can uncover it. Exhausted by their failure, the Prefect consults Dupin for assistance. When Dupin enters the Minister's home for a casual visit, he

immediately sees the letter perched in plain sight, crumpled and “apparently thrust carelessly” between the legs of the Minister's mantel. Artfully forgetting his snuffbox on the table, Dupin returns the following day, and substi-

tutes the letter with a facsimile that bears his own signature. (Hallsby, 2015, p. 360)

D- seizes the advantage of the intersubjective relationship he sees played out before him. In the second scene (Figure 6), the police are blind to the letter, the Minister D- wishes

for it to remain hidden, and Dupin—because he seizes upon the structure of the Minister D-'s theft—takes advantage of D-’s blind spot.

As Shoshana Felman (1987) explained, “[What] is repeated... is not a psychological act committed as a function of the individual psychology of a character, but three functional positions in a structure which, deter-

mining three different viewpoints, embody three different relations to the act of seeing of seeing, specifically, the purloined letter” (p. 41). What are these “positions” or “relations” to

the letter? (Figure 7) Repetition (as retroaction) is far and away the star of the show. The recurrence of the

The first is the “realist imbecile,’ the blind

Other embodied first by the king and then by

(Not seeing)

(Not seeing)

KING A

A

POLICE

Scene II

B QUEEN (Seeing that the other does not see)

Cc MINISTER (Seeing the letter)

Figure 5. Shoshana Felman’s diagram of Scene | of “The Purloined Letter” (1844) in Jacques Lacan

and the Adventure of Insight (1987). Source: Felman (1987).

B

C

MINISTER

DUPIN

(Seeing that the other does not see)

(Seeing the letter)

Figure 6. Shoshana Felman’s diagram of Scene 2 of “The Purloined Letter” (1844) in Jacques Lacan

and the Adventure ofInsight (1987). Source: Felman (1987).

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

«+

1399

range of intersubjective positions available to the characters in “The Purloined Letter.” The signifier’s materiality is muted because the letter organizes the story despite its having

Empirical glance “REAList’s imbecility” A

/

never been read. Like the Queen’s letter, the

Figure 7. Shoshana Felman’s diagram of the intersubjective relations of “The Purloined Letter”

signifier is hermetically sealed, cut off from the signified. At no point is the reader invited to read the letter’s compromising message, nor to consider why the Queen fears the King’s wrath. Instead, the recalcitrant signifier-letter has an agency of its own that draws characters into a network of dispossession and desire. The evidence of the signifier’s agency is that the logic of desire proceeds unhindered by the

(1844) inJacques Lacan and the Adventure ofInsight

fact that the letter’s signified (i.e., its content or

(1987). Source: Felman (1987).

meaning) is completely obfuscated throughout the story. Moreover, the repetitious char-

the prefect of the police. The second is the

acter of the triangular intersubjective relations of the story illustrates how the signifier (and

secret-keeper, who hides the letter, embodied

not the legible secret that it contains) coordi-

first by the queen and then by the Minister D-. This position embodies the imaginary register and exists at the scale of the intersubjective dyad. The third is the secret-taker: it sees what the second sees, and seizing the opportunity it removes the letter from its place. The third position moves the letter from its place only to find himself occupying a different position in the intersubjective triangle. This relation is occupied first by the minister and then by Auguste Dupin. Each assumes the role of the symbolic insofar as they take a supraposition with respect to another intersubjective relation; by being in a position to “seize” the symbolic order, these characters identify themselves with it—only to find themselves “put into place” by the symbolic order. The

nates the distinct modes of desire that are oriented to it. The signifier’s agency also illustrates how psychoanalytic theory reaches beyond the conceit that analysis should focus solely or exclusively on deciphering the meaning of speech or symbols. Granted, when placed in the terms of the imaginary, the psychoanalytic theoretical framework is concerned with signification insofar as meaning is tethered to a signifier that produces meaning for a subject. But the search for a deep historical and/ or hermeneutical inquiry into the meaning of a sign for an audience may place too high a premium on the interpretation of the signified over the constitutive effects of the signifier’s circulation. Psychoanalysis isa theory beyond signification because it captures how the signifier (placed in terms of the symbolic) is always in transit and acquires force and meaning only by actively and retroactively referencing a prior signifier. Recalling, for example, how the second instance of the letter’s theft

/ B IMAGINARY delusion

SYMBOLIC

Cc

Specular glance (Dual perspective)

perspective (Triangular perspective)

letter, of course, is the signifier that remains

constant as characters and contexts shift around it. When Lacan argues that the agency of the signifier is responsible for creating a network of intersubjective relationships, it is because the letter’s muted materiality organizes the

(by Dupin) retroactively grants the first

1400

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

AND

CRITICAL

theft (by the Minister D-) form and meaning, we could argue that symbolic repetition

is beyond signification because it describes the formal conditions that make signification possible. Finally, the theory of the signifier explains the connection between the imaginary and symbolic registers. Often enough, psychoanalytic rhetorical analyses make a competitive choice to focus upon only one or another privileged register. One reason for the either/ or framing of the imaginary and the symbolic in RS is that these registers came to scholars’ attention as a published debate between Gunn (2004a, 2004b) and Lundberg (2004). Whereas Gunn prioritized the importance of the imaginary for rhetorical analysis by recourse to the mirror-stage, little-o other, mis-recognition (méconnaissance), and

the fundamental fantasy, Lundberg argued that “Lacan opens a path to think of the Symbolic as specifically tropological and, therefore, as a rhetorical phenomenon”

(pp. 49-50). The oppositional framing ofthe psychoanalytic registers encourages

a two-

tier approach such that rhetorical scholars are entreated to either take on the thick description of imaginary fantasy, or alternatively, to account for the unfolding tropological structure of the symbolic order. From the perspective of the signifier of the “Seminar on ‘The Purloined Letter,” however, these regis-

ters are interimbricated. Per the imaginary fantasy, the signifier is always-already articulated to an overdetermined meaning for a subject. Per the symbolic order, this signifier refuses the tether of a particular signified through tropologically determined structures and the retroactivity of reference. The final lesson of Lacan’s “Seminar” is that these registers should be understood to function in tandem with one another rather than as mutually exclusive provenances of psychoanalytic thought.

CULTURAL

STUDIES

CRITICAL AND CULTURAL STUDIES WITH/AND PSYCHOANALYSIS The rhetorical examples offered in this entry will hopefully chart a less bifurcated path for psychoanalysis and CCS in future communication scholarship. A joint endeavor is desirable because the oppositional framing of psychoanalysis and CCS simply does not do justice to the way that these modes of inquiry can and do work together. If psychoanalysis is dismissed based on its most outdated assumptions, CCS risks missing out on the

embedded psychoanalytic nuance of some canonical critical theory, including that of Frantz Fanon (2008), Gayle Rubin (1975), Henry Louis Gates Jr. (1988), Hortense Spillers (2003), Jared Sexton (2008), Homi Bhabha (1994), Gayatri Spivak (1999), and

Judith Butler (1990, 1997, 2006). Absent psychoanalysis, the logics of alienation and signification at play in much ofthis foundational critical scholarship is too easily passed over in silence. What ethical goal should animate critical psychoanalytic scholarship? Elizabeth Roudinesco (2004) provided one answer:

Psychoanalysis testifies to an advance of civilization over barbarism. It restores

the idea that human speech is free and that human destiny is not confined to biological being. Thus in the future it should occupy its full place, next to the other sciences, to contest the obscurantist claims seeking to reduce thought to a neuron or to equate desire with a chem-

ical secretion. (p. xi) Psychoanalytic theory, in sum, hopes to recover some measure of the agency that is re-

linquished to the unconscious of speech or that has been attributed to biological nature. Such a purpose opens a path forward for

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

psychoanalysis as a method and CCS as a field of inquiry because both share the goal ofmitigating human suffering, as well as optimism

for the speaking subject who embraces the talking cure. By refusing the reified distinction between psychoanalytically informed scholarship and CCS, scholars open the way for a new kind of scholarship that aims to apply a psychic salve to distressed public discourse.

ADDITIONAL

Exploring Psychoanalysis through the Work of Jacques Lacan. Available at http: //us.karnacbooks.com/. Karnac Books. Available at http://us.karnacbooks .com/,

Lacan Dot Com Is Jacques Lacan in the US. Available at http://www.lacan.com/. in Ireland. Available lacaninireland.com/.

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

1401

Kristeva, J. (1969). Desire in language: A semiotic

approach to literature and art. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Laclau, E. (2005). On populist reason. New York, NY: Verso.

Lacoue-Labarthe, P., & Nancy, J.-L. (1992). The title of the letter: A reading of Lacan. Albany: State University of New York Press. Liu, L. H. (2010). The Freudian robot: Digital media and the future of the unconscious. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Mitchell, J. (1974). Psychoanalysis and feminism.

RESOURCES

Lacan

AND

at

http://www

New York, NY: Pantheon Books. Pfaller, R. (2014). On the pleasure principle in culture: Illusions without owners. New York, NY: Verso.

Rickert, T. (2007). Acts of enjoyment: Rhetoric, Zizek, and the return of the subject. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Ricouer, P. (1970). Freud and philosophy: An essay on interpretation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Rose, J. (1986). Sexuality in the field of vision. London, UK: Verso.

FURTHER

Adams,

Roudinesco, E. (2001). Why psychoanalysis? New

READING

P. (1996).

The emptiness

of the image:

Psychoanalysis and sexual differences. New York,

NY: Routledge.

Butler, J. (1997). The psychic life ofpower: Theories in subjection. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Chatain, G. D. (1996). Rhetoric and culture in Lacan.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Copijec, J. (2002). Imagine there’s no woman: Ethics

York, NY: Columbia University Press. Rubenstein, D. (2008). This is not a president: Sense, nonsense, and the American political imaginary. New York, NY: New York University Press. Rubin, G. (1975). The traffic in women: Notes on the “political economy” of sex. In R. R. Reitner (Ed.), Toward an anthropology of women (pp. 187-210).

New York, NY: Monthly Review Press. Salecl, R. (1998). (Per)versions of love and hate. New York, NY: Verso.

and sublimation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Dean, J. (2009). Democracy and other neoliberal fan-

Stavrakakis, Y. (1999). Lacan and the political. New

tasies: Communicative capitalism and left politics.

Zizek, S. (1989). The sublime object of ideology. New

Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Derrida, J. (1987). The postcard: From Socrates to

Freud and beyond. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Derrida, J. (1998). Resistances of psychoanalysis. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Felman, S. (2003). The scandal of the speaking body: Don Juan with J. L. Austin, or seduction in two lan-

guages. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Irigaray, L. (1985). This sex which is not one. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

York, NY: Routledge. York, NY: Verso.

Zizek, S. (1999). The ticklish subject: The absent centre ofpolitical ontology. New York, NY: Verso. Zupantié, A. (2000). Ethics of the real: Kant, Lacan. New York, NY: Verso.

REFERENCES

Althusser, L. (1972). Lenin andphilosophy and other

essays. New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.

1402

-«

PSYCHOANALYTIC

AND

METHODS

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

Armstrong, A. (2008). Beyond resistance: A response to Zizek’s critique of Foucault's subject of

Cassin, B., Rendall, S., & Apter, E. S. (2014). Dictionary of untranslatables: A philosophical lexi-

freedom. Parrhesia, S, 19. Badiou, A., & Tho, T. C. (2007). New horizons in mathematics as a philosophical condition: An

con. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Cohler, B. J., & Galatzer-Levy, R. (2007). What

interview with Alain Badiou. Parrhesia, (3), 7.

kind of science is psychoanalysis? Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 27(5), 570.

Badiou, A. (2009). Logics of worlds: Being and event

Copjec, J. (1994). Read my desire: Lacan against the

II. New York, NY: Continuum. Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination. Austin: University of Texas Press.

historicists. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Davis, D. (2008). Identification: Burke and Freud

Barthes, R. (2012). Mythologies. New York, NY: Hill and Wang. Bender, J., & Wellbery, D. E. (1990). Rhetoricality: On the modernist return ofrhetoric. In J. Bender

& D. E. Wellbery (Eds.), The ends of rhetoric: History, theory, practice (pp. 32-33). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Bhabha, H. (1994). The location of culture. New

on who youare. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 38(2), 124.

De Lauretis, T. (2008). Freud's drive: Psychoanalysis, literature and film. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. De Saussure, F. (2000). Course in general linguistics. Peru: Open Court. Dean, J. (2002). Publicity’s secret: How technoculture

capitalizes on democracy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

York, NY: Routledge.

for the evental Obama Mark J.

Derrida, J. (1972). Freud and the Scene of Writing.

Porrovecchio (Ed.), Reengaging the prospects of rhetoric: Current conversations and contemporary challenges (p. 21). New York, NY: Routledge. Biesecker, B. A. (1998). Rhetorical studies and the

Edelman, L. (2004). No future: Queer theory and the death drive. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Fanon, F. (2008). Black skin, white masks. New York, NY: Grove Press.

Biesecker, B. (2010). Prospects of rhetoric twenty-first century: Speculations on rhetoric ending with a note on Barack and a benediction by Jacques Lacan. In

“new” psychoanalysis: What's the real problem? Or framing the problem of the real. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 84(2), 223.

Borch-Jacobsen, M. (1991). Lacan: The absolute master. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Brooks, P. (1985). Reading for the plot: Design and intention

in narrative.

New

York, NY:

Vintage

Books. Burke, K. (1969). A rhetoric of motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Bush, R. (2012). Rhetoric, psychoanalysis, and the imaginary. Cultural Studies, 26(2-3), 283.

Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion ofidentity. New York, NY: Routledge.

Butler, J. (1997). The psychic life of power: Theories in subjection. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Butler, J. (2003). Force of fantasy: Feminism, Mapplethorpe, and discursive excess in The Judith Butler reader. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Butler,J.(2006). Precarious life: The powers ofmourn-

ing and violence. New York, NY: Verso.

Yale French Studies, 48(1), 88. Dolar, M. (2006). A voice and

nothing more.

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Felman, S. (1987). Jacques Lacan and the adventure of insight: Psychoanalysis in contemporary culture. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Freud, S., & Strachey, J. (2010). Civilization and its discontents. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

Galison, P. (2012). Blacked out spaces: Freud, censorship, and the re-territorialization of mind.

BJHS, 45(2), 264.

Gates, H. L., Jr. (1988). The signifying monkey: A theory of African-American literary criticism. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Gay, P. (2006). Freud: A life forour time. New York, NY: W. W. Norton. Genette, G. (1983). Narrative discourse: An essay in

method. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Grossman, J. R. (2017). Hurricane Katrina and the choric object of rhetorical studies. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 103(3), 260, 264, 266.

Gunn, J. (2003). Refiguring fantasy: Imagination and its decline in U.S. rhetorical studies. Quarterly

Journal ofSpeech, 89(1), 43.

PSYCHOANALYTIC

METHODS

Gunn,J.(2004a). Refitting fantasy: Psychoanalysis, subjectivity, and talking to the dead. Quarterly

AND

CRITICAL

CULTURAL

STUDIES

1403

Lacan, J. (1993). The seminar of Jacques Lacan book III: The psychoses. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

Journal ofSpeech, 90(1), 9-10. Gunn, J. (2004b). On dead subject: A rejoinder

Lacan,J.(2005). The imaginary, symbolic, and Real.

to Lundberg on (a) psychoanalytic rhetoric. Quarterly Journal ofSpeech, 90(4), S01-S13. Gunn, J. (2007). Hystericizing Huey: Emotional appeals, desire, and the psychodynamics of demagoguery. Western Journal ofCommunication, 71(1), 6, 12-14.

Polity Press. Laclau, E. (2014). The rhetorical foundations of society. Brooklyn, NY: Verso. Lacoue-Labarthe, P., & Nancy, J.-L. (1992). The title

Gunn, J. (2010). On speech and public release.

Laplanche, J., & Pontalis, J. B. (1974). The lan-

Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 13(2), 1S. Gunn, J. (2018). On political perversion. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 48(2), 169, 171. Hallsby, A. (2015). Imagine there’s no president: The rhetorical secret and the exposure ofValerie

guage of psycho-analysis. New York, NY: W. W.

Plame. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 101(2), 360. Hyde, M. J. (1980). Jacques Lacan’s psychoanalytic theory of speech and language. Quarterly Journal

In On the names-of-the-father.

Malden,

MA:

of the letter: A reading of Lacan. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Norton. Lundberg, C. (2004). The royal road not taken:

Joshua Gunn's “Refitting fantasy: Psychoanalysis, subjectivity and talking to the dead” and Lacan’s symbolic order. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 90(4), 495-500.

Lundberg, C. O. (2009). Enjoying God’s death: The

Jakobson, R. (1971). Two aspects of language and two types of aphasic disturbances. In Selected

Passion of the Christ and the practices of an evangelical public. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 95(4), 389, 396, 401-402.

Writings (Vol. 2, pp. 239-259). The Hague,

Lundberg, C. O. (2012). Lacan in public: Psychoanalysis

ofSpeech, 66(1), 107.

Netherlands: Mouton. Johnson,J.M. (2014). American lobotomy: A rhetorical history. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Johnson, K., & Asenas,J.(2013). The Lacanian Real

as a productive supplement to rhetorical cri-

tique. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 43(2), 1SS-176. Kittler, F. A. (1999). Gramophone, film, typewriter. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Kristeva, J. (1984). Revolution in poetic language. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Kristeva, J. (2002). Intimate revolt. New York, NY:

Columbia University Press. Lacan, J., & Fink, B. (2006). Seminar on “The

purloined letter.” In Ecrits (p. 30). New York, NY: W. W. Norton. Lacan, J. (1998a). The seminar ofJacques Lacan book

I: Freud’s papers on technique. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

Lacan, J. (1998b). The seminar ofJacques Lacan book XI: The four fundamental concepts ofpsychoanalysis. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

Lacan, J. (1991). The seminar of Jacques Lacan book

II: The ego in Freud's theory and in the technique of psychoanalysis. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

and the science ofrhetoric. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Lundberg, C. O. (2015S). Revisiting the future of meaning. Quarterly Journal ofSpeech, 101(1), 179. Matheson, C. (2016). “What does Obama want of

me?” Anxiety and Jade Helm. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 102(2), 135. Metz, C. (1982). The imaginary signifier: Psychoanalysis and the cinema. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Miller, J. A. (1994). Context and concepts. In R. Felstein, B. Fink, & M. Jaanus (Eds.), Reading seminar IX: Lacan's four fundamental concepts of

psychoanalysis (pp. 9-11). Albany: State University of New York Press. Mulvey, L. (2009). Visual pleasure and narrative cinema. In M. G. Durham & D. M. Kellner (Eds.), Media and cultural studies key works

(pp. 344-345). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Myres,J.D. (2016). The bit player: Stephen Hawking and the object voice. Rhetoric Society Quarterly,

46(2), 162.

Penney, J. (2012). The structures oflove: Art and politics beyond the transference. Albany: State University of New York Press.

1404.

«

PUBLIC

MEMORY

Poe, E. A. (1988). Text of ‘The purloined letter, with

notes. In J.P. Muller & W.J.Richardson (Eds.), The purloined Poe: Lacan, Derrida, and psychoanalytic

reading (pp. 3-27). Baltimore,

MD: Johns Hopkins

Zizek, S. (1989). The sublime object of ideology. New York, NY: Verso.

Zizek, S. (2007). How to read Lacan. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

University Press.

Rorty, R. (1992). The linguistic turn: Essays in philosophical method. Chicago, iL: University of Chicago Press. Roudinesco, E. (2004). Why psychoanalysis? New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

NOTE

Rubin, G. (1975). The traffic in women: Notes on the

1. Equating rhetoric with the formal-symbolic dimensions of discourse offers a distinct approach to the symbolic from that of prominent Lacanian

“political economy” ofsex. In R. R. Reitner (Ed.), Toward an anthropology of women (pp. 157-210).

philosopher Alain Badiou. Badiou (2009) hada dismissive attitude toward rhetoric, which is

New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.

loosely equated with “the politics of opinions” (p. S11) and labeled by Badiou as a “derivative construction, whose detailed study is a matter for anthropology” (p. 174). Instead of a formal vo-

Rufo, K. (2003). The mirror in The matrix of media ecology. Critical Studies in Media Communication,

20(2), 120, 122.

Rushing, J. H., & Frentz, T. S. (1980). “The deer hunter”: Rhetoric of the warrior. Quarterly

mathematical ontology that resembles Lacan's

Journal of Speech, 66(4), 40S. Rushing, J. H., & Frentz, T. S. (1991). Integrating

methodical diagrams, algorithms, and mathemes for the unconscious, although Badiou occasion-

ideology and archetype in rhetorical criticism. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 77(4), 386, 389.

ally acknowledges the necessity of rhetoric and poetics for his theorizations: “The relationship between the poetic process and the construction of ageneric truth is finally something like the re-

Sexton,J.(2008). Amalgamation schemes: Antiblackness

and the critique of multiracialism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Silverman, K. (1988). The acoustic mirror: The female voice in psychoanalysis and cinema. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Simons, H. W. (1989). Distinguishing the rhetorical from the Real: The case of psychotherapeutic

cabulary of trope, Badiou has embraced a formal-

lationship, the real relation, between life and

mathematics. But of course this is . . phor” (2007, p. 7).

. a meta-

Atilla Hallsby

placebos. In H. W. Simons (Ed.), Rhetoric in the human sciences (p. 114). London, UK: SAGE.

Spillers, H. (2003). Black, white, and in color:

PUBLIC MEMORY

Essays on American literature and culture. Chicago,

IL: University of Chicago Press. Spivak, G. C. (1999). A critique ofpostcolonial reason: Toward a history ofthe vanishing present. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Terrill, R. E. (1993). Put ona happy face: Batman as schizophrenic savior. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 79(3), 324. Todorov, T. (1977). The poetics of prose. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Zemlicka, K. (2013). The rhetoric of enhancing the human: Examining the tropes of “the human”

and dignity in contemporary bioethical debates over enhancement technologies. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 46(3), 257-279.

THE STUDY OF PUBLIC MEMORY

The world is filled with evidence of the human impulse to mark experiences in ways that will endure beyond a single lifetime. Cave drawings, burial mounds, pyramids, and statues were all crafted at least in part with the hope that some aspect of human experiences— lives, deaths, battles, triumphs—would be

recalled by others who did not experience them directly. For many scholars, the various processes by which individual experience is crafted into things that can be shared, repeated,

PUBLIC

and endure are part of crafting a shared, or public, memory. In its broadest sense, public memory en-

tails the acts and processes through which memories move beyond the remembering individual and become shared, passed on, and

in this way, form a broader network through which people gather a sense of collectivity. We are a public, one might say, to the extent that we share a set of memories. While shared

MEMORY

«

1405

circulation of diverse memories constitutes an important aspect of culture. The reasons for this growing interest in public memory will be discussed later. At this point, it is sufficient to note that the study of public memory—or one of its numerous cognate terms such as “cultural memory,” “collective memory,’ or “social memory,’ each of which has its specific applications and valences (Casey, 2004)—has rapidly expanded to encompass scholars from a

uncontrover-

wide range of disciplines throughout the hu-

sial, or uncontested, the fact that certain individuals, events, places, and legacies are shared

manities and social sciences, including those

memories

are rarely uniform,

through this network of memory helps to

in Communication Studies and Rhetoric. While the broad field of “memory studies”

craft us as a collective, as an “us.”

draws from numerous sources, French sociol-

History is one way in which the past is shared with future generations,

and most

social collectives put energy into crafting and preserving an official history. History, however, is not identical with public memory. As early as 1926, philosopher R. G. Collingwood contended that, “the difference between them

is that memory is subjective and immediate,

history objective and mediate” (Collingwood, 2005, p. 366). The divergence between these two ways of knowing the past—one informal and personal, the other formal and official—

accelerated as the nation-state emerged as a principle source of cultural and political identity. French sociologist Pierre Nora contends that the nation-state employed the science of history to construct an official account that provided it legitimacy as the locus of identity and authority. As Nora writes in relation to the French experience: “History and memory were being brought together in such a way as to become another point of reference for the nation: in this sense, national history was becoming the French memory” (Nora, 2001, p. xvi).

The assumption that history held the final word in relation to past events, however, did

ogist Maurice Halbwachs has been particularly foundational. Influenced by the works of Henri

Bergson

and Emile

Durkheim,

Halbwachs developed some of the first comprehensive theories of what he termed “collective memory.” In his work, Halbwachs insists that memory is socially constructed and, as such, can be analyzed in relation to other social structures, including the family and religious institutions. Halbwachs posits that “no memory is possible outside frameworks used by people living in society to determine and retrieve their recollections” (Halbwachs, 1992, p. 43). Moreover, society not only enables recollection through collective frameworks but, in certain instances, requires acts

of recollection through rituals and celebrations. Illuminating the social frameworks that both enable and constrain memory also opens up ways of thinking about the means by which memories change. As Halbwachs notes, “precisely because these memories are

repetitions, because they are successively engaged in very different systems of notions, at different periods of our lives, they have lost the form and the appearance they once had”

not last. At least since the 1930s, there has

(Halbwachs, 1992, p. 47). Building upon Halbwachs’s work, scholars

been a growing recognition that the dynamic

recognize memory as a dynamic, complex, and

1406

»«

PUBLIC

MEMORY

often conflicted process in which diverse and at times divergent groups dialogically engage with each other over the present meaning of our shared pasts. Rhetorical and communication scholars have been particularly interested in public memory in part because it opens avenues for exploring the public meaning-

by a rapid proliferation of public memorials and commemorations (the “memory boom’) and a rapid growth in memory scholarship across various disciplines (the “memory in-

making practices and contests over the past. As

ence. Gavriel Rosenfeld (2009) argues that

Barbie Zelizer observes, “This recognition of

Another aspect of public memory that draws the attention of communication and rhetoric scholars is the necessity that memories be manifested in some way. These manifestations may

“the emergence of memory represents one of the more noteworthy developments of contemporary Western, if not global, cultural, and intellectual life” (p. 125), while Jay Winter (2001) refers to public culture’s (re)turn to memory as the “historical signature of our own generation” (p. 13). There is little agreement on what sparked this sudden upsurge. Some contend that the

take the form of public speeches, monuments,

turn to memory was caused by emergent anx-

museums, and commemorative events, but they are all decidedly public and visible. Stephen H. Browne identifies this aspect of public memory “a principle of textuality,’ and through this principle “public memory lives as it is given

ieties over national identity and multiculturalism (Kammen, 1991), or as a response to challenges facing the boundaries of nation

conflicting renditions of the past by definition necessitates a consideration of the tensions

and contestations through which one rendition wipes out many of the others” (1995, p. 217).

expressive form; its analysis,’ he asserts, “must

therefore presume a theory of textuality and entail an appropriate mode of interpretation” (Browne, 1995, p. 248). Importantly, there are diverse modes of interpretations that lead to diverse, conflicting claims about the past, often resulting in contests and controversies. As such, the contests

over public memory are not merely disputes about the historical record but entail fundamental questions about the structure and legitimacy of social and political institutions. John Bodnar notes that the real focus of a public memory dispute “is not the past, however, but serious matters in the present such as the nature of power and the question of loyalty to both official and vernacular cultures” (Bodnar, 1992, p. 15). The 1980s, for example, witnessed a wealth

of scholarly interest in the manifestations and contests over memory. This period is marked

dustry”), including communication, rhetoric,

history, religion, architecture, philosophy, sociology, English, literature, and political sci-

states (Bodnar, 2000). Others suggest alternative causes, including the growing distrust

over official history marshaled by the “postmodern turn” (Klein, 2000; Schwartz, 1996), an increased awareness of the differentiation between past and present (Lowenthal, 1985), as a response to modernity’s various social transformations (Nora, 1989), and as a repercussion to World War II and the Jewish Holocaust (Winter, 2001), among others. Whatever the memory boom and rise of the memory industrys root causes, this academic turn has had

sweeping influence on numerous fields, including communication and rhetorical studies. This article identifies some of the major trends within the broader field of memory studies, especially, within communication and rhetoric.

PUBLIC MEMORY AND THE STUDY OF PUBLIC ADDRESS

Memory has a long relationship with the study and practice of rhetoric. As one of the classical

PUBLIC

tradition’s five canons of rhetoric (along with invention, style, organization, and delivery), ancient rhetoricians were particularly interested

in memory. This interest is often characterized in relation to the search for mnemonic devices that enabled speakers to recall important pieces of information or evidence. Francis Yates demonstrates that there were numerous and remarkably complex systems for facilitating recollection, perhaps most famously the notion of the “memory palace,” which recommended using an architectural frame for placing important ideas in particular locations within a mental structure (Yates, 1966). While contemporary scholars are less interested in memory-as-mnemonic, the ways memory influences and is influenced by public address has received great interest. Scholars attentive

to the relationship between memory and public address have generally approached it along several broad lines: memory as inventional resource; memory as an animating force within public address; public address focused on memory issues; and, the lingering memory of

particular public speeches. The relationship between memory and invention is one crucial notion undergirding much of this contemporary work. As Sharon Crowley notes, the connection between memory and invention was an important part of classical rhetoric. As she puts it, “memory was not only a system of recollection for ancient and medieval peoples; it was a means of invention”

MEMORY

«

1407

In their study of 19th-century abolitionist Anna Dickinson, for example, Sara VanderHaagen and Angela Ray examine the way Dickinson employed her tour of southern states in her own rhetorical invention, becoming what they call a “pilgrim-critic.” As they explain, “Our conception of the pilgrim-critic combines the spiritual, experiential, often subjective dimension of the pilgrim—who views places as sacred— with the intellectual, analytic, often more public functions of the social critic—who approaches places seeking knowledge” (VanderHaagen & Ray, 2014, p. 351).

Just as public memory provides resources for speakers and writers to develop their arguments and appeals, it is also an important context, at times a difficult one, through which

public speakers must navigate. Stephen H. Browne (2003) observes the rhetorical maneu-

vers required of Thomas Jefferson in the first presidential inaugural address to reconstruct a unified national culture after a particularly contentious electoral process. Early patriotic

speeches like Jefferson’s worked, as James Farrell puts it, to “craft a useful history and consign those narratives to the public memory, to suggest a dominant national identity proud

of its past and confident of its future” (1999, p. 148). This difficult process of simultaneously navigating and shaping public memory provides an important context for understanding political public speeches. Kirt Wilson, for example, observes the ultimately failed efforts

(Crowley, 1993, p. 35).J.Robert Cox extends

of President Benjamin Harrison to promote

this notion by suggesting that our collective memories of the past serve as the basis for many kinds of arguments and appeals. In Cox's conception, memory provides a valuable resource for critiquing the status quo and is thus crucial

black civil rights within the context of an “increasingly romanticized public memory of the Civil War and Reconstruction” (Wilson, 2008,

forimagining future possibilities (Cox, 1990).

Connecting public memory to rhetorical invention processes provides a useful lens through which to view and assess the development of the kinds of critical appeals Cox conceptualized.

p. 270).

In addition to serving as a resource and context, public memory also functions as an animating force within particular instances of public address. For example, Denise Bostdorff and Steven Goldzwig demonstrate how President Ronald Reagan appropriated quotations from

1408

PUBLIC

MEMORY

the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to justify his administration’s civil rights’ poli-

framework ofalterity, Reyes argues that “memory is a medium for the negotiation of present and

cies. Similarly, in their study of President Bill

past, identity and alterity, selfand other” (Reyes,

Clinton’s 1998 speech commemorating the

2010, p. 236). The work of rhetoric in crafting an individual's place in memory is also engaged

March on Washington, Shawn and Trevor

Parry-Giles examine how Clinton utilized the past as a bulwark against his sex scandal with Monica Lewinski. As they observe, Clinton “is able to exploit a national commemorative moment for his personal rhetorical needs and to use the nostalgia shared by his audience for the success and the struggle of the civil rights

by others. Amos Kiewe, for example, observes

ear in the service of his individual image (re)

Native American woman's status and opens

construction” (Parry-Giles & Parry-Giles, 2000, p. 432).

up transformative possibilities for women's social place and standing. For Koenig Richards, the commemoration “promoted identification with a new or different vision of community through the veneration of an ‘invented great’ ”

While public memories are often marshaled as evidence for contemporary issues by rhetors, those same memories are also often openly contested. Numerous rhetorical scholars have attended to specific controversies erupting around diverging public memories. Marouf Hasian Jr. and Robert Frank, for example, ex-

amine the public arguments surrounding the German people's complicity in the Holocaust after the publication of DanielJ.Goldhagen’s Hitler's Willing Executioners (Hasian & Frank,

1999). Similarly, Bradford Vivian analyzes the public arguments complicating Thomas Jefferson’s legacy in light of his relationship with

his slave, Sallie Hemmings (Vivian, 2002). Equally important, other scholars have focused on how individual moments of public address can seek to reconfigure the public’s memory. In his 1974 essay, Thomas Benson examines the ways that Malcolm X’s Autobiography works to frame the civil right’s leader’s

complicated life as a series of “transcendent movements” that invite readers to become “actors in the drama of enlargement and recon-

ciliation” (Benson, 1974, p. 15). G. Mitchell Reyes also engages Malcolm X’s Autobiography, focus-

ing instead on the way the divergent identities of Malcolm X are not so easily reconciled into the transcendent. Reading the text through a

similar efforts in Ronald Reagan's farewell speech, which Kiewe reads as an attempt by Reagan to craft his place in the national memory (Kiewe, 2004). In her study ofthe 1905 commemoration of Sacagawea, Cindy Koenig Richards finds a rhetoric that raises the iconic

(Koenig Richards, 2009, p. 3).

A final notable strand of research on memory and public address involves studies of the collective memory ofpublic speeches. “Great” speeches often become part of the collective memory of events and movements but, as several scholars observe, these memories can

at times limit our understanding of the movements themselves. Garth Pauley pursues such an agenda in his historical recovery of civil rights activist John Lewis’s role in the historic 1963 March on Washington. The emphasis on King’s iconic “I Have a Dream” speech has obscured other, often more radical, dimensions of the

historic march and King’s own rhetoric. This emphasis, Pauley contends, plays “a role in perpetuating the dominant, uncomplicated understanding of the March on Washington” (Pauley, 1998, p. 321). Kristin Hoerl finds a similar tactic at work in news media coverage of the 2009 Inauguration of President Barack

Obama. She argues that the coverage de-emphasized histories of violence and discrimination in favor of constructing a narrative connecting King’s nonviolent struggle to Obama's election. As Hoerl notes, such efforts promote

PUBLIC

akind of “selective amnesia,” which omits “events that would dramatically reframe our understanding of how historic conflicts connect to

MEMORY

«

1409

nation-state discussed earlier have led to the apparent political and cultural need to anchor memory in stone and static, constructed sites

contemporary social relations” (2012, pp.

of commemoration. Nora contends that such

194-195).

sites have “no referents in reality; or, rather,

they are their own referents—pure signs” (p. THE PLACES OF PUBLIC MEMORY

19), and therefore are open to interpretation, contestation,

and

countermemories

from

While investigations into memory and public address have a long history within rhetorical

vernacular communities or others. Since the

and communication studies, the role of place

scholars have been drawn to these contested

within the discipline is equally ancient. In the opening pages of Yate’s The Art of Memory, the author tells the story of the poet Simonides of Ceos, who, it is told, left a banquet shortly before the roof collapsed, crushing all the

surrounding memory places, such as museums, monument, and memorials. James Young observes the crucial relationship between memorials and the crafting of

guests (Yates, 1966). The poet was called in

the national story. On one hand, official state

to identify the now unrecognizable bodies and used his memory of their location around the

memorials are designed to “shape memory explicitly as they see fit, memory that best

table to make the identification. The story of Simonides is found in Cicero’s De oratore in his discussion of memory as one of the five

serves a national interest.” On the other hand, “once created, memorials take on lives of their

late 1980s, rhetoricians and communication

and

polysemic

meaning-making

practices

own, often stubbornly resistant to the state's

canons of rhetoric, which included a discus-

original intensions” (1993, p. 3). Scholars in

sion on the mnemonics of places and images (loci and imagines )employed by Roman rhetors. This technique was also discussed in the anonymous Ad C. Herennium and Quintilian’s

communication and rhetoric have pursued similar notions. Treating places of memory as rhetorical texts, these scholars unpack the often conflicting messages inscribed in such sites to reveal the power relations imbued therein. In an early foundational essay, Carole Blair, Marsha Jeppeson, and Enrico Pucci (1991) engage the Vietnam Veterans Memorial to argue for how memorials “select from history those

Institutio Oratoria. In general, the technique

calls for the student of rhetoric to construct a mental architecture (a “memory palace”) to form

a series of places of memory that one can use to arrange and recall a speech. Contemporary scholars focus less on the mental placement of memories than on the way physical places or spaces are constructed to evoke particular memories. For Pierre Nora, these official places or sites of memory, lieux de memoire, have become crucial because, as

he puts it, “there are no longer any milieux de memoire, settings in which memory is a real

part of everyday experience” (Nora, 1996, p. 1), which is not to suggest that these environments of memory are not equally crucial. Yet, the multiple crises of history, identity, and the

events, individuals, places, and ideas that will

be...[considered sacred] by a culture or a polity,’ and that they “instruct their visitors about what is to be valued in the future as well as the past” (p. 91). They read the memorial as a postmodern memory text in order to call attention to the site as a “multivocal rhetoric” able to produce a variety of meanings and evoke a variety of responses, while still firmly establishing the political character of the memorial’s rhetoric. Others in communication and rhetorical studies have investigated how museums are

1410

»«

PUBLIC

MEMORY

curated to (re)present particular interpreta-

marginalized groups awaiting fulfillment in

tions of history onto the American memo-

the crucible of public controversy” (p. 236).

ryscape in order to constitute a national iden-

Given the function of such places of memory to construct a vision of national identity for their viewers, these same sites invite dissident voices to challenge the official versions of his-

tity. Many such studies aim to pry open the

dialectic of presence(s) and absence(s) to reveal the power relations and political stakes inscribed in these constructed mnemonic places. Greg Dickinson, Brian Ott, and Eric Aoki (2005), for instance, argue that the Buffalo Bill

Museum fosters a vision of “national identity that rests on white masculinity, carnivalized violence, and manifest destiny... [and] purposefully forgotten oppressions and rejections of the ‘Other” (p. 102). Similarly, in an analy-

tory to create space so that their own voices may be heard. Some build countermemorials or countermuseums that contest the institu-

tional version of the past, as Armada details with his analysis of the National Civil Rights Museum. Others may critique, debate, and deliberate over a given monument’s meaning in order to make it better reflect the contin-

sis of the US Holocaust Memorial Museum,

gent economic, political, and material con-

Hasian (2004) finds that the exhibit’s curation

text in which it is represented (Gallagher &

lends itself to (re) presenting the Holocaust as

LaWare, 2010). In such cases, the locations of

a distinctly American event through a complex negotiation of selection and deflection.

museums, monuments, or memorials within

While such (re)presentations may be problematic in that they omit certain historical details and subtly toe the line of revisionism, the imperfect nature of such places of memory still do important memory work. Taken together, the rhetorical engagement with muse-

ums opens space to consider how institutions of memory function to shape national identity through writing and rewriting the past for present political purposes, and how such narratives can be contested in the process. Another focus within the discipline is how

a specific space and time, and the embeddedness within a particular geographical and economic landscape, open them to vernacular contestation.

COMMEMORATION PUBLIC MEMORY

AND

While some aspects of public memory— memorials, historical markers, museums, the list

(re)presentations of the past by museums,

goes on—fill everyday spaces, most cultures have developed certain ritual practices that serve to acknowledge past events, at least those events deemed worthy of acknowledg-

monuments, and memurials are often contested

ing. These commemorative

within vernacular cultures. Since public memory “speaks primarily about the struc-

the form of feasts or fasts, celebrations or days of mourning, parades or vigils and, at least

events may take

ture of power in society” (Bodnar, 1992, p.

after several iterations, they may come to seem

15), its material manifestations become sites

rote and pointless. But even the most mundane commemoration can be powerful. As John Gillis notes, “Commemorative activity is by definition social and political, for it involves the coordination of individual and group memories, whose results may appear consensual when they are in fact the product of pro-

of both “conflict and domination,” where sub-

jugated vernacular communities leverage their own interpretations to better reflect their own

values (Hauser, 1999, pp. 114-116). As Bernard Armada (1998) writes, “somewhere beneath the surface of all presentations of the past lie the potentially defiant voices of

cesses of intense contest, struggle, and, in some

PUBLIC

instances, annihilation” (Gillis, 1996, p. 5). Even as commemorative activities lose their somber and sacred tones, Gillis reminds us, they constitute important social moments

during which some aspect of our culture is magnified and reflected back to us. Scholars of communication and rhetoric

have attended closely not only to the tension between the sacred and profane within public commemorative activities, but also focus on how tensions between official and vernacular memories create the conditions for commemoration to change in meaning, function,

and importance. In one of the field’s foundational essays on public memory, Stephen H. Browne traces the shifting remembrance of

Crispus Attucks, an African American victim of the 1770 Boston Massacre. Over the decades in which the Massacre was commemorated

as a crucial moment Revolution, Browne of Attucks shifts as ployed by different political ends. The

leading to the American finds that public memory it is deployed and redeparties towards different public commemorations

MEMORY

.-

1411

Memorial on the National Mallin Washington, DC. In these various commemorative gestures, Biesecker finds an effort to counter

contentious contemporary politics and valorize the “Greatest Generation’s” stoic suffering. Of this valorization, she writes, the “pained

body is being made to trump the historically and social disenfranchised subjects in the national imaginary” (Biesecker, 2004, p. 213). Similarly, Bradford Vivian examines the use of excerpts from famous American speeches during the first anniversary of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, an event we return

to later. In Vivian's view, these historic words

helped to reestablish national identity following the traumatic attacks. They also functioned to reinscribe a set of neoliberal values that “encouraged audiences to view the recent tragedies as yet one more trial in the destined reign of American liberties over the forces of violence,

fear, and repression” (Vivian, 2006, p. 16). In addition to inscribing and repairing cultural values, commemorative activities can shift

the interpretation of current events. In their

a single interpretation of the commemorated

analysis of television news coverage during Israel's Memorial Day for the Holocaust and Heroism, Eyal Zanderberg, Oren Meyers, and Motti Neiger discern the way that the holiday transforms current news items so that they become narrated in relation to past events. They term this process “reversed memory,’ which “cultivates the understanding of past events as continuous ones, constantly extending the past into the present” (Zanderberg, Meyers, &

event.

Neiger, 2012, p. 66).

of Attucks, like most national commemora-

tive activities were, in Browne's words, places “where rituals of remembrance could be deployed, in effect, to re-create for new Americans

a story they might call their own” (Browne, 1999, p. 185). Importantly, Browne’s work suggests that these highly strategized acts of commemoration are not static but are reformu-

lated by those seeking to establish or re-establish

While recognizing the shifting meaning and valence of commemoration, other schol-

ars have focused more specifically on individual iterations of commemorative activities. Barbara

Biesecker, for example, explores the numerous commemorative activities of the 1990s centered on World War II, including Steven

Spielberg’s film Saving Private Ryan (1998) and the construction of the World War II

Commemorative activities have the power to shape and reshape not only our understanding of the past but also of our present and future. While commemorations are largely dictated within official and socially accepted frames, they also can serve as opportunities for social intervention and critique. Columbus Day, for instance, has become a time of protest, as Native Americans and First World peoples

1412

PUBLIC

MEMORY

object to the portrayal Columbus

as a hero

of Christopher

(see Riding,

1993).

Perhaps the most famous and celebrated instance of social critique emerging from commemorative activities is abolitionist Frederick Douglass’s July S, 1852 speech. The famous African American speaker and freed slave spoke in Rochester, New York, during a celebration ofJuly 4, 1776. Douglass’s speech, however, shifted the grounds from celebra-

Affect is generally understood as a kind of energy or intensity circulated among individuals by virtue of their contact with events, objects, and others. While affect is often associated with emotions, there is a sense that

affect is felt prior to a specific emotion’s designation and, as such, precedes emotion. As

Melissa Gregg and Gregory Seigworth contend, affect consists of “visceral forces beneath,

presence on American soil (Leroux, 1991, p.

alongside, or generally other than conscious knowing, vital forces insisting beyond emotion” (2010, p. 1). While distinct from both

45). Douglass’s speech, titled “What to the

emotions and cognitive thought, affect is deeply

Slave Is the Fourth of July?” has been the focus of considerable attention by rhetorical

intertwined with these other psychic qualities and, importantly, these processes intersect within the human body. As Brian Massumi

tion to condemnation of slavery’s persistent

scholars (Jasinski, 1997; Leroux, 1991; Lucaites, 1997; McClure, 2000; Terrill, 2003). Robert

notes, the intensities of affective energy “are

Terrill, for instance, finds the speech “an un-

immediately embodied” (2002, p. 25).

paralleled exemplar of rhetorical irony” (Terrill, 2003, p. 217), while John Lucaites argues that Douglass's employment of an ironic framework “crafts a usage of equality that would reconstitute the national public forum as a dialogue

Public memory scholars have pursued these notions of affect and body in relation to prac-

between past, present, and future, and thus

engaging these dimensions, scholars explore

enact a legitimate public space for the articulation of a uniquely African American political

such questions as, “Why is this memory so alluring as compared to another? What affect is being deployed that helps to secure adherence to this particular memory content and to the group that holds it to be important to is collective identity?” (Blair, Ott, & Dickinson, 2010,

voice” (Lucaites, 1997, p. 49). PUBLIC MEMORY, AFFECT, AND TRAUMA Public memories are crucial to the creation of a shared sense of the past, to the ways we contest this shared sense and, as noted above, to

tices of remembrance. Carol Blair, Brian Ott,

and Greg Dickinson suggest that public memories contain a crucial affective dimension. In

p. 14). Affective energy can thus be thought of as one dimension through which memories become visible, and gain, or lose, adher-

ence among the broader public. Affect is also a dimension that helps explain our experience of moving through memorial spaces. Greg

our very conception of who we are as members of a broader public. While symbolic construction and circulation of memory has

Dickinson, Brian Ott, and Eric Aoki contend

garnered much attention, scholars have also

that our bodily movement through memory

pointed out that our memories are not solely constituted by how we envision the past, but also by how those visions make us feel. Renewed attention within the Humanities to the concept of affect has also animated stud-

sites, like monuments and memorials, activates

ies of public memory.

an “experiential landscape” that “invites visitors to assume (to occupy) particular subject positions” (Dickinson, Ott, & Aoki, 2006, p. 30). While affect can be seen as permeating our everyday experience of memories, these

PUBLIC

energies are most intense during sudden moments of upheaval and crisis. Such experiences

are often defined as trauma, which

Cathy Caruth understands as “the response to an unexpected or overwhelming violent

event or events that are not fully grasped as they occur, but return later in repeated flashbacks, nightmares, and other repetitive phe-

nomena” (Caruth, 1995, p. 91). The overwhelming experience of trauma is depicted as devastating the individual’s psyche. Julia Kristeva contends that trauma entails a kind

of “shattering of psychic identity” (1989, p.222). This shattering is among the reasons that the experience of trauma often returns in flashbacks as the shattered psyche attempts to reintegrate both itself and the traumatic experience that affected it. Public memory scholars have observed similar processes at work in the collective psyche. Jay Childers, in his study of the national response to President McKinley’s assassination, observes that “at times certain violent political acts or events can cause a rupture in the nation’s understanding of itself”; these moments of rupture, in turn, “demand an imme-

diate response by the nation’s intellectual and political leaders” (Childers, 2013, p. 174). Public responses to trauma provide rich material for rhetorical critics interested not only in the crafting of public remembrance but also in the political body’s constitution and reconstitution. In this light, Mary Stuckey observes

the way that Ronald Reagan’s speech after the Challenger disaster served to reunite the nation in the act ofremembrance and mourning. As Stuckey notes, “Mourning thus became

an act of citizenship” (2006, p. 85). One of the most traumatic global events in recent memory was the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, DC, on September ll, 2001. This event reverberated through global culture, and scholars have shown con-

siderable

interest in its memorialization

MEMORY

«

1413

(e.g., Biesecker, 2007; Bostdorff, 2003; Milford, 2016). Nicholas Paliewicz and Marouf Hasian Jr. attend to the National September 11

Memorial and Museum’s construction in New York City, arguing that its physical contours craft a rhetorical tone of absence and melancholia: “The way the museum is organized—-spatially, visually, and aesthetically— makes it impossible for visitors not to experience some form of post-9/ 11 grief” (Paliewicz & Hasian, 2016, p. 15). Interestingly, the careful crafting of the national memorial did not make it immune from contest and controversy. Theresa Ann Donofrio observes the public protest launched by some family members of victims of the World Trade Center attack in their effort to “take back the memorial.” Donofrio notes the way that their position as mourning family members adds a certain affective tone to their protests. “Their authority is derived from subjectivities of suffering,’ she writes, “meriting critical attention to the ways in which rhetorical tropes ofsuffering function ideologically. Those thought to be suffering—and particularly individuals who are in the throes

of grief—are ceded privileged status as their claims become unassailable in many respects” (Donofrio, 2010, p. 164). While trauma may be most acute for those

who directly experienced it, repetition is one of trauma’s notable qualities. This happens both through the periodic flashbacks of traumatic memories as well as in the more sys-

tematic public remembrances of them. As Marita Sturken notes, “compulsive repeti-

tion is a response to trauma” (2007, p. 26). Scholars of rhetoric have shown considerable interest in the ways that public traumas are engaged and reengaged. Some of this occurs through the official mechanisms of commemorations, discussed above, but there are also

other modes of engaging the traumatic past. A. Susan Owens and Peter Ehrenhaus, for

1414

»«

PUBLIC

MEMORY

example, explore the practice of reenacting the horrifying 1946 lynching of four African Americans at Moore’s Ford in Georgia. In exploring the 2008 performative reenactment, they found that it “invites participants to experience the past viscerally through the liminal space that performance opens, and consequently, to participate in the affective construction of traumatic memory” (Owens & Ehrenhaus, 2014, p. 86). Stephanie HoustonGrey identifies a similar form of repetition in the performative aspects of the literary accounts of atomic bomb survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Houston-Grey notes, “these performances symbolically reconstruct the traumatic moment, representing the past through vocabularies capable of both revision and selective repression” (2002, p. 1). MEMORY AND FORGETTING

serves as a means to grant both legitimacy and recognition to those who have suffered and as a way to confront past wrongdoings. Other scholars, however, have pointed out how the desire to remember past atrocities can result in different forms of forgetting. Barbie Zelizer addresses the paradox produced by the mass circulation of images of Holocaust atrocities. While she grants that the proliferation of such images in the 1970s pushed the topics of witnessing and reconciliation into the public sphere, she argues that the more societies depend on these photographs for public memory, the more such remembering results in forgetting the particularities and specifics of events (Zelizer, 1998), a notion

that Nora has also emphasized (Nora, 1989). The photographs, Zelizer contends, dull our

responses to these atrocities and undermine “our ability to attend to contemporary atrocities” (Zelizer, 1998, p. 13). This repressive

The power of traumatic memories has spurred a growing interest in the way we can become

form of forgetting brought forth by repetition

reconciled to them and move on, leading to a

lective ability to confront the recurrences

focus on the multiple dynamics of public forgetting. Traditionally, forgetting has been seen as a kind of moral failing. In the years follow-

of atrocities and attend to the specificities of other mass violence that have occurred in places like Rwanda and Bosnia. While forgetting can be repressive when

ing World War II, European governments re-

fused to publically recall or draw attention to the victims of the Nazi party’s inflicted mass genocide. In such cases, “forgetting is institutionally fostered by states and governments, and ideologically supported by modernity. Official responses throughout the world are predicated on encouraging permanent forgetting, because the intent is to reproduce the existing power relations that would be undermined through remembrance” (Gécek, 2014,

p. 50). Such a selective memory, and thus purposeful forgetting, may bolster the nation state's power, but only at the expense of those who suffered from the wartime atrocities. On face value, memory and forgetting in such contexts can be viewed in binary opposition to one another, and the call to remember

and habituation, moreover, threatens our col-

those in power refuse to recognize the past—

or even as an effect of certain forms of ritual remembrance—public forgetting can also be a productive and even necessary cultural practice. Friedrich Nietzsche identified the desire to collect and remember everything as the main culprit of cultural decay. “All acting requires forgetting,’ he writes, “as not only light

but also darkness is required for life by all organisms . . ., but without forgetting it is quite impossible to live at all. Or, to say it more simply yet: there is a degree of insomnia, of rumination, of historical sense which injures every living thing and finally destroys it, be it a man, a

people or a culture” (Nietzsche, 1980, p. 10). Extending this line of thinking, Nathan

Stormer argues for a reconception of the

PUBLIC

material performativity of rhetoric within a framework that recognizes the simultaneous nature of remembering and forgetting. Stormer argues,

“No term names the interdependence of remembering and forgetting, which creates a challenge for studying them,

but the symbolic range of ‘mnesis’ makes it a good candidate for a term of

MEMORY

«©

1415

In a similar vein, Bradford Vivian views for-

getting as potentially productive in our contemporary age, suggesting it is necessary for

“beginning again” after atrocities or moments of historical rupture. Vivian asserts that remembering and forgetting should be seen as “reciprocal,” and that “in healthier forms forgetting can be used productively to maintain, replenish, or inaugurate vital cultures of memory writ large. In what circumstances,”

terms. As | use it, the word names a dynamic simultaneity of memory and its loss with no precedence for one state or

ductive and destructive manifestations of forgetting in public affairs?” (Vivian, 2010,

another, of having remembered

over

p. 9). Vivian’s question speaks to a tension in-

having forgotten” (Stormer, 2013, p. 32).

herent in many of public forgetting’s different manifestations, one that calls into the question the clean binary between memory and forgetting.

Rhetorical action, for Stormer, requires this simultaneous forgetting and remembering as discourse crafts the contours of its own emergence, creating its own present.

At the more practical level, productive forgetting is employed in historical moments of political transition and regime change. Paul Connerton, in detailing what he calls “prescriptive forgetting,” points to the Ancient Greeks

as offering a prototype for this form of forgetting. Connerton notes that in 403 Bcg, Athenian Democrats, returning to Athens after suffering a terrible defeat at the hands of a dictator, proclaimed general reconciliation as a means of

moving beyond the preceding crisis and political turmoil. They issued a decree that applied to all citizens, from democrats to oligarchs,

who remained in the city as non-combatants during the period of dictatorship, stating that it

was “forbidden to remember” any crimes and misdeeds carried out during the period of civil strife. Moreover, the “Athenians erected on the

acropolis, in their most important temple, an altar dedicated to Lethe, that is, to forgetting. The installation of this altar meant that the in-

junction to forget, and the eradication of civil conflict that this was thought to engender, was

seen as the very foundation of the life of the polis” (Connerton, 2008, p. 62).

he asks, “can one differentiate between pro-

Aleida Assmann coins the term “therapeutic forgetting” to capture a new form of pro-

ductive forgetting that has emerged on the global stage. Assmann engages the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa to make her point. She asserts that “in these public rituals a traumatic event had to be publicly narrated and shared; the victim had to relate his or her experience, which had to

be witnessed and acknowledged by the perpetrator before it could be erased from social memory” (Assmann, 2014). Rhetorical scholars have also paid considerable attention to racial reconciliation efforts in South Africa and the elsewhere. Katherine Mack (2014), for instance, notes the ways that reconciliation discourses circulated more widely than just in the official spaces of the Commission, while Erik Doxtader (2001) has similarly observed that scholars should pay heed to reconciliation’s “unofficial” story in addition to its public articulations. In each of these cases, the focus on memory and forgetting has been central to coming to terms with the past. To these ends, Mark McPhail (2004) argues that reconciliation efforts require a “certain degree of amnesia” for both sides to move on

1416

+

PUBLIC

MEMORY

and for nation-states to find coherence between

principles and practices, espoused ideals and material realities. John Hatch points out that, in the context of forgiveness, forgetting does not mean “forgetting the offense” altogether, but rather, “remembering in a different way”

(2003, p. 750). Yet, McPhail asserts that “despite the willingness of black leaders and citizens to forgive and even forget the racial injustices of apartheid, there remains a strong commitment to an ideology of innocence among white South Africans” (McPhail, 2004, p. 395). Racial differences between this willingness to productively forget and claims for innocence might best be explained by Kirt Wilson’s observation that “it is the structure of our collective memory and public discourse that makes racism a persistent problem’ (2002,

p. 198). Considering the broader role ofrhetoric in relation to questions of human rights, atrocities, and reconciliation efforts, Arabella

Lyons and Lester Olson observe the urgent need for deeper “conversations concerning evidence, persuasion, and epistemology in human rights rhetoric” (Lyons & Olson, 2012, p. 8).

PUBLIC MEMORY IN THE TRANSNATIONAL AGE

Although the majority of the topics addressed in this article have taken up memory and for-

In the past few decades, an immense body of literature has engaged the anxieties and hopes endemic to these fragmented processes of global interconnection, acceleration, and withdrawal.

Andreas Huyssen suggests that these overlapping and, at times, conflicting processes have

decentered the nation state as the primary site of public memory, simultaneously weakening the stable links between communities, families,

and national identity, while also producing a return to tradition and heritage as a response to these crises (Huyssen, 2003, pp. 4-S). Scholars have tracked these transformations

in the shape and tenor of public memory in a number of ways. Kendall Phillips and G. Mitchell Reyes, for example, have advanced the term global mem-

oryscapes to point toward the complex dynamics that influence and alter memories and memory practices within and across local, national, and transnational registers. They aim to move beyond considering the processes of public memory purely in relation to local or national cultures, and instead seek to resitu-

ate memory within a global framework. For Phillips and Reyes, global memoryscapes is a concept “for imagining the ways that global forces impact local memories, the ways that international encounters create and transform memories, and the ways that memories change

and adapt as the move across the global land-

getting in the nation state, the forces ofglob-

scape” (Phillips & Reyes, 2011, p. 19). Sucha

alization have pushed scholars to consider public memory’s dynamics beyond and across national borders. Anthony Giddens defines

conceptual shift, for the authors, aids in the

globalization, “as the intensification of world-

wide social relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa” (1990, p. 64). It marks a multidimensional process of transnational social change that manifests across technological, economic, labor, trade, ecological, ideological, social movement, and human rights domains.

ability to foster a “global memory horizon” and “planetary community” that would be able to better respond to universal crises and craft global perspectives in general. An increasingly shared global memory of events has contributed to a growing transnational human rights movement. While public remembrances of World War II and Holocaust survivors came to the fore in the 1980s, the

1990s witnessed an increased and shared concern over remembering other victims of

PUBLIC

MEMORY

«

1417

oppression and genocide. Daniel Levy and Natan Sznaider contend that this transformation has created a “cosmopolitan memory” described as a process of “internalized globalization” that views global and local cultures as “mutually binding and interdependent prin-

Along similar lines, Huyssen favors a soften-

histories” of victimization and genocide, in-

cluding slavery (Rothberg, 2009, pp. 4-6). ing of the borders between events like the Holocaust, colonialism, and migration to understand the similarities and differences of

ciples” (Levy & Sznaider, 2006, pp. 9-10).

ostensibly competing histories. He suggests

This emergent dialectic allows global memories of watershed events like the Holocaust to be mediated and transferred to different cultural contexts, shaping moral dispositions and memories that transcend the nation state in the process. For Levy and Sznaider, transnational public memories of the Holocaust do

“the continuing strength of memory politics remains essential for securing human rights

not become some “totalizing signifier.” Instead,

In addition to the topics identified, the study of public memory continues to expand into new territory. While the full scope of these many innovative studies is beyond our present

they become a framework for interpreting other historically contingent acts of mass violence and genocide (Levy & Sznaider, 2006,

pp. 11-12). Others within this debate suggest that the uptake of Holocaust remembrance in other countries has served as “another kind of

in the future” (2011, pp. 621-622). NEW DIRECTIONS IN THE STUDY OF PUBLIC MEMORY

limits, this final section identifies a few prominent trends in contemporary research as a

means of acknowledging the ongoing developments in the study of public memory. Of

Holocaust denial” (Michaels, 2006, pp. 289-

particular note are studies pursuing the rela-

290). Walter Benn Michaels contends that

tionship between public memory and social movements, efforts to queer public memory, and the recognition of public memory’s place in popular culture. Social movements arise out of some form of dissatisfaction with the dominant status

the failure to publically remember and grapple with transatlantic slavery in the United States is the result of the global proliferation of Holocaust memories. Michaels views such public memories as strictly “competitive,” arguing that to grant some memories of victimization legitimacy simultaneously marginalizes others (Michaels, 2006). Along similar lines, Marouf HasianJr.argues that even though nation states may apologize and admit regret over their colonial legacies, such admissions

may belie more “substantive restitutional or restorative justice,’ or serve as a means to end such “debates about contentious pasts” altogether (2014, p. 191). Against this notion of competitive memory, Michael Rothberg suggests that “we consider memory as multidirectional” to recognize how the global proliferation of Holocaust memory has “contributed to the articulation of other

quo. Often these movements promote a di-

vergent narrative of the past in the sense of seeking to reconfigure the official story and promote some other, contrary, version. Michael Eric Dyson, for instance, contends that one of

the important functions of antiracist movements is the work they do to “unearth sites of resistive memory, history, and practice”

(Dyson, 2003, p. 119). Houston BakerJr.calls this kind of memory work “critical memory,’ a form of remembrance that simultaneously recalls past injustices and earlier efforts to combat them (Baker, 2001). Recently, scholars have begun to consider the reverse aspect of this relationship between

1418

«

PUBLIC

MEMORY

memories of the civil rights movement, his-

as an inventional wellspring is inextricably linked to queer movement; traversal of time and space, mobilization and circulation of meanings that trouble sexual normalcy and

torian Kathryn Nasstrom notes, “By treating

its discriminations” (2006, pp. 147-148). In

the civil rights movement from the perspective of memory and narrative, we call atten-

a series of essays, Morris has undertaken this analysis on objects ranging from the AIDS

memory and movements; namely, the ways social movements are themselves remembered. At the conclusion to her study of

tion to activists not only in their own time,

Quilt to Abraham Lincoln in an effort to re-

but also in relation to the present and, implic-

frame public memory itself through the simul-

itly, the future” (1998, p. 134). Scholars in

taneous engagement with a queer archive and

communication and rhetoric have pursued this notion with numerous studies attending to the way social movements of the past are remembered and the impact these recollections have on current social struggles. Kimberly Madison, for example, observes the way several historically based films, including Cry Freedom (1987), Amistad (1988), and Mississippi Burning (1988) featured white heroes and,

a queering of existing archives. In their discussion of queer archives, Morris and K. J. Rawson observe that queer is more than simply a reference to LGBTQ individuals, but “implies a broad critique of normativity along many different axes of identity, community, and power” (Morris & Rawson, 2013, p. 75). E. Cram suggests this queer engagement with

thus, worked to “marginalize African and

archives “plays with the dynamics of absence and presence, illustrating how even if dom-

African American agency” and instead “high-

inant representational strategies attempt to

light “white” heroism” (1999, p. 400). Pursuing

control official narratives of gender and sexual-

a similar research agenda, Kristen Hoer! rec-

ity, that meaning is never guaranteed” (2016,

ommends close attention to the complex

struggles surrounding efforts to commemorate past social movements and the ways in which such struggles “both nurture and sup-

pi): Other scholars have pursued similar projects, examining how public memories of LGBTQ. individuals are constituted, critiqued, and

press important memories about previous

transformed. Thomas R. Dunn, for example,

social struggles” (2009, p. 73). The LGBTQ social movement has had

examines the public monuments memorializing Oscar Wilde (Dunn, 2014) and Canadian pioneer Alexander Wood (Dunn, 2011) and observes the ways such monuments both enable and limit the creation of queer public memories. Similarly, in her study of the AIDS Quilt, Erin Rand finds ways in which the memorial artifact may limit the possibility of activism by framing the AIDS crisis and the recognition of gay men within a framework of mourning and melancholia. Yet even within

considerable impact on communication and rhetorical studies, and some of this has en-

tailed explorations of public memory. Scholars have carefully sifted through historical memory in an effort to recapture the lost voices of LGBTQ individuals and open spaces for dif-

ferent ways of remembering. Charles E. Morris II, for example, has developed a large and sophisticated research agenda aimed not only at recovering lost voices, such as the collected speeches of activist Harvey Milk (Morris & Black, 2013), but also discerning new ways to explore existing archives. Morris urges recognition that “the archive’s promise

the confines of this rhetorical frame, Rand

observes that “the process of mourning may actually serve as an opportunity for the exter-

nalization of aggression that serves to constitute the subject in a new way” (2007, p. 673).

PUBLIC

A final trajectory of research to consider has been the focus in recent years on public memories as they circulate within popular culture. Memory scholars have long recognized a distinction between official memorial practices and the way memories are enacted in more ordinary circumstances. John Bodnar refers to this as a distinction between official and vernacular memories. Ordinary people, as Bodnar notes, will engage in official memo-

rial events but often “they are less interested than cultural leaders in exerting influence of control over others, and are preoccupied, instead, with defending the interests and rights

of their respective social segments,” and tend to “privilege the personal or vernacular dimen-

sion of patriotism over the public one” (Bodnar, 1992, p. 16). Ekaterina Haskins pursues this notion of vernacular memory further to explore the way the public is drawn into the circulation of particular memory texts. She coins the term “popular memory” to capture this sense of mass appeal and the processes of popularization through which, “historic representations began to speak the language of popular culture to gain traction in popular imagination” (Haskins, 2015, p. 12).

As noted, film is a prominent means by which popular memories achieve mass appeal and circulation. Peter Ehrenhaus examines

Steven Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan (1998) as invoking the memory of the Holocaust in an effort to relieve America of its “Vietnam syndrome,’ the legacy of our failed war in Southeast Asia. The film uses memories of World War II and the Holocaust to craft “a reconstituted national identity grounded in uncontested and incontestable moral clarity and

commitment” (2001, p. 335). Of course, not all films seeking to depict past events are so uncontested or successful. John Jordan attends to the public controversy arising around Peter

Greengass’s 2006 movie, United 93. The film depicts the event of September lth and the

MEMORY

«

1419

passengers who rose up against the hijackers on the United 93 flight. Controversy around the film provoked a vibrant discussion of “Hollywood’s attempt to construct civic memory, the politics of seeing and avoiding United 93,

and the veracity of cinematic representations ofreal events” (Jordan, 2008, p. 218). Other critics observe the way that certain films can resonate with memories even while

not seeking to depict historical events. Claire Sisco King (2006), for example, observes the ways Wolfgang Petersen's Poseidon, a remake of the 1972 film The Poseidon Adventure, reso-

nates with the trauma of September Ith. In its depiction ofa fictional disaster at sea, King contends that the film “attempts to make sense of and move past the traumatic memory of

that day” (2008, p. 432). An even broader orientation toward memory is discerned by Greg Dickinson in Gary Ross’s 1998 film Pleasantville. This film, along with similar

films from the late 1990s, offered “spatial visions of nostalgically tinged suburbs that place individuals into the bosom of imperfect but loving and white families, and remake

home and away, self and Other, on founda-

tions of security and comfort” (2006, p. 213). Similarly, Kendall Phillips (2015) has argued that the popular documentary films of Michael Moore base much of their rhetorical appeal on an underlying rhetoric of nostalgia that simultaneously seeks a return to past values while opening avenues toward imagining new and different futures. While films are one of the more obvious places that popular memories are crafted and circulated, there are numerous other aspects of popular culture that seem to operate in similar ways. Michael Butterworth, for instance, finds the intermingling of memory and a valorization of the American military at work in the Pro Football Hall of Fame and suggests, “public memory scholarship would be well served to engage more robustly with

1420

-«

PUBLIC

MEMORY

the discourses of sports” (Butterworth, 2012,

p. 25S). Josh Boyd pursues a different aspect of the intersection between public memory and sports in his analysis of corporate sponsorship of sports arenas. In renaming historic sporting venues, corporate sponsors dramati-

cally shift the way fans interact with these important cultural sites. As Boyd argues, “the name is critically important, anchoring the building as a memory place and making an identity statement about the city and the fans”

Biesecker, B. (2004). Renovating the national imaginary: A prolegomenon on contemporary paregoric

rhetoric. In K. R. Phillips (Ed.), Framing public memory (pp. 212-247). Tuscaloosa: University

of Alabama Press. Biesecker, B. (2007). No time for mourning: The rhetorical production of the melancholic citizensubject in the war on terror. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 40, 147-169. Blair, C., Dickinson, G., & Ott, B. L. (2010). Places of public memory: The rhetoric of museums and me-

morials. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

(Boyd, 2000, p. 331).

Blair, C., Jeppeson, M. S., & Pucci, E., Jr. (1991).

In addition to cinema and sports, rhetorical scholars have explored the memorial aspects of numerous other artifacts of popular culture including video games (Hess, 2007), tattoos (Brouwer & Horwitz, 2015S), and chil-

Public memorializing in post-modernity: The Vietnam Veterans Memorial as prototype. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 77, 263-288. Blouin, F. X., Jr, & Rosenberg, W. G. (2011).

dren’s books (VanderHaagen, 2012). Taken together, these diverse studies recommend the

need to seek out the rhetorics of public memory in a wide variety of discourses that do not present themselves as explicitly commemorative.

Processing the past: Contesting authority in history and the archives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Bodnar, J. (1992). Remaking America: Public memory, commemoration, and patriotism in the twentieth century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Bodnar, J. (2000). Pierre Nora, national memory,

and democracy: A review. Journal of American History, 87, 951-963. REFERENCES

Armada, B. J. (1998). Memorial agon: An interpretive tour of the National Civil Rights Museum. Southern Communication Journal, 63(3), 235-243. Assmann, A. (2014, October 1). Forms offorgetting. Public lecture delivered at Castrum Peregini, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Baker, H.,Jr.(2001). Critical memory: Public spheres, African American writing, and the black fathers and sons in America. Athens: University of Georgia Press.

Benson, T. W. (1974). Rhetoric and autobiography: The case of Malcolm X. Quarterly Journal ofSpeech, 60(1), 1-15. Bergman, T., & Duquette Smith, C. (2010). You were on Indian land: Alcatraz Island as recalcitrant memory space. In G. Dickinson, C. Blair, & B. L. Ott (Eds.), Places ofpublic memory: The rhetoric of museums and monuments (pp. 160-190). Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Bostdorff, D. M. (2003). George W. Bush's postSeptember 11 rhetoric of covenant renewal:

Upholding the faith of the Greatest Generation. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 89, 293-319. Bostdorff, D. M., & Goldzwig, S. R. (2005). Reagan’s rhetorical legacy. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 35, 661-690. Boyd, J. (2000). Selling home: Corporate stadium names and the destruction of commemoration. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 28, 330-346. Brouwer, D. C., & Horwitz, L. D. (2015). The cultural politics of progenic Auschwitz tattoos: 1$7622, A-15510, 4559,... Quarterly Journal of Speech, 101, 534-SS8.

Browne, S. H. (1995). Reading, rhetoric, and the texture of public memory. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 81, 237-250. Browne, S. H. (1999). Remembering Crispus Attucks:

Race, rhetoric, and the politics of commemoration. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 85, 169-187.

PUBLIC

Buruma, I. (1994). The wages ofguilt: Memories ofwar in Germany and Japan. New York, NY: Farrar Straus & Giroux. Butterworth, M. L. (2012). Militarism and memorializing at the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 9, 241-2588. Caruth, C. (Ed.). (1995). Trauma: Explorations in memory. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press. Casey, E. S. (2004). Public memory in place and time.

In K. R. Phillips (Ed.), Framing public memory (pp. 17-44). Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. Childers, J. P. (2013). The democratic

balance:

President McKinley’s assassination as domestic trauma. Quarterly Journal ofSpeech, 99, 156-179. Collingwood, R. G. (2005). The idea ofhistory (Rev. ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Connerton, P. (2008). Seven types of forgetting. Memory Studies 1(1), S9-71.

Cox, J. R. (1990). Memory, critical theory, and the argument from history. Argumentation and Advocacy, 27, 1-13.

«

1421

and representation of South African reconciliation. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 4, 223-260. Dunn, T. R. (2011). Remembering “A great fag”: Visualizing public memory and the construction of queer space. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 97, 435-460. Dunn, T. R. (2014). “The quare in the square:” Queer memory, sensibilities, and Oscar Wilde. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 100, 213-240. Dyson, M. E. (2003). Open mike: Reflections on philosophy, race, sex, culture, and religion. New York, NY: Basic Books. Ehrenhaus, P. (2001). Why we fought: Holocaust memory in Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 18, 321-337. Fatma M. G. (2015S). Denial of violence: Ottoman past, Turkish present, and collective violence against the Armenians,

1789-2009.

New

York,

NY:

Oxford University Press. Gallagher, V. J., & LaWare, M. R. (2010). Sparring with public memory: The rhetorical embodiment of race, power, and conflict in the Memorial

Cram, E. (2016). Archival ambience and sensory memory: Generating queer intimacies in the set-

tler colonial archive. Communication and Critical/ Cultural Studies, 13(2), 109-129. Crowley, S. (1993). Modern rhetoric and memory.

In J. F. Reynolds (Ed.), Rhetoric memory and delivery: Classical concepts for contemporary composition (pp. 31-44). New York, NY: Routledge. Dickinson, G. (1997). Memories for sale: Nostalgia

and the construction ofidentity in Old Pasadena. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 83(1), 1-27. Dickinson, G., Ott, B. L., & Aoki, E. (2005). Memory and myth at the Buffalo Bill Museum. Western Journal of Communication, 69(2), 85-108.

Dickinson, G., Ott, B. L., & Aoki, E. (2006). Spaces of remembering and forgetting: The reverent eye/[ at the Plains Indian Museum. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 3(1), 27-47.

Donofrio, T. A. (2010). Ground zero and placemaking authority: The conservative metaphors in 9/11 families’ “Take Back the Memorial” rhetoric. Western Journal of Communication,

MEMORY

74,

1$0-169.

Doxtader, E. (2001). Making rhetorical history in a time of transition: The occasion, constitution,

to Joe Luis. In G. Dickinson, C. Blair, & B. L. Ott (Eds.), Places of public memory: The rhetoric of museums and memorials (pp. 87-112). Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press. Gillis, J. R. (1996). Commemorations: The politics of national identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Gécek, F. M. (2014). Denial of violence: Ottoman past,

Turkish

present

and

collective

violence

against Armenians, 1789-2009. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Gregg, M., & Seigworth, G. J. (2010). The affect theory reader. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Halbwachs, M. (1992). On collective memory. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Hasian, M.,Jr.(2004). Remembering and forgetting

the “Final Solution”: A rhetorical pilgrimage through the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 21(1), 64-92. Hasian, M., Jr. (2014). Restorative justice, humanitar-

ian rhetorics, and public memories of colonial camp cultures. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

1422

+«

PUBLIC

MEMORY

Hasian, M., Jr, & Frank, R. E. (1999). Rhetoric, history, and collective memory: Decoding the Goldhagen debates. Western Journal of Communication, 63, 9S—114. Haskins, E. V. (2015). Popular memories: Commemoration, participatory vulture, and democratic citi-

zenship. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press. Hatch, J. B. (2003).

Reconciliation:

Building a

bridge from complicity to coherence in the rhetoric of race relations. Rhetoric and Public Affairs,

6(4), 737-764. Hauser, G. A. (1999). Vernacular voices: The rhetoric

ofpublics and public spheres. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press. Hess, A. (2007). “You don’t lay, you volunteer”: Narrative public memory construction in Medal of Honor: Rising Sun. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 24, 339-356. Hoerl, K. (2009). Burning Mississippi into memory?

Kammen, M. (1991). Mystic chords of memory: The transformation of tradition in American culture. New York, NY: Knopf. Kiewe, A. (2004). Framing memory through eulogy: Ronald Reagan's long goodbye. In K. R. Phillips (Ed.), Framing public memory (pp. 248-266). Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. King, C. S. (2008). Rogue waves, remakes, and resurrections: Allegorical displacement and screen

memory in Poseidon. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 94, 430-454. Klein, K. L. (2000). On the emergence of memory in historical discourse. Representations, 69, 127-150.

Koenig Richards, C. (2009). Inventing Sacagawea: Public women and the transformative potential of epideictic rhetoric. Western Journal of Communication, 73, 1-22.

Kristeva, J. (1989). Black sun: Depression and melancholia. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Leroux, N. (1991). Frederick Douglass and the atten-

Cinematic amnesia as a resource for remembering

tion shift. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 21, 36-46.

civil rights. Critical Studies in Media Communi-

Levy, D., & Sznaider, N. (2006). The Holocaust and memory in the global age. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

cation, 26, 54-79.

Hoerl, K. (2012). Selective amnesia and racial transcendence in news coverage of President Obama's inauguration. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 98, 178-202.

Houston-Gray, S. (2002). Writing redemption: Trauma and the authentication of the moral order

in Hibakusha literature. Text and Performance Quarterly, 22, 1-23. Huyssen, A. (2003). Present pasts: Urban palimpsests

and the politics of memory. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Huyssen, A. (2011). International human rights and the politics of memory. Criticism 53(4),

607-624. Jasinski, J. (1997). Rearticulating history in epideictic discourse: Frederick Douglass’s “The meaning of the Fourth ofJuly to the Negro.’ In T. W. Benson (Ed.), Rhetoric and political culture in nineteenth-

century America (pp.71-89). East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.

Jordan,J.W. (2008). Transcending Hollywood: The referendum on United 93 as cinematic memorial. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 25,

196-223.

Lowenthal, D. (1985). The past is a foreign country. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Lucaites, J. L. (1997). The irony of “equality” in black abolitionist discourse: The case of Frederick Douglass's “What, to the Slave, is the Fourth of July?” In T. W. Benson (Ed.), Rhetoric and political culture in nineteenth-century America (pp. 47-70). East Lansing: Michigan State University Press. Lyons, A., & Olson, L. C. (2012). Human rights rhetoric: Traditions oftestifying and witnessing. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Mack, K. (2014). From apartheid to democracy: Deliberating truth and reconciliation in South Africa. University Park Penn sylvania State University Press. Madison, K. (1999). Legitimation crisis and con-

tainment: The “anti-racist-white-hero” film. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 16, 399-416. Maier, C. S. (1998). The unmasterable past: History,

Holocaust, and German national identity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Maier, C. S. (2000). Lines of force, territorialization, technologies, and the production of the new world order. Keynote address for the

PUBLIC

MEMORY

«

1423

Conference, “Geography and International History,”

Vol. I: The state (pp. vii-xxii). Chicago, IL:

International Security Studies, Yale University,

University of Chicago Press. Owen, A. S., & Ehrenhaus, P. (2014). The Moore’s Ford lynching reenactment: Affective memory and race trauma. Text and Performance Quarterly, 34, 72-90. Paliewicz, N. S., & Hasian, M.,Jr.(2016). Mourning

February 11-12. Massumi, B. (2002). Parable for the virtual: Movement, affect, sensation. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. McClure, K. R. (2000). Frederick Douglass’ use of comparison in his Fourth ofJuly oration: A textual criticism. Western Journal of Communication, 64, 425-426. McPhail, M. L. (2004). A question of character: Re(-)signing the racial contract. Rhetoric and

Public Affairs, 7(3), 391-408. Michaels, W. B. (2006).

Plots against America:

Neoliberalism and anti-racism. American Literary History, 18(2), 288-302. Milford, M. (2016). National identity, crisis, and the

inaugural genre: George W. Bushand 9/11. Southern Communication Journal, 81, 18-31.

absences, melancholic commemoration, and the

contested public memories of the National September 11 Memorial and Museum. Western Journal of Communication, 80, 140-162. Parry-Giles, S. J., & Parry-Giles, T. (2000). Collective memory, political nostalgia, and the

rhetorical presidency: Bill Clinton’s commemoration of the March on Washington, August 28,

1998. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 86, 417-437. Pauley, G. E. (1998). John Lewis’ “serious revolution”: Rhetoric, resistance, and revision at the March on

Morris, C. E., III. (2006). Archival queer. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 9(1), 145-151. Morris, C.E., III. (2013). Sunder the children: Abraham Lincoln's queer rhetorical pedagogy. Quarterly

Journal of Speech, 99(4), 395-422. Morris, C. E., III, & Black, J. E. (2013). An archive of hope: Harvey Milk’s speeches and writings. Berkeley: University of California Press. Morris, C. E., III, & Rawson, K. J. (2013). Queer archives and archival queers. In M. Ballif (Ed.),

Theorizing histories of rhetoric. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Nasstrom, K. L. (2006). Down to now: Memory,

narrative, and women’ leadership in the Civil Rights Movement in Atlanta, Georgia. In R. C. Roman & L. Radford (Eds.), The civil rights movement in American memory (pp. 253-289). Athens:

Washington. Quarterly Journal ofSpeech, 84, 320-340. Phillips, K. R. (2004). Framing public memory. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Phillips, K. R. (2015S). “I’m sorry to see it go”: Nostalgic rhetoric in Michael Moore's Capitalism: A love story. In T. W. Benson & B. J. Snee (Eds.), Michael Moore and the rhetoric of documentary (pp. 170-192). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Phillips, K. R., & Reyes, G. M. (2011). Global memoryscapes:

Contesting remembrance

in a transna-

tional age. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. Rand,

E. J. (2007).

Repeated

remembrance:

Commemorating the AIDS Quilt and resuscitating the mourned subject. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 10, 655-680. Reyes, G. M. (2010). Memory and alterity: The case

University of Georgia Press. Nietzsche, F. (1980). On the advantages and disad-

for an analytic of difference. Philosophy and

vantages of history for life (Peter Preus, Trans.). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.

Reyes, G. M. (2011). Introduction. In G. M. Reyes

Nora, P. (1989). Between memory and history: Les lieux de mémoire. Representations, 26, 7-24.

Nora, P. (1996). Introduction to Volume 1. In P. Nora (Ed.), Realms of memory: Rethinking the

French past (pp. 21-25).

New

York, NY:

Columbia University Press. Nora, P. (2001). General introduction. In P. Nora

(Ed.), Rethinking France: Les lieux de mémoire,

Rhetoric, 43(3), 222-282.

(Ed.), Public memory, race, and ethnicity (pp. 1-14). Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Riding, J. (1993). The politics of the Columbus Celebration: A perspective of myth and reality in United States society. American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 17, 1-9.

Rosenfeld, G. D. (2009). A looming crash or a soft landing? Forecasting the future of the memory

1424

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

AND

MANUFACTURED

“industry. Journal of Modern History, 81, 122-158. Rothberg, M. (2009). Multidirectional memory: Remembering the Holocaust in the age of decolonization. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Savage, K. (1999). Standing soldiers, kneeling slaves: Race, war, and monument in nineteenth-century America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Schwartz, B. (1996). Introduction: The expanding past. Qualitative Sociology, 19, 275-282.

Stormer, N. (2013). Recursivity:

A working paper

on rhetoric and mnesis. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 99(1), 27-SO. Stuckey, M. (2006). To slip the surly bonds: Ronald Reagan’s Challenger address. College Station: Texas A&M University Press. Sturken, M. (2007). Tourists of history: Memory, kitsch, and consumerism from Oklahoma City to

Ground Zero. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Terrill, R. E. (2003).

Irony, silence, and time:

Frederick Douglass on the Fifth ofJuly. Quarterly Journal ofSpeech, 89, 216-234. VanderHaagen,

S. (2012). Practical truths: Black

IDENTITIES

College

Station:

Texas

A&M

University

Press. Winter,J.(2001). The generation of memory: Reflections

on the “memory boom” in contemporary historical

studies. Canadian Military History, 10(3), 57-66. Winter, J. (2006). Remembering war: The great war between memory and history in the twentieth century. Ann Arbor, MI: Sheridan Books. Yates, F. (1966). The art of memory. New York, NY: Routledge. Young, J. (1993). The texture of memory: Holocaust memorials and meaning. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Zanderberg, E., Meyers, O., & Neiger, M. (2012). Past continuous: Newsworthiness and the shaping of collective memory. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 29, 6S—79. Zelizer, B. (1995S). Reading the past against the grain: The shape of memory studies. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 12(2), 214-239. Zelizer, B. (1998). Remembering to forget: Holocaust memory

through the camera's eye. Chicago, IL:

University of Chicago Press.

Matthew Houdek and Kendall R. Phillips

feminist agency and public memory in biographies for children. Women’s Studies in Communication, 3S, 18-41. VanderHaagen, S., & Ray, A. G. (2014). A pilgrim-

critic at places of public memory: Anna Dickinson's southern tour of 1875S. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 100, 348-374.

Vivian, B. J. (2002). Jefferson's other. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 88, 284-302. Vivian, B. J. (2006). Neoliberal epideictic: Rhetorical

form and commemorative politics on September U1, 2002. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 92, 1-26. Vivian, B. J. (2010). Public forgetting: The rhetorics

and politics of beginning again. State College: Pennsylvania State University Press. Wilson, K. H. (2002). The reconstruction desegrega-

tion debate: The politics ofequality and the rhetoric ofplace, 1870-1875. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press. Wilson, K. H. (2008). The problem with public memory: President Benjamin Harrison confronts the “Southern Question.’ In M. J. Medhurst (Ed.),

Before the rhetorical presidency (pp. 267-288).

PUBLIC PEDAGOGY AND MANUFACTURED IDENTITIES IN THE AGE OF THE SELFIE CULTURE

NEOLIBERALISM AND THE CRISIS OF AGENCY

The most important forms of domination are not only economic but also intellectual and pedagogical, and lie on the side of belief and persuasion. Pierre Bourdieu and Gunter Grass (2002)

Under the reign of neoliberalism, a particularly savage form of capitalism, the blight of rampant consumerism, unregulated finance capital, and weakened communal bonds

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

increasingly promote what may be called a crisis of identity, memory, and agency. In part, such a crisis is directly related to neoliberalism’s production of an individualism that embodies a pathological disdain for community and, in doing so, furthers the creation of at-

omized, isolated, and utterly privatized individuals who have lost sight of the fact that, as

Hannah Arendt (2013) once expressed, “humanity is never acquired in solitude” (p. 37). Nothing appears to escape the reach of predatory capitalism, as even space, time, and language

have been subject to the forces of privatization and commodification. Commodified and privatized, public spaces are replaced by malls and entertainment spheres that infantilize almost everything they touch. As one’s humanity is more and more defined by the abil-

AND

MANUFACTURED

IDENTITIES

1425

modes of public pedagogy are defined by the logic of the market, individuals can only recognize themselves within settings—whether the school or the mass media—whose ultimate fidelity is to expanding market values and profit margins. In this instance, the public collapses into the personal, and the symbolic and affective dimensions of social existence begin to erode. One consequence is that political life disintegrates into private obsessions,

and the triumph of the personal over the political becomes evident in the rise of the confessional society. Even worse, the only condi-

tion of agency is the ongoing desire to survive

in a period of social breakdown, uncertainty, massive unemployment, and the collapse of the social contract. Under such circumstances,

the only control that many people, especially

ity to consume, exchange values are given pri-

youth, have over their identities is through the

ority over public values, just as communal values are replaced by atomizing and survival-

production of self-representations organized through the manufactured images they post on social media. With the destruction of public spaces and communal bonds, coupled with the ongoing ideology of privatization, the production of identity appears to be wedded almost entirely to the invention of an isolated self. One consequence is that agency is now deeply embedded in the process of self-fashioning and an endless performance of freedom, which becomes an exercise in self-development rather than social responsibility. This primarily takes place through the boundless production of images that stand in for some control over

of-the fittest market values. Hence, it is not surprising that, at this historical moment, in-

dividual and collective agency is more and more overwhelmed by a tsunami of information, the ubiquity of market values, the ravages of inequality in income, power, and wealth, and the absence of space and time, which allow for contemplation, dialogue, and

shared responsibilities. Within this brutal logic of neoliberalism, the social becomes regres-

sive, emptied of democratic values, and reduced to the dustbin of history by a politics that in the famous words of the late Margaret Thatcher declares with no apologies: “There is no such thing as society, there are only indi-

viduals and families.” The crisis of agency is further reproduced through an ongoing assault on public spaces, where identities that once could be constructed,

both in shared spaces and in dialogue with others, are under siege and withering in ab-

sence of a vibrant set of democratic public spheres. As more and more public spheres and

depictions of the self. Moreover, sharing such

images becomes the vehicle by which to exit from any notion of privacy and to render representations of the self as the only viable way to enable a sense of agency, however limited. Under the auspices of casino capitalism, there is an ongoing attempt by the apostles of neoliberalism to remove politics from the ideals of the common good, social contract,

and democracy. Shared responsibilities are

1426

-«

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

AND

MANUFACTURED

now replaced by shared fears, reinforced by a market driven culture that celebrates privatization, deregulation, consumerism, choice, the

spectacle of celebrity, and a revival of the ethics of Social Darwinism. Abstracted from the ideal of public commitment, neoliberalism, or what

might be called market fundamentalism, rep-

IDENTITIES

privatized orbits of consumption, commodification, and display, verifying the conviction that there is no democracy without an informed public. In this instance, pedagogy becomes central to the very meaning of politics, because it is crucial in understanding how culture deploys power and produces those

resents a political, economic, and ideological

desires, values, and modes of identity that

practice that loosens the connection between substantive democracy, critical agency, and

support and mimic the demands of a marketfundamentalism in which exchange value becomes the only value that matters. In the institutions of both public and higher education and the neoliberal mainstream cultural apparatuses of screen and print culture, the American polity is continuously commercially carpet-bombed with a form of public pedagogy the promotes narcissism, obsessive

progressive education. It does so, however,

not simply by disconnecting power from politics. As Samir Amin (2001) suggests, it does so by “gaining control of the expansion of markets, the looting of the earth's natural resources, [or] the super exploitation of the

labor reserves” (p. 6). One of the most important new weapons of global capitalism is that it constitutes a form of public pedagogy. While a number of theorists extending from Antonio Gramsci to C. Wright Mills have talked about culture as an educational force,

it was Raymond Williams (1967) whe first articulated the notion of culture as a form of permanent education. That is, the educational force of dominant culture, in all of its diver-

sity, represents one of the primary conditions for spreading values, ideologies, and social relations. Culture today increasingly defines global citizenship as a private affair, a solitary act of consumption, and a war against all competitive ethos rather than as a practice of social and political engagement performed by critical agents acting collectively to shape social, political, and economic forces.

NEOLIBERAL PUBLIC PEDAGOGY Economic structures alone cannot account for

the success of neoliberalism or any other mode of oppression. Shaping public consciousness is crucial to enforcing repressive values and social relations. In large part, this is done by keeping the American public absorbed in

self-interest, and a libidinal economy in which

consuming is defined as the only obligation of citizenship. As Joseph E. Stiglitz (2013) explains, neoliberal common sense insists that it is better “to trust in the in the pursuit of self-interest than in the good intentions of those who pursue the general interest”; looking out for oneself in the age of selfie culture is transformed from a principle of embedded self-development and growth to the belief that “selfishness [is] the ultimate form of selflessness.’ Looking out for oneself in the best sense morphs into looking at oneself. Under neoliberalism, as Jonathan Crary (2013) observes, time is now defined by “the

non-stop operation of global exchange and

circulation” (p. S), including the endless perpetuation of an impoverished celebrity and consumer culture that both depoliticizes people and narrows their potential for critical thought, agency, and social relations to an investment in shopping, and other marketrelated activities. It is also subject to an algorithm of speed designed to intensify the labor of working people to the point of sheer exhaustion. Time is a luxury only for the rich and well off. For those engaged in the ongoing

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

battle to survive, what the Occupy Movement called the 99%, it is largely a deprivation. Yet, it is a deprivation that has not provoked the public outrage it deserves. One reason might be that ethical paralysis and disposability are the new signposts of a society in which historical memory and social agency are diminished in part because care for the other is not only under assault by conservatives but is also

derided as figments of liberal past. As Frank B. Wilderson III (2012) has argued, as public trust and values are derided the discourses necessary to draw attention to the eth-

AND

MANUFACTURED

IDENTITIES

+

1427

and customers, while taught that the only interests that matter are individual interests,

almost always measured by monetary considerations. Under such circumstances, social and

communal bonds are shredded, important modes of solidarity attacked, and a war is waged against any institution that embraces the values, practices, and social relations

endemic to a democracy. Neoliberal public pedagogy, in this instance, functions as what Hannah Arendt (1968) calls a form of “totalitarian education,” one whose aim “has never

been to instill convictions but to destroy the

ical grammars of suffering, state violence, and

capacity to form any” (p. 468). One outcome

disposability begin to disappear, leaving only

has been a heightening of the discourse of narcissism and the retreat from public life and any viable sense of worldliness. The retreat into private silos has resulted in the inability of individuals to connect their personal suffering with larger public issues. Thus detached from any concept of the common good or viable vestige of the public realm, they are left to face alone a world of in-

a “discourse of embodied incapacity” (p. 30). Unsurprisingly, as public values, the common good, and civic life are devalued, what emerges

in its place is a culture of cruelty dominated by hyperindividualism, a survival-of-the fittest ethos, brutal forms of competition, and

the nonstop production of celebrity culture, the spectacle of violence, and the reduction of agency to isolated and often anxiety-ridden and traumatized notions of the self. What emerges from this culture of narcissism and obsessive self-interest is both a callous disregard for human life and a notion in which consumption largely focuses on the consuming self at the expense of caring for others. Dispossession, infantilization, and depoliticization are central to the discourse of neoliberalism, in which language is central to

molding identities, desires, values, and social relationships. Within this fog of market-induced paralysis, language is subject to the laws of the capitalism, reduced to a commodity, and subject to the “tyranny of the moment, ... emaciated, impoverished, vulgarized, and

squeezed out of the meanings it was resumed

to carry” (Bauman & Donskis, 2013, p. 46). As Doreen Massey (2013) observes, within the discourse of neoliberalism, the public are urged to become highly competitive consumers

creasing precariousness and uncertainty, in

which it becomes difficult to imagine anything other than how to survive. In addition,

there is often little room for thinking critically and acting collectively in ways that are imaginative and courageous. Surely, as Bauman and Donskis (2013) argue, the celebration and widespread prevalence of ignorance in American culture does more than merely testify “to human backwardness or stupidity”; it also “indicates human weakness and the fear that it is unbearably difficult to

live beset by continuous doubts” (p. 7). Yet, what is often missed in analysis of political and civic illiteracy as the new normal is the degree to which these new forms of illiteracy not only result in an unconscious flight from politics, but also produce a moral coma that supports modern systems of terror and authoritarianism. Civic illiteracy is about more than the glorification and manufacture of

1428

-«

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

AND

MANUFACTURED

IDENTITIES

ignorance on an individual scale: it is producing a nationwide crisis of agency, memory, and

and events in ways that are meaningful and expand democratic relations. Needless to say,

thinking itself.

as John Pilger (2014) has pointed out, what is

THE CRISIS OF CIVIC LITERACY

at work in the death of literacy and the promotion of ignorance as a civic virtue is a “confidence trick” in which “the powerful would

Clearly, the attack on reason, evidence, science,

like us to believe that we live in an eternal

and critical thought has reached perilous proportions in the United States, and any discus-

present in which reflection is limited to Facebook, and historical narrative is the preserve of Hollywood.” Among the “materialized shocks” of the ever-present spectacles of violence, the expanding states of precarious-

sion of the rise of a narcissistic selfie culture must include this growing threat to democracy. A number of political, economic, social, and technological forces now work to distort

reality and keep people passive, unthinking, and unable to act ina critically engaged manner. Politicians, right-wing pundits, and large swaths

of the American public embrace positions that support Creationism, capital punishment, torture, and the denial of human-engineered climate change, any one of which not only defies human reason but also stands in stark

ness, and the production of the atomized, repressed, and disconnected individual, narcis-

sism reigns supreme. As Frankfurt School theorist Leo Lowenthal’s important essay “The Atomization of Man” (1987) states, “personal communication tends to all meaning,”

even as moral decency and the “agency of conscience” wither (p. 183). How else to explain the endless attention-

opposition to evidence-based scientific arguments. Reason now collapses into opinion, as thinking itself appears to be both dangerous

that accepts cruelty toward others as a neces-

and antithetical to understanding ourselves, our relations to others, and the larger state of world affairs. Under such circumstances, lit-

of contempt” (St. Claire, 2014), that maligns and blames the poor for their condition rather than acknowledging injustices in the

eracy disappears not just as the practice of

social order; or the paucity of even the most

learning skills, but also as the foundation for

rudimentary knowledge among the American public about history, politics, civil rights, the Constitution, public affairs, politics, and other

taking informed action. Divorced from any sense of critical understanding and agency, the meaning of literacy is narrowed to completing basic reading, writing, and numeracy

seeking in our self-absorbed age; a culture sary survival strategy; a growing “economics

cultures, countries, and political systems?

considerations and standardized assessment, rooted in test taking and deadening forms of memorization, and becomes far removed

Political ignorance now exists in the United States on a scale that seems inconceivable: for example, “only 40 percent of adults know that there are 100 Senators in the USS. Congress” (Werleman, 2014), and a significant number of Americans believe that the

from forms of literacy that would impart an ability to raise questions about historical and

Constitution designated English as the country’s official language and Christianity as

social contexts.

its official religion. Zygmunt Bauman

tasks assigned in schools. Literacy education

is similarly reduced to strictly methodological

Literacy, in a critical sense, should always ask what it might mean to use knowledge and theory as a resource to address social problems

and

David

Lyons

(2013) have connected the philosophical implications of experiencing a reality defined by

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

constant measurement to how most people

now allow their private expressions and activities to be monitored by the authoritarian security-surveillance state. No one is left unscathed. In the current historical conjuncture, neoliberalism’s theater of cruelty joins forces with new technologies that can easily “colonize the private” even as it holds sacrosanct the notion that any “refusal to participate in the technological innovations and social networks (so indispensable for the exercise of social and political control) . . . becomes sufficient grounds to remove all those who lag behind in the globalization process (or have disavowed its sanctified idea) to the mar-

gins of society” (Bauman & Lyons, 2013, p. 7). Inured to data gathering and number crunching, the country’s slide into authoritarianism has become not only permissible, but “partic-

AND

MANUFACTURED

IDENTITIES

-

1429

entertainment and increasingly listen to and invest their hopes in politicians and hatemongers who endlessly lie, trade in deceit,

and engage in zombie-like behavior, destroying everything they touch. As stressed previously, American society

is in the grip of a paralyzing infantilism. Everywhere we look, the refusal to think, to engage troubling knowledge, and to welcome

robust dialogue and engaged forms of pedagogy are now met by the fog of rigidity, anti-intellectualism, and a collapse of the public into the private. A politics of intense privatization and its embrace of the self as the only viable unit of agency appears to have a strong grip on American society as can be seen in the endless attacks on reason, truth, critical

ipatory” as John Feffer (2014) claims— bolstered by a general ignorance of how a market-driven culture induces all of us to sac-

thinking, and informed exchange, or any other relationship that embraces the social and the democratic values that support it. This might be expected in a society that has become increasingly anti-intellectual, given its commit-

rifice our secrets, private lives, and very iden-

ment to commodities, violence, privatization,

tities to social media, corporations, and the

the death of the social, and the bare-bones relations of commerce. But it is more surprising when it is elevated to a national ideal and, like a

surveillance state. Ignorance finds an easy ally in various elements of mass and popular culture, such as the spectacle of reality TV, further encourag-

ing the embrace of a culture in which it is no longer possible to translate private troubles into public concerns. On the contrary, reveling in private issues now becomes the grounds for celebrity status, promoting a new type of confessional in which all that matters is interviewing oneself endlessly and performing private acts as fodder for public consumption. Facebook “likes,” lists of “friends,” and

other empty data reduce our lives to numbers that now define who we are. Technocratic rationality rules while thoughtful communication withers, translated into data without

fashion craze, wrapped in a kind of self-righteous moralism marked by an inability or reluctance to imagine what others are thinking. This type of ideological self-righteousness, fueled by a celebrity culture and elevation of self-interest as the only values that matter, is especially dispiriting when it accommodates rather than challenges the rise of the surveillance state and the demise of the public good along with those modes of solidarity that embrace a collective sense of agency. SURVEILLANCE AND THE FLIGHT FROM PRIVACY

of larger purpose, it is not surprising that

Surveillance has become a growing feature of daily life wielded by both the state and the

individuals become addicted to outrageous

larger corporate sphere. This merger registers

feeling, meaning, or vision. Lacking any sense

1430

-«

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

AND

MANUFACTURED

both the transformation of the political state into the corporate state as well as the transformation of a market economy into a criminal economy. One growing attribute of the merging of state and corporate surveillance apparatuses is the increasing view of privacy

on the part of the American public as something to escape from rather than preserve as a precious political right. The surveillance and security-corporate state is one that not only

listens, watches, and gathers massive amounts

of information through data mining necessary for monitoring the American public— now considered as both potential terrorists and a vast consumer market—but also acculturates the public into accepting the intrusion of surveillance technologies and privatized commodified values into all aspects of their lives. Personal information is willingly given over to social media and other corporate -based websites such as Instagram, Facebook, MySpace,

and other media platforms, and is harvested daily as people move from one targeted website to the next across multiple screens and digital apparatuses.

As Ariel Dorfman (2014) points out, “social media users gladly give up their liberty and privacy, invariably for the most benevolent of platitudes and reasons,” all the while endlessly shopping online and texting. While selfies may not lend themselves directly to giving up important private information online, they do speak to the necessity to make the self into an object of public concern, if not a manifestation of how an infatuation with selfie culture now replaces any notion of the social as the only form of agency available to many people. Under such circumstances, it becomes much easier

to put privacy rights at risk, as they are viewed less as something to protect than to escape from in order to put the self on public display. When the issue of surveillance takes place outside of the illegal practices performed by government intelligence agencies, critics most

IDENTITIES

often point to the growing culture of inspection and monitoring that occurs in a variety

of public spheres through ever present digital technologies used to amass information, most evident in the use of video cameras that inhabit every public space from the streets, commercial establishments, and workplaces, to the schools our children attend, as well as in

the myriad scanners placed at the entry points of airports, stores, sporting events, and the like. Rarely do critics point to the emergence of the selfie as another index of the public's need to escape from the domain of what was once considered to be the cherished and protected realm of the private and personal. Privacy rights in the not too distant past were

viewed as a crucial safeguard in preventing personal and important information from becoming public. Privacy was also seen as a sphere of protection from the threat of totalitarianism made infamous in George Orwell’s 1984. In the present oversaturated information age, the right to privacy has gone the way of an historical relic and, for too many Americans, privacy is no longer a freedom to be cherished and by necessity to be protected. Of course, there is a notable exception here regarding people of color, especially poor dissenting blacks, for whom privacy has never been an assumed right. The right to privacy was violated in the historical reality of slavery, the state terrorism enacted under deep surveillance programs such as COINTELPRO, the current wave of mass incarcerations, and

in the surveillance of the Black Lives Matter movement. What has changed, particularly since 9/11 is that the loss of privacy has been intensified with the rise of the surveillance state, which appears to monitor most of the

electronic media and digital culture (Greenwald, 2015). Unfortunately, in some cases the loss of privacy is done voluntarily rather than imposed by the repressive or secret mechanisms of the state.

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

RISE OF SELFIE CULTURE This is particularly true for many young people who cannot escape from the realm ofthe private fast enough, though this is not surprising given neoliberalism’s emphasis on branding, a “contextless and eternal now of consumption” (D. L. Clark, personal correspondence, February 10, 2015) and the undermining of any viable social sphere or notion ofsociability. The rise of the selfie offers one index of this retreat from privacy rights and thus another form of legitimation for devaluing these once guarded rights altogether. One place to begin is with the increasing presence of the selfie, that is, the ubiquity of self-portraits being

endlessly posted on various social media. One BBC News commentary on the selfie reports

that: A search on photo sharing app Instagram retrieves over 23 million photos uploaded with the hashtag #selfie, and a

whopping S1 million with the hashtag #me. Rihanna, Justin Bieber, Lady

Gaga, and Madonna are all serial uploaders of selfies. Model Kelly Brook took so many she ended up “banning” herself. The Obama children were spotted posing into their mobile phones at their father's second inauguration. Even astronaut Steve Robinson took a photo of himself during his repair of the Space Shuttle Discovery. Selfie-ism is everywhere. The word “selfie” has been bandied about so much in the past six months it's currently being monitored for inclusion in the Oxford Dictionary Online. (BBC News, 2013)

What this new politics of digital self-representation suggests is that the most important transgression against privacy may be happening

AND

MANUFACTURED

IDENTITIES

-«

1431

not only through the unwarranted watching, listening, and collecting of information by the state. What is also taking place through the interface of state and corporate modes of the mass collecting of personal information is the practice of normalizing surveillance by upping the pleasure quotient and enticements for young people and older consumers. These groups are now constantly urged to use the new digital technologies and social networks as a mode of entertainment and communication. Yet, there is, in mainstream culture, an ongoing attempt, not only to trans-

form any vestige of real community into site, not only to harvest information for corporate and government agencies, but also to socialize young people into a regime of security

and commodification in which their identities, values, and desires are inextricably tied to a culture of private addictions, self-help,

and consuming. A more general critique of selfies by Anita

Biressi and Heather Nunn (2014) points to their affirmation as a mass-produced form of vanity and narcissism in a society in which an unchecked capitalism promotes forms of rampant self-interests that legitimize selfishness and corrode individual and moral character. In this view, a market-driven moral econ-

omy of increased individualism and selfishness has supplanted any larger notion of caring, social responsibility, and the public good. For example, one indication that Foucault's notion of self-care has now moved into the realm of self-obsession can be seen in what Patricia Reaney (2014) has observed as the “growing number of people who are waiting in line to see plastic surgeons to enhance images they post of themselves on smartphones and other social media sites.” The merging of neoliberalism and selfie culture is on full display in the upsurge in the number of young women between the ages of 20 and 29 who are altering their facial contours

1432

«

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

AND

MANUFACTURED

IDENTITIES

through surgical procedures such as nose jobs, eye lid lifts, plumped up lips, puffer-fish cheeks,

THE PLAGUE OF NARCISSISM

and laser facials. As Sabrina Maddeaux (2015)

The plague of narcissism has a long theoretical and political history extending from Sigmund Freud in 1914 (Sandler, Person, &

points out:

The American Society of Plastic Surgeons last year reported that, in female patients aged 20 to 29, face-shaping cosmetic procedures were on the rise: Requests for hyaluronic acid fillers were up by almost 10 per cent, while Botox and chemical peels saw similar upticks. What's more,

according to dermatologists, young patients aren’t looking for subtle results;

they want the “work” to be noticeable. That’s because the puffed and plumped “richface” aesthetic is the new Louis Vuitton handbag in certain circles—an instant, recognizable marker of wealth

and status. (Maddeaux, 2015)

Maddeaux argues that selfie culture “fuels this over-the-top approach to grooming” and (quoting Melissa Gibson, a senior artist for MAC Cosmetics) supports the view that “The selfie has turned an extreme aesthetic that wouldn’t normally be acceptable into something people want on a daily basis” (Maddeaux, 2015). Social media now becomes a site where selfie culture offers women an opportunity to display not only their altered looks, but also their social status and

wealth. It appears that selfies are not only an indication of the public’s descent into the narrow orbits of self-obsession and individual posturing but are also good for the economy, especially plastic surgeons, who gener-

ally occupy the one percent that constitutes the upper class. The unchecked rise of selfishness is now partly driven by the search for new forms of capital, which recognize no boundaries and appear to have no ethical limitations.

Fonagy, 1991) to Christopher Lasch (1991).

Freud analyzed narcissism in psychoanalytic terms as a form of self-obsession that ran the gamut from being an element of normal behavior to a perversion that pointed to a psychiatric disorder. According to Lasch, narcis-

sism was a form of self-love that functioned less as a medical disorder than as a disturbing cultural trait and political ideology deeply embedded in a capitalist society, one that disdained empathy and care for the other and promoted a cut-throat notion of competition. Lasch argued that the culture of narcissism promoted an obsession with the self

under the guise of making selfishness and self-interest a cherished organizing principle of a market-based society. For Lasch, the fictional character megalomaniac and utterly narcissistic Gordon Gekko, the main character in Oliver Stone’s 1987 film Wall Street, has

become immortalized with his infamous “greed is good” credo. Both theorists saw these psychological and cultural traits as a threat to one’s mental and political health. What nei-

ther acknowledged was that, in the latter part of the 20th century, they would become normalized, common-sense principles that shaped the everyday behavior of a market-driven society in which they were viewed less as an aberration than as a virtue. In the current historical moment, Gordon

Gekko looks tame. The new heroes of contemporary American capitalism are now modeled after a marriage of John Galt, the character from the infamous Ayn Rand novel Atlas Shrugged (1957), who transforms the pursuit of self-interest into a secular religion for the ethically bankrupt and Patrick Bateman, the more disturbing character in Bret Easton Ellis’s

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

1991 novel and the film American Psycho (2000) who literally kills those considered disposable in a society in which only the strong survive. Today, fiction has become reality, as

the characters Gordon Gekko, John Galt, and Patrick Bateman, are personified in the reallife figures of the Koch brothers, Lloyd Blankfein,

and Jamie Dimon, among others. The old narcissism looks mild compared to the current retreat into the narrow orbits of privatization, commodification, and self-interest. Lynn Stuart Parramore gets it right in her insightful comment:

IfLasch had lived to see the new millennium, marked by increased economic inequality and insecurity, along with trends like self-involved social networking and celebrity culture, he would not have been surprised to hear that the new normal is now pretty much taken for granted as the way things are in America. Many even defend narcissism as the correct response to living with increased competition and pressure to win.

According to one study, Americans score higher on narcissism than citizens of any other country. Researchers who study personality find that young Americans today score higher on narcissism and lower on empathy than they did 30 years ago. (Parramore, 2014)

Under the regime of neoliberalism, narcis-

sism not only becomes the defining characteristic of spoiled celebrities, brutish and cruel CEOs, and fatuous celebrities, it also

speaks to a more comprehensive notion of deformed agency, an almost hysterical sense of self-obsession, a criminogenic need for ac-

cumulating possessions, and a pathological disdain for democratic social relations. Selfie culture may not be driven entirely by a pathological notion of narcissism, but it does speak

AND

MANUFACTURED

IDENTITIES

-

1433

to the disintegration of those public spheres, modes of solidarity, and sense of inclusive community that sustain a democratic society. In its most pernicious forms, it speaks to a flight from convictions, social responsibility,

and the rational and ethical connections between the self and the larger society. Selfie culture pushes against the constructive cultivation of fantasy, imagination, and memory allowing such capacities to deteriorate in a constant pursuit of commodified pleasure and the need to heighten the visibility and performance of the self. The culture of atomization and loneliness in neoliberal societies is intensified by offering the selfasthe only source of enjoyment, exchange, and wonder. How else to explain the bizarre behavior of individuals who have their faces altered in order to look good in their selfies? Reaney (2014) quotes one individual after having plastic surgery: “I definitely feel more comfortable right now with my looks, if Ineed to take a selfie,

without a doubt, I would have no problem.” In a society in which the personal is the only politics there is, there is more at stake in selfie culture than rampant narcissism or the swin-

dle of fulfillment offered to teenagers and others whose self-obsession and insecurity takes an extreme, if not sometimes dangerous, turn.

What is being sacrificed is not just the right to privacy, the willingness to give up the self to

commercial interests, but the very notion of individual and political freedom. The atomization that, in part, promotes the popularity of selfie culture is nourished not only by neoliberal fervor for unbridled individualism, but

also by the weakening of public values and the emptying out of collective and engaged politics. THE CONTRADICTIONS OF SELFIE CULTURE

The political and corporate surveillance state is not just concerned about promoting the

1434

-«

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

AND

MANUFACTURED

flight from privacy rights but also attempts to use that power to canvass every aspect of one’s life in order to suppress dissent, instill fear in the populace, and repress the possibilities of

mass resistance against unchecked power (Evans & Giroux, 2015). Selfie culture is also fed by a spiritually empty consumer culture, which Jonathan Crary (2013) characterizes as driven by never-ending “conditions of visibility... in which a state of permanent illumination (and performance) is inseparable from the non-stop operation of global exchange and circulation.” Crary’s insistence that entrepreneurial excess now drives a 24/7 culture points

rightly to a society driven by a constant state of producing, consuming, and discarding ob-

jects as disposable—a central feature of selfie culture. Selfie culture is increasingly shaped

within a mode of temporality in which quick turnovers and short attention spans become

the measure of how one occupies the ideological and affective spaces of the market with its emphasis on speed, instant gratification,

fluidity, and disposability. Under such circumstances, the cheapening of subjectivity and everyday life are further intensified by social identities now fashioned out of brands, commodities, relationships, and images that

are used up and discarded as quickly as possi-

IDENTITIES

only source of agency worth validating. At the same time, the popularity of selfies points beyond a pervasive narcissism, or a desire to collapse the public spheres into endless and shameless representations of the self. Selfies and the culture they produce cannot be entirely collapsed into the logic of domination. More specifically, I don’t want to suggest that selfie culture is only a medium for various forms of narcissistic performance. Some commentators have suggested that selfies enable people to reach out to each other, present themselves in positive ways, and use

selfies to drive social change. And there are many instances in which transgender people, people with disabilities, women of color, undocumented immigrants, and other margin-

alized groups are using selfies in proactive ways that do not buy into mainstream corporate selfie culture. In contrast to the market-driven economy that encourages selfies as an act of privatization and consumption, some groups

are using selfie culture to expand public dialogue rather than turn it over to commercial interests. At the same time, there is considerable re-

search indicating that “the reality of being watched results in feelings of low self-esteem,

held hostage to the addiction of consuming

depression, and anxiety. Whether observed by a supervisor at work or by Facebook friends, people are inclined to conform and demonstrate

with its constant discharging of impulses, fast

less individuality and creativity” (Murphy,

consumption, and quick turnovers, at the expense of purposeful thought and reflection. Once again, too many young people succumb to the influence of neoliberalism and its relentless refiguring of the public sphere as a site for displaying the personal by running from privacy, by making every aspect of their lives public. Or they limit their presence in the public sphere to posting endless images of themselves. In this instance, community becomes reduced to the sharing of a nonstop production of images in which the self becomes the

2014). Moreover, the more people give away

ble. Under such circumstances, pleasure is

about themselves whether through selfies or the emptying out of their lives on other social media such as Facebook, “the more dissatis-

faction with what they got in return for giving away so much about themselves” (Murphy,

2014). Is it any wonder that so many college students in the age of the selfie are depressed? What is missing from this often romanticized and depoliticized view of the popularity of selfies is that the mass acceptance, proliferation, and commercial appropriation of selfies

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

AND

MANUFACTURED

IDENTITIES

«

1435

suggests that the growing practice of producing representations that once filled the public space that focused on important social problems and a sense ofsocial responsibility are in

shots—in limos, in hotel rooms, in low light at nightclubs; dozens are come-

decline among the American public, especially among the many young people whose

We see Kim getting dressed or undressed,

identities and sense of agency are now shaped largely through the lens of a highly commodi-

or “in my closet in Miami trying on clothes.” Kim dons a fur hat fit for a chic

fied celebrity culture. Ironically, there is an element of selfie culture that does not fall into this trap but is barely mentioned in mainstream media. We live in a market-driven age defined as heroic by the conservative Ayn Rand, who

Russian winter, poses with a flashbulb above a toilet (“I love bathroom selfies”), models huge amber sunglasses, blows us a kiss. Often she does snap pics in bathrooms, where other photographers may not dare to tread.

argued in her book The Virtue of Selfishness

(Burt, 2015)

(1964) that self-interest was the highest virtue, and that altruism deserved nothing

more than contempt. Of course, this is an argument that now dominates the discourse of the Republican Party, especially the extremist wing that now controls it and can be seen in the bluster and bloviating rhetoric of Donald Trump, who won the presidency of the United States. This retreat from the public good, compassion, and care for the other, and movement

toward the legitimation of a culture of cruelty and moral indifference is often registered in strange signposts and popularized in the larger culture. For instance, one expression of this new celebrity-fed stupidity can be seen less in the endless prattle about the importance of selfies than in the rampant posturing inherent in selfie culture, most evident in the widely marketed fanfare over reality TV star Kim Kardashian's appropriately named 450-page

book Selfish (2015), the unique selling feature of which is that it contains 2,000 selfies.

Stephen Burt’s (2015) description of the book is too revealing to ignore. He writes that the book:

collects photos of Kim by Kim, from a 1984 Polaroid of little Kim putting an earring on little Khloé to shots from Kim

and Kanye's epic wedding. Most are head-

hither photos or revealing full-body shots. lounging poolside or couchant on beds

There is more at work here than the marketing of a form of civic illiteracy and retrograde consumer consciousness in which the public is taught to mimic the economic success of alleged “brands,” there is also the pedagogical production of a kind of insufferable idiocy that remakes the meaning of agency, promoted endlessly through the celebration of celebrity culture as the new normal of mass entertainment. As Mark Fisher (2009) points out, this suggests a growing testimony

to a commodified society in which “in a world of individualism everyone is trapped within their own feelings, trapped within their own imaginations, . . . and unable to

escape the tortured conditions of solipsism” (p. 74). But there is more. Kim Kardashian (2015S) makes a startling and important comment at one point in the book when she writes, “Since choice or chance gave me a way of life without privacy, I’ll violate my privacy myself, and I’ll have a good time doing it, too”(quoted in Burt) At a time when

the surveillance

state, corporations,

and social media track our comings and goings, the voluntary giving up of privacy by so many people is barely registered as a threat to dissent and freedom.

1436

-«

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

AND

MANUFACTURED

RETHINKING THE FLIGHT FROM PRIVACY AS AN ATTACK ON FREEDOM Under the surveillance state, the greatest threat

one faces is not simply the violation of one’s right to privacy, but the fact that the public is subject to the dictates of authoritarian modes of governance it no longer seems interested

in contesting. It is precisely this existence of

unchecked power and the wider culture of political indifference that puts at risk the broader principles of liberty and freedom, which are fundamental to democracy itself. According to Quentin Skinner and Richard Marshall (2013):

The response of those who are worried about surveillance has so far been too much couched, it seems to me, in terms

of the violation of the right to privacy. Of course it’s true that my privacy has been violated if someone is reading my emails without my knowledge. But my point is that my liberty is also being vio-

lated, and not merely by the fact that someone is reading my emails but also by the fact that someone has the power to do so should they choose. We have to insist that this in itself takes away liberty because it leaves us at the mercy of arbitrary power. It’s no use those who have possession of this power promising that they won't necessarily use it, or will use it only for the common good. What is offensive to liberty is the very existence of such arbitrary power. (Skinner & Marshall, 2013)

The rise of the mainstream appropriation of selfies under the surveillance state is only one register of the neoliberal-inspired flight from privacy. As I have argued elsewhere (Giroux, 2015), the dangers of the surveillance

IDENTITIES

state far exceed the attack on privacy or warrant simply a discussion about balancing security against civil liberties. The critique of the flight from privacy fails to address how the growth of the surveillance state and its appropriation of all spheres of private life are connected to the rise of the punishing state, the militarization of American society, secret prisons, state-sanctioned torture, a growing cul-

ture of violence, the criminalization ofsocial

problems, the depoliticization of public memory, and one of the largest prison systems in the world, all of which, according to Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri (2012)

“are only the most concrete, condensed manifestations of a diffuse security regime, in which we are all interned and enlisted” (p.

23). The authoritarian nature of the corporate-state surveillance apparatus and security

system, notable for what Tom Engelhardt (2013) describes as its “urge to surveil, eavesdrop on, spy on, monitor, record, and save

every communication of any sort on the planet,” can only be fully understood when its ubiquitous tentacles are connected to wider cultures of control and punishment, includ-

ing security-patrolled corridors of public schools, the rise in supermax prisons, the hypermilitarization of local police forces, the rise of the military-industrial-academic complex, and the increasing labeling of dissent as an act of terrorism in the United States (see Giroux, 2011, 2012, 2014). Moreover, it must

be recognized that the surveillance state is at its most threatening when it convinces the public to self-monitor themselves so that selftracking becomes a powerful tool of the apparatus of state spying and control. Selfies may be more than an expression of narcissism gone wild, the promotion of privatization over preserving public and civic culture with their attendant practice of social responsibility. They may also represent the degree to which the ideological and affective

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

spaces of neoliberalism have turned privacy into mimicry of celebrity culture that both abets and is indifferent to the growing surveillance state and its totalitarian revolution,

one that will definitely be televised in an endlessly repeating selfie that owes homage to George Orwell. Once again, it must be stressed that there are registers of representation in selfie culture that point in a different direction. There are elements ofselfie culture that neither subscribe to the Kardashian model of self-indulgence nor limit the potential of an al-

ternative selfie culture to comments by a handful of mainstream feminists talking about photos being self-esteem builders.

There is another trajectory of selfie culture at work that refuses the retreat into a false sense of empowerment and embraces modes of self-representation as a political act intent on redefining the relationship between the per-

sonal and the social in ways that are firmly wedded

to social change. There are non-

mainstream groups that are concerned with far more than building self-esteem in the su-

perficial sense. For example, there are women of color, transgender and disabled people, who are using selfies to promote communi-

ties of healing and empowerment while also challenging a culture of cruelty that marks those who are different by virtue of their age, disability, gender identity, sexual orientation, and race as disposable. These activities have received increased attention from alternative media sites such as Browntourage, The Daily Dot, Fusion, and Viva La Feminista

AND

MANUFACTURED

IDENTITIES

1437

and groups are using selfie culture to expand the parameters of public dialogue, public issues,

and the opportunity for different political identities to be seen and heard. This is a growing movement whose public presence has largely been ignored in the mainstream press because it connects the personal to the task of rewriting notions of self-presentation that stress matters of difference, justice, and shared beliefs and practices aimed at creating more inclusive communities. But this is a small movement when compared to the larger selfie culture caught in the endless display of a kind of depoliticized and unthinking flight from privacy. Hannah Arendt (1968) has written that “Totalitarian domination as a form of government is new in that it is not content with... isolation and destroys private life as well. It bases itself on loneliness, on the experience of not belonging to the world at all, which is

among the most radical and desperate experiences of man” (p. 47S). Selfie culture cannot be viewed as synonymous with totalitarian politics; however, it reorganizes and rearranges private life, and in some instances fights such a political attitude. Yet, under the shadow of an authoritarian state, selfie culture can be used to denigrate the incarcerated, sell

dangerous drugs, shame immigrants, promote bullying, and sexually oppress young girls. The good news is that there is growing evidence that selfie culture can also be used to rewrite the relationship between the personal and the political and, in doing so, can expand the vibrancy of public discourse and work to prevent the collapse of public life. In this case,

SELFIE CULTURE AS A SITE OF STRUGGLE What is crucial to recognize here is that selfie culture itself can be a site of struggle, one that

refuses to become complicit either with the politics of narcissism or the growing culture of surveillance. In this case, various individuals

selfie culture moves away from the isolation and privatization of neoliberal culture and further enables those individuals and groups working to create a formative critical culture that better enables the translation of private troubles into public issues and promotes a

further understanding of how public life affects private experiences. In contrast to the

1438

-«

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

AND

MANUFACTURED

IDENTITIES

mainstream appropriation of selfie culture, this more empowering use of selfies becomes part of an emergent public, dedicated to un-

separated from how mainstream politics and the forces of neoliberalism work to change how people see things, to produce moments of iden-

dermining what Alex Honneth (2009) has

tification, and to define what counts as a viable

called “an abyss of failed sociality” (p. 188). What selfie culture will become, especially under the force of neoliberal public pedagogy, presents a crucial site of struggle to address both the collapse of the public into the private and the rise of the punishing and surveillance state—a fight desperately worth waging.

mode of agency. Such moments point to how valuable it is to recognize how crucial education is to politics.

At the same time, it is crucial to stress that

digital promiscuity is not a virtue or an unproblematic attempt to establish connections with others. On the contrary, it is, within the

current reign of the national security state, a free pass for state and corporate power to spy on its citizens by encouraging their flight from privacy. Privacy rights are crucial as one bulwark against the surveillance state. When the public is forced to police the realm of the private, the suppression of dissent becomes all the more formidable and paves the way for a range of antidemocratic practices, policies, and modes of governance. As long as selfie culture lacks a self-consciousness and political understanding about what the implications are in a surveillance state for giving up one’s privacy, in the effort to produce a new politics of representation, this culture will speak less to new modes of resistance than to the practice of becoming complicitous with a new mode of state terrorism and a neoliberal reign of oppression. Any attempt to address the rise of selfie culture globally has to recognize the larger and more comprehensive politics and modes of public pedagogy that shape a given society. Matters of power, inequality, and politics are crucial in determining the values, practices, and impact any given technology will have on a social order. The struggle over how one fashions the self, constructs a viable iden-

tity, produces representations of oneself, and enables a particular form of agency cannot be

The issue is not how we view ourselves, but

how we understand who we are in relation to others and the larger public good. Any notion of selfie culture or the project of self-fashioning that does not press for the claims of economic and social justice will fall prey to the morbid symptoms of a society in which the self is removed from the worldliness of the public realm and is destined to wither in the shadow ofan authoritarian society. Lowenthal (1987) argued that “the modern system of

terror amounts to the atomization of the individual” in which “human beings live in a state

of stupor, in a moral coma” (pp. 181-182). The struggle over selfie culture will have to face the challenges posed by privatization and commodification and, in doing so, will

struggle against rather than heighten the atomization of the individual. This suggests a struggle over not only the conditions of agency but the future of democracy itself. FURTHER

READING

Arendt, H. (1968). Ideology and terror: A novel form of government. In The origins of totalitarian-

ism (pp. 460-482). New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Bauman, Z., & Donskis, L. (2013). Moral blindness: the loss ofsensitivity in liquid modernity. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Bauman, Z., & Lyons, D. (2013). Liquid surveillance. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

Crary, J. (2013). 24/7: Late capitalism and the ends of sleep. Brooklyn, NY: Verso Press. Evans, B., & Giroux, H. A. (2015). Disposable Futures:

The seduction of violence in the age of the spectacle. San Francisco, CA: City Lights.

PUBLIC

PEDAGOGY

Fisher, M. (2009). Capitalist realism: Is there no alternative? Winchester, UK: Zero Books. Giroux, H. A. (2001). Public spaces, private lives: Beyond the culture of cynicism. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Harvey, D. (2005S). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press,

Judt, T. (2010). Ill fares the land. New York, NY: Penguin Press.

Lasch, C. (1991). The culture of narcissism: American life in an age of diminishing expectations. New York, NY: Norton.

AND

MANUFACTURED

IDENTITIES

«

1439

Giroux, H. A. (2012). The twilight of the social. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Press.

Giroux, H. A. (2014). The violence of organized forgetting. San Francisco, CA: City Lights. Giroux, H. A. (2015). Totalitarian paranoia in the post-Orwellian surveillance state. Truthout. Retrieved from http://www.truth-out.org/opinion /item/2165S6-totalitarian-paranoia-in-the-post -orwellian-surveillance-state Greenwald, G. (2015). No place to hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. surveillance state. New York, NY: Picador. Hardt, M., & Negri, A. Declaration. (2012). New

York, NY: Argo Navis. Honneth, A. (2009). Pathologies of reason. New

REFERENCES

Amin, S. (2001). Imperialism and globalization.

Monthly Review, 53(2), 6. Arendt, H. (2013). Hannah Arendt: The last interview and other conversations. Brooklyn, NY: Melville House.

York, NY: Columbia University Press. Kardashian, K. (2015). Selfish. New York, NY: Universe. Lowenthal, L. (1987). Atomization of man. In L. Lowenthal (Ed.), False prophets: Studies in authoritarianism. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.

BBC News. (June 7, 2013). Self-portraits and social

Maddeaux, S. (July 31, 2015). The rise of richface:

media: The rise of the “selfie.” BBC News Magazine.

Why so many young women are getting cosmetic

Retrieved

from

http://www.bbc.com/news

/magazine-22511650

Biressi, A., & Nunn, H. (Spring 2014). Selfishness in

austerity times. Soundings, S6(1), 54-66. Bourdieu, P., & Grass, G. (2002). The “progressive”

restoration: A Franco-German dialogue. New Left

surgery. Globe and Mail. Retrieved from http:// www.theglobeandmail.com/life/fashion-and -beauty/beauty/the-rise-of-richface-why-more -and-more-young-women-are-getting-cosmetic -surgery/article2$756128/ Massey, D. (2013). Vocabularies of the economy. Soundings, 54.

Review, 14, 62-77.

Burt, S. (July 27, 2015). Kim, Caitlyn, and the people we want to see.” New Yorker. Retrieved from

Murphy, K. (October 4, 2014). We want privacy but can’t stop sharing. New York Times. Retrieved

http: //www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural

from

-comment/kim-caitlyn-and-the-people-we

/sunday-review/we-want-privacy-but-cant

-stop-sharing.html

-want-to-see

Dorfman, A. (February 3, 2014). Repression by any other name. Guernica. Retrieved from https://

www.guernicamag.com/features/repression-by -any-other-name/ Engelhardt, T. (November 12, 2013). Tomgram: Engelhardt, a surveillance state scorecard. Retrieved from http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/17$771/

Feffer, J. (June 4, 2014). Participatory totalitarianism.

CommonDreams.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/05

Retrieved

from http://

www.commondreams.org/views/2014/06/04 /participatory-totalitarianism Giroux, H. A. (2011). Zombie politics and culture in the

age ofcasino capitalism. New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Parramore,

L. S. (December 30, 2014). Can we

escape narcissism in America? S possible antidotes.

Alternet.

Retrieved

from

http://www

.alternet.org/ culture/ can-we-escape-narcissism

-america-5S-possible-antidotes Pilger,J.(February 13, 2014). “Good” and “bad” war

and the struggle of memory against forgetting. New Statesman. Retrieved from http://www .newstatesman.com/2014/02/good-korea-bad -korea Reaney,

P. (November,

2014). Nip, tuck, click:

Demand for U.S. plastic surgery rises in selfie era. Reuters.

Retrieved

from

http://www.reuters

1440

-

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

.com/article/life-selfies-surgery-idUSLIN

The Structural Transformation of the Public

OSW1FI20141129

Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society (Habermas, 1989). A public sphere, in

SandlerJ.,Person, E. S., & Fonagy, P. (1991). Freud's “On narcissism: An introduction. New Haven, CT:

Yale University Press. Skinner, Q. & Marshall, R. (July 26, 2013). Liberty, liberalism, and surveillance: A historic overview.

Open Democracy. Retrieved from https://www .opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/quentin-skinner -richard-marshall/liberty-liberalism-and -surveillance-historic-overview

St, Claire, J. (May 23-25, 2014). The economics of

short, is any site where free and open communication steers judgment according to deliberative principles, in contrast to methods of decision-making steered by undemocratic forms of power like money or status. Structural Transformation responded to a number of cultural currents: the post-World War II reckoning with Nazi atrocities, the only quasi-

www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/23/the

successful imposition of democracy on previously fascist regimes, the rise of student

-economics-of-contempt/.

movements in the 1960s, and the growth of

contempt. CounterPunch. Retrieved from http://

Stiglitz, J. E. (December 21, 2013). In no one we trust. New York Times. Retrieved from http://

opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/21 /in-no-one-we-trust/

Werleman, C. J. (June 18, 2014). Americans are dangerously politically ignorant—The numbers are shocking. Salon. Retrieved from http://www .salon.com/2014/06/18/the_shocking

numbers

_americans_are_dangerously_ignorant_on

technical systems that appeared to defy democratic oversight. Structural Transformation was also shaped by the continued intellectual efforts to theorize socioeconomic organiza-

tion beyond capitalism (spearheaded by Habermas's Frankfurt School colleagues Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, and Herbert Marcuse) and the rise in the centrality of

_politics partner/ Wilderson, F. B. II. (2012). Red, white, and black. London, US: Duke University Press.

communication as a meaningful category of analysis (following pragmatists like Charles

Williams, R. (1967). Preface to the second edition.

losophers of language like Ludwig Wittgen-

In R. Williams (Ed.), Communications (pp. 15-16).

stein and Ernst Cassirer). This article traces

Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.

Habermas's development of the bourgeois public sphere, major critiques of early public sphere theory, later uptake and revisions of the public sphere, more recent advancements in theorizing about publics and counterpublics, and future directions for research on public sphere(s), publics, and counterpublics. In developing his theory of the public sphere, Habermas departed from an earlier generation of critical theorists in four ways (for a

Henry A. Giroux

PUBLIC SPHERE(S), PUBLICS, AND COUNTERPUBLICS INTRODUCTION: JURGEN HABERMAS AND THE BOURGEOIS PUBLIC SPHERE

The phrase public sphere is most closely associated with Jiirgen Habermas, a German critical theorist strongly associated with the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research, and

his landmark book, first published in 1962,

Peirce and George Herbert Mead, and phi-

broad overview, see Ingram, 2010). First,

Habermas expressed skepticism about the immanent critique favored by his predecessors in favor of transcendent critique. Immanent critique, for Habermas, lacked the critical distance necessary to gain perspective; sometimes,

the values of a society, like Nazi Germany,

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

.«

1441

offered limited resources for social transfor-

integrative, legitimizing force, informed by an

mation. What, then, are the conditions that

understanding of reasoning as a reflexive process grounded in communication. Structural Transformation expands on this thesis by extracting and recuperating democratic practices from the ideological trappings of the early modern bourgeois public sphere. Habermas does not imply that the ideals of the bourgeois public sphere were fully real-

would allow communicative interaction to generate transcendent principles capable of guiding public life through reflection and deliberation? Habermas has devoted much of his career to answering this question, and his early work on the bourgeois public sphere planted the seeds for his later work on the subject of communication and democratic theory. Second, Habermas rejected the Hegelian and Marxist philosophies that presumed the contradictions of capitalism would inevitably resolve themselves in the direction of socialism. For Habermas, this approach was inadequately grounded in empirical social science and failed to account for the transformations of late capitalism that appeared capable of indefinitely forestalling revolution. Third, Habermas moved away from

the individualistic, subject-centered philosophy that had animated much early critical theory, and indeed, much European philosophy of the modern era. For Habermas, knowledge—of the self, of the other, of the world

around us—is produced not through individual sense impressions but through communicative interaction. Fourth, Habermas

was more ‘tempered in his response to the growth of science, technology, and expertise than many of his Frankfurt School colleagues. While Habermas is cautious about the undemocratic potential of technical systems, he is also a pragmatist concerning their existence. Ifa return to more pastoral times is impossible, then Habermas argues that the more

pragmatic approach to Heidegger's question concerning technology must involve creating new mechanisms of democratic oversight to check the power of new technical systems.

Habermas aims to complete modernity’s

unfinished project (d’Entréves & Benhabib, 1997) by identifying public deliberation as an

ized in their historical context, nor does he

suggest that we uncritically import the norms of the bourgeois public sphere into contemporary deliberative practice. Rather, he suggests that the social imaginary—the way that individuals think of themselves, their interactions with others, and the institutions of the

broader society—undergirding the bourgeois public sphere has powerfully shaped the self-concept of citizens in ways that destabilize undemocratic modes of power (Taylor, 2004). At the core of this social imaginary is a belief in the power of critical publicity as a democratic replacement for the representative publicity that characterized the aristocrats in the European tradition. Monarchs and the small class of aristocrats that domi-

nated the Middle Ages cultivated an aura about their royal bodies through ritual displays of power

involving insignia, dress, demeanor,

and formal address. This publicity was exercised by king or lord as a status attribute—a public display of the king’s body was a representation of divine authority. Against this backdrop of representative publicity, and amids the growth of capitalism, the Protestant Revolution, and the diffu-

sion of the printing press, the bourgeois public

sphere coalesced. During the 1Sth and 16th centuries, a new social group—the bourgeois—emerged as a distinct class with specific interests. This gradually precipitated a cultural shift in identity, from what one was—a nobleman, with a specific lineage that granted power and authority—to what one produced.

1442

-

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

This shift in identity coevolved with the increase in traffic about commodities and news. In 1531, Antwerp established the first perma-

people come together as a public; they soon claimed the public sphere regulated from above against the public authori-

nent trade fair, which in turn spurred the development of three institutions as a way to

ties themselves, to engage them in a

manage the continuous flow of information from the fair: stock markets, the postal service, and the press. A permanent

state appa-

ratus, often mercantilist in practice, welled up as a way to manage this circulation of information. As these processes were unfold-

ing, public and private became more distinct, with the public sphere initially coming to mean the “sphere of public authority” in the

sense of state power (Habermas, 1989, p. 18) and the private sphere referring to activities that were not subject to public authority, namely the activity of the market and civil so-

debate over the general rules governing relations in the basically privatized but publicly relevant sphere of commodity exchange and social labor. The medium of this political confrontation was peculiar and without historical precedent: people’s public use of their reason. (Habermas, 1989, p. 27)

The very name bourgeois public sphere poses some translational challenges. Bourgeois, translated from biirgerlichen, has etymological origins in the 16th-century Old French borjois or “town dweller,” itself borrowed from the

the center of economic production eventu-

Frankish—burg root, meaning city. By the 18th century, the term had absorbed connotations

ally gave way to commercial enterprise not centered in the home, freeing the home to be

of middle-class taste, social striving, and capital accumulation that Marx would lambaste,

reconceived as an intimate sphere populated by the conjugal family, where reproduction and inculcation into bourgeois values occurred. The private sphere, then, came to refer to relations managed by the market. Public, private, and intimate spheres were connected by the press. Initially oriented around exchanging information about commodity prices, the

overshadowing the connotation of bourgeois /biirger as one accustomed to managing the challenges of living together in cities. Public sphere poses more significant challenges, derived as it is from the German Offentlichkeit, a word whose direct translation into English

press matured into an organ for instruction,

turning the adjective backinto anoun). Publicity may be the best English translation of the term, though the negative connotations of publicity led early Habermas translators to adopt the phrase public sphere instead (Peters,

ciety. The model of the oikos, or household, as

criticism, and reviews. The press became the

means through which bourgeois subjects deepened their sense of interiority and humanity, a site through which state authorities and citizens interacted, an agenda-setter for public conversation, and an avenue for differences in opinion to be negotiated as they circulated through public texts. Habermas characterized the emergence of the bourgeois public sphere thusly:

The bourgeois public sphere may be conceived above all as the sphere of private

would be openliness (offen- “open”; -lich, “ly,” rendering a noun an adjective; -keit, “ness,”

1993). The “sphere” language is often interpreted as an indication that the public sphere necessarily implies a spatial dimension. The French translation of Offentlichkeit as “espace public,” or-public space, further consolidates the referent of the public sphere to space. However, “sphere” ought to be understood in the sense offield of argument; thus, public sphere should be understood as referring to

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

«

1443

those branches of communication about the challenges of living life in concert with others (Goodnight, 1982). Public spaces are potentially part of the public sphere, but the public sphere is better conceived in more processual terms as coming into being with the circulation of civic communication through a com-

France's salons provided a contact space for the old aristocrats and the new bourgeois— men and women—to mix. England developed

plex, multitiered latticework of institutions,

eties were slower to build up, but they, too,

associations, press outlets, and citizen inter-

ultimately evolved as sites where subjects spoke across their differences in the vernacular. The common features across these culturally diverse sites of communication were a disregard for status, a problematization of previously unquestioned areas of life, and a belief in the public as inclusive in principle. Rather than defer to rank, participants prided themselves on treating each other as equals capable of judging arguments on their own merits, without defaulting to social identity or position for evaluation. Rather than defer to the authority of the Church and State to interpret the social world, participants felt emboldened to surface and discuss their own perceived problems. Rather than defer to the power of the nobility in discussing culture, participants convinced themselves that participation was in theory open to anyone who could afford to engage with the cultural life of the city. For example, while the nobility were historically given the privilege of balcony seating at the theater, balcony seating eventually became open to anyone who could afford it. These criteria are best thought of as useful fictions

action (Habermas, 1974). The opposite of Offentlichkeit is secrecy, not privacy, implying that open and free deliberation among citizens is preferable to decisions made by the whim of authority or naked self-interest, especially as these two modes of power might be exercised in closed deliberations among decision makers. The aristocratic backdrop loomed large in the development of offentliches Rasonnement, public reason, or, as it is often translated, “rational-critical debate.” Rather than embrace the naive, Kantian-

inflected, Enlightenment sense of rationality, Habermas understands public reason as a mode of reflexive criticism with roots in Hegel’s reinterpretation of the Ancient Greek sophists. Critical publicity—the thematization and articulation of collective problems and open consideration of facts, definitions, values, and

policies related to them—was seen as capable of dissolving domination through reason (Habermas, 1989, p. 28). Such critical faculties were idealized as being forged in the inti-

mate sphere, as one deepened a sense of self and audience by engaging with the world of letters—novels, newspapers, pamphlets, personal correspondence, and the rest of the burgeoning print culture. The literary public sphere provided a training ground through which one clarified one’s own individual experience as a subject by cultivating taste and judgment that could then be transposed to the institutions of the political public sphere. These institutions of the bourgeois public sphere emerged in culturally specific ways.

a robust coffeehouse culture, where shopkeepers, editors, intellectuals, and artists would, in a male-only environment, discuss current events

and artistic endeavors. Germany's table soci-

that, indeed, had consequential effect in de-

stabilizing aristocratic authority, even as they failed to be fully enacted in the democratic way that they were envisioned at the time. Clearly, social identities, especially those related to class, gender, and ethnicity, compli-

cated the self-understanding of the bourgeois as engaged in emancipatory practice. The ret-

rograde social norms of the time explicitly and implicitly curtailed the participation of nonnormative and nondominant subjectivities.

1444.

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

Nonetheless, the participants in the bourgeois public sphere experienced their own participation in these activities as a radical break from the strict hierarchy that had constituted most prior recorded history. Habermas identifies these criteria as the “valuable kernel in the flawed ideology of the bourgeois public sphere” (Calhoun, 1992, p. 2), arguing that these principles can be extracted from their problematic origins and repurposed for contemporary democratic culture. The analysis laid out in Structural Transformation is notable in terms of scope, account-

ing for how significant changes in political institutions, economic relations, architecture,

be identified by Karl Marxas a species of false consciousness foisted on society to promote transparently bourgeois interests does not

undercut the role of public opinion in providing a reasonable alternative to decision making by aristocratic authority. Even Marx believed that the “weapons of publicity forged by the bourgeoisie” could be turned against bourgeois interests (Habermas, 1989, p. 126).

What Habermas characterizes as the social and structural transformation of the public sphere has roots in three phenomena. First, bythe late 19th century, there began a “mutual infiltration” of public and private spheres. This “refeudalization of the public sphere”

family structure, media technology, artistic

(Habermas, 1989, p. 195) reintroduced state

genre, criticism, and subjectivity all shaped the growth of the bourgeois public sphere. One considerable consequence of the communicative interaction made possible by the

authority into private relations, through the regulation of capitalism, state contracts with industry, and the growth of the welfare state.

sense of the people, and common voice were terms often invoked to reflect the collective

State and society interpenetrated to such an extent that the previous distinction of public and private spheres no longer obtained. The second cause of the structural transformation of the public sphere was a change in the role of the intimate sphere. The intimate sphere of the family became more private but lost exclusive control over child-rearing with the rise of public education. Meanwhile, the world of work became articulated as a distinct sphere

judgment of citizens (Habermas, 1989, p. 64).

that, with the rise of large industrial organiza-

Public opinion began to gain traction around 1750, quickly becoming the dominant term that participants in the public sphere used to characterize the accumulative output of their deliberations. Public opinion in this sense departed from mere common sense or accepted folkways, as it was seen to be produced through

tions, reproduced many of the democratically unaccountable power dynamics of feudalism.

bourgeois public sphere is the crystallization of the belief in reasoned public opinion (Habermas, 1989, p. 89). Habermas traces

how public opinion emerged out of a soup of terms that attempted to capture the aggregate feelings of a people: general opinion, common opinion, public spirit or spirit of the public,

a more rigorous process of critical testing.

Just as the invisible hand of the market had become naturalized in economic relations, so

did public opinion come to be interpreted as the only legitimate rudder to orient liberal democracies. That public opinion would later

Finally, Habermas explains that the rise of

mass culture precipitated a shift from a culture-debating public to a culture-consuming public. While the early commodification of culture had produced the formal equality necessary for the growth of the bourgeois public sphere, capitalism’s interest in extracting value ultimately resulted in a depoliticized consumer culture oriented around mass-produced cultural artifacts. As Habermas explains, “public, rational-critical debate had a tendency

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

to be replaced by consumption, and the web of public communication unraveled into acts of individuated reception” (Habermas, 1989, p. 161). Since bourgeois subjectivity was idealized as being richly developed by engaging with the world of letters, “interiority was hollowed out by the mass media” and mass production (Habermas, 1989, p. 162). The literary and political periodicals were replaced by advertiser-driven magazines in most house-

holds, “noncommittal group activities” like going to the movies or listening to the radio supplanted the raucous conversations in the

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

1445

empirically and normatively problematic; a focus on reasoned communication elides the importance of bodies in public deliberation; a thin understanding of media theory drives a preference for print culture over electronic mass media; and the knowledge claims thought to

emerge from deliberation are merely reflections of power relations. On Multiple Publics and Public Spheres. While Habermas's explanation of the public

sphere is, as the subtitle of Structural Transformation makes clear, an identification of a “cat-

coffeehouses, and the administration of public

egory of bourgeois society,” critics often take

conversation by elites squeezed out the more organic agenda setting prized by the bourgeois public sphere. While a return to the norms of the bourgeois public sphere is neither pos-

issue with his elevation of bourgeois norms

sible nor desirable, Habermas's tracing of this

of communication and sociopolitical structures over other alternatives. One thread of this critique involves registering what Nancy Fraser (1990) called “actually existing democracy,’ (p. 57) the presence of multiple publics,

transformation identified themes that have since animated critical and cultural studies: the in-

including “subaltern counterpublics” (p. 67)

fluence of advertising and profit-motives on

organized around marginalized identities, which

the press, the centrality of horizontal networks

overlapped and competed for influence with the bourgeois public sphere. Publics consti-

of communication to democratic cultures, and

the dangers in allowing powerful actors to orchestrate patterns of communication.

“THE PUBLIC SPHERE” AND ITS DISCONTENTS

Given the centrality of the public sphere to theories of classical liberalism and democratic theory, and the ubiquity of the public sphere conceit in describing the power of public communication driven by citizen-subjects, few contemporary concepts have drawn as much critical attention. Major criticisms can be constellated around five themes: a privileging of the bourgeois public sphere ignores the potential of communicative interaction in multiple public spheres to provide emancipatory practice; the bedrock assumption of a distinction between public and private sphere is

tuted by women, the poor, peasants, and people from marginalized ethnicities, religions, and nationalities coexisted with the bour-

geois public sphere in early modern Europe and generated their own communicative norms, which deserve scrutiny and potential recuperation (see Ryan, 1992; also Eley, 1993). Indeed, to take the bourgeois ideals of rational

and informed communication as the normative core of democratic theory is to center a

historically and culturally specific mode of interaction as a universal to which all communication should aspire. Different models of communication,

materializing

in nonbour-

geois publics, orient democratic communica-

tion otherwise. For example, Oskar Negt and Alexander Kluge (2016) theorized the proletarian public sphere in counterpoint to Habermas, arguing that the abstraction from specific

1446

+

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

feature

associated with nonintimate spheres (Fraser,

of the bourgeois public sphere worked to

1985). Furthermore, the presumption that economic relations are freely entered into (tendentious even in the official, private sphere of the market because of the power of economic compulsion) is only possible by ignoring the reproductive labor that takes place in the

conditions, which were a common

conceal the power of capital. Rita Felski (1989)

sketched a view of the feminist public sphere as being oriented internally toward creating collective consciousness of women’s historical marginalization while being externally oriented toward challenging patriarchal institutions and cultural norms. Catherine Squires (2002), drawing on the various black public spheres that historically existed in the United States, showed that publics act in more complicated ways than merely “counter” to the dominant public. Enclave publics withdraw from wider arenas of public deliberation to mature and hone perspectives in a safer space where perspectives can be taken seriously, as in the case of many African American associations in the Jim Crow South. Satellite publics, like the Nation of Islam, are more inter-

ested in cultivating a distinct group identity and building institutions that seek independence from the dominant culture. The picture that theorists of public spheres paint, in the wake of Habermas, is of a rich, tumultuous,

complex web of publics competing for attention and navigating administrative institutions.

On the Division Between Public and Private. At the core of Habermas’s analysis of the self-understanding of the bourgeois is the strong distinction between the different spheres of human activity. The intimate sphere of the conjugal family and the private sphere of the free market were idealized as sites where,

respectively, personal subjectivities were organized around noninstrumental goals and economic relations were freely negotiated. Both claims are questionable when taking into consideration the gendered structure of the family and market. Patriarchal family structures are often riven with coercion, violence, and exploitation; they are, in other words, shaped by the

very instrumentalism that Habermas typically

household. Indeed, the activities of the bour-

geois public sphere could only be envisioned by male subjects who had shed responsibilities for child rearing. Normatively, the publicprivate divide posed some challenges for contemporary democratic theory. The ascent of the bourgeois public sphere coincided with a change in gender roles, such that public

became articulated to men and masculine ways of communication and private became associated with women and feminine ways of communication (Landes, 1995; Young, 1990). Thus, what came to be known as public reason, theorized as a universal mode of communication by bourgeois interlocutors, was actually a reflection of male, European, class-privileged particularity. The public-private split, then, posed difficulties for theorizing participation across differences of identity. The second wave feminist rallying cry, that “the personal is political,” further troubled the easy distinction between these two spheres made by the bourgeois.

On the Presence of Bodies. ‘That standpoints could be abstracted from bodies was a central premise of the bourgeois public sphere. Members of the Black Public Sphere Collective (1995) observed, in tandem with feminist and queer critics, that publicity is forged not out of reason alone, but a range of

embodied interactions. While the civil rights struggle in-the United States featured public reason, the phenomena of mass protests, sitins, jailings, and music created modes of publicity that were not legible within the imaginary of rational-critical debate. Historically

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

marginalized groups, locked out of the dominant mass media press, have not had access to the kinds of publicity favored by the bourgeois. Consequently, in addition to creating their own ecology of press outlets, they cultivated embodied ways of being in public together capable of fulfilling functions theorized by the bourgeois public sphere: namely, transforming how people pay attention to social controversies. Queer theorists like Eric O. Clarke

(2000) and Ann Cvetkovich (2003) have further eroded assumptions about the norma-

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

«

1447

These accounts called into question the rosier description of the bourgeois world of letters

conveyed by Habermas and suggested that the mass media ecology was, also, a place where opinions were voiced, negotiated, and transformed.

On

Power/Knowledge.

‘The genesis of

the bourgeois public sphere in the early modern era, and Habermas's explicit goal of rehabilitating some of the guiding principles of modernity, attracted criticism from the diverse

tive elevation of reason, viewed as an act of cognition, over affective experiences that work

vantage points emanating from postmodernist

on and through bodies. The quest of participants in the bourgeois public sphere to generate legitimacy for positions arrived at through rational-critical debate can also be problematized through queer critiques of normativity (Berlant & Warner, 1998).

of Michel Foucault (collected in Rabinow,

On Media and Cultural Studies. ‘The theory of the mass media and mass culture voiced by Habermas’s predecessors in the Frankfurt School, Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer, was too quickly absorbed into

the theory of the bourgeois public sphere laid out in Structural Transformation, according to more contemporary scholars of media and culture. The Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, more colloquially known as “the Birmingham School,’ initiated under the lead-

ership of Stuart Hall an approach to media and culture that did not view early print culture with nostalgia, nor did it demonize the mass media of film, television, and radio (see Hall,

Hobson, Lowe, & Willis, 2003). Rather than assuming that the advent of the electronic mass media produced merely a “culture-consuming” society, scholars working out of this tradition drew on ethnography, reception theory, and other qualitative methods to see how people actually made meaning out of the programming they engaged with through mass media.

and post-structuralist perspectives. The work 1984) engages themes of authorship, discipline, and the possibility of transhistorical research directly related to Habermas's account of the bourgeois public sphere. For Foucault, the fetishization of the author is a consequence of modernity rather than, as Habermas would interpret it, an enabler of it. Authors are not solitary geniuses of creative production working on the clean slate of culture; rather, they are points of articulation that reflect power

relations of the culture they are embedded within. Thus, that argument which is proffered as a knowledge claim put forth by an author to gain the assent of others—the fundamental activity of the bourgeois public sphere—ought to be viewed skeptically as invariably imbued with power. Foucault theorizes that the flipside of publicity is discipline, a mode of power that aligns knowledge with dominant power relations. As much as the bourgeois wants to believe in the emancipatory power of their own rational faculties, disciplinary power works to

include and exclude, both formally (by limiting participation to the leisured and privileged) and informally (by placing parameters on the sayable). Consequently, for Foucault, there is only limited value in trying to recuperate normative values from other historical and cultural traditions for contemporary use.

1448

«

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

PUBLICS,

AND

REVISIONS AND LATER UPTAKE OF THE “PUBLIG SPHERE

Habermas’s Structural Transformation circulated in German since publication in the early 1960s, of course, but the 1989 translation into

English brought the text to a wider audience and precipitated a renewed round of critical engagement. Craig Calhoun’s (1992) edited volume, Habermas and the Public Sphere, com-

bines salient empirical and normative criticisms of the bourgeois public sphere alongside an extended response from Habermas. In this response, Habermas concedes many of the criticisms of the bourgeois public sphere while affirming the broad outlines of the project. Indeed, copious historical research in the in-

tervening years had confirmed the rise of an associational culture politicized through the press with important consequences for the growth of democratic institutions. Yet, as Haber-

mas explains, he did not fully consider the possibility of the bourgeois public sphere as being constituted through the exclusion of others, just as he failed to emphasize the multiplicity and dynamism of multiple publics organized through the press and other sites of civic engagement. The bourgeois public sphere was founded on a fiction of inclusion while grounded in the reality of exclusion; nonetheless, Habermas argues that the communi-

cative norms of the bourgeois public sphere contain the possibility of self-transformation. For example, while women might have been

historically excluded from many public sphere activities, feminist critiques have exposed

the patriarchal foundations of the public sphere and thus forged a way to make another public sphere possible. Similarly, Habermas explains that critics from media and cultural studies

have convincingly overturned the mid-20thcentury sociology and early Frankfurt School influence that produced, in his words, too

“simplistic” an interpretation of the new mass

COUNTERPUBLICS

media (Habermas, 1992, p. 438). Habermas's

acceptance and integration of critique exhibits his faith in the public reason imagined by the bourgeois public sphere, though critics continue to question whether or not theories of public spheres can escape their origins enough to transform themselves into vehicles for social justice and democratic practice. Elaboration of the work initiated with Structural Transformation occupied Habermas throughout his career (although it should

be noted that many critics of Habermas and the bourgeois public sphere only engage with Structural Transformation). Toward a Rational

Society: Student Protest, Science, and Society

(1971) shows the importance of putting contemporary techno-science under democratic authority. Legitimation Crisis (Habermas, 1975) made the influential distinction between the lifeworld (the social realm of interactions with family and culture) and system (institutional

authority), warning that the contemporary system of administrative power threatened to colonize the lifeworld and displace alternative values. The Theory of Communicative Action (1981) was an effort to firm up the foundations of critical theory, not in a specific historical moment as Structural Transformation does, but in the presumed rationality of communication itself. Widely panned by communication scholars for envisioning an “ideal speech situation” and retaining a functionalist view of communication, The Theory of Communicative Action nonetheless boldly aimed to place communication at the very center of any critical theory of society. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory ofLaw and

Democracy (1996) is widely seen as Habermas's most detailed explication of a public sphere theory for late capitalism. Habermas explicated a two-track model of democracy reliant on the sluicing of opinion from associational influencers working on the periphery toward the core of administrative institutions.

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

His contemporary diagnosis of publics and their problems was that, while spontaneous communication on the periphery is vital for democratic legitimacy, the political economy of the mass media constrains the free circulation of opinion. Finally, Habermas turned his attention to the possibility of a supranational public sphere in The Postnational Constellation (2001). Habermas is a key intellectual architect of the European Union, a transnational

administrative organization theoretically steered by deliberative forums. Habermas's conception of the public sphere is a key concept connecting scholarly research across the disciplines of communication,

English, political science, media and cultural studies, sociology, philosophy, and history. Among the copious amount of scholarship engaging with the public sphere concept, three books stand out as both exemplary and relevant for critical-cultural studies. James Bohman’s (1996) Public Deliberation: Pluralism, Complexity, and Democracy was indebted to Habermas's work but aimed to synthesize the theoretical defense of deliberative democracy in a way that shed the historical specificity of the bourgeois public sphere and the quasi-proceduralism of Habermas's later

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

«

1449

produce deliberative inequalities, Bohman has advocated for a combination of institutional

reforms (like campaign finance reform) and a mobilization of collective action to address social divides. To the charge that political institutions and the publics that interrelate with them are so complex and specialized as to defy deliberative solutions, Bohman has responded in a Deweyan spirit, with a call to link the core administrative actors with more peripheral actors through public hearings, open debate,

and the development of what he calls “deliberative consensus,’ the willingness to continue

in the process of deliberation simply because it follows deliberative principles (p. 184). Finally, Bohman addressed the role of deep-seated biases and ideologies in foreclosing the invention of different possibilities in public deliberation (a version of Foucault’s observation

about power and knowledge). For Bohman, “crucial discourse moments” created by social critics or collective movements disclosed new experiences, critiques, and juxtapositions that

facilitated new meanings and new publics

(p. 211). Although unlikely to satisfy the harsh-

work. For Bohman, deliberation referred to

est critics of the public sphere concept, Bohman has blended theoretical principles and practical reforms that might credibly enhance the power of deliberation to shape civic life.

“the way in which the practical reasoning of agents enters into political decision making” (Bohman, 1996, p. 2), so Bohman was especially attuned to how democratic deliberation

The Rhetoric ofPublics and Public Spheres contested the late-20th-century tendency to collapse publics into public opinion polls, a

generates legitimacy for decisions made in the name of the people. While no panacea for what ails a society, the dialogical basis of deliberative democracy tends to improve the quality of reasoning while making speakers “accountable and answerable to one another” (p. 17). A valuable contribution that Bohman made was in articulating sophisticated responses to three prevalent criticisms of public deliberation in the context of the late 20th century. Against the charge that social inequities

Gerard A. Hauser’s (1999) Vernacular Voices:

phenomenon that Habermas, too, detected at

the end of Structural Transformation. Such a collapse denies how, in Hauser’s terms, pub-

lics’ opinions are always evolving as they engage with each other through “vernacular rhetoric”

in the “reticulate public sphere” (Hauser, 1999, p. 12). In locating the action of democracy

in everyday conversation and sense-making rather than in the institutional rhetoric that was long featured at the center of rhetorical studies, Hauser underlined the processual

1450

-

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

political repetitions-in-transformation’ (p. 48).

character of the formation of publics, the mutual imbrication of reason and emotion

In other words, through the processes of com-

in rhetorical interaction, and the dangers that

munication, argumentation, discussion, debate,

abstraction poses for discussing problems that are particular in nature. Consequently, Hauser proposed a rhetorical model of public spheres as an alternative to Habermas's model of the public sphere, premised on his theory of communicative action. A rhetorical public

and a whole range or other kinds of rhetorical production, citizens should have the power to transform received understandings of the

sphere (a) is discourse-based rather than group

or place-based; (b) replaces the communicative norm of rationality with the rhetorical norm of reasonableness; (c) is cognizant of how

local conversation constitutes larger arenas of discourse; and (d) values communication that produces shared judgments. Hauser's observations about the significance of the reticulate public sphere, a network of vernacular rhetoric that fuels the development of publics and public opinion, became even more salient with the widespread diffusion of digitally networked communication technologies in the early 21st century. Seyla Benhabib’s (2008) Another Cosmopolitanism is one final example of how Habermas's work on the public sphere opened up new lines of inquiry for scholars at the intersection of democratic political theory and critical-cultural

law, rights, and culture. Democratic iterations

can be contrasted with the authoritative pronouncements often offered by the administrative state. Decisions made by the administrative state without preceding democratic iterations lose the opportunity for public learning to be set in motion and for legitimacy to be secured. Benhabib’s case study of the French state’s decision to ban, with minimal public debate, the wearing of headscarves by Muslim women is an example ofa lost opportunity for expanding the imaginations of different publics through iterations of communication. THEORIZING PUBLICS AND COUNTERPUBLICS Fraser’s (1990) theorization of subaltern coun-

terpublics in the wake of Habermas’s work generated significant interest in how counterpublics differed from and related to publics. Robert Asen (2000) explained how counter-

studies. Like Habermas, Benhabib is centrally interested in how to generate cosmopolitan norms in a postmetaphysical, post-nation-state

publics are typically understood by scholars as persons, places, or topics. Counterpublics are often thought to be groups with an opposi-

context. Her solution is tightly linked to the cultivation of public spheres where jurisgenerative processes and democratic iterations are the engines that power deliberative episodes. The notion of jurisgenerative processes “permits us to conceptualize those moments when a space emerges in the public sphere when principles and norms that undergird democratic will become permeable and fluid to new semantic contexts, which enable the augmentation of the meaning of rights” (Benhabib, 2008, p. 50). Jurisgenerative processes rely on democratic

tional focus, as in an activist group or a group

iterations, or the “linguistic, legal, cultural, and

of historically marginalized people united by a common experience of oppression. Alterna-

tively, counterpublics can be seen as physically co-present in a place, as in the audience of a lecture or rally. Finally, counterpublics might be understood as individuals organized around a certain topic, as is the case with protests or letter writing campaigns on a specific cause. While each of these approaches foregrounds an element of counterpublic activity, linking counterpublics to persons, places, or topics also poses risks. Seeing counterpublics as linked

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

.«

1451

to persons risks a reductive essentialism. For example, Phaedra Pezzullo’s (2003) examination of toxic tours showed how counterpublics typically engage in a range of cultural performances that is seen as both conventional public discourse and counterpublic critique. Similarly, conceptualizing counterpublics as located in particular places forecloses seeing how they oscillate into broader spheres of public discourse. Indeed, as much deliberative activity migrated to digital networks of communication, the place-centrism of earlier scholarship on counterpublics has faded (Dahlgren, 2005). Finally, locating the essence of counterpublicity in a topical orientation presumes that counterpublic concerns are generated independent of engagement with broader publics rather than in conversation with them.

texts through an indefinite audience of strang-

Karma Chavez's (2011) case study of the co-

by being addressed? For Warner, this circu-

alitional politics between a queer rights and migrant rights organization illustrates how public discourse coming from institutions of the press and the state shapes the self-conception

larity is a cue to the reflexivity of publics, which

and coalitional possibilities of counterpublics. Working out of these critiques, Asen’s alternative is to consider how counterpublics articulate themselves in relation to other publics andthe state (see also Asen & Brouwer, 2001). This approach to understanding counterpublics has the advantage of seeing exclusion from dominant public spheres as a rhetorical construction that can be challenged. Moreover,

this approach reflects the fluidity of counterpublic articulations of their own counterpublicity as they move through different moments in engagement with internal and external audiences, offering a more supple understanding of actually existing counterpublics. Michael Warner's (2002) Publics and Coun-

terpublics suggested that part of the conceptual fuzziness of counterpublics theory stems from a thin theorization of the fundamental unit of publics. Warner sketched a theory of publics as constituted by the circulation of

ers that iteratively reinterprets, remixes, and

recirculates texts. Such an interpretation could certainly be read backward onto Habermas’s account of how the circulation of print texts constituted bourgeois publics in the early modern era, but is also flexible enough to

support an expansion of the term text to include other kinds of nonprint artifacts like music, images (still and moving), digital posts, memes, and tweets.

Warner outlines seven features of publics before detailing how counterpublics differ. First, publics are self-organized through being

addressed. This introduces a “chicken-and-egg

circularity” (Warner, 2002, p. 67) to the notion of publics, for how could something be ad-

dressed to a public that only comes into being

flicker in and out of existence as texts work

their way through public attention. Second, publics are constituted by stranger relationality. Just as nation-states are imagined communities of citizens across far-flung geographies (Anderson, 2006), so are publics reliant on

the assumption that an indefinite audience of potential readers is likewise engaging with a circulating text. Texts in common

provide a

shared sense of the social world, an entree to sociability even among people who have nothing else in common. This characteristic of publics conditions Warner’s third feature,

which is that the address of public speech is both personal and impersonal. What makes a

speech public, and capable of assembling a public, is that it feels addressed to an individual who realizes that it is also addressed to a

broader, indefinite public of strangers. The simultaneity of this process means that “our subjectivity is understood as having resonance with others” (Warner, 2002, p. 77), allowing for individuation with regard to the text in the broader context of collective engagement.

1452

«

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

Fourth, a public is “constituted through mere

attention”: “by coming into range, you fulfill the only entry condition demanded bya public” (p. 88). Warner contrasts this dimension of publics with other accounts of public forma-

tion through kinship structures, formal group membership, class standing, or institutional existence.

that publics are engaged in poetic world making: “all discourse or performance addressed to a public must characterize the world in which it attempts to circulate, and it must

attempt to realize that world through address” (p. 114). Public address makes and remakes worlds, not just through propositional claims but through the stylistics of rhetorical perfor-

These four foundations are the grounds on which Warner builds three more radical

mances. A metaphor is not merely an ornament

theses about publics. The fifth feature of publics is that they are created by the reflexive

two things being compared. An appreciation for the poetic world-making function of any text reveals the ideological fiction that publics operate through a mode of Habermasianstyle rational-critical debate. Publics are not mere rational actors, processing alternatives

circulation of discourse:

No single text can create a public. Nor can a single voice, a single genre, even

for speech; it constitutes how we think about

a single medium. All are insufficient to create the kind of reflexivity that we call a public, since a public is understood to be an ongoing space of encounter for discourse. Texts themselves do not create

for action to facilitate collective good. Rather,

publics, but the concatenation of texts

A counterpublic, for Warner, largely adheres to these seven features of publics, but is “struc-

through time. Only when a previously existing discourse can be supposed, and when a responding discourse can be postulated, can a text address a public. (Warner, 2002, p. 90)

This key passage suggests the broader interactive context in which publics come into being over time. Recurring situations stabilize communicative genres, which in turn stabilizes

publics through repetitive attention to similarly situated texts. The sixth feature of publics is that they “act historically according to

the temporality of their circulation” (p. 96). Warner suggests that the daily punctuation of texts like the newspaper organizes publics that are closer to politics than, say, the quar-

terly or yearly punctuation of academic publications. Consequently, the continuous flow of information that characterizes the digital media ecology challenges the temporal underpinnings of the modern public sphere in ways that, as yet, are not fully clear. Finally, Warner argues

they are constantly projecting a vision of what the social world looks like that is infinitely contestable, revisable, and negotiable—that is the

core activity of publics.

tured by different dispositions or protocols from those that obtain elsewhere in the culture,

making different assumptions about what can be said or what goes without saying” (Warner, 2002, p. 119). Warner differed from Fraser in conceptualizing counterpublics; for Fraser, an

ideal-type feminist counterpublic can be located in the network of feminist bookstores,

lectures, and associations found in many cities. Warner characterized this sense of counterpublics as “subalterns with a reform program” (p. 119). Warner's sense of counterpublicity is more radical, noting that counterpublics maintain a conflictual relationship to dominant cultural horizons that track down to styles and modes of address, as well as their conceptions of stranger sociability and belonging. Historically, the emergence of counterpublics is a predictable consequence of marginalized groups being denied access to the dominant modes of generating publicity—the newspapers, pamphlets, and other artifacts of print culture.

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

Consequently, counterpublics have developed their own parallel media ecologies, but they have also experimented with ways to gain publicity for their perspectives in wider public spheres through communicative acts like protests and pranks, which did not aspire to, and were not necessarily recognizable as, “rationalcritical debate.” Dan Brouwer’s (2005) study

of zines produced by and for gay men with HIV/AIDS in the 1990s is an exemplar of how counterpublics produce alternative modes of expressivity in a media ecology that is more hospitable to nondominant communicative

forms. Counterpublics often renovate specific public agendas with these interventions, but

they just as often serve as sites for the cultivation of ways of communicating and being that transform dominant visions of what pub-

lics could be. FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCH ON PUBLIC SPHERE(S), PUBLICS, AND COUNTERPUBLICS The resonance of public sphere(s), publics, and counterpublics as organizing terms in contem-

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

«

1453

rational-critical debate that characterized the print-driven bourgeois public sphere. Typical accounts of the public sphere thus replicate what Finnegan and Kang (2004) referenced as the “talk and text” model of publicity while maintaining a wariness toward how visuality shapes publics, counterpublics, and their deliberations. Scholars have corrected for the linguistic and propositional bias of Habermas's early account in several ways. Deluca and

Peeples (2002) theorized the “public screen” as a supplement to the public sphere, noting that such a term captures how protests are often designed to maximize attention in a televisually mediated context. By coining “networked public screens,” Ewalt, Ohl, and Pfister (2013)

extended the concept of the public screen to account for the diffusion of digital imagemaking and circulation in contemporary protests like Occupy Wall Street. Although everyday, vernacular images produced and circulated by protestors and onlookers alike are consequential in shaping public culture, Hariman and Lucaites (2007) demonstrated how iconic images continue to play a central role in envisioning citizenship and civic possibility.

porary scholarship on communication and critical/cultural studies is evident in four re-

Greening Public Spheres.

search trajectories that aim to update these

esque atmosphere that plays so well on the

terms in the context of visuality, ecology, digi-

television screen has been developed, in many

tality, and transnationality. These four contexts

ways, through the environmental movement. Activism centered on ecological issues attempts to green the public sphere, turning public conversation toward the dire consequences of pollution, habitat loss, global climate disruption, and a whole panoply of threats to envi-

are interlocking, for understanding public deliberation in a contemporary context requires

grappling with the increase in the circulation of visual images, the challenge of environmental degradation, the growth of a digital media ecology, and the advent of deliberation on a global scale.

Visualizing Public Spheres.

Habermas's

original conception of the public sphere was explicitly oriented around the circulation of

The carnival-

ronmental health. Douglas Torgerson (1999)

saw in the comic dimensions of environmental activism the resources for a green public sphere that offered an alternative to the technocratic, administrative solutions that otherwise

dominated discussions of green politics. As he

print texts; indeed, in Habermas's telling, the

explained, even environmental movements fall

increase in the circulation of images through film and televisual media supplanted the

prey to administrative traps, stunting the creative and deliberative impulses of citizens in

1454

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

exchange for organizational maintenance. Robert Brulle (2000) drew on Habermas's theory of the public sphere and communicative action to suggest a theory of social change for green politics that is reflexive enough to speed social learning processes related to environmentalism. Robyn Eckersley (2004) similarly argued that a green public sphere capable of steering communication toward ad-

dressing underlying environmental problems is central to the broader project of greening the state. John Dryzek (2013) defended deliberation as that communicative aspect of democracy most necessary for greening politics. No other instrumentality can evaluate, contest, and negotiate the perspectives of the various stakeholders involved in environmental disputes, and no other instrumentality can incorporate local knowledge of environmental issues into broader spheres of politics. Networking Public Spheres.

Theorists

of the networked public sphere observe how digital media technologies help address some of the traditional problems faced by public sphere actors, while introducing new challenges

for deliberation. Benkler’s (2006) groundbreaking work on the genesis of the networked public sphere emphasized how the hub and spoke architecture of digital communication networks allows allowed for a more fluid and organic movement of communication from the periphery toward core administrative agencies. Rather than the primarily unidirectional messaging of the mass media ecology, internetworked media support bidirectional flows of communication that offer new opportunities

for publics and counterpublics in both their reactive and generative capacities. “Perhaps for the first time in history,’ Friedland, Hove, and

Rojas wrote, “the informal public sphere has a medium that in principle allows for large-scale expression of mass opinion in forms that systematically affect the institutional media

system” (Friedland, Hove, & Rojas, 2006, p. 19). New intermediaries, like bloggers and microbloggers, constitute politically potent

networked publics capable of amplifying the weak signals historically projected by civil society actors (boyd, 2007; Pfister, 2014). Unfortunately, some of these weak signals being amplified reflect the deep biases of racism, sexism, classism, homophobia, ableism, and

other axes of oppression. Moreover, the combination of information abundance and disintermediation of traditional editorial authority means that the networked public sphere is populated by echo chambers—enclaves of communication where like-minded interlocutors push each other to rhetorical extremes (Sunstein, 2001). An ongoing concern for scholars of the

networked public sphere concerns whether or not internetworked media transform the conditions of publicity too dramatically for public spheres and counterpublics to be useful organizing heuristics. It is an open question if public sphere theory can survive conceptually when the divide between publicness and privateness foundational to Habermas’s bourgeois public sphere has eroded, the proliferation of point sources capable of making messages public has spurred a general epistemic crisis about the very category of news, and the corporate refeudalization of public space and networks of communication has made an organic congealing of public opinion more difficult (Splichal, 2018). Globalizing Public Spheres.

Given Haber-

mas’s own workin theorizing postnational constellations, the scholarly interest in conceptualizing global public spheres is unsurprising. Since the Internet is the first global medium,

global publics are connected across nationstate boundaries to pursue social problems with a cosmopolitan spirit. Traditionally, as Nancy Fraser (2009) noted, “a public sphere should correlate with a sovereign power” to

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

«

1455

maximize the normative legitimacy and po-

Fraser, N. (2014). Transnationalizing the public sphere.

litical efficacy of public opinion (pp. 76-77). Despite the presence of some supranational administrative organizations like the European

Gripsrud,J.,Moe, H., Molander, A., & Murdock, G.

Union and African Union, and weak global authorities like the United Nations, there is

no sovereign power capable of responding to public opinion in the way normally conceived by advocates of public deliberation. This requires rethinking the public sphere outside the orbit of state authority or perhaps abandoning the concept in favor of a post-Westphalian term that captures the activity of a globalizing

planet. James Bohman (2007) attempted to lay the philosophical foundation for such a transnational project by emphasizing the ne-

cessity for a plurality of governing institutions across borders that would be receptive to deliberative pressure. Although a global public sphere is difficult to imagine and has certainly been forestalled by the Great Recession, “Brexit”

(the departure of the United Kingdom from the EU), and the rise of nationalist far-right leaders across the world, publics continue to coalesce across nation-state boundaries with the aim of shaping attitudes and policy.

FURTHER

READING

Allen, D. S. (2004). Talking to strangers. Anxieties of citizenship since Brown v. Board of Education. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Arendt, H. (2013). The human condition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. First published in 1958. Brouwer, D. C., & Asen, R. (2010), Public modalities:

Rhetoric, culture, media, and the shape ofpublic life. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. Brown,W. (2015). Undoing the demos: Neoliberalisms stealth revolution. New York, NY: Zone Books.

Crossley, N., & Roberts,J.M. (2004). After Habermas: New perspectives on the public sphere. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Dewey, J. (2016). The public and its problems: An essay in political inquiry. Columbus: Ohio University

Press. (Original work published in 1927.)

Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

(2010). The idea of the public sphere: A reader. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books,

Meehan, J. (Ed.). (1995). Feminists read Habermas: Gendering the subject of discourse. New York, NY: Routledge. Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and tear gas: The power

and fragility of networked protest. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

REFERENCES

Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London,

UK: Verso Books. Asen, R. (2000). Seeking the “counter” in counterpublics. Communication Theory, 10(4), 424-446. Asen, R., & Brouwer, D. C. (Eds.). (2001). Counter-

publics and the state. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. Benhabib, S. (2008). Another cosmopolitanism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Berlant, L., & Warner, M. (1998). Sex in public.

Critical Inquiry, 24(2), $47-S66. Black Public Sphere Collective. (Eds.). (1995). The black public sphere. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Bohman, J. (1996). Public deliberation: Pluralism, complexity, and democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Bohman, J. (2007). Democracy across borders. Cam-

bridge, MA: MIT Press.

boyd, d. (2007). Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage

social life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), MacArthur Foundation series on digital learning: Youth, identity, and digital media volume (pp. 119-142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Brouwer, D. C. (2005). Counterpublicity and cor-

poreality in HIV/AIDS zines. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 22(5), 351-371. Brulle, R. J. (2000). Agency, democracy, and nature: The US environmental movement from a critical theory perspective. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

1456

-«

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

PUBLICS,

AND

Calhoun, C. J. (Ed.). (1992). Habermas and the public sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Chavez, K. R. (2011). Counter-public enclaves and understanding the function of rhetoric in social movement coalition-building. Communication Quarterly, S9(1), 1-18.

Clarke, E. O. (2000). Virtuous vice: Homoeroticism and the public sphere. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Cvetkovich, A. (2003). An archive offeelings: Trauma, sexuality, and lesbian public cultures. Durham, NC:

Duke University Press. Dahlgren, P. (2005). The internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication, 22(2), 147-162. DeLuca, K., & Peeples, J. (2002). From public sphere to public screen: Democracy, activism, and the “violence” of Seattle. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 19(2), 125-151. d’Entréves, M. P., & Benhabib, S. (Eds.). (1997). Habermas and the unfinished project of modernity: Critical essays on the philosophical discourse of modernity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Dryzek, J. S. (2013). The politics of the earth: Environmental discourses. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Eckersley, R. (2004). The green state: Rethinking democracy and sovereignty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Eley, G. (1993). Nations, publics, and political cultures: Placing Habermas in the nineteenth century. In N. Dirks, G. Eley, & S. Ortner (Eds.),

Culture/power/history: A reader in contemporary social theory (pp. 297-335). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Ewalt,J.P., Ohl, J.J., & Pfister, D. S. (2013). Activism, deliberation, and networked public screens: Rhetori-

cal scenes from the occupy moment in Lincoln, Nebraska. Cultural Studies—Critical Methodo-

logies, 13(3), 173-190. Felski, R. (1989). Beyond feminist aesthetics: Feminist literature and social change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Finnegan, C. A., & Kang, J. (2004). “Sighting” the

public: Iconoclasm and public sphere theory.

COUNTERPUBLICS

Fraser, N. (1990). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text, 25/26, 56-80.

Fraser, N. (2009). Scales ofjustice: Reimagining political space in a globalizing world. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Friedland, L. A., Hove, T., & Rojas, H. (2006). The

networked public sphere. Javnost—The Public,

13(4), 5-26.

Goodnight, G. T. (1982). The personal, technical, and public spheres of argument: A speculative inquiry into the art ofpublic deliberation. Journal of the American Forensics Association, 18, 214-227.

Habermas, J. (1971). Toward a rational society: Student protest, science, and politics. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Habermas,J.(1975). Legitimation crisis. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Habermas, J. (1974). The public sphere: An encyclopedia article (S. Lennox & F. Lennox, Trans.). New German Critique, 3, 49-SS.

Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action (2 vols.). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society (T. Burger, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published in 1962.) Habermas, J. (1992). Further reflections on the public sphere. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 421-461). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Habermas, J. (2001). The postnational constellation (M. Pensky, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Habermas, J. (2008). Between naturalism and religion: Philosophical essays. Cambridge, UK: Polity. Hall, S., Hobson, D., Lowe, A., & Willis, P. (Eds.).

(2003). Culture, media, language: Working papers in cultural studies, 1972-79. New York, NY: Routledge. Hariman, R., & Lucaites, J. L. (2007). No caption needed: Iconic photographs, public culture, and lib-

eral democracy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Hauser, G. A. (1999). Vernacular voices: The rhetoric

ofpublics and public spheres. Columbia: University

Quarterly Journal of Speech, 90(4), 377-402. Fraser, N. (1985). What's critical about critical theory?

of South Carolina Press. Ingram, D. (2010). Habermas: Introduction and analysis. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

The case of Habermas and gender. New German

Landes,J.(1995). The public and the private sphere:

Critique, 35, 97-131.

A feminist reconsideration. In J. Meehan (Ed.),

PUBLIC

SPHERE(S),

Feminists read Habermas: Gendering the subject of discourse. New York, NY: Routledge.

Negt, O., & Kluge, A. (2016). Public sphere and expe-

rience: Analysis of the bourgeois and proletarian public sphere. London, UK: Verso Books. (Original work published in 1972.) Peters, J. D. (1993). Distrust of representation:

Habermas on the public sphere. Media, Culture,

and Society, 15(4), S41-S71.

PUBLICS,

AND

COUNTERPUBLICS

«

1457

Splichal, S. (Ed.). (2018). The liquefaction of publicness: Communication, democracy, and the public sphere in the Internet age [Special issue}.Javnost— The Public, 25(1-2).

Squires, C. R. (2002). Rethinking the black public sphere: An alternative vocabulary for multiple public spheres. Communication Theory, 12(4), 446-468.

Sunstein C. R. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton, NJ:

Pezzullo, P. C. (2003). Resisting “National Breast Cancer Awareness Month”: The rhetoric of counterpublics and their cultural performances. Quarterly Journal ofSpeech, 89(4), 345-365.

Taylor, C. (2004). Modern social imaginaries. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Torgerson, D. (1999). The promise of green politics:

Pfister, D. S. (2014). Networked media, networked rhet-

Environmentalism and the public sphere. Durham,

orics: Attention and deliberation in the early blogosphere. University Park: Pennsylvania State Press. Rabinow, P. (Ed.). (1984). The Foucault reader. New

NC: Duke University Press. Warner, M. (2002). Publics and counterpublics. New

Ryan, M. P. (1992). Women in public: Between banJohns Hopkins University Press.

York, NY: Zone Books.

Young, I. M. (1990). Justice and the politics of differ-

York, NY: Pantheon.

ners and ballots, 1825-1880.

Princeton University Press.

Baltimore,

ence. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

MD: Damien Smith Pfister

Leto

elicuy

¢- b-8l

Aber

;

yinitiand ; Ce} bral ot

ene

.

pa

=

uyat cmanWh dirk ‘ei h 2G yh d

;

|

a

wae iA

isp

rma

imitaS

TTY =

—

ms

af

nL

“ene

rot

ag




7

a

=

arr

ia

myer

. -

a

a

ead

"

Say 2

Ne

cnt

aad

i

Gesu ra (eee 0 ae

om

jie

FPGn

Ae PLM th : Ct _Saeeee re

»&

so,

cas

—

(i eon ©)|, Came Ol 's nn #1

q a

dag iE ia3,6 1 amber’ rae

sombre :

-

te

dh Ramlila Sin li ig As

sre wath st,

:

vane

ener)

Gea trailers shadwiieamesal®,

ad a

,

ae Bee o -

oe fein

dareiieve plete

Sane

eng

cabaes ners

mL tane YF Lipper

ie

=D

e

ERR a3 bedilideg trawl

ieest o

a

i

;

0

nt ghar af ge : sree Oytonite

=

i

the.

ant al SAL DA ett

——

Nithaenpatiati

QUEER STUDIES IN CRITICAL AND CULTURAL COMMUNICATION

and analysis (e.g., whether individuals who identify as heterosexual can lay claim to queerness), disciplinary divides that led to allegiances to some definitions over others, and

QUEER DEFINITIONS

Unlike many other terms of art related to crit-

disparate senses of whether queer should be conceptually privileged as a noun, adjective, or verb. That said, as Erin Rand (2014) has

ical/cultural studies of gender and sexuality,

argued, most of the initial work in queer stud-

such as hegemonic masculinity (Connell, 1987) or feminine style (Campbell, 1989), the “queer” in queer studies lacks a discreet, linear origin from a single source that may serve as a foundational definition of the concept. There are a number of reasons for this genealogical problematic, including the inherent slippages in the migrations of “queer” from its vernacular usage in queer enclaves to the academic page, differences about whether “queer” could or should be an essentialist category of experience

ies selected its conceptual anchors from a rel-

atively small set of the definitions. In many rehearsals of queer studies’ academic institutionalization, Teresa de Lauretis’s

(1991) memorialization of a conference about lesbian and gay sexualities often is cited as one of the earliest attempts to corral a swirling set of concerns about the aporias of gay and lesbian studies into a coherent and shared conversation known as queer theory.’ In that moment, de Lauretis offered up queer theory

«

1459

1460

-

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

AND

CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION

as remedy for the failures of the by-then rote “gay and lesbian” to capture the complexities

“The insistence on ‘queer—a term initially generated in the context of terror—has the

of nonnormative sexualities, bodies, and lives. In contrast, de Lauretis hoped the rubrics

effect of pointing out a wide field of normali-

of “queer theory” would destabilize these increasingly sedimented assumptions about gay and lesbian desires, lives, and politics to allow

for a fuller consideration of the variegated differences among and between nonnormative sexual identities. Opting against the offering of a strict definition of queer theory, de Lauretis argued instead for a set of promiscuous perspectives that problematized the normative legibilities afforded by the rapid ratification of “lesbians and gays” as tolerated

zation, rather than simple intolerance, as the

site of violence” (p. xxvi). The polyvalent qual-

ities of “queer” were a strength, not a weakness, for queer politics: Its brilliance as a naming strategy lies in combining resistance on that broad social terrain with more specific resistance on the terrains of phobia and queer-bashing, on one hand, or of pleasure, on the other. “Queer” therefore also suggests

the essay, de Lauretis made clear her primary

the difficulty in defining the population whose interests are at stake in queer politics.

interest in queer theory as a reading strategy

(Warner, 1991, p. xxvi)

identities in mainstream culture. In a note in

for interrogating popular culture representations of sexual and gender identity when she stated: “My ‘queer, however, had no relation to the Queer Nation group, of whose existence

I was ignorant at the time. As the essays will show, there is in fact very little in common between Queer Nation and this queer theory” (p. xvii). Other cultural theorists had somewhat different agendas for queer theory. Michael Warner (1991), alone and also later with Lauren Berlant (Berlant & Warner, 1998), inflected the “queer” in queer theory with a stronger sense of direct action politics and active resistance against sexual regulation. The influence of Michel Foucault’s (1972, 1978, 1980) research on resistance and its discursive properties informed this line of queer thinking in ways subtle and explicit. For Warner, like de Lauretis, queer theory operated as an

analytical lens for scrutinizing the shortcomings of shared representational landscapes, but it also needed to account for the creative maps of meanings crafted by and in queer lives. Queer theory, then, has a twin function of recognizing injustices and promoting remedies to these wrongs. In Warner’s (1991) words:

The joining together of pleasure and pain as two sources of queer affect is informed by Warner’s observations about the quotidian experiences of queer life. In the everyday political terrain, contests over sexuality and its regulation are generally linked to views of social institutions and norms of the most basic sort. Every person who comes to a queer self-understanding knows in one way or another that her stigmatization is connected with gender, the family, notions of individual freedom, the state, public speech, consumption and desire, nature and culture,

maturation, reproductive politics, racial and national fantasy, class identity, truth and trust, censorship, intimate life and social display, terror and violence, health care, and deep cul-

tural norms about the bearing of the body. Being queer means fighting about these issues all of the time, locally and piecemeal but always with consequences. It means being able, more or less articulately, to challenge the common understanding of what gender difference means, or what the state is for, or what “health” entails, or what would define fairness, or what

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

a good relation to the planet’s environment would be. Queers do a kind ofpractical social

AND

CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION

1461

always serves as the focus of queer studies in critical/cultural communication studies.

reflection just in finding ways of being queer.

(p. xiii) Thus, on Warner's reading, the permea-

bility of academic theory and the queer lives that inform it led him to define queer oppositionally as that which “rejects a minoritizing logic of toleration or simple political interestrepresentation in favor of a more thorough

resistance to regimes of the normal” (p. xxvi). Other influential figures in queer theory, such as Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick (1993) and Judith Butler (1993, 1997), also relied on resistance to cultural norms as the bases of their sense of queerness’ critical edge.’ A curious lack ofaunique or distinct definition of queer and queerness in critical/ cultural communication studies has been true

from the first uses of the terminology (Yep, 2003; Yep, Lovaas, & Elia, 2003). To wit, in Jeffrey Ringer’s (1994) edited volume Queer Words, Queer Images, there is a stunning absence

of the term beyond its cover. As a follow-up to James Chesebro’s (1981) edited volume Gayspeak, Ringer and his contributors did

QUEER ROOTS OF CRITICAL/ CULTURAL COMMUNICATION STUDIES

Even though queer studies in critical/cultural communication studies may lack an indigenous definition of queer, many of the concerns in these areas of inquiry align and intersect with the enduring questions in communication studies. Thus, contra claims that queer studies is a radical departure from the center of communication studies (Gross, 2005), it

may be better thought of as an evolution of these concerns in different contexts and directions, including those that date back to

premodern, Western rhetorical theory. Although Plato’s (2009) Phaedrus may be a more obvious place to begin a discussion of the history of queerness in communication studies, especially given the same-sex courtships animating the love triangle between Lysias, Socrates, and Phaedrus in the dialogue, Plato’s Gorgias may be more fruitful

minorities in communication studies, but the

ground for the unearthing of a queer studies antecedent.’ In this foundational text in the

essays were not conversant with the burgeon-

Western tradition of communication studies,

ing field of queer theory. Of course, it must be

Socrates implores Gorgias to define the proper object of rhetoric. In the dialogue between them and their partisans, Socrates's preference for collating cultural practices into discrete and distinct forms of reproducible knowledge

renovate extant theories of sexual and gender

noted that there is a lag time between the writing and publishing of an edited volume,

and queer theory likely did not register as a distinct academic disciplinary conversation for the volume’s authors when conceiving and writing their essays. In addition, the use of “queer” in the title may have been an attempt to cash in on the marketability of the term more so than an academic interest in the conceptual affordances of the queer theory. Over time, communication

studies scholars have

adapted and complicated many of the tenets of queer theory, but the underlying sense of resistance to norms and normativities almost

(techné) is denied to him by Gorgias’s refusal to circumscribe rhetoric to the practice of oratory alone. Gorgias and his disciples eventually cede Socrates’s proposition regarding rhetoric as the performance of speeches for an audience. Yet they qualify their concession with the proviso that rhetoric is also a perspective and method for negotiating the grand

and quotidian decisions involved in public life. Undoubtedly, this claim is a strategic one

1462

-

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

AND

meant to usurp some, if not all, of Socrates's

dominion and undercut the intellectual monopoly afforded to philosophy as the master discipline. Socrates’s instructional model involved interpersonal modes ofdialectical reasoning to arrive at the just and the beautiful. Rhetoric, or at least Plato’s rendering of rhetoric, relied not ona singular method of instruction; rather, rhetoric’s protean character—it was an art, a skill, a perspective, and foreign

to the dominant Athenian norms of the time— was a liability and a threat to the established order of things. Fast forward to the present, and we face an analogous dynamic at work when trying to pin down the meaning and scope of queer studies in critical and cultural communication studies: Are they each a subset of existing methods and perspectives or a radical break with previous traditions and practices? Does either one have a proper object of study? Do they trouble the very foundations of communication studies as a discipline? Is either one even coherent enough to be spoken of as fields or subfields?* Generally speaking, both queer studies and critical and cultural communication studies are defined more by their perspective and orientation than any one fixed domain of knowl-

edge (e.g., the rhetoric of medicine) or set of practices (e.g., presidential inaugural addresses). Under duress, each mode of inquiry may relent, like Gorgias, and confess to an in-

terest in culture and the persons and institutions that constitute that category of experience and analysis. Even then, neither one of these approaches to culture operates with any

established set of procedures or prefabricated architectures of inquiry. Unlike, say, a metaphoric analysis tracing the usage of a defined figure of speech in a limited discourse domain (e.g. war metaphors in political campaign coverage), the best of queer studies and critical and cultural communication studies is less faithful to a method than to answering a question

CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION

regarding why and how certain cultural formations circulate in particular contexts (e.g., how and why heterosexual white Americans more easily accept discourses of marriage equality

than the language of same-sex marriage). Thus far, we have considered queer studies and critical and cultural communication studies as two distinct entities, and this is an in-

tentional parsing because they are not natural partners. Neither are they natural enemies. To borrow from Stuart Hall (1985), one of the most influential cultural studies scholars,

there is no necessary correspondence between any set of symbols, including those associated with the disciplinary formations of queer studies and cultural studies.‘ Casual observers often mistake queer studies as a subset of cultural studies because each of these disciplines has a political edge to it and queer critique relies on cultural contextualization. Also, some queer studies scholars contribute to this confusion by claiming some form of allegiance to critical and cultural studies as well. As a result, the conflation of the two disciplines is understandable. Yet, cultural studies as a dis-

cipline has not always embraced queer studies, for many of the same reasons as the rest of academia including latent and explicit heterosexism and transprejudice, the dismissal of queer studies as a distracting and unproductive identity politics, and the redirection of scholarship about queer topics to outlets concerned with gender and sexuality. Likewise, queer scholarship sometimes lays claim to critical and cultural studies because of its objects of study and/or the practice of critical interrogation of those objects, say the close reading of a television program to identify its investment in cisgender privileging of some bodies over others. This research might share some common concerns with cultural studies if sufficient attention is paid to the disciplinary conventions and conversations of cultural studies, but the choice of a cultural

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

artifact alone, in this case a television program, does not secure its status as cultural studies. Instead, the relationship between queer studies and critical and cultural studies is a Venn diagram with substantial overlap where the

AND

CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION

«

1463

and practices ofnon-Athenians with Athenian habits of mind may be considered some of the earliest cultural studies. In short, the

philosophers and the sophists held differing views on the distinction between nomos

shared space indicates common interests and

(convention)

goals, but also we must allow for the fact that

the native Athenian philosophers tended to defend the natural order of things and the outsider sophists utilized their own perspectives as strangers to these customs and conventions to argue for their artificiality. In place of this polarized and binary view of the

there are unclaimed spaces where each is unburdened by the demands of the other. If Plato’s Gorgias allows us one route for working through the millennia-old debates about the wisdom of refusing a proper object and method of disciplinary study, in Aristotle’s Rhetoric we find another unlikely genealogical ally for queer studies and critical and cultural studies in its recognition of culture as a necessary source of constraint and invention. Aristotle's Rhetoric is many things for many people—sometimes it is a relic of premodern categories of speaking and experience, and sometimes it is revered as an enduring treatise on rhetorical theory and practice. For our purposes it is Aristotle’s attention to context

and norms that align him with the traditions of queer studies and critical and cultural studies. Aristotle’s preoccupation with classifying different kinds of speech, proofs, and moods into legible categories of analysis and practice mapped out Athenian cultural norms such that students of rhetoric could assess the possibilities for persuasion within the accepted boundaries and expectations of that culture. Today we may read anachronistically Aristotle's three books on rhetoric as an encyclopedic enumeration of Rhetoric writ large, but such a reading ignores the corrective spirit of

the work. Aristotle’s Rhetoric was a rejoinder against the formulaic handbooks of the lesser sophists and logographers, which he resisted in part because they failed to take into account the contexts of the admixture of the topic, the particular audience, and the speaker. In this way, Aristotle’s brokering of an uneasy peace treaty between the rhetorical theories

and physis (nature), wherein

world and knowledge about it, Aristotle ac-

cepted the need to temper transcendent truths against cultural conventions and norms (Farrell, 1993; Morrall, 1977; Long, 2005; Roberts,

2005). Although loyal to his intellectual lineage, Aristotle understood also that he lived in a different world than Socrates and Plato. With larger-scale governance, greater discoveries, and evolving attitudes in all manners of life, Aristotle adapted to these shifting conditions, including those related to communication. Communal life demanded public speaking of all kinds. As a result, Athenians needed

some form of oratorical knowledge and practice, and Aristotle recognized the importance of cultural adaptations in different speaking situations and for different audiences. Without capitulating to the sophists’ cultural relativism, Aristotle catalogued Athenian norms as

something more than a simple inventory of categories and assumptions—they were offered as inventional resources for tailoring arguments within a particular milieu. It may be a stretch to attempt to recuperate Aristotle as queer theorist, but a similar sense of perspicacity toward cultural norms informs contemporary practices in queer critique and

critical and cultural studies. With these two concerns of communication studies in mind, the lack of a proper object of study and the unceasing trouble of norms

for the living of shared lives together, one can

1464

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

AND

connect critical/cultural studies and queer studies to persistent questions at the supposed center of communication studies. One may

not be able to draw a straight line as an unbroken transmission from Socrates, Plato, and

Aristotle on through to Friedrich Nietzsche's (1886/1989,

1887/2009,

1896/2012)

dis-

missal of the fealty paid to cultural norms and

morality to Michel Foucault’s (1980) genealogical inquiry into the nexus of power and knowledge to contemporary queer theorists, but this brief tracing of their overlapping interests gives lie to the claim that queer and critical and cultural studies exist apart from the communication studies discipline (Alexander & Rhodes, 2015; Morris & Palczewski, 2014).

MEDIA REPRESENTATIONS Much of the earliest work in queer critical/

cultural communication studies focused on

mediated representations of dissident sexu-

CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION

2013; Gray, 2009a; Fisher, 2016; Fox & Warber, 2015; Rawson, 2014; West, Frischherz, Panther,

& Brophy, 2013), magazines (Brouwer, 2005; Draper, 2010; Sender, 2004), or radio (Martin,

2018). Academic conversations about queer media representations tend to focus on the limitations of these images to represent the fuller panoply of queer subjectivities. Take, for example, the majority of the scholarship about the first incarnation of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, which critiqued the program for the ina-

bility of its hosts to understand and address transmasculinities (Booth, 2011), the program’s complicity with vanity consumption and hegemonic masculinities (Clarkson, 2005; Westerfelhaus & LaCroix, 2006), its rein-

scription of homonormative masculinities and neoliberal self-fashioning (Papacharissi & Fernback, 2008; Sender, 2006), and its feminization of gay men (Ramsey & Santiago, 2004).° Implicit in much of this research is

ories such as queer theory are important cor-

the assumption that audiences adopt the heteronormative positioning presented by the texts without much negotiation of their meaning, although some authors do read queer texts

rectives for previous perspectives that may

like Queer Eye as transgressive (Hart, 2004;

alities and gender identities. When a previously underrepresented population is made more available for public inspection, new the-

not have accounted for the presentation and circulation of sexualities and genders as an important consideration. From the first work

to map this territory on through to today, critical efforts tend to concentrate on what affordances are available to marginalized populations and what publics may or may not be

Pearson & Lozano-Reich, 2009; Weiss, 2005S).

This empirical question of audience reception has been posed in research that indicates that audiences interpret texts in more complex ways than previously assumed (Cavalcante, 2016, 2017, 2018; Schiappa, 2008; Schiappa, Gregg, & Hewes, 2005, 2006).

possible as a result, whether it be filmic representations (Brookey, 1996; Cooper & Pease, 2008; Grindstaff, 2008; King, 2010; King & West, 2014; Spencer, 2014), televisual pro-

gramming (Erni, 1998; Fejes & Petrich, 1993;

PERFORMANCE, PERFORMATIVITY, AND PERFORMATIVE WRITING

Aoki, 2002), online social media platforms

Judith Butler’s (1990, 1993) elaboration on performativity as a heuristic for understanding the materialities of identity, subjectivity, and agency emphasized the importance of communication as a site and mode of politics

(Bennett, 2010, 2014; Ciszek, 2014; Goltz,

and action. In brief, Butler had grown tired of

Gamson, 1998; Griffin, 2016; Gross, 2002),

newspaper and other press coverage (Landau, 2009; Moscowitz,

2013; Ng, 2013; Ott &

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

the stale and exclusionary debates in feminist circles regarding who had the ability to lay claim to the categories of woman and feminism. In the wake of bitter divisions generated by the sex-negative opponents of pornography, white feminists who marginalized women

of color and their concerns, and the

hostility directed at trans folk and lesbians, Butler refined existing theories of subjectivity and discourse to develop an anti-essentialist theory ofidentity and action. Thus performativity explained how discursive formations allow individuals to be recognized as subjects who then are able to negotiate within and against those networks of legibility. For example, the category of“trans person ofcolor” allows for individuals and collective groups of persons to be seen and heard as a political unit, to be counted for the purposes ofrepresentation, and to voice concerns from a spe-

cific subject position. Although everyone who lays claim to trans person of color may have different ideas about what this category of rec-

AND

CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION

1465

us to acknowledge that all cultural arrangements, even those self-fashioned as radical, involve logics of inclusion and exclusion, identity categories, and normative commitments.

As a result, performativity asks us to be selfreflexive about how and why we adhere to some norms and not others as well as how these cultural formations foreclose some politics and not others. In developing her thoughts on performativity, Butler (1997) earned rebuke from some performance studies scholars for her misunderstanding, if not ignorance, of this aca-

demic field of study (Bennett, 2003; Johnson, 2001). In parsing the difference between per-

formativity and performance, Butler (1994b) wanted to separate performativity from theatricality and the sense that we are sovereign subjects imbued with free will to choose consciously our identities without consideration of context and constraint, thus she saddled

performativity posited a more dispersed and distributed sense of identity and agency. Although some feminist and queer thinkers saw as their task the overthrowing of existing

performance with these connotations. Despite this misunderstanding, performance studies scholars have developed multiple programs of research emphasizing the compatibility of performance and performativity as modes of feeling and knowledge production. Fred Corey and Tom Nakayama (1997) employed a form of performative writing to craft a fictional, first-person narrative about the connections between academic theory production and sex. Queer theory, although scandalized by some for its interests in desires and sexualities, rarely engages sex in any graphic detail (Eng, Halberstam, & Munoz, 2005;

power relations, Butler (1997) refused the

Halley & Parker, 2011). Sexualities and sex

possibility that we could undo completely those cultural formations, opting instead to work the weaknesses of the logics of our own legibility and existence. Butler’s critics accused her of political defeatism and branded performativity with the tarnish of acquiescing to the conditions of domination and oppression. To

exist as identity categories and backdrops more often than the site of critique itself. In some ways this is understandable, as the ephemerality of an intimate encounter is rarely archived outside of pornography, thus complicating

the contrary, however, performativity allows

Nakayama set out to trouble these boundaries.

ognition designates and inaugurates, its exist-

ence allows individuals to twist and queer the recognition it provides. Contra unitary theories of gender and sexuality in vogue at the time, such as some feminists identifying the patriarchy as the root of all evils or gender theorists seeking biological explanations for difference between the sexes,

scholarly efforts to engage sexual acts, desires, and affects as communicative acts.’ Corey and

1466

-«

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

AND

In the piece, they wove together fragments of high theory with personal reflections from their protagonist about how sexual desires work similarly to the desire to discover and reproduce knowledge. The frank descriptions of intimate touching, the shaving of one’s

CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION

non-middle-class

gays, bisexuals, lesbians,

and transgendered people in the struggle against homophobia and oppression” (p. 5). To address these tendencies in queer studies, Johnson forwarded “quare’, which he explained as a “way to critique stable notions of identity

body, and cruising for sex (and theory) of-

and, at the same time, to locate racialized and

fended some communication scholars, who

class knowledges” to acknowledge how “ways of knowing are both as discursively mediated and as historically situated and materially con-

saw the publication of the essay as lowering the standards of academic publishing and celebrating same-sex pornography (Benson, 2012; Owen, 2003). In a follow-up to these negative responses, Nakayama and Corey

(2003) penned “Nextext,” which again employed a fictional narrative, this time a police officer who stands in for the essay’s critics. In it Nakayama and Corey offer the following critique of the artificial disconnect between scholarly research and the activities of our

ditioned” (p. 2). Challenging Butler's critique of performance of the sovereign subject, Johnson refused this definition of performance. For Johnson and now others, the emphasis on performance complemented performativity to account for corporeal epistemologies, how bodies are more than discur-

sive products as they move through space and time (Hatfield, 2017), how bodies are racial-

quotidian lives, including sex and desire:

ized and sexualized (Eguchi & Roberts, 2015),

“Everyday knowledge is the stuff we live our lives by, but it is not the foundation of great academies” (p. 322). In the last installment of this unplanned trilogy, titled “deathTEXT,” Corey and Nakayama (2012) lament the essay's impact, stating it “set no standard” and “merely performed a newness” (p. 18), although numerous citations contradict this judgment. Moreover, it influenced much of the autoethnographic and performative writ-

and strategic coalitional politics.

ing that followed its publication (Eguchi, 2015; Fox, 2007, 2010, 2013; Moreman & McIntosh, 2010; Perez & Goltz, 2010; Samek& Donofrio,

2013). Another innovative moment in performance

In more and less direct ways, quare studies opened up a space for research more accountable to race-conscious queer theory. Wenshu Lee (2003) proposed kuaering as one way to

extend Johnson's ideas to develop a transnational, womanist quare theory, thus pushing even further the intersectional edge of quare theory. Explicit critiques of the whiteness of queer studies and critical and cultural communication studies have challenged the default assumptions of the field, including the closet, outness, and the racialization of private

and public spaces (Howard, 2014; McCune, 2014; Snorton, 2014). Johnson's work is also

studies appeared when E. Patrick Johnson (2001) proposed “quare” as an alternative to “queer.” On Johnson's survey of queer studies, too often the conceptual bucket of queerness operated more like a sieve filtering out “the material realities of gays and lesbians of color”

a connective tissue for intercultural and transnational studies of queerness that continue to draw attention to the boundaries of queer studies and a reconceptualization ofits norms (Chavez, 2013b; Eguchi & Asante, 2016;

as well as the “intellectual, aesthetics, and

Masint, & Murphy, 2016; Huang & Brouwer,

political contributions

2018; Van Gilder & Abdi, 2014).

of nonwhite

and

Eguchi & Washington, 2016; Goltz, Zingsheim,

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

QUEER POLITICS AND ACTIONS

pecially the efforts associated with direct action protests and grassroots social services related

to the HIV/AIDS epidemic (Christiansen & 1996; DeLuca,

1999; Dow,

CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION

1467

aware of historical figures who violated the

One strand of queer studies and critical and cultural communication studies grew out of the activism of sexual and gender minorities, es-

Hanson,

AND

1994;

Gilder, 1989; Patton, 1985, 1990, 2002; Rand, 2004; Scott, 2003; Slagle, 1995; Treichler,

1999). With groups such as the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) and Queer Nation as the most studied examples of this kind of activism, much of the emphasis has been placed on how these groups defy propriety to direct attention to the general public’s indifference to queer suffering and death. Alongside these studies related to HIV/AIDS,

scholars have investigated public policies related to the gay gene (Brookey, 2002), the American ban on blood donation by men who have sex with men (Bennett, 2009), the American military’s disavowal of queer soldiers (Brouwer, 2004; Rich, Schutten, & Rogers,

2012), restrictive migration policies (Chavez, 2010, 2013a) and asylum claims (McKinnon,

2016), and rights claims made by and for queers (Awwad, 2010; Campbell, 2012; Erni, 2017; Fejes, 2008; Gutierrez-Perez & Andrade, 2018;

Kearl, 2015; Lipari, 2002; West, 2014, 2015).

HISTORY, RECOVERY, MEMORY

When forging a subdiscipline within an established one, particularly when it is related to an underrepresented minority, one of the tasks involved is establishing the presence and importance of the forgotten and ignored population in question. Too often this can be labeled simply as a recovery project, which it is in part, but this descriptor does not represent the entirety of such projects. To be made

gender and sexual norms of their day (Brookey, 1998; Morris, 1996, 1998; Ringer, 1994) forces scholars to reconsider existing canons

of speakers and texts (Morris, 2007). This research asks us to acknowledge figures as di-

verse as Abraham Lincoln (Morris, 2010, 2013), Sylvia Rivera (Osorio, 2017), Matthew Shepard (Dunn, 2016; Lynch, 2007), trans victims of violence (Cram, 2012), and the AIDS quilt (Morris, 2011) as memory texts

and archives that map out revised paths for remembering the past and charting a course for the future.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS Predictions are risky propositions, but there are three areas of research that are poised for growth in the near future. First, as stated

earlier, greater attention to the transnational flows of queerness, including people, media products, and social networks, are apparent at conferences and in doctoral dissertations,

thus indicating potential for further refinement of queer beyond its white, Eurocentric origins. Second, the digital lives of queers and queer politics remain a fertile area for continued exploration. Finally, trans folk and politics are understudied. Although there is a literature base that take trans folk and politics as their objects of study (Booth & Spencer, 2016; Nuru, 2014; Sloop, 2004, 2012; Spencer

& Capuzza, 2015; West, 2014), the next step will likely be greater engagement with trans studies more squarely.

LINKS

TO

DIGITAL

MATERIALS

American Rhetoric (http://www.americanrhetoric .com/).

Digital Transgender Archive (https://www.digital transgenderarchive.net/).

1468

-

QUEER

FURTHER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

AND

CULTURAL

READING

Bennett, J. (2009). Banning queer blood: Rhetorics of citizenship, contagion, and resistance. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Chavez, K. (2013). Queer migration politics: Activist rhetorics and coalitional possibilities. Urbana: University ofIllinois Press. Erni,J.N. (2017). Cultural studies, human rights, and the legal imagination: Reframing critical justice. London, UK: Routledge. Grindstaff, D. (2006). Rhetorical secrets: Mapping gay identity and queer resistance in contemporary

America. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. Gross, L. (2002). Up from invisibility: Lesbians, gays, and the media in America. New York, NY:

Columbia University Press. Howard, S. (2014). Black queer identity matrix: Towards

an integrated queer of color framework. New York, NY: Peter Lang.

McCune,J.(2014). Sexual discretion: Black masculinity

and the politics ofpassing. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Morris, C, UI. (Ed.). (2007). Queering public address: Sexualities in American historical discourse. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press. Patton, C. (1990). Inventing AIDS. New York, NY: Routledge. Rand, E. (2014). Reclaiming queer: Activist and academic rhetorics ofresistance. Tuscaloosa: University

of Alabama Press.

COMMUNICATION

Yep, G., Lovaas, K., & Elia, J. (Eds.). (2003). Queer

theory and communication: From disciplining queers to queering the disciplines. New York: Haworth.

REFERENCES

Alexander,J.,& Rhodes,J.(Eds.). (2015). Sexual rhetorics: Methods, identities, publics. New York, NY: Routledge.

Awwad, J. (2010). The postcolonial predicament of gay rights in the Queen Boat affair. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 7, 318-336. Battles, K., & Hilton-Morrow, W. (2002). Gay char-

acters in conventional spaces: Will and Grace and the situation comedy genre. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 19, 87—10S. Bennett, J. (2003). Love me gender: Normative ho-

mosexuality and “ex-gay” performativity in reparative therapy narratives. Text and Performance Quarterly, 23, 331-382.

Bennett, J. (2009). Banning queer blood: Rhetorics of citizenship, contagion, and resistance. Tuscaloosa:

University of Alabama Press. Bennett, J. (2010). Queer teenagers and the media-

tion of utopian catastrophe. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 27, 455-476.

Bennett, J. (2014). “Born this way”: Queer vernacular and the politics of origin. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 11, 211-230. Benson, T. W. (2012). A scandal in academia: Sextext

Ringer, J. (Ed.). (1994). Queer words, queer images:

and CRTNET. Western Journal ofCommunication,

Communication and the construction of homosexuality. New York, NY: New York University Press. Schiappa, E. (2008). Beyond representational correct-

Berlant, L., & Warner, M. (1998). Sex in public. Critical Inquiry, 24(2), S47-S66.

ness: Rethinking criticism ofpopular media. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. Sender, K. (2004). Business, not politics: The making of the

Booth, E. T. (2011). Queering Queer Eye: The stability of gay identity confronts the liminality of trans embodiment. Western Journal of Communication,

gay market. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Snorton, C. R. (2017). Black on both sides: A racial history of trans identity. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Spencer, L., & Capuzza,J.(Eds.). (2015). Transgender communication studies: Histories, trends, and tra-

jectories. Lanham, MD: Lexington.

Treichler, P. (1999). How to have theory in an epidemic: Cultural chronicles ofAIDS. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

76(1), 2-16.

7S, 185-204. Booth, E. T., & Spencer, L. (2016). Sitting in silence:

Managing aural body rhetoric in public restrooms. Communication Studies, 67(2), 209-226. Brookey, R.A. (1996). Acommunity likePhiladelphia. Western 40-S6.

Journal

of Communication,

60(1),

Brookey, R. (1998). Keeping a good wo/man down: Normalizing Deborah Sampson Gannett. Communication Studies, 49, 73-85.

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

Brookey, R. A. (2002). Reinventing the male homo-

sexual: The rhetoric and power of the gay gene. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Brouwer, D. (2004). Corps/corpse: The U.S. military and homosexuality. Western Journal of Communication, 68, 411-430.

Brouwer, D. (2005). Counterpublicity and corporeality in HIV/AIDS zines. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 22, 351-371. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the

subversion ofidentity. New York, NY: Routledge. Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of “sex.” New York, NY: Routledge.

Butler, J. (1994a). Against proper objects. differences

6(2-3), 1-26.

Butler, J. (1994b). Gender as performance: An in-

terview with Judith Butler. Radical Philosophy, 67, 32-39.

Butler, J. (1997). Excitable speech: A politics of the performative. New York, NY: Routledge. Campbell, K. K. (1989). Man cannot speak for her: A critical study of early feminist rhetoric (Vol. 1). New York, NY: Greenwood. Campbell, P. (2012). The procedural

queer:

Substantive due process, Lawrence v. Texas, and queer rhetorical futures. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 98, 203-229.

Cavalcante, A. (2016). “I diditall online”: Transgender

identity and the management of everyday life. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 33(1), 109-122.

AND

CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION

1469

Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 6(2). Cherney, J., & Lindemann, K. (2014). Queering Street: Homosociality, masculinity, and disabil-

ity in Friday Night Lights. Western Journal of Communication, 78(1), 1-21. Chesebro, J. (Ed.). (1981). Gayspeak: Gay male & lesbian communication.

New York, NY: Pilgrim Press.

Christiansen, A., & Hanson, J. (1996). Comedy as cure for tragedy: ACT UP and the rhetoric of AIDS. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 82, 157-170.

Clarkson,

J. (2005S).

Contesting

masculinity’s

makeover: Queer Eye, consumer masculinity, and

“straight-acting” gays. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 29, 235-255. Ciszek, E. (2014). Cracks in the glass slipper. Does it really “Get Better” for LGBTQ youth, or is it just another Cinderella story? Journal ofCommunication Inquiry, 38, 325-340. Connell, R. W, (1987). Gender and power: Society, the person and sexual politics. Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin.

Cooper, B. (2002). Boys Don’t Cry and female masculinity: Reclaiming a life and dismantling the politics of normative heterosexuality. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 19, 44-63.

Cooper, B., & Pease, E. (2008). Framing Brokeback Mountain: How the popular press corralled the “gay cowboy movie.” Critical Studies in Media Communication, 25, 249-273. Corey, F., & Nakayama, T. K. (1997). Sextext. Text

and Performance Quarterly, 17(1), 58-68.

Cavalcante, A. (2017). Breaking into transgender life: Transgender audiences’ experiences with “first of its kind” visibilityinpopular media. Communication, Culture & Critique, 10(3), S38-SSS. Cavalcante, A. (2018). Struggling forordinary: Media and transgender belonging in everyday life. New York: New York University Press.

Cram, E. (2012). “Angie was our sister”: Witnessing

Chavez, K. (2010). Border (in) securities: Normative

de Lauretis, T. (1991). Queer theory: Lesbian and

and differential belonging in LGBTQ and immigrant rights discourse. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 7, 136-155.

Chavez, K. (2013a). Queer migration politics: Activist rhetorics and coalitional possibilities. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Chavez, K. (Ed.). (2013b). Out of bounds? Queer intercultural communication [Special issue].

Corey, F. C., & Nakayama, T. K. (2012). deathTEXT. Western Journal of Communication, 76(1), 17-23.

the trans-formation of disgust in the citizenry of photography. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 98, 411-438.

gay sexualities, an introduction. differences, 3(2), iii—xvili.

DeLuca, K. (1999). Unruly arguments: The body rhetoric of Earth First!, ACT UP, and Queer Nation. Argumentation & Advocacy, 36, 9-21.

Denes, A. (2012). Pillow talk: Exploring disclosures after sexual activity. Western Journal of Communication, 76(2), 91-108.

1470

«+

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

AND

CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION

Denes, A. (2013). Engaging pillow talk: The chal-

Draper, J. (2017). “What has she actually done??!”

lenges of studying communication after sexual activity. International Journal of Communication, 7, 2495-2506.

Gay men, diva worship, and the paratextualization of gay-rights support. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 34(2), 130-137. Dunn, T. (2016). Queerly remembered: Rhetorics for representing the GLBTQ past. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press. Dunn, T. R. (2017). Whence the lesbian in queer monumentality? Intersections of gender and sexuality in public memory. Southern Communication

Denes, A. (2018). Toward a post sex disclosures

model

(PSDM):

Exploring

the associations

among orgasm, self-disclosure, and relationship satisfaction. Communication Research, 45(3), 297-318.

Denes, A., Dhillon, A., & Speer, A. C. (2017). Relational maintenance strategies during the post sex time interval. Communication Quarterly, 65(3), 307-332. Denes, A., & Speer, A. C. (2016). Chatting, snacking, and snuggling: An overview of research

Journal, 82(4), 203-215. Eguchi, S. (2015). Queer intercultural relationality:

An autoethnography of Asian-black (dis)connections in white gay America. Journal ofInternational and Intercultural Communication, 8(1), 27-43.

on post sex communication. In J. Manning &

Eguchi, S., & Asante, G. (2016). Disidentifications

C. Noland (Eds.), Contemporary studies of sexual-

revisited: Queer(y) ing intercultural communica-

ity & communication: Theoretical and applied approaches (pp. 203-216). Dubuque, IA: Kendall-

tion theory. Communication

Hunt. Denes, A., Speer,A. C., Dhillon,A., & Winkler, K. L.

(2016). Future directions in post sex communication research: Exploring long-term relationships, aging, and physiology. In J. F. Nussbaum (Ed.), Communication across the lifespan: ICA theme book (pp. 63-78). New York, NY: Peter Lang. Dhaenens, F. (2012). Gay male domesticity on the

small

screen:

Queer

representations

of gay

homemaking in Six Feet Under and Brothers & Sisters. Popular Communication, 10(3), 217-230. Dhaenens, F. (2013). The fantastic queer: Reading

gay representations in Torchwood and True Blood as articulations of queer resistance. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 30(2), 102-116. Dhaenens, F. (2014). Articulations of queer resistance on the small screen. Continuum, 28(4), 520-531.

Dow, B. (1994). AIDS, perfpective by incongruity, and gay identity in Larry Kramer’s “1,112 and Counting.” Communication Studies, 45(3-4), 225-240.

Theory, 26(2),

171-189.

Eguchi, S., Calafell, B., & Files-Thompson, N. (2014). Intersectionality and quare theory: Fantasizing African American male same-sex relationships in Noah's Arc: Jumping the Broom. Communication, Culture & Critique, 7(3), 371-389.

Eguchi, S., & Roberts, M. (2015). Gay rapping and possibilities: A quare reading of “Throw that Boy p***y”. Text and Performance Quarterly, 35(2-3), 142-157. Eguchi, S., & Washington, M. S. (2016). Race-ing queerness:

Normative

intimacies

in LOGO’s

DTLA. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 40(4), 408-423. Eng, D., Halberstam,J., & Mufioz,J.E. (Eds.). (2005). What's queer about queer studies now? [Special issue]. Social Text, 23(3-4). Erni, J. N. (1998). Queer figurations in the media: Critical reflections on the Michael Jackson sex scandal. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 15, 1S8-180.

gay and lesbian visibility. Critical Studies in Media

Erni, J. N. (2017). Cultural studies, human rights, and the legal imagination: Reframing critical justice. London, U.K.: Routledge.

Communication, 18, 123-140.

Farrell, T. (1993). Norms of rhetorical culture. New

Dow, B. (2001). Ellen, television, and the politics of

Draper, J. (2010). “Gay or not?!” Gay men, straight masculinities, and the construction of the Details audience. Critical Studies in Media Communication,

27, 357-375.

Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Fejes, F. (2008). Gay rights and moral panic: The origins of America’s debate on homosexuality. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

Fejes, F, & Petrich, K. (1993). Invisibility, homophobia, and heterosexism: Lesbians, gays, and the

media. Critical Studies in Mass Communication,

10(4), 396-422. Fischer, M. (2016). #Free_ CeCe: The material convergence ofsocial media activism. Feminist Media

Studies, 16(S), 755-771. Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology ofknowledge & the discourse on language (A. M. S. Smith, Trans.). New York, NY: Pantheon.

Foucault, M. (1978). The history ofsexuality, an introduction: Vol. 1. (R. Hurley, Trans.). New York, NY: Random House. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews @& other writings, 1972-1977 (C. Gordon, L. Marshall,J.Mepham, & K. Soper,

Trans.; C. Gordon, Ed.). New York, NY: Pantheon. Fox,J.,& Warber, K. (2015). Queer identity management and political self-expression on social networking sites: A co-cultural approach to the spiral ofsilence. Journal ofCommunication, 6S(1),

CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION

«

1471

Goltz, D. B., Zingsheim,J.,Masint, T., & Murphy, A. G. (2016). Discursive negotiations of Kenyan LGBTI

identities: Cautions in critical humility. Journal of International

and Intercultural

Communication,

9(2), 104-121. Gray, M. (2009). Out in the country: Youth, media, and queer visibility in rural America. New York, NY: New York University Press.

Griffin, F. H. (2016). Feeling normal: Sexuality and media criticism in the digital age. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Grindstaff, D. (2008). The fist and the corpse: Taming the queer sublime in Brokeback Mountain. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, S, 223-244. Gross, L. (2002). Up from invisibility: Lesbians, gays, and the media in America. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Gross, L. (2005). The past and the future ofgay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender studies. Journal of Communication, SS, 508-528.

Grossberg, L. (1993). Can cultural studies find true happiness in communication? Journal of

79-100.

Fox, R. (2007). Skinny Bones #126-774-835-29: Thin gay bodies signifying a modern plague. Text and Performance Quarterly, 27, 3-19. Fox, R. (2010). Tales of a fighting bobcat: An “auto-

archaeology” of gay identity formation and maintenance. Text and Performance Quarterly, 30, 122-142.

Fox, R. (2013). “Homo’-work: Queering academic communication

AND

and communicating queer in

academia. Text and Performance Quarterly, 33,

state of cultural studies: The discipline of communication and the reception of cultural studies in the United States. In C. Nelson & D. P. Gaonkar

(Eds.), Disciplinarity and dissent in cultural studies (pp. 131-147). New York, NY: Routledge. Grossberg, L. (1997). Bringing it all back home: Essays on cultural studies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Grossberg, L. (2015). The long and winding road of

$8-76.

Gamson,J.(1998). Freaks talk back: Tabloid talk shows

and sexual nonconformity. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Gilder, E. (1989). The process of political praxis: Efforts of the gay community to transform the social significance of AIDS. Quarterly, 37(1), 27-38.

Communication, 43(4), 89-97. Grossberg, L. (1996). Toward a genealogy of the

Communication

co-existence. Cultural Studies, 29(1), 19-22. Gutierrez-Perez, R., & Andrade, L. (2018). Queer of color worldmaking: in the rhetorical archive and the embodied repertoire. Text and

Performance Quarterly, 38(1-2), 1-18. Hall, S. (1985). Significance, representation, ideology: Althusser and the post-structuralist debates.

Goltz, D. B. (2010). Queer temporalities in gay

Critical Studies in Media Communication, 2, 91-114.

male representation. New York, NY: Routledge. Goltz, D. B. (2013). It Gets Better: Queer futures, critical frustrations, and radical potentials.

Halley, J., & Parker, A. (Eds.). (2011). After sex? On writing since queer theory. Durham, NC: Duke

Critical Studies in Media Communication, 30, 135-151.

University Press. Hatfield, J. E. (2017). Dancing southern diaspora:

Alvin Ailey’s blood and the backwardness of

1472

-

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

AND

CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION

Text and Performance

Long, A. A. (2005). Law and nature in Greek

Quarterly 37(1), 1-67. Howard, S. (2014). Black queer identity matrix: Towards

thought. In M. Gagarin & D. Cohen (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to ancient Greek law (pp.

an integrated queer of color framework. New York,

412-430). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University

quare disidentification.

Press.

NY: Peter Lang. coming home, coming with: Models of queer sexu-

Lynch, J. (2007). Memory and Matthew Shepard: Opposing expressions of public memory in tele-

alityin contemporary China. Journal ofInternational

vision movies. Journal of Communication Inquiry,

Huang, S., & Brouwer, D. C. (2018). Coming out,

and Intercultural Communication, 11(2), 97-6.

Johnson, E. P. (2001). “Quare” studies, or (almost) everything I know about queer studies I learned from my grandmother. Text and Performance Quarterly, 21(1), 1-25. King, C. S. (2010). Un-queering horror: Hellbent and the policing of the “gay slasher” Western Journal of Communication, 74, 249-268. King, C. S., & West, I. (2014). This could be the

place: Queer acceptance in Lars and the Real Girl. QED, 1(3), $9-84. Hart, K. P. (2004). We're here, we're queer—and

were better than you: The representation superiority of gay men to heterosexuals on Queer Eye

31, 222-238.

Martin,

J. L.

(2018).

Queer

(in)frequencies:

SiriusXM’s OutQ and the limits of queer listening

publics. Feminist Media Studies, 18(2), 249-263. Marwick,

A., Gray, M., & Ananny,

M.

(2014).

“Dolphins are just gay sharks”: Glee and the queer case of transmedia as text and object. Television & New Media, 15(7), 627-647. McCune,J.(2014). Sexual discretion: Black masculinity

and the politics ofpassing. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. McKinnon, S. (2016). Gendered asylum: Race and violence in US. law and politics. Urbana, IL: University

of Illinois Press.

for the Straight Guy. Journal of Men’s Studies,

Moreman, S., & McIntosh, D. (2010). Brown script-

Kearl, M. K. (2015). “Is gay the new black?” An inter-

nography of Latina drag queens. Communication and Cultural Studies, 7, 11S—13S.

12(3), 241-253.

ings and rescriptings: A critical performance eth-

sectional perspective on social movement rhetoric in California's Proposition 8 debate. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 12(1), 63-82. Landau, J. (2009). Straightening out (the politics of ) same-sex parenting: Representing gay families in

USS. print news stories and photographs. Critical Studies in Media Communication,

26, 80-100.

https://www.coursehero.com/file/6329557 /landau-straightening-out/. LeMaster, B. (2015). Discontents of being and becoming fabulous on RuPaul’s Drag U: Queer

criticism in neoliberal times. Women’s Studies in

Morrall, J. B. (1977). Aristotle. London, UK: Routledge. Morris, C., III. (1996). Contextual twilight/critical liminality: J. M. Barrie’s Courage at St. Andrews, 1922. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 82, 207-227. Morris, C., IL. (1998). “The responsibilities of the critic’: F. O. Matthiessen’s homosexual palimpsest. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 84, 261-282. Morris, C., IIL. (2010). Sexuality and public address: Rhetorical pasts, queer theory, and Abraham Lincoln. In S. Parry-Giles & J. M. Hogan (Eds.),

Communication, 38(2), 167-186. Lee, W. (2003). Kuaering queer theory: My autocri-

The handbook of rhetoric and public address

tography and a race-conscious, womanist, trans-

Morris, C., IIL. (2013). Sunder the children: Abraham

national turn. In G. Yep, K. Lovaas, & J. Elia (Eds.),

Lincoln's queer rhetorical pedagogy. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 99, 395-422. https://www .tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00335630 .2013.836281 ?journalCode=rqjs20. Morris, C., III. (Ed.). (2007). Queering public address: Sexualities in American historical discourse. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.

Queer theory and communication: From disciplining queers to queering the discipline(s) (pp. 147-170). New York, NY: Harrington Park.

Lipari, L. (2002). Queering the public sphere: Liberalism andthe rhetoric of rights. Argumentation & Advocacy, 38, 169-175.

(pp. 398-421). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

Morris, C., III. (Ed.). (2011). Remembering the AIDS quilt. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press. Morris, C., III, & Palczewski, C. (2014). Sexing communication: Hearing, feeling, remembering sex/ gender and sexuality in the NCA. In P. Gehrke & W. Keith (Eds.), A century of communication

AND

CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION

.-

1473

Papacharissi, Z., & Fernback, J. (2008). The aesthetic

power of the Fab 5: Discursive themes of homonormativity in Queer Eye for the Straight Guy. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 32, 348-367.

Patton, C. (1985). Sex and germs: The politics of

studies: The unfinished conversation (pp. 128-165).

AIDS. Boston, MA: South End Press. Patton, C. (1990). Inventing AIDS. New York, NY:

New York, NY: Routledge. Moscowitz, L. (2013). The battle over marriage: Gay rights activism through the media. Urbana-

Routledge. Patton, C. (2002). Globalizing AIDS. Minneapolis,: University of Minnesota Press.

Champaign: University of Illinois Press. Nakayama, T. K., & Corey, F. C. (2003). Nextext. In

Pearson, K., & Lozano-Reich, N. M. (2009). Cultivating

G. Yep, K. Lovaas, & J. Elia (Eds.), Queer theory and communication: From disciplining queers to queering

the discipline(s) (pp. 319-334). New York, NY: Harrington Park. Ng, E. (2013). A “post-gay” era? Media gaystreaming, homonormativity, and the politics of LGBT integration. Communication, Culture & Critique, 6, 258-283. Nietzsche, F. (1989). Beyond good and evil: Prelude to

a philosophy of the future. New York, NY: Vintage. (Original work published 1886) Nietzsche, F. (2009). On the genealogy of morals.

New York, NY: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1887)

Nietzsche, F. (2012). On truth and lies in a nonmoral sense. Munich: Aristeus. (Original work published

1896) Nuru, A. (2014). Between layers: Understanding the communicative negotiation of conflicting identities by transgender individuals. Communication Studies, 65(3), 281-297.

Osorio, R. (2017). Embodying truth: Sylvia Rivera's delivery of parrhesia at the 1973 Christopher Street Liberation Day Rally. Rhetoric Review,

36(2), 151-163.

queer publics with an uncivil tongue: Queer Eye's critical performance of desire. Text and Performance Quarterly, 29, 383-402. Pelle, S. (2010). The “grotesque” pussy: “Transformational shame” in Margaret Cho's stand-up performances. Text and Performance Quarterly, 30, 21-37. Perez, K., & Goltz, D. (2010). Treading across Lines

in the Sand: Performing bodies in coalitional subjectivity. Text and Performance Quarterly, 30, 247-268. Peters, J. D. (1999). Speaking into the air: A history of the idea ofcommunication. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Plato. (2009). Phaedrus. (R. Waterfield, Trans.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Plato. (2008). Gorgias. (R. Waterfield, Trans.).

Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Ramsey, E. M., & Santiago, G. (2004). The conflation of male homosexuality and femininity in Queer Eye for the Straight Guy. Feminist Media Studies, 4, 353-35S. Rand, E. (2004). A disunited nation and a legacy of contradiction: Queer Nation’s construction of identity. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 28,

Shepard murder. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, S,

288-306. Rand, E. (2014). Reclaiming queer: Activist and academic rhetorics of resistance. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

483-S0S.

Rawson, K. (2014). Transgender worldmaking in

Ott, B., & Aoki, E. (2002). The politics of negotiating public tragedy: Media framing of the Matthew

Owen, A. S. (2003). Disciplining “Sextext”: Queers,

fears, and communication studies. In G. Yep,

K. Lovaas, & J. Elia (Eds.), Queer theory and communication: From disciplining queers to queering

the discipline(s) (pp. 297-317). New York, NY: Harrington Park.

cyberspace: Historical activism on the internet. QED, 1(2), 38-60. Rich, C., Schutten,J. & Rogers, R. (2012). “Don’t drop the soap”: Organizing sexualities in the repeal of the U.S. Military’s “Don’t Ask, Don't Tell” policy. Communication Monographs, 79, 269-291.

1474

«

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

AND

CULTURAL

Ringer, J. (Ed.). (1994). Queer words, queer images: Communication and the construction of homosexuality. New York, NY: New York University Press. Roberts, J. (2005). Natural and conventional justice. In C. Rowe & M. Schofield (Eds.), The Cambridge history of Greek and Roman political thought (pp. 345-350). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Rodriguez, N. S. (2018). Hip-hop’s authentic masculinity: A quare reading of Fox’s Empire. Television & New Media, 19(3), 225-240. Samek, A., & Donofrio, T. (2013). “Academic drag”

and the performance ofthe critical personae: An exchange ofsexuality, politics, and identity in the academy. Women’s Studies in Communication, 36,

28-SS. Schiappa, E. (2008). Beyond representational correctness: Rethinking criticism ofpopular media. Albany: SUNY Press. Schiappa, E., Gregg, P., & Hewes, D. (2005). The parasocial contact hypothesis. Communication Monographs, 72, 92-115. Schiappa, E., Gregg, P., & Hewes, D. (2006). Can

one TV show make a difference? Will & Grace and the parasocial contact hypothesis. Journal of Homosexuality, S1(4), 15-37. Scott, B. (2003). Risky rhetoric: AIDS and the cultural practices of HIV testing. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Sedgwick, E. K. (1993). Tendencies. Durham, NC:

Duke University Press. Sender, K. (2004). Business, notpolitics: The making of the gay market. New York, NY: University Press.

Columbia

Sender, K. (2006). Queens for a day: Queer Eye for the Straight Guy and the neoliberal project. Critical Studies in Media 131-151.

Communication,

23,

Skerski, J. (2007). From prime-time to daytime: The domestication of Ellen DeGeneres. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 4, 363-381. Slagle, R. A. (1995). In defense of Queer Nation: From identity politics to a politics of difference. Western Journal of Communication, 59, 85-102.

Sloop, J. (2004). Disciplining gender: Rhetorics of sex identity in contemporary U.S. culture. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.

COMMUNICATION

Sloop, J. (2012). “This is not natural”: Caster Semenya’ss gender threats. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 29, 81-96.

Snorton, C. R. (2014). Nobody is supposed to know: Black sexuality on the down low. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Spencer, L. (2014). Performing transgender identity in The Little Mermaid: From Anderson to Disney. Communication Studies, 6S, 112-127.

Treichler, P. (1999). How to have theory in an epidemic: Cultural chronicles ofAIDS. Durham, NC:

Duke University Press. Van Gilder, B., & Abdi, S. (2014). Identity manage-

ment and the fostering of network ignorance: Accounts of queer Iranian women in the United States. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 43(2), 151-170.

Vesey, A. (2017). “A way to sell your records”: Pop stardom and the politics of drag professionalization on RuPaul’s Drag Race. Television & New Media, 18(7), 589-604. Warner, M. (1991). Introduction: Fear of queer planet [Special issue]. Social Text, 29, 3-17. Weiss, D. (2005). Constructing the queer “I”: Performativity, citationality, and desire in Queer Eye for the Straight Guy. Popular Communication, 3, 73-95. West, I. (2014). Transforming citizenships: Transgender articulations of the law. New York, NY: New York University Press.

West, I. (2015). Analogizing interracial and same-sex marriage. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 48, 561—S82. West, I. (2018). Queer perspectives in communi-

cation studies. In J. Nussbaum (Ed.), Oxford research encyclopedia of communication. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. http:// oxfordre.com/communication/view/ 10.1093 /acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore -9780190228613-e-81. West, L., Frischherz, M., Panther, A., & Brophy, R.

(2013). Queer world-making in the “It Gets Better” campaign. QED, Fall, 49-85. Westerfelhaus, R., & Lacroix, C. (2006). Seeing “straight” throug*h Queer Eye: Exposing the strategic rhetoric of heteronormativity in a mediated ritual of gay rebellion. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 23, 426-444.

QUEER

STUDIES

IN CRITICAL

Wolf, J. (2013). Resurrecting camp: Rethinking the queer sensibility. Communication, Culture & Critique, 6, 284-297,

Yep, G. (2003). The violence of heteronormativity in communication studies: Notes on injury, healing, and queer world-making. In G. Yep, K. Lovaas, & J. Elia (Eds.), Queer theory and communication: From disciplining queers to queering the discipline(s) (pp. 11-59). New York, NY: Harrington Park. Yep, G., Lovaas, K., & Elia, J. (2003). Introduction: Queering communication: Starting the conversation. In G. Yep, K. Lovaas, & J. Elia (Eds.), Queer theory and communication: From disciplin-

ing queers to queering the discipline(s) (pp. 1-10). New York, NY: Harrington Park.

Yep, G., Lovaas, K., & Elia, J. (Eds.). (2003). Queer theory and communication: From disciplining queers to queering the discipline(s). New York, NY: Harrington Park.

NOTES

1. Interestingly, de Lauretis borrowed the term “queer” from a conference hosted by Douglas Crimp. 2. In a corresponding entry on queer studies in communication studies for the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication, Isaac West (2018) details the influence of Judith Butler, Eve Kosofsky

AND

CULTURAL

COMMUNICATION

1475

explicit as Waterfield’s contextualization of the text, but Peters embraces the possibility of eros and agape in the text.

4. Judith Butler’s (1994a) essay on the wisdom of refusing a proper object of study for different disciplines informs and motivates these questions. Butler cautioned against the unnecessary circumscription of feminist theory to focus narrowly on gender or queer theory to limit itself to sexuality. In its place, Butler argued for a multidimensional, intersectional approach to academic

inquiry wherein the disciplines are sites of conversation about topics instead of walls prohibiting the free flow of insights across them. S. Cultural studies itself is a highly contested field, and Larry Grossberg (1993, 1996, 2015) has chronicled the fault lines between cultural studies and communication studies. In brief, Grossberg

finds most communication studies scholarship to be incompatible with cultural studies because communication studies scholarship elevates the communicative act above the contexts of its utter-

ance and circulation. Grossberg (1997) would reverse the emphasis because, for him, in cultural studies “context is everything and everything is

contextual” (p. 25S). 6. A similar pattern developed around other notable lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender media

Sedgwick, and Michel Foucault in much greater

personalities and characters. Communication

detail. 3. Waterfield’s (Plato, 2009) translation restores the palpable lust and sexual teasing between Phaedrus and Socrates, and Waterfield’s introductory essay contextualizes this choice for the reader. Waterfield historicizes same-sex sexual intercourse between men in a broader reading of premodern Greek culture. Waterfield’s frank prose does not shy away from the topic nor does it oversimplify the issues involved in these intergenerational relationships. Unlike many scholars who sap this dialogue of its interest in love by historicizing it away and thus straighten out this history of communication, Waterfield’s treatment of the subject resists compliance with a modernist heterosexist script that discounts premodern sexual encounters as anything other than platonic or transactional. Peters’s (1999) reading of Phaedrus is not as

scholars have investigated the plotlines, acting, and circulation ofWill & Grace (Battles & Hilton-

Morrow, 2002), Ellen (Dow, 2001; Skerski, 2007), Glee (Marwick, Gray, & Ananny, 2014), and RuPaul’s Drag Race (LeMaster, 2015; Vesey, 2017). 7. In the field of interpersonal

communication,

Amanda Denes is developing multiple methods and scales for researching communicative acts before, during, and after sexual contact (Denes, 2012, 2013, 2018; Denes, Dhillon, & Speer, 2017; Denes & Speer, 2016; Denes, Speer, Dhillon, &

Winkler, 2016). Denes’s work may not be articulated to queer theory as its primary interlocutor, but its emphasis on the communicability of sex has transgressed and moved the boundaries of interpersonal communication in queerer directions. Isaac N. West

5 ®

ie ae

ti a]

—~

2

ie .

=

Ie

=

a

,

als

ion =)

a

nl ia as

i

9G

rie

im.

tea?

UE

=

aes

OVS?

2

sl

20

>

Ges

Oe

ies Grea

Ha

fies

i,

bas none

ne oe Nakao Vie) Th UE etal Ci ns 2@@ i thee e Fs ed

od leper (eo

: 4

a»

7

7e

i

sée¥.

tal

.

x

1S

| En!

:

“* =f

@SOul

SP

—s ha

©

ele

a

=“

pees

et 4

Qtedene

ama

f

iv. 21083

arts gmt Crit od Nobu 2 fulebom

doth haan iwae

a

28 parte” Wow ip sit J “atipe

e

ne @

a

ge4 ‘yg wets

J

..¢

Pu

ae

—

CAV

h* 2

M2 ad

usva

rye —?.

Saito Ted ILE tecnaaes

es

Pala

elites

>

amor. j

usted i

iPdectonpelds

eigAy “L. jPeangoeied

wo,

1 Roy.

‘L rw.

—ttear

OT of

A

Scat

«210

a

Fans

—— "

th

LVM

+a

Laan r

>

iin” =

ak

Sty

=>

ons a

ry vetTiearvane toa

a oe

2

=

94)! a

‘

egawan

oaaf Sey

red os

fib

el

—

Wiel 7

;

@

def

CTOto ee

amy h wieeeitaetoen paoohy é

x

ee

(stig

teal na + in

es

ous

7

vat

CLT

Abie

Tee i

‘

4

ties

elOL). Md A aay

MO fone

Eas ties

;

ei ee

CLG

ih

oe

TOES ANd

We ae

Ct Ge

Pd

perp) pbverulrt

(exsicpet teeth

(else

eee

—

~~

0k

.

=

Directory of Contributors

Bryant Keith Alexander

Lee Artz

College of Communication and Fine Arts,

Department of Communication and Creative Arts, Purdue University Northwest

Loyola Marymount University Performance of Race, Culture, and Whiteness

Raisa Alvarado Department of Communication Studies, University ofDenver Rhetoric and Social Movements Colleen E. Arendt Department of Communication Studies,

Concordia University, St. Paul Feminist Organizational Communication

Ronald C. Arnett Department of Communication and Rhetorical

Studies, Duquesne University Ethics, Rhetoric, and Culture

Marxist Traditions in Cultural Studies

Doug Ashwell School of Communication, Journalism, and

Marketing, Massey University Communication and the Global South

Matthew Bost Department ofRhetoric Studies, Whitman College Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri in Communication Studies

Diana Isabel Bowen

Communication Division, Pepperdine University Gloria Anzaldua: From Borderlands to

Nepantla

e

1819

1820

+

DIRECTORY OF CONTRIBUTORS

Marco Briziarelli

Department of Communication and Journalism, The University ofNew Mexico Antonio Gramsci and Communication

Studies; Hegemony in Marxist Traditions Robert Alan Brookey Department of Telecommunications, Ball State University

Michael Warner and Communication Studies

George Cheney Department of Communication, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs Alternative Organizational Culture

Shira Chess Grady College ofJournalism and Mass Communication, University of Georgia Game Studies

Department of Communication Studies, James

Bhavya Chitranshi School ofHuman Studies, Ambedkar University Delhi Rethinking Development Communication

Madison University Neoliberalism and Communication

Department ofEnglish, Trent University

Peter K. Bsumek

Sally Chivers

Jenny Burman

Alzheimer's, Age Panic,

Department of Art History and

Media Discourses of Dementia and Care

Communication Studies, McGill University Colonialism and Postcolonialism

Patrice M. Buzzanell Department of Communication, University of South Florida Feminist Organizational Communication

Donovan Conley

Department of Communication Studies, University ofNevada, Las Vegas Space in Critical Communication Studies Nathan A. Crick

Department of Communication, Texas AGM

Department of Integrated Studies, University of

University Post-Structuralism

Wisconsin-Whitewater at Rock County

Stephen M. Croucher

Ana Caballero Mengibar

Nation, Identity, and Power in the Critical Cultural Studies Tradition

Bernadette Marie Calafell Department of Communication Studies, University of Denver Chicana Studies Antonio Calcagno Department ofPhilosophy, King’s University College Alain Badiou’s New Constructivism and Universalism

Neuroscience:

School of Communication, Journalism, and

Marketing, Massey Business School, Massey University Communication and the Global South

Lincoln Dahlberg Centre for Critical and Cultural Studies, The University of Queensland Cyberlibertarianism Simon Dawes

Department ofEnglish, University ofNevada,

Department of Communication, Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines Liberalism and Neoliberalism

Reno

Anup Dhar

Catherine Chaput

Michel Foucault and Communication Studies; Theories of Economic Justice in the Rhetorical Tradition

School ofHuman Studies, Ambedkar University Delhi Rethinking Development Communication

DIRECTORY OF CONTRIBUTORS

«

1821

John D. H. Downing

Radhika Gajjala

Professor Emeritus of Communication,

School ofMedia and Communication, Bowling

Southern Illinois University Social Movement Media and Media

Green State University Women Entrepreneurs, Global

Activism

Microfinance, and Development 2.0

Susan J. Drucker

Antonis Galanopoulos School ofPolitical Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

Department of Journalism and Mass Media

Studies, Hofstra University Urban Communication Mohan Jyoti Dutta Department of Communications and New

Media, National University ofSingapore Global Health and Critical Studies; Power

and Control in Communication Studies J. Daniel Elam Department of Comparative Literature,

University ofHong Kong Homi Bhabha and Communication Studies

Ernesto Laclau and Communication Studies

Henry A. Giroux

Department ofEnglish and Cultural Studies, McMaster University Public Pedagogy and Manufactured Identities in the Age of the Selfie Culture Antje Gliick

School ofMedia and Communication, University of Leeds De-Westernization and Decolonization

in Media Studies

Charles Ess Department ofMedia and Communication,

Gary Gumpert Professor Emeritus of Communication, Queens

University of Oslo

College of the City University ofNew York Urban Communication

Digital Media Ethics

of Utah Mapping and Spatial Studies

Rachel Hall Department of Communication and Rhetorical Studies, Syracuse University Surveillance and Public Space

Deanna L. Fassett

Atilla Hallsby

Department of Communication Studies, San

Department of Communication, North Carolina State University Psychoanalytic Methods and Critical Cultural Studies

Joshua Ewalt Department of Communication, University

Jose State University Critical Communication Pedagogy: Toward “Hope in Action”

Kathleen E. Feyh Department of Communication and Rhetorical Studies, Syracuse University A Survey of Materalism in Thought and Communication

Christina R. Foust Department of Communication Studies, University ofDenver Rhetoric and Social Movements

Judith Hamera

Lewis Center for the Arts, Princeton University Performance Studies in Critical Communication Studies

Joshua S. Hanan

Department of Communication Studies, University ofDenver Theories of Economic Justice in the

Rhetorical Tradition

1822

»

DIRECTORY OF CONTRIBUTORS

Jayson Harsin

Department of Global Communication, American University of Paris Post-Truth and Critical Communication Marouf Hasian, Jr.

Department of Communication, University of Utah Critical Perspectives on Humanitarian Discourses

Axel Heck Department of Political Science, Christian-Albrechts-Universitat zu Kiel Visuality and Security Larissa Hjorth School ofMedia and Communication, RMIT University

Digital Cultures and Critical Studies Jeff Hoffmann Department of Communication and

Journalism, The University ofNew Mexico Hegemony in Marxist Traditions

Matthew Houdek Department of Communication Studies, University of Iowa Public Memory Koichi Iwabuchi

Monash Asia Institute, Monash University

Dal Yong Jin School of Communication, Simon Fraser University

Political Economy of the Media Davi Johnson Thornton

Department of Communication Studies, Southwestern University Rhetorical Construction of Bodies Vasant Kaiwar Department of History, Duke University

Ranajit Guha’s Historiography of Colonial india E. Ann Kaplan Department of Cultural Analysis and Theory, Stony Brook University Alzheimer’s, Age Panic, Neuroscience: Media Discourses of Dementia and Care

Eric Karikari

Department of Communication and Journalism, The University ofNew Mexico Antonio Gramsci and Communication

Studies Diane Marie Keeling Department of Communication Studies, University of San Diego Posthumanism

Communication: Renationalization in a

Casey Ryan Kelly Department of Critical Communication and

Globalized World

Media Studies, Butler University

Globalization, Culture, and

Sarah J. Jackson

Department of Communication Studies, Northeastern University Progressive Social Movements and the Internet Fiona Jenkins

Centre for Moral, Social, and Political Theory, School of Philosophy, Australian National University

Judith Butler and Communication Studies

Representations of Native Americans in

the Mass Media Amos Kiewe

Department of Communication and Rhetorical Studies, Syracuse University Anti-Semitism and Communication

Young Yun Kim Department of Communication, The University of Oklahoma Cross-Cultural Adaptation

DIRECTORY OF CONTRIBUTORS

Edward Lubich Kuperman

English Faculty, Berkeley Preparatory School Donna Haraway and Communication

Studies Kevin Douglas Kuswa English Faculty, Berkeley Preparatory School Donna Haraway and Communication

Studies Claudia Lagos Lira Instituto de la Comunicacion e Imagen,

Universidad de Chile and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Jesus Martin Barbero and Communication Studies

Oliver W. Lembcke Department of Comparative Government,

University ofErfurt Giorgio Agamben’s Political Theory

André Lemos Department of Communication, Federal University of Bahia Cyberculture and Globalization

Lisbeth A. Lipari Department of Communication, Denison University Communication Ethics

Ashley Noel Mack

Department of Communication Studies, Louisiana State University Critical Approaches to Motherhood Josina M. Makau Division ofHumanities and Communication, California State University, Monterey Bay Dialogue, Listening, and Ethics

«-

1823

Matthew S. May Department of Communication, Texas A&M University Althusser and Structuralism in

Communication Studies; Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri in Communication Studies

Steven K. May

Department of Communication, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Labor, Culture, and Communication

Vicki Mayer

Department of Communication, Tulane University

Cultural and Creative Industries Bryan J. McCann

Department of Communication Studies, Louisiana State University Materialist Rhetoric

Robert McDonald Department of Communication Studies,

University ofKansas Slavoj Zizek and Comunication Studies Jim McGuigan

Emeritus Professor of Cultural Analysis, Loughborough University Raymond Williams and Communication Studies

Toby Miller School ofJournalism, Media, and Cultural Studies, University of Cardiff Cultural Studies and Communication; Néstor Garcia Canclini and Communication Studies; Stuart Hall and Communication Studies

Dana Mastro Department of Communication, University of

Vincent Mosco

California, Santa Barbara Race and Ethnicity in U.S. Media Content and Effects

University

Professor Emeritus of Communication, Queen's Political Economies of Media Technologies

1824

DIRECTORY

OF CONTRIBUTORS

Debashish Munshi Department of Communication, University of

Waikato Alternative Organizational Culture Patrick Murphy

Department ofMedia Studies and Production, Temple University Critical Audience Studies Madhavi Murty Feminist Studies Department, University of California, Santa Cruz

Chandra Talpade Mohanty and Communication Studies Majia Nadesan School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Arizona State University Overview in Critical and Cultural Organizational Communication

Marguerite Nguyen Lehman Department of Communication Arts and Sciences, Pennsylvania State University Posthumanism Ned O’Gorman

Department of Communication, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Media Technologies in Communication and Critical Cultural Studies Kent A. Ono

Department ofCommunication, University of Utah Race, Nationalism, and Transnationalism

Brian L. Ott

Department of Communication Studies, Texas Tech University Affect in Critical Studies Mahuya Pal

Department of Communication, University of South Florida Labor Politics in the Neoliberal Global Economy

Phaedra C. Pezzullo College ofMedia, Communication and Information, University of Colorado, Boulder Environment

Damien Smith Pfister

Department of Communication, University of Maryland

Public Sphere(s), Publics, and Counterpublics Sean Phelan School of Communication, Journalism, and

Marketing, Massey University Liberalism and Neoliberalism

Jason Phillips Department of Telecommunications, Ball State University

Michael Warner and Communication Studies

Kendall R. Phillips Department of Communication and Rhetorical Studies, Syracuse University Public Memory M. Madhava Prasad Department of Cultural Studies, The English and Foreign Languages University

Popular Culture and Cultural Studies Swapnil Rai Center for Contemporary South Asia, Watson Institute forInternational and Public Affairs, Brown University

Arjun Appadurai and Critical Cultural Studies Tania Ramalho Department of Curriculum and Instruction, State University of

New York at Oswego Paulo Freire and Communication Studies

DIRECTORY OF CONTRIBUTORS

Malcolm K. Read Department of Hispanic Languages and Literature, Stony Brook University Juan Carlos Rodriguez and Michel Foucault: Discourse, Ideology, and the

Unconscious

Zazil Reyes Garcia Communication Arts, University of the Incarnate Word Visual Rhetoric

«

Adrienne Shaw Department ofMedia Studies and Production, Temple University Critical Audience Studies Raka Shome Department of Communications and New Media, National University of Singapore Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak: Relevance for Communication Studies

Helene A. Shugart

Marnie Ritchie

Department of Communication, University

Department of Communication, Pacific

of Utah Critical Food Studies

Lutheran University Brian Massumi and Communication Studies

John Rountree Department of Communication Arts and

Science, Pennsylvania State University Jurgen Habermas and Communication

Studies C. Kyle Rudick Department of Communication Studies,

University ofNorthern Iowa Critical Communication Pedagogy: Toward “Hope in Action”

Freya Schiwy Department ofMedia and Cultural Studies, University of California, Riverside Decolonization and Collaborative Media: A Latin American Perspective

Ralph Schroeder Oxford Internet Institute, University

of Oxford Big Data and Communication Research

Katherine Sender Department of Communication Studies, University ofMichigan Critical Audience Studies

1825

Kate Siegfried Department of Communication, Texas AGM University Althusser and Structuralism in Communication Studies

Claire Sisco King Department of Communication Studies, Vanderbilt University Critical Cultural Approaches to Gender and Sex Catherine R. Squires Department of Communication Studies, University ofMinnesota Angela Y. Davis and Communication Studies Yannis Stavrakakis

School of Political Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Ernesto Laclau and Communication Studies

Shannon Sullivan

Department of Philosophy, University ofNorth Carolina, Charlotte Critical Whiteness Studies

Robert T. Tally, Jr. Department ofEnglish, Texas State University Fredric Jameson and Cultural Studies

1826

+«

DIRECTORY

OF CONTRIBUTORS

Dinah Tetteh School ofMedia and Communication, Bowling Green State University Women Entrepreneurs, Global

Microfinance, and Development 2.0 Armond Towns Department of Communication Studies, University ofRichmond A Fanonian Philosophy of Race; Paul Gilroy and Communication Studies Mary E. Triece

School of Communication, The University of Akron Ideology in Marxist Traditions; Movements and Resistance in the

United States, 1800 to the Present

Myra Washington Department of Communication and Journalism, The University ofNew Mexico Race, Nationalism, and Transnationalism

Isaac N. West Department of Communication Studies, Vanderbilt University Queer Studies in Critical and Cultural Communication

Mark Wheeler Department of Social Sciences, London Metropolitan University Celebrity Politics and Cultural Studies within the United States and United Kingdom J. Macgregor Wise Department of Communication, Arizona State University

Gilles Deleuze and Communication Studies

Index

Note: Page numbers printed in boldface indicate a major discussion, those followed by “f” indicate figures and illustrations, “t” indicates tables. Page numbers followed by “n” indicate a note and the note number follows. Aadhaar card, in India, 1356 Aarseth, Espen, 668

ACRAWSA (Australian Critical Race and Whiteness

AASS (American Anti-Slavery society), 1085-1086,

active trust, 1335

_ a

1088

ability, bodies and, 1614-1616 abjection, identity and, 884

Studies Association), 354 activism. See also resistance movements; social movements

bodies and, 1366

abolitionist movement, 1084-1089, 1111, 1650

CCP and classroom as site of, 291-292

About Chinese Women (Kristeva), 682

celebrity, 177-179 Chicana studies and history of, 193-197

Abrahams, Roger, 1224 Abrego, Carment, 786 absolutism, ethnic, 1185-1186 abstractness, affect and, 4-5

clicktivism/slacktivism and, 1370 collaborative media and, 445-446, 456-459 commemoration and, 1411-1412

abusive speech, offensive speech compared to, $02 academic systems, global inequalities in, 477-481

culture jamming and, 1367 cyberlibertarianism and, 435-436

acculturation, 359-361, 370

deliberative, 502-504

global health processes of, 749

Foucault on revolutionary, 1075-1076

Achter, Paul, 1620-1621 Acker, J., 931-934

hacktivists and, 436-437 hashtag, 1374

Acquiring Genomes (Marguilis and Sagan), 556

HIV/AIDS, 1467

e

1827

1828

+«

INDEX

activism (Continued) immigration rights, 1370

mapping and, 975 of Negri, 1034 online, characteristics of, 1369-1371

WAOWAUIMUE!

UL IOIEE ils 702

VOLUME

3) PP

performance, human rights and, 1226 place and, 975

Jameson on, 2

symbols and, 1366 women’s health, motherhood and, 250-251 workerism and, 1032-1034

The Activist, 1S65

activist learning, CCP revitalization of, 295-298 activist media, 1648 actor-network theory (ANT), 673, 713

Acts ofActivism (Madison, D. S.), 1226 actualism, 864

ACT UP (AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power), 1366, 1467, 1604 AD. See Alzheimer’s disease Adams, John, 1053 adaptation. See cross-cultural adaptation adaptive personality, 366 adjustment, 359

i/ Otaleliac

emotion compared to, 159-160 extralinguistic effects and, 158-161 generality and, $ Grossberg on, H-12 Guattari on, 7-11 as intensive force, 7-11

queer studies, politics and, 1467 radio and, 456

2 PDS

as elemental state, 3-7

online, rise of, 1367-1369

online, identity, power and, 1373-1375

VOLUME

Il 79-19 1s

intersubjectivity and, 7 Lacan on, 12, 18n4, 18n5

linguistic turn and, 7-8 Massumi on, 2-3, 9, 159-161, 1742

non-representational theory and, 10 posthumanism and, 1301-1302 postmodernism and, 2 power and, 161 primary, 3-6 public memory and, 1412-1413 social movements, Internet and, 1372-1373 Spinoza on, 1-2, 11 terror and, 3-4

theory of atmospheres and, 13-14 urgency and, 4 virtual and, 159 affectio, 1-2, 8

affective competence, 363

affective state apparatus (ASA), 1144

advanced liberalism, 950

affectus, 1-2, 8 affirmative action, neoliberalism and, 1146 AFL. See American Federation of Labor Africa de-Westernization, decolonization and, 475-476 telegraph and colonialism in, 210 African American Pamphlet Collection, 1111

adversarial model of communication, 493-494, 503

African Americans. See also critical whiteness studies

Adorno, Theodor, 306, 392, 1539, 1737

on art and capitalism, 1274 culture industries and, 377-378, 993, 1019, 1273-1274

on ideology, 825

on political economy of media, 1252 on popular culture, 1273

Adversus Judeaus (Saint Chrysostom), 94

in AFL, 1101-1102

advertising. See also consumption

antislavery movement and, 1084-1089 audience exposure to unfavorable depictions of,

as art, 1537

Native American depictions in, 1566 aesthetics

1480-1481

critical whiteness studies and, 345-356

mapping and, 973 political, of celebrity politics, 171-172

labor movements and, 1100-1102

posthumanism and, 1299-1300

media depictions of, 1478-1481

affect abstractness and, 4-5

in IWW, 1102

motherwork and, 1106

movie portrayals of, 1480

autonomy and, 160

policing, surveillance in public space and, 1696

CAS and, 13, 1302

television portrayals of, quality of, 1479-1480 television portrayals of, quantity of, 1478-1479 Women’s Movement and, 1091-1092 Africanism, critical whiteness studies and, 349-350

communication studies and, 160-161 in critical studies, 1-14 Davis, D., on rhetoric and, 1301-1302 Deleuze on, 1, 7-11, 18n1

Afriethics, 475-476

VOLUME VOLUME

PRY 1s)

VOLUME

2. PP. $73-1178

INDEX

e

1829

3 PP. 1179-1918

Afrocentricity, 1491 Against Race (Gilroy), 1179, 1186-1188, 1191-1193 Agamben, Giorgio. See also Homo Sacer project ban and, 724-725, 736

on bare life and good life, 721-722, 732

on biopolitics, 726-727, 729, 731, 1146 on divine power, 730

Alexie, Sherman, 1556, 1564

Algeria

censorship and French colonial, 215 journalism and French colonial, 214 media for anticolonialism organization in, 216-218

media in postcolonial, 219-220

on media and sovereignty, 731 on messianic politics, 733, 738

movies and French colonial, 213 radio in French colonial, 211 Algerian People’s Party (PPA), 215 algorithms, digital cultures and, 508-509

on natural life, 725-726

Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore, 72

on political dimension of thinking, 733-734 political theory of, 721-740

Aliceheimer’s (Walrath), 71-72 alienation, capitalism and, 915

on politics and law, 722-723, 731-732, 739-740

Allen, Danielle, 903

on Holocaust, 729, 735

on powerlessness of sovereignty, 729-730

Allison, Eric W., 1765

on power oflaw, 721-722 on pure politics, 731-732, 738-739 on sovereignty, 723-724

Allison, Mary Ann, 1765

state of exception and, 727-729, 733, 735-736

thanatopolitics and, 737 agency CCA and, 752-753

in CCP, 292 Chicana feminism and, 197-198

definition of, 1290

Grossberg on, 1671 health as interplays of culture, structure, and, 753 humanism and, 1290

Marxist approach to, 1299

allure (fascino), 105-106 ALTAR: Cruzando Fronteras, Building Bridges, 780, 791-792

alterity, communication ethics and, 238-239 Alterman, Eric, 1323, 1328 alternate reality games (ARGs), 674 alternative, meaning of, 30 alternative culture, 1538 alternative media in apartheid South Africa, 1367, 1661 definition of, 1647 social movements and, 1366-1367 alternative organizational culture, 30-40

materialist rhetoric and, 1011 neoliberalism and crisis of, 1424-1426

of Apple, 37 cooperatives and, 34

passion and, 1733 psychoanalysis and, 1400-1401 public sphere destruction and, 1425

feminism and, 35, 38-39

rhetorical, posthumanism and, 1290-1292 agential realism, 1674-1675 aging AD and, 57

media discourses and representations of, 56-75 in movies, feminism and, $8 Agre, Philip, $34 Ahmed, Sara, 12-13, 1700-1701

Al (artificial intelligence), 539. See also social robots AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP), 1366, 1467, 1604 AIDS Quilt, 1418, 1467 AIM (American Indian Movement), 1558, 1566 ALAIC (Latin American Association of Communication

Researchers), 841 Alexander, Bryant Keith, 1229-1230 Alexander Craft, Renée, 1228-1229

of Google, 37 key features of, 39-40 Marxism and, 35 nationalism and, 36

neoliberalism and, 36-38

not-for-profit sector and, 37-38 organizational history and, 32-35 PR and, 34 social media and, 39 team-based, 34-35

terminology of, 30-32 visibility of, 39 Althusser, Luis, 189, 1379, 1386

biography of, 45-46 capitalism and, 47 cultural studies and, 308, 994-996

death of, 46 discursive unconscious and, 869-870 on economic justice, 1740-1741

1830

+

INDEX

Althusser, Luis (Continued) epistemological break and, 858 feminism and, $3-S4 Foucault and, 856-857, 859-860, 869, 1065-1066 future readings on, 52-54 Hall, S., and, 1684 on Hegelian dialectic and Marx, 48-49

on hegemony, 801 ideological unconsciousness and, 857-858 on ideology, 51-53, 306, 657-658, 801, 826, 918,

1633, 1740 interpellation and, 51-52, 306, 826

VOUUME

We

VOLUME)

3 PRPs 1179-1998

PrlSsi72

VOLUME

2eP

Rr S73m ll 78

AMEDI (Mexican Association for the Right to Information), 1159 America by Heart (Palin), 118-119 American Anti-Slavery society (AASS), 1085-1086, 1088 American Federation of Labor (AFL), 924-925, 1112 African Americans in, 1101-1102 formation of, 1101 women in, 1101

American Indian Movement (AIM), 1558, 1566 American neoliberalism, 1143-144 American Psychiatric Association, 1107

American Psycho (Ellis), 1432-1433

on Marxism, 44, 1065-1066 on materialism, 54, 1715-1718, 1740

Amin, Samir, 1426

mental health of, 45

notoriety of, 43

amplitude modulation (AM), 1015 Amsden, Brian, 1077-1078

overdetermination, structuralism and, 48—S1

Andean Oral History Workshop (THOA), 452

PCE and, 45-46

Anderson, Benedict, 124, 207, 77S

Rodriguez,J.C., and, 856-857, 860 on RSAs and ISAs, 306, 995

on social reproduction, $3 Spinoza and, 54 on structural causality, 1716 structuralism in communication studies and, 43-54, 825-826

Amoore, Louise, 1802

on nation, 1118-1119

on nationalism, 814 Anderson, Perry, 656 Andrejevic, Mark, 1700 Ang, len, 1277

Anholt, Simon, 766

animals, posthumanism and, 1300-1301

Altieri, Charles, 3

animism, 861, 867, 874

The Alzheimer’s Case, 66

Annals ofRural Bengal (Hunter, W. W.), 1519

Alzheimer’s disease (AD). See also dementia

Annan, Kofi, 341 Anonymous, 436-437

absence ofself and, 61-62, 66-67

aging and, $7 alternative conceptions of, 71-75 care facilities compared to home care for, 66-67

Another Cosmopolitanism (Benhabib), 1450 ANT (actor-network theory), 673, 713

care facilities for, in movies, 63-64, 67-70 escape from care facilities for, 67 gender and movies on, 65-66

anthropological machine, 725-726 Anti-Oedipus (Deleuze and Guattari), 699, 707

group subjectivity and, 73 horror of care facilities for, 70 humanities age studies and, 57-58 incidence of, in United States, 56

antagonism, 591, $96

anti-Semitism communication and, 92-103 creation of Israel and, 95-97 definition of, 92, 93

in journalism, 61-62 media discourses and representations of, 56-75

Dreyfus Affair and, 101-102 in early Christianity, 94-96 financial stereotypes and, 98

movie case studies on, 62-70 neuroscience, brain and, $8-61

Holocaust and, 93 in Islam, 96-97

restrictive policies in care facilities for, 74

predatory identities in Holocaust and, 133 The Protocols of the Wise Elders of Zion and, 100-101

stages of, 71 AM (amplitude modulation), 1015 Amanecer de un Sueno, 66 Amaya, Hector, 779

Ambedkar University, Delhi, 1586-1587, 1592n4 ambient biopower, neoliberalism as, 1145 ambiguity, security and, 1800-1801 ambivalence, colonialism and, 815

race and, 102-103

rhetorical perspective on, 93-94 as scapegoating, 97-101 secular practices and, 97 terminology of, 93 theft of enjoyment and, 1638-1639 theological perspective on, 93-94

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. $73-1178

usury and, 98-99 Vatican II Council and, 95 antislavery movement, 1084-1089, L111, 1650 antitheatrical prejudice, performance studies and, 1219-1220 antiwar movement, social movement media and, 1651 Anzaldua, Gloria Evangelina, 198, 202-204, 778-792 awards of, 788

biographical information on, 778 borderlands and, 778-784 Chicana feminism and, 779, 788

on gender normativity, 782 on “geography ofselves” and identity, 786-788 Google Doodle on, 792, 792f on home, 782-783

on intersectionality, 785 literature on, 788-790 on nepantla, 78S—787 on oppression, 779 politics of archives on, 791 primary sources on, 790-791

recurring characters in work of, 783-784

sociology and, 789 on Virgin of Guadalupe, 784 AolR (Association of Internet Researchers), 509 Aoki, Eric, 1412

apartheid, alternative media in South Africa and, 1367, 1661 Appadurai, Arjun, 273 CCS and, 123-135 on disjunctures and globalization, 124-126 on ethnonationalisms, 129-130

global flows and, 124-126 on global terrorism, 130-131 on grassroots globalization, 134-135 on locality, 416 on modernity and colonialism, 126-128 on post-national identities, 128-130 Public Culture started by, 123 Pukar and, 135

on violence and globalization, 131-134 Apple, alternative organizational culture of, 37 APPO (Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca), 457 The Apprentice, 179-180 AR (augmented reality), 674, 1769 Arab-European Association for Media and Communication Researchers (AREACORE), 479-480

Arabs de-Westernization, decolonization and, 476-477

media depictions of, 1485-1486 Arab Spring, 1657-1659

INDEX

-

1831

Archaeologies of the Future (Jameson), 658, 660-661 archeology, Foucault and, 1067-1069 The Archeology of Knowledge (Foucault), 869, 1064 archetypes, 1165 psychoanalysis and, 1384 architecture, urban communication and, 1764 archives

on Anzaldua, politics of, 791 digital environmental communication and, 584-585

performance studies and, 1231-1233 Subaltern Studies and, 691-692

AREACORE (Arab-European Association for Media and Communication Researchers), 479-480 area studies, globalization and, 134 Arellano, Victoria, 974-975

Arendt, Hannah, 99, 101, 614, 616, 727, 1425 on Fanon, 627

on human rights, 728

on on on on

politics and economics, 1729 promotional culture and PT, 1331-1332 public lying, 1334 public pedagogy, 1427

on totalitarianism, 728-729, 737, 1437

Argentinian Socialist Party (PSA), 589 ARGs (alternate reality games), 674 Aristotle, 240, 1084

on language and consciousness, 1735 materialism and, 1707

polis theory and, 725-726 queer studies and, 1463 Arizona Senate Bill 1070, 1698 Armada, Bernard, 1410 Arnett, Ronald, 245 Arnold, Matthew, 393 Arraes, Miguel, 1196 Arrizén, Alicia, 202

art. See also specific types advertising as, 1537

capitalism and, 1274 digital cultures and, 513-514, 513f, S14f green applied, 579 popular culture and, 1270-1271 rhetoric as, 1606-1607

sensation and, 8-9

Virgin of Guadalupe in, 198-199 articulation, 831

discourse theory and, 594 Hall, S., on, 1685

populism and, 603 artificial emotions, sexbots and, 543

artificial intelligence (AI), $39. See also social robots

The Art of Interpretation (Bacon, W.), 1223

1832

¢

INDEX

VOLUME

Artz, Lee, 1754

IRR, tas72

VOLUME

VOLUME

2) PP. S 7350178

3) PRP UU79=1918

Australia

ASA (affective state apparatus), 1144

Chinese diaspora in, 772-773

Asante, Molefi, 1491 Asen, Robert, 904, 907, 1450 on economic justice, 1753

creative industries and, 382

Asian Americans, media depictions of, 1484-1485

cultural studies in, 398-399 Global South and, 227 Australian Critical Race and Whiteness Studies

askesis, 1074-1075 Assange, Julian, 436 Assassination Market, 434

Association (ACRAWSA), 354 authenticity personal, 171

assemblages collective, 707-708 Deleuze and Guattari on, 707-709, 713-714 feudal, 708 video game studies and, 673

space and, 972 voice and, 1494 author, Barthes on death of, 1312-1313 authoritarianism social movement media and, 1656

assembly, politics of, 890-892 Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO), 457 assimilation, 359-360, 370-371

surveillance and, 1436 authority, journalism and, 1331 Autobiography (Malcolm X), 1408

Assmann, Aleida, 1415

autoethnography

Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR), 509 asymmetrical warfare, 339 Atanarjuat, the Fast Runner, 450 Atari, 666 Atlanta Braves, 1566, 1568 The Atlantic, 210

dialogic potential of, 1229-1230 origin of, 1229 for performance of race, culture and whiteness, 1214-1216 performative writing and, 1229-1231 space and, 1673 Autonomia Operaia, 1035-1036 autonomist Marxism economic justice and, 1743-1744 Hardt and Negri influenced by, 1030-1031, 1037

Atlas Shrugged (Rand, A.), 1432 atmospheres, theory of, 13-14 “The Atomization of Man” (Lowenthal), 1428 Attali, Jacques, 395

attention economy, PT and, 1329-1330 Attucks, Crispus, 1411

labor and, 920-921

autonomy affect and, 160

audience commodity theory, of Smythe, 1262

alternative organizational culture and, 40

audience exposure to African Americans, unfavorable depictions of,

erotic love and, $44 liberalism and, 938

1480-1481

Avatar, 1568

to Latinos, unfavorable depictions of,

Away From Her, 63-64, 66

1483-1484 positive implications of racial/ethnic depictions in,

Aymara Katarista movement, in Bolivia, 452 Azione Catholica, 1034

1486-1487

Aztlan, 19S

The Audience in Everyday Life (Bird), 270 audiences

commodification of, 1241-1242 fragmentation of, PT and, 1323 performance shaped by, 1207 reception, 831 audience studies. See critical audience studies augmented reality (AR), 674, 1769 August, Bille, 65, 75 Aune, James Arnt on economic justice, 1750 on ideology, 1749 on Marxism and rhetoric, 1750 Austin,J.L., 882, 896, 1221

Babich, Babette, 1067 Baby Lucent, 51S—S16 background emotions, $ Bacon, Francis, 9 Bacon, Wallace, 1223 Badiou, Alain constructivism and universalism of, 19-27 ethics and, 26-27 on events, 20-26 on fidelity to events, 22 on intensity of events, 23-25 on laws and events, 22-23 on naming of events, 25

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. $73=1178

philosophical beginnings of, 19

on philosophy and truth, 20-21 on rhetoric, 1404n1 set theory and, 21, 27

on subjectivity of events, 25-26 on temporality of events, 26 bad sex, 1060

Baha’, reversibility and, 490

Baidu Baike, 138 Baker, Houston, Jr., 1417 Baker, Keith Michael, 90S

INDEX

Belafonte, Harry, 178 Bell, Duncan, 956 Bell, Elizabeth, 1205-1206 Bell McDonald, Katrina, 257-258 Beltran, Luis Ramiro, 266 Bengal

historiography of, 1514 Mutiny of 1857 in, 1519 Permanent Settlement of 1793 in, 1509 Bengalee, 216-217

ban, Homo Sacer project and, 724-725, 736

Benhabib, Seyla, 492, 496, 892, 904-905 on public sphere, 1450 Benjamin, Walter, 658, 723, 888-890, 1769 Martin-Barbero influenced by, 847-848

banal inter-nationalism, 771, 773-774

Bennett, Jane, 11, 714

Band Aid, 178-179

Bennett, Tony, 1276, 1701-1702

Bannon, Steve, 180

Barad, Karen, 1674-1675, 1677

Benson, Thomas, 1408 Bentham, Jeremy, 241, 1071, 1701 Berardi, Franco, 1045 Berelson, Bernard, 1018

Baran, Paul, 1252

Berland, Jody, 577

Barbrook, R., 438-439

Berlant, Lauren, 893, 10S9

Bakhtin, Mikhail, 1223-1224, 1279, 1649-1650

Baldwin, James, 348-349

Bano, Shah, 133

Bantu Educational Kinema Experiment (BEKE), 213

bare life, 721-722, 725-726, 728, 732, 734-735

Barker, Martin, 379 Barnard, Chester, 1164 Barrett, Michele, $3 Barthes, Roland, 318, 1231, 1316-1317

on post-structuralism and death of author, 1312-1313 Basak, Nilmani, 1514 basic emotions. See primary emotions Basilio, Daniele, 780 Basting, Anne, 56, 57, 58, 60-61, 73 Battle in Seattle, WTO and, 1368-1369, 1658

Battle of Algiers, 215

on queer theory, 1460 Berlin, Isaiah, 937, 955-956 Berliner, Alan, 74 Bernardi, Franco “Bifo,” 713 Bernasconi, Robert, 634

Bernhardt, Stephen, 1782 Bernstein, DanielJ.,425 Bernstein, Robin, 1232-1233 Berevalno

pore

The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel, 68-70 Between Facts and Norms (Habermas), 900-901, 1448-1449

Baudrillard, Jean, 394, 1322 on ideology, 827-828 Bauman, Richard, 1221, 1224

Between Past and Future (Arendt), 616 Beverley, J., 459 Bezos, Jeff, 294

Bauman, Zygmunt, 232, 242, 407

Bhabha, Homi K., 617, 1125

Bayley, John, 62 BBSs (bulletin board systems), 411, 422n2 BCCCS (Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies), 814, 1738-1739 Beach, Adam, 1563-1564 Beasley-Murray, Jon, 600-602

on ambivalence and colonialism, 815 communication studies and, 812-818 criticism on work of, 813 on cultural difference and colonialism, 815

Beauvoir, Simone de, 249-250, 624n6, 880-881, 1092

on hybridity, 816-817 influences on, 813-814 intellectual range of, 814

Beck, Ulrich, 1796

methodology of, 817-818

Becoming Intercultural (Kim), 373

on mimic men and colonialism, 815-816

Becoming Virtual (Lévy), 713

on nation, 1119 postcolonialism and, 812-813, 817-818

behaviorism, 3

Being and Event (Badiou), 21, 2S

on race and identity, 817-818 Bhaduri, Bhubaneswari, 691

BEKE (Bantu Educational Kinema Experiment), 213

Bhaskar, Roy, 858

behaviors, health, 750

1833

1834

e¢

INDEX

VOLUME

IVP Py

tas72

VOLUME

292 Pas738-UL78

Vi@ENOIMIEWS =PsP i 17,9 Sito es

bias, 49S

The Birth of the Clinic (Foucault), 860, 1064, 1068

Biesecker, Barbara, 1078-1079, 1386, 1754

Bitcoin, 432

on ideology, 1749

Big Agriculture (Big Ag), 321-322

BitTorrent, 429 Black, Edwin, 832

communication research and, 137-151

The Black Atlantic (Gilroy), 1186, 1190, 1192 black feminism, motherhood critiques from, 257-258 black future, Gilroy on, 1188-1191

definition of, 148

black liberation, Gilroy on cultural studies and,

digital labor and, 1261

1179-1180 #BlackLivesMatter, 1374

big data. See also quantified self access to, 137-138, 148

Facebook and social networking sources of, 140-142 force, communication ethics, and, 238 future uses and trends in, 1S0-151 haves and have-nots of, 1260

Black Panther Party (BPP), 81, 1598 Black Power, 84-86

Black Public Sphere Collective, 1446 Black Reconstruction in America (Du Bois), 347

“high-consensus rapid-discovery” science and, 148-149

Black Robe, 1589-1560

limitations of, 149 literature on, 151

black studies, Fanon and, 627-628

mobile phones and, 146-147

Black Vernacular (hooks), 1787

political economy and, 1257, 1259-1261

privacy issues with, 1260-1261

Blackwell, Maylei, 194-196 The Black Worker, 1101-1102

Schiller, D., on, 1259-1260

Blair, Anthony, 1783-1785

search engines as source of, 145-146, 1259 security and, 1803

Blair, Carole, 1010, 1077, 1079, 1412

sources of, 137, 1259 Twitter and microblogging as source of, 143-145 Web as source of, 142-143

Wikipedia as source of, 138-140 Big Data and Society, 151

The Big Move (Wyatt-Brown), 64 Bigo, Didier, 1802 big-o Other, 1393-1395, 1636 Billig, Michael, 771

bioethical decision-making, 496 biopolitics

Black Skin, White Masks (Fanon), 468, 627

Blair, Tony, 173, 178, 381 Blake, Debbie, 786

Blakesley, David, 1780 Blanco, Magallanes, 457 Blankfein, Lloyd, 1167, 1169, 1172

Blas, Zach, 513, S13f Bleiker, Roland, 1798-1799 Bloom, Peter, 213

Blues Legacies and Black Feminism (Davis, A.), 83 bodies

ability and, 1614-1616 activism and, 1366

Agamben on, 726-727, 729, 731, 1146 communication and, 1144-1145

communication about, 1613, 1620-1621 communication studies and, 1610-1611

Foucault on, 727, 737, 1071-1073, 1140-1141, 1743

control of speech and, 1622-1623

Hardt and Negri on production and, 1039-1040 Homo Sacer project and, 726-727, 731

cyborgs as, 553-560, 1295-1296

neoliberalism and, 1140-1141 neoliberalism and, after Foucault, 1144-1147

Biopolitics and Social Change in Italy (Righi), 1047 bios, 72S-726 bioterrorism, medical humanitarianism and, 336

Bird, S. E., 268-270, 275, 279 Birmingham Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies

(BCCCS), 814, 1738-1739 Birmingham School, 307-310 Martin-Barbero influenced by, 848 birthing process, nepantla and, 786

The Birth of Biopolitics (Foucault), 956, 1072, 1140-1144, 1743

Deleuze and Guattari on, 1296-1297 feminism and, 1613 literature on, 1628-1629 materiality and, 1625-1628

meaning of, 1611-1612 obesity and, 1617-1618 performance studies and, 1610-1611 place and, 969 plasticity and, 1618-1620 in posthumanism, 1296-1298 public sphere and, 1446-1447 resistance and, 1623-1625 rhetorical construction of, 1610-1629 Rogers on, 1298

VOLUME

1 PP. 1=572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. 573-1178

INDEX

-«

sexuality and, 1613-1614 speech and, 1621-1623 Bodies That Matter (Butler), 885, 893 Bodnar, John, 1406 body rhetoric, 1110 Bogard, William, 1702 Bogost, lan, 672

Bourdieu, Pierre, 615, 1183, 1279, 1424 bourgeois public sphere, 899-900, 904-905, 907-908,

Bohman, James, 1449, 1455

Bracero Program, 194

Bohme, Gernot, 13-14 Bok, Sissela, 1334 Bolivia Aymara Katarista movement in, 4S2 CEFREC-CAIB in, 453-454, 461 CIDOB in, 453

MAS in, 452

1322, 1440-1445. See also public sphere Boyd, Josh, 1420 BPO (business process outsourcing), 929 BPP (Black Panther Party), 81, 1598 Bracci, Sharon, 245 Brady, Robert A., 1252-1254

brain

adaptation of, 74 AD in, neuroscience and, 58-61 consciousness and, 59

plasticity of, 73 brain-mind-body, self and, 59, 72-73

Ukamau Group in, 447-448 Bollywood movies, 1284

Brand, Russell, 177 Brand, Stewart, 426 Brandeis, Louis, 534 Brando, Marlon, 1558

Bonaparte, Napoleon, 821

Brandt Report, 223

radio and social movement media in, 1653

THOA in, 452

Bono, 179

Bratich, Jack, 1046

Boorstin, Daniel, 170, 1332

Brave Eagle, 1562

Booth, Ken, 1797

Braverman, H., 918-919, 1242

BoP (Bottom ofthe Pyramid), 1811

Brazil, 397 Freire’s return to, 1198-1199

Borch-Jacobsen, Mikkel, 1393 Bordenave, Juan Diaz, 266

borderlands Anzaldua and, 778-784 Chicana feminism and, 202 definition of, 778-779 home and, 782

linguistic terrorism and writing in, 780-781 nepantla and, 786

poetic and physical descriptions of, 781-783 psychological aspects of, 779-780 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and, 779, 781

war and, 781

zero-subject identity and, 781-782 Borderlands/La Frontera (Anzaldua), 202, 779, 783 borders cultural flows and, 760-761 inclusive, 774

security of, 1792-1793

IDAC and, 1198 MCP in, 1196

MOVA and, 1199 national development in, 1959, 1196 Pernambuco, 1194-1195

SEC in, 1196-1197 SESI and, 1196

social movement media in, 1662 Brazilian Video in the Villages website, 461

Breast Giver (Devi), 683 Brecht, Bertolt, 394 Breckenridge, Carol, 123, 127-128 Brennan, Teresa, 7 Brexit, 174

A Brief History ofNeoliberalism (Harvey, D.), 956, 1137-1138

Brillat-Savarin, Jean Anthelme, 318 Brinkema, E., 18n1

Borges, Jorge Luis, 867-868

British Broadcasting and the Public-Private Dichotomy (Dawes), 957 British cultural studies. See United Kingdom

Borsook, P., 439 Bost, Matt, 1731

British Instructional Films, 212 broadcast radio, origin of, 1015-1016

Boston Female Anti-Slavery Society, 1088 Boston Massacre of 1770, 1411

Bronte, Charlotte, 681-682 Broomberg, Adam, 1695

Bottom of the Pyramid (BoP), 1811 bounded emotionality, 639

Brouwer, Dan, 1453

Border Wars (Fay), 1792-1793 Bordo, Susan, 893

Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, 1101-1102

1836

+«

INDEX

VOLUME ID VOLUME

R692

VOLUME

2 PP. 573-1178

3 PP. 1179-1918

Brown, Wendy, 953-954, 1145-1146 Browne, Stephen H., 1406, 1407, 1411, 1628

on Judaism and Zionism, 888-890 legacy and impact of, 877

Brown v. Board of Education, 351

on normative power, 883-885

Brulle, Robert, 1453

on performativity, 312, 1221, 1464-1465

Bruner, M. Lane, 1753

on politics of cohabitation, 888-890

Bryant, Levi, 1666-1667 Buber, Martin, 238, 242, S02-S03, 614 Buchanan, Ian, 653, 708, 711 Buddhism in India, 474

on post-structuralism, 1310 on precariousness, 887-888 on queer studies, 147Sn4

paticca samuppada and, 474

reception of, 892-893 on sex, 881-883

on universalism and politics of assembly, 890-892

reversibility and, 490

Butterworth, Michael, 1419

uchi/soto and, 475

Buy a Lady a Drink campaign, 1812-1813

Buffalo Bill Museum, 1410

Buzan, Barry, 1794

Buffett, Warren, 294 bulletin board systems (BBSs), 411, 422n2

Caesarism, Zizek and, 1388

Burawoy, M., 1167

CAIB (Coordinating Body of the Indigenous, Originary

bureaucracy, modern, 32 Burgess, Ernest W., 1763 Burke, Kenneth, 93-94, 1223, 1598, 1629 on identity, 1301-1302, 1383-1384

and Intercultural Peoples of Bolivia), 453-454, 461 Caine, Michael, 177 Calafell, Bernadette Marie, 789 Calgary Anti-Racism Education collective

on symbols, 1777, 1780 visual rhetoric and, 1786

(CARED), 1211 Calhoun, Craig, 1448

Burke, Tarana, 1600 Burns, Lucy, 1091 Burt, Stephen, 1435 Bush, George W., 161, 767, 1041, 1660 PT and, 1328, 1332-1333

Calhoun, John C., 1669 The Californian Ideology (Barbrook and Cameron, A.), 438-439 call centers, offshoring and, 929-931 Callinicos, Alex, 830

Business as a System of Power (Brady), 1253 business process outsourcing (BPO), 929 business-society relationship, 926-927

camcorder (portable video camera), 1654 camera phones, 1695 Cameron, A., 438-439

Butler, Judith, 52, 591, 617, 680

Cameron, David, 177

on abjection and identity, 884 on awareness of vulnerability, 888

Campbell, David, 1790, 1799 Campbell, Karlyn Kohrs, 832, 1109-1110

communication studies and, 877-893

Candide (Voltaire), 1650

on constative statements, 882 criticism on work of, 813 on critique, 879 on ethics, 891, 893 on fantasy, 1392-1393

Can the Subaltern Speak? Reflections on the History of an Idea (Morris, R.), 687 Can We Cure Alzheimer’s?, 74 CAP (communication activist pedagogy), 295-296 capability, 1S92n2

on feminism and gender normativity, 880-881

Capital (Marx), 44, 45, 47, 822, 1001, 1032, 1123-1124

on frames of war, 886-887

capitalism. See also labor

gender and, 877

alienation and, 915

on gender and identity, 884-885

Althusser and, 47

on gender as performative, 880, 882-883, 1212-1213, 1221 on gender subversion, 880

art and, 1274 CCP and, 293 class divisions in, 914-915, 982

on genealogy, 879-880

commodity, 394

on grievable lives, 885-888

cool, 761

on hegemony, 878, 883

corporate ethics and, 232

on heteronormativity, 878 influences on, 877-878

cultural studies and, 396 culture of, 911-913

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. $73-1178

INDEX

disorganized, 913

horror of, 70

economic justice and, 1732-1734

in movies, 63-64, 67-70

Engels on, 1001-1002

finance, 913

restrictive policies in, 74 The Care ofthe Self (Foucault), 1073-1074

Fordism and, 912

Carey, James, 307, 1764

Frankfurt School critiques on, 916-917 globalization and, 408 Gramsci on, 917-918

on communication and ritual, 1761 on US cultural studies, 1021 Carson, Rachel, 624n6, 1104

Habermas on, 916-917

cartography, 207, 973-974. See also mapping

Hardt and Negri on, 1039

Cartwright, Lisa, 7

historical materialism and, 1001-1002 informational, 913 Jameson on culture and, 919

Caruth, Cathy, 1413

objectives of, 727

Lukacs on, 1736 Marx on, 914-915, 1001-1002, 1249, 1732-1734 materialist rhetoric in postmodern, 1006-1009

motherhood and, 253-254

neoliberalism and, 913, 949

1837

CAS (critical affect studies), 13, 1302 Cashmore, Ellis, 179 Casmir, Fred, 245 Castells, M., 1371, 1540, 1763 caste-related violence, in India, 130 Castillo, Ana, 197,779 casual video games, 669-670 categorical imperative, 240 catharsis, Gramsci and, 111

Lazzarato on, 920

e«

organized, 912

Catholic hierarchy, social movement media and, 1649

postindustrial, 913

Catlin, George, 1551

power and, 1345-1346

Cato Institute, 440

rhetoric and, 1734

Catsoulis, Jeanette, 70

Rodriguez, J. C., on, 875

Caws, Peter, 1309

social relations of, 989

CCA. See culture-centered approach CCCS. See Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies CCP. See critical communication pedagogy CCS. See critical cultural studies CCTV (closed-circuit television), 1694-1695, 1702

space, nature and, 1668 spatial turn and, 966 state and power under, 1123 surveillance, 947 third wave, 913 transnationalism and, 1496

CDA (Communications Decency Act), 424, 429

welfare, 73 Zizek on, 920

CEFREC (Center for Cinematography Training and Production), 453-454, 461

Zizek on the real and, 1643 Capitalism and Freedom (Friedman), 956 Capitalism and Schizophrenia (Deleuze), 698 capitalist patriarchy, identity and, 188 capital logic, 1577 Caputo, Joseph, 242 Carby, Hazel V., 314

CDA (critical discourse analysis), 1121

celebrity endorsers, 175-177 celebrity humanitarianism, 336-338

celebrity politicians (CPs) activism and CP2s, 177-179

Corbyn as CP1 in UK, 173-175 CP2s in UK, 176-177 CP2s in US, 175-176

Carcassan, Martin, 494

Obama as CP1 in US, 172

care ethics of, 544-545 ethics of, environmental communication and,

social media and, 179-182, 183

§81-583

carebots, 540

CARED (Calgary Anti-Racism Education collective), 1211 care facilities, for AD

escape from, 67 home care compared to, 66-67

Trump as celebrity turned politician, 179-180 types of, 171-172 celebrity politics activism and, 177-179 CP 1s and, 171-175

CP2s and, 171-172, 175-179 cultural studies and, in US and UK, 169-183 democratic values and, 182-183 media and, 169

1838

+«

INDEX

celebrity politics (Continued) media spectacle and, 170-172 moral authority in, 171 personal authenticity and, 171 political aesthetics of, 171-172 PR and, 170 of Trump and Twitter, 180-182

Celebrity Studies, 185n2 censorship French colonialism in Algeria and, 215 UK colonialism in India and, 215 center, in structuralism, 1310-1312

Center for Advanced Studies in Communication for

Latin America (Ciespal), 841, 843 Center for Cinematography Training and Production (CEFREC), 453-454, 461 Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS), 307, 831, 1447, 1679-1680

VOLUME,

ISP

VOUUME

Smee

VOLUME

Psi S72) L729

2 PP. $73=1178

Lous

borderlands and, 202 home and, 782

identity and, 201-202 key tenets of, 197-203 lesbianism and, 197, 199, 202 La Llorona and, 201-202

loyalists opposing, 196-197 Malinches and, 197

Malintzin Tenépal and, 199-201 mestizaje and, 202 race and, 197

Virgin of Guadalupe and, 196-199 Chicana Feminist Thought (Garcia), 779 Chicana Lesbians (Trujillo), 197, 199 Chicana studies, 193-204

in academy, 203-204 Hijas de Cuauhtémoc and, 164 history of activism in, 193-197

Cervantes, Miguel de, 859, 861-863, 865-866

“Ideal Chicana” and, 195-196 sexism and, 196 Chicanismo, 19S-196

Chakrabarty, Dipesh, 685, 696

Chicano Movement, 195

Challenger disaster, 1413 Chanan, Michael, 449 Chanarin, Oliver, 1695

change, radical empiricism and, 157

Child, Julia, 32S Childers, Jay, 1413 childhood delinquency, comic books blamed for, 265 Child Online Protection Act (COPA), 424, 429 Children of Nature, 67

Chaput, Catherine, 1045, 1079 Charland, Maurice, 51-52, 1007, 1078

Chile, Freire in, 1197-1198 China

Centros de Video Indigena (CVI), 455 Ceremony (Silko), 1551

“Chandra’s Death” (Guha), 1520-1521

on collective identity, 1745-1746 on materialist rhetoric, 1745-1746 Charlottesville, Virginia, “Unite the Right” rally and, 1212-1213 Chashini, Chandra, 1520-1521

Chasing Papi, 201 Chatterjee, Partha, 1126, 1284

Chavez, Brittany, 789 Chavez, César, 195, 1103 Chavez, Karma, 789, 1451 Chavis, Benjamin, Jr., 1105

checkpoints, border, 1697-1698 Cheney, George, 615 Cheney-Lippold, John, $08, 712 The Cherokee Word for Water, 1565 Chesebro, James, 1461 Chess, Shira, 673

Cheyenne Autumn, 1557 Chiapas Media Project (Promedios), 455, 461 Chicago Blackhawks, 1567 Chicana feminism agency, self-definition and, 197-198 Anzaldua and, 779, 788

Australia and diaspora from, 772-773 Baidu Baike in, 138 cultural studies in, 398

mobile phone use in, 1659 privacy in, 536 Twitter banned in, 145 Chinese encyclopedia, Foucault and Rodriguez, J. C., on, 867-868

Chinese Social Science Report, 1259 Chivers, Sally, 58, 62 Chomsky, Noam, 1245, 1648 chora, 1292-1293

Choudhury, D. K. L., 209 Christianity anti-Semitism in early, 94-96 antislavery movement and, 1087 Code of Theodosius II and, 95 Council of Nicaea and, 95 Golden Rule and, 490

Judaism separated from early, 94 Platonism and, 1707

Virgin of Guadalupe in, 198 Christians, Clifford, 242, 245

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. $73=1178

Chthulucene, 552, 562, 567

CIDOB (Confederation of Indigenous Peoples of Bolivia), 453 Ciespal (Center for Advanced Studies in Communication for Latin America), 841, 843 cinema. See movies

Cinema ofSolitude (Ramirez Berg), 448 CIO (Congress for Industrial Organization), 924-925, 1103-1104

circulability, security and, 1800

INDEX

materialist rhetoric and, 1008-1009 Mexican Americans, immigration and consciousness

of, 194 Miliband on ruling, 1123 multitude and, 1043-1044

Negri on subjectivity and, 1035 popular culture and, 1272-1273 power and, in Marxism, 982-983

Cisneros, David, 1147, 1366

public sphere and, 1443 structuration of, in political economy of media technologies, 1244

citing, politics of, 480

citizen journalism DME and, 821 PT and, 1330 citizen media, 1647

Citizens Climate Lobby, 1104 citizenship, Garcia Canclini on consumption and, 1154-1156

The City (Park and Burgess), 1763 City of Joy, 119 civic illiteracy, 1427-1429 civility, dialogic communication and, $01-502 Civilization, 673 civil liberties, cyberlibertarianism and, 425-427,

struggle, Marxism on, 1032 time and, 1426-1427

Williams, R., on, 990 Women’s Movement and, 1089 classical Marxism, 1720-1722 Cleveland Indians, 1567 clicktivism, 1370 ClimateAccess, 586

climate change, attitudes towards, 145 climate justice, 583-584 clinics, Foucault on, 1068 Clinton, Bill, 1060-1061, 1408 Clinton, Hillary, 1326, 1786-1787

celebrity endorsers and, 175-176 Trump's criticism of, 181

435-436 Civil Rights Digital Library, 1111

Clive, Robert, 1523

Civil Rights movement, 1083, 1093-1098, 1111

Cloud, Dana L., 35, 52, 1600, 1754 on dialogic communication, 501-503

civil society, Foucault on, 1072-1073 CLACPI (Latin American Council of Indigenous

Peoples’ Film and Communication), 454, 461 Clarke, Eric O., 1447 class

capitalism and divisions of, 914-915, 982 common sense and, 108 in communication studies, 50-S1 critical whiteness studies and, 348, 353

cultural and critical organizational communication

1839

hegemony as leadership of, in Marxism, 985-987 Hogart on, 990 Marx on ruling, 983-984

circular communication, 34

on social movements as fictions, 1600 Cisneros, Sandra, 199, 203, 782 cities, urbanization and, 1761-1762

«

closed-circuit television (CCTV), 1694-1695, 1702

on economic justice, 1746-1747, 17S1 on Foucault, 1078 on hegemony, 119, 803-804 Marxism defended by, 1005-1006 on materialist rhetoric, 1004-1007 on materiality, 833 on visual rhetoric, 1778-1779

CMC (computer-mediated communication), 524 coal industry, environmental regulations fought by, 1148-1149

and, 1166 in cultural studies, 979-980 Davis, A., on labor and, 88-89 Davis, A., on motherhood and, 86-88 Davis, A., on race, gender and, 82-83

COCE (Conference on Communication and Environment), 576

Gilroy on race and, 1491

Code of Theodosius II, 95

Gramsci on power and, 984, 1736 Guha on nationalism and, 1515 Hall, S., on, 1689 Hardt and Negri on, 1043-1044

Cody, William Frederick “Buffalo Bill,” 1553 Coeckelbergh, Mark, 543 cognitive competence, 362-363 cognitive mapping, Jameson and, 657-658, 972

Coalition of Labor Union Women, 1104 Coase, Ronald, 956

1840

+«

INDEX

cohabitation, politics of, 888-890 Cohen, Bram, 429

VOLPUMEB

IEW

VOLUME

3s) PROS

VOLUME

Rs tas,

2) BR Seals

Los

movies and, 212-213 Native American media depictions and, 1550

Cohen, Roger, 341

new journalism and, 214

Cohen-Shalev, Amir, 58

photography and, 212 postcolonialism and, 207-220 power and, 1348 print technology development and US, 1053

Colbert, Stephen, 1324 Cold War, 409

development communication and, 1358-1359 media, influence and, 1358

collaborative media activism and, 445-446, 456-459 of CEFREC-CAIB in Bolivia, 453-454, 461 CLACPI and, 454, 461

radio and, 210-211, 217-218 scholarship on, 220 space and, 634 suicides in India and, 688-691 technology and, 207

decolonization and, in Latin America, 445-461

telegraph and, 207, 209-210

ethnography and, 450 in indigenous languages, 450-456

telegraph and organizing against, 215-216

literature on decolonization and, in Latin America,

459-461 in Mexico, 454-455

new lines ofinquiry about, 460-461 Promedios and, 4SS, 461 THOA and, 452 TMA and, 455 collective action, 1372, 1712

collective assemblages, 707-708 collective identity, Charland on, 1745-1746 collective security, 331 Collingwood, R. G., 1405 Collins, Patricia Hill, 257, 1188

on intersectionality, 1492

Colloque Walter Lippmann (CWL), 1135 Colombia, 398

CRIC and, 451-452 colonialism ambivalence and, 815 critical food studies and, 320-321 cultural difference and, 815 dependency theory and, 449 exhibitions of, 216 Gilroy on politics and, 1183-1184 Guha on world of, 1525-1526 Guha’s historiography of India and, 1508-1530 human rights and, 332-333 India and impact of, 128, 1283-1284 Indian development and, 1510-1511 Latin America’s unique, 460-461, 1159-1160 La Llorona and, 201-202

media media media mimic

for metropolitans and settlers in, 213-215 for propaganda in, 210-213 networks organizing against, 215-218 men and, 815-816

modernity and, 126-128, 1126 motherhood and, 258

visuality and, 212 colonias, 194 colonization, Mohanty on, 187-188

The Colored American, 1085 Colored National Labor Union, 1099-1100 Columbus, Christopher, 631, 1S52

Columbus Day, 1411-1412 comic books, childhood delinquency blamed on, 265 coming community, 731 command, Hardt and Negri on war, control and, 1041-1042

commemoration, public memory and, 1410-1412 Commentary on the Letter to the Romans (Agamben), 738 Committee of Public Information (CPI), 1357 commodification of audiences, 1241-1242 communication ethics and, 614-615 definition of, 1241 Hall, S., on, 1690

in political economy of media technologies, 1241-1243 commodity capitalism, 394 commodity fetish, Marx on, 1632

common sense Deleuze on, 701-702 Gramsci on, 107-109, 824

hegemony and, 108, 802 power and, 1122 Warner on, 1058

Common Sense (Paine), 1650

Commonwealth (Hardt and Negri), 1029 communal interests, in communication, 498-499

communication. See also development communication; dialogic communication; environmental communication; organizational communication

adversarial model of, 493-494, 503 anti-Semitism and, 92-103 biopolitics and, 1144-1145

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2° PP. S738=1178

INDEX

about bodies, 1613, 1620-1621 civility and, S01-S02

social robots and, 539-540

commodity capitalism and, 394 communications compared to, 1$3S—1S37 computer-mediated, 524

as strategic tool, 1350-1351 Subaltern Studies and, 696 systematically distorted, 903

constitutive, S80-S81

unconscious and, 1591n1

consumer freedom and, 395 critical theories on labor, culture and, 914-922

cross-cultural adaptation influenced by, 362-363, 368-369, 368f cultural studies and, 390-402 cultural studies on labor, culture and, 921-922 definition of, 1612-1613 deliberative activism and, $02-—504

democracy and, 1536 digital labor and, 1261-1263 eloquence and, 1621-1622 environmental science, technology, and health, $78 as erasure, 1351]

expression and, 1S8 fear and, 498-499 global health and, 744-746

globalization of culture and, 759-776 Global South and, 223-228 Gramsci and, 104-105, 112-116 Habermas's theories of, 895-898 Hall, S., on power and, 922

history of, 488-489 hypodermic needle model of, 1018, 1578-1579

identity work and, 923-924 inclusive borders and, 774 as inversion, 1351]

labor, culture and, 911-927 Martin-Barbero on culture and, 847

materialism and, 115-116 materialism in thought and, 1705-1723 neoliberalism and, 1134-1150 obstacles to, 498-—S00 paradigms of, 1578-1584 political economy of, 1239, 1249-1251

speech, 1621

urban, 1761-1772 Communication, Culture and Hegemony

(Martin-Barbero), 269 communication activist pedagogy (CAP), 295-296 Communication and the Economy (Hanan and

Hayward), 1754 Communication Culture Critique, 1617 Communication Education, 286, 299 communication ethics, 230-245

alterity and, 238-239 approaches to, 61S characteristics of, 489-490 commodification and, 614-615

compassion and, 239 context and, 233 culture and, 615-616

deontological ethics and, 240-241 dialogic ethics and, 242, 245 force and, 237-238

heterogeneity and, 232-233, 489-490 historicity and, 233-234, 489-490 history of, 231-232 hypermodernity and, 614-615 integrity, truth, truthfulness, and trust in, 234-235 interconnectivity and, 233, 489-490 justice and, 236-237

key themes of, 243 literacy, 612 multiplicity of goods and, 612-614 normativity and, 235-236 postmodern ethicists and, 241-242 power and, 235-238 relation and, 238-239 rhetoric and, 618-620

posthumanism and, 1287 post-structuralism on labor, culture and, 922-923

scope of, 230-231

power and, 488, 1346-1349

teleological ethics and, 241

power and control strategies in, 1350-1352

textbooks for, 245 virtue ethics and, 239-240

pragmatic, S80-S81

professional political, 1331-1333 radical empiricism and, 158 of resistance to globalization, 22S ritual and, 1761

security and, 1791-1792 self-interest and communal interests balanced in, 498-499

Smythe on political economy of, 1254

-

in social media, 234-235

whistleblowing and, 235 communication research big data and, 137-151 future trends in, 150-151 “high-consensus rapid-discovery” science and, 148-149 literature on, 151

1841

1842

e

INDEX

las 72)

VOLUME

IPPs

VOUUME

3° PPr1t7 911s

VOLUME

272 Pys73ell7s

communications, communication compared to,

communicative action, strategic action compared

1535-1537 Communications Decency Act (CDA), 424, 429 communication studies

communicative city concept, 1771-1772 Communism, Foucault and, 1065

affect and, 160-161

Bhabha and, 812-818 bodies and, 1610-1611 Butler and, 877-893 class in, SO-S1 Davis, A., and, 79-91 Deleuze and, 698-714

economic justice in literature of, applied use of, 1750-1754 economic justice in literature of, theoretical discussion of, 1745-1750

environmental organizational, $78 Foucault and, 1064-1080 Garcia Canclini and, 1152-1161

Gilroy and, 1179-1193 Gramsci and, 104-120 growth in field of, 286 Habermas and, 895-908 Hall, S., and, 1679-1691

Haraway and, 552-569 Hardt and, 1029-1048

on hegemony, 802-803, 807-808 hegemony in media and, 117 interdisciplinary nature of, 1612 Laclau and, $89-605 Martin-Barbero and, 839-853 Massumi and, 154-164 materialism and, 1719-1723

media technologies in, 1014-1025 Mohanty and, 186-193 Negri and, 1029-1048

to, 896-897 Communist Manifesto (Marx and Engels), 1002 Communist Party (CP-USA), 81 communities

in colonial India, patriarchy and, 1520-1522 of health, 749-750

marginalized, CCA and, 750-751 marginalized, internationalized cultural diversity and, 771-774

media construction of, 760, 775 of privilege, CCP and, 296-297 security, 1795 urban communication and, 1765-1766

video game, 277

virtual, 411-412, 416 community media construction of, 760, 775 definition of, 1647 in indigenous languages, 450-456 community participation, culture and, in global health, 749 Community Power Structures (Hunter, F.), 1345

commutative justice, 1730

Companion Species Manifesto (Haraway), 554 compassion, communication ethics and, 239 competence, cultural, 748-749 competitiveness, neoliberalism, consumption and, 1427

complete sex, 544-546 “compossibility,” 705 computer-mediated communication (CMC), $24 computers, 410-411, 1542-1543

on neoliberalism, 957-958 origins of, 1534 overdetermination and, 50-S1

Comunicacion masiva: Discurso y poder (Martin-Barbero),

performance studies in, 1218-1234 place genres and, 969-971 power and control in, 1344-1362

conceptual dynamism, Deleuze and, 700 condensation, 1382

PT and, 1320-1338

on bodies and materiality, 1626-1628 on materiality modes, 1626 on scientific racism, 1627 The Condition of Postmodernity (Harvey, D.), 1763

research possibilities for neoliberalism, liberalism and, 951-955 social movements and, 1365-1367, 1752

space in, 1664-1678 Spivak and, 677-696

849-850

The Concept of theModel (Badiou), 19

Condit, Celeste, 804, 1010

Confederate statues, 1212-1213

structuralism in, Althusser and, 43-54, 825-826

Confederation of Indigenous Peoples of Bolivia (CIDOB), 453

university curriculum for, 1534-1535

Conference on Communication and Environment

Warner and, 1052-1063 whiteness and, 1494-1495 Williams, R., and, 1532-1548

Conference on the Elimination of Racist Mascots, 1566

Zizek and, 1631-1644

Confucian thought, reversibility and, 490

(COCE), 576 conformism, linguistics and, 115

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. $73-1178

Congo, 1228 Congress for Industrial Organization (CIO), 924-925

INDEX

-

1843

Contingency, Hegemony, Universality (Butler, Laclau, & ,

1103-1104 Congressional Union, 1091 conjecture, Hall, S., on, 1685 conjunctural analysis, 316 connective action, 1372

Zizek), 591 contractualism, 241 contradiction, feminist organizational communication engaging, 641-643, 645

The Contradictions ofMedia Power (Freedman), 957 control

Connell, R. W., 258

communication strategies of, 1350-1352

Connerton, Paul, 1415

Conquergood, Dwight, 1209, 1219-1223, 1225-1226

in communication studies, 1344-1362 embodied, 1356 Hardt and Negri on command and, in war, 1041-1042

Consalvo, Mia, 671

ideology and, 1346

consciousness

media constructions of power and, 1352-1354 mobility of subjects and, 1356

conocimiento, 203

brain and, 59

common sense and, 107 elite, 1518, 1S18¢t

false, 1519

movies and, 709-710 news media and elite, 1353

social being as determining, in Marxism, 981-982

organizational sites of, 1355 political economy and, 1236-1237 societal sites of power and, 1354-1356 space and, 1349-1350

Subaltern Studies and, 686

of speech and bodies, 1622-1623

language and, 1734-1735 rebel, 1517-1518

Consejo Regional del Cauca (CRIC), 451-452 consequentialism, DME and, 527-528 conspiracy culture, PT and, 1324 constative statements, 882

state and totalitarian, 1355 surveillance and, 712, 1355-1356

technologies of power and, 1360-1362 Control and Consolation (Cloud), 1751

Constitution, US, 1055-1056, 1087

Coogan, Steve, 177

The Constitution ofLiberty (Hayek), 956

“Cool Britannia,” 767

constitutive communication, 580-581

cool capitalism, 761 Coontz, Stephanie, 254 Cooper, James Fenimore, 1553

constructivism, Badiou and, 19-27

consultation, participation by, 1582 consumer freedom, 395

Cooper, Martha, 1077, 1079

Consuming Modernity (Appadurai and Breckenridge),

cooperatives, 34

127-128 consumption culture industries and, 1155

Coordinating Body of the Indigenous, Originary and Intercultural Peoples of Bolivia (CAIB), 453-454, 461

Development 2.0 and, 1812-1813 Garcia Canclini on citizenship and, 1154-1156

COPA (Child Online Protection Act), 424, 429

globalization and, 1155-1156

coping, 359 Copjec, Joan, 1389-1390

Habermas on, 1738

Corbucci, Sergio, 1556

neoliberalism, competitiveness and, 1427 obesity and, 1617-1618 popular culture and, 1280-1281

Corbyn, Jeremy, 173-175

selfie culture and, 1434 Warner on, 1059

Consumption and Identity at Work (du Gay), 1174 Contesting Media Power (Couldry and Curran), 456 context

in CCP, 290 communication ethics and, 233 feminist organizational communication and, 645-646 visual rhetoric and, 1784-1785

contextual integrity, privacy and, $35

Corey, Frederick, 1231, 1465-1466 Corner, John, 172 Cornish, Samuel E., 1085 Cornwallis, Charles, 1510 corporate ethics, 232 corporations first multinational, 32-33

laws and history of, 33 media activism reforming media policies of, 1659-1660 structures of, 33-34 corporeal rhetoric, 1009-1010

1844

+«

INDEX

VOLUME ViOTUMEsS

TPP,

las72

PP

ti79—

VOLUME

Cortés, Hernan, 197, 199-200

Creel, George, 1357

The Cosby Show, 1479

cricket, in India, 126-128

Coser, Lewis, 379

crime

cosmopolitan memory, 1417 Costa, Paola, 448 Costa Rica, 397 Couldry, Nick, 456, 479

on neoliberalism, 1145 Council ofNicaea, 95 counterculture, Native Americans media depictions and, 1964-1996, 1557-1560

counterhegemony, 802-803 counterinformation media, 1648

Foucault on history and, 1520 prison-industrial complex and, 89-91 crisis

of agency, neoliberalism and, 1424-1426 ethics of, environmental communication and, $81-583 Critchley, Simon, 590-591

critical affect studies (CAS), 13, 1302 Critical Art Ensemble, 437 critical audience studies, 264-279

future directions for, 1453-1455

development theory and, 266 in digital age, 274-276 early history of, 265-267

as persons, places or topics, 1450-1451

ethics and, 275-276

public sphere, publics and, 1440-1455 queer, 1059-1060

ethnography and, 271-272, 279 feminism and, 268-269, 273-274 foundations in, 267-270

counterpublics feminism and, 14$2

subaltern, 1450 theorization of, 1450-1453

2 PP. S73-U87s

ols

future of, 279

theory, 906-907

generations of, 270

Warner on, 1057, 1059-1060, 1452

globalization and, 272-273 gratification and, 266-267 Hall, S’s, encoding/decoding model for, 267-268 location in, 272-274

counterspaces, resistance movements and, 967 Courage of the People, 448 The Courage of Truth (Foucault), 1075-1076 Course in General Linguistics (Saussure), 46, 652 cowboys, Native American media depictions and, 1553

Cox, Robert, $76, 581-582, 1407

media consumption and, 264 mediations and, 269

mobile phones and, 272

CPI (Committee of Public Information), 1357

neoliberalism and, 272

CPs. See celebrity politicians CP-USA (Communist Party), 81 CQ(cultural intelligence), 118

populism and, 270

Cracked: New Light on Dementia, 74

Crafting Selves (Kondo), 1171 Craig, Robert T., 615 Crary, Jonathan, 1426, 1434 creative class, 382

creative industries, 376-387 in Asia, 382-383

Australia and, 382

critical approaches to, 384-386 culture industries compared to, 381 emotions and, 385 global flow of, 383

social media and, 275 subjectivity and, 270, 273 transnationalism and, 269-270

video games and, 276-278, 670-672 women and early, 265 critical communication pedagogy (CCP), 285-301 activist learning revitalization in, 295-298 agency in, 292

capitalism and, 293 “classroom as site of activism and interpersonal justice” theme in, 291-292 commitments of, 287-292

historical forces influencing, 376-377

“communication is constitutive” theme of, 288-289 communities of privilege and, 296-297 context in, 290

labor and, 384-385 literature on, 386-387

critical theory revitalization in, 293-295 critiques of, 293-300

NICL and, 384 UK and, 381-382 UNESCO definition of, 383-384 US and, 382

culture in, 289 definition of, 285-286

dialogue in, 292 expanding potential of, 293

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. 573-1178

INDEX

future of, 300-301

race and, 320

identity in, 288

Slow Food movement and, 324 theoretical implications of, 327-328

language in, 290-291 main themes of, 287 Marxism and, 294-295

multi-method revitalization in, 298-300

neoliberalism and, 293-294 oppressive forms challenged in, 290 pedagogy and research as praxis in, 291-292 power in, 288-289 quantitative scholarship and, 299-300 reflexivity in, 291 SIU and, 298-299 “social justice is a process” theme in, 289-291, 296

subjectivity in, 292 WVU and, 298

Critical Communication Pedagogy (Fassett and Warren,

John T.), 286 critical cultural studies (CCS). See also cultural studies

Appadurai and, 123-135 complex interdisciplinary relationship of, 305 conjunctural analysis and, 316 current and future trends in, 315-316 feminism and, 310-313 Frankfurt School and, 1131

on gender and sex, 305-316 hegemonic masculinity and, 313-314 intersectionality and, 314 media technologies in, 1014-1025

Mohanty and, 192-193 nation, identity and power in, 1117-1132 psychoanalytic methods and, 1378-1401 queer roots in, 1461-1464

queer studies in, 1459-1467

rhetoric of psychoanalysis compared to, 1378-1380 critical disability studies, 315

women and, 319

Critical Inquiry, 340 critical memory, 1417 critical parrhesia, 1075S critical race theory (CRT), 1170-1172 culture and, 1492-1493

intersectionality and, 1493-1494 out-law discourse and, 1493 RS and, 1493 tenets of, 1207-1208 critical regionalism, 972 Critical Resistance, 89

Critical Rhetorics ofRace (Lacy and Ono), 1078 critical security studies (CSS) development of, 1794-1797 individual security and, 1796-1797 language and, 1791 linguistic turn in, 1798-1799

ontological security and, 1793 securitization theory and, 1797-1801 societal security and, 1795-1796 state security and, 1794-1795 terminology of, 1790-1791 visual turn in, 1797-1800 critical studies. See also communication studies; critical cultural studies; cultural studies affect in, 1-14 digital cultures and, §07-517 global health and, 743-757 Critical Studies in Media Communication, 1801

critical synergy theory of PT, 1335 critical theory. See also critical cultural studies CCP revitalization of, 293-295

critical discourse analysis (CDA), 1121

cultural studies compared to, 310

Critical Ethnography (Madison, D. S.), 1226

definition of, 305-306 foundations of, 305-307 Frankfurt School and, 306-307, 1019 on labor, culture and communication, 914-922

critical food studies, 318-328 Big Ag and, 321-322 colonialism and, 320-321 environment and, 319 foodie culture and, 324-327

critical whiteness studies, 345-356 Africanism and, 349-350

food safety and, 322-323

Baldwin on white guilt and, 348-349

formation of, 318

gender and, 319-320

Brown v. Board of Education and, 351 challenges to, 356

health and, 319

class and, 348, 353

identity and, 318-321

Du Bois and, 347-348

industrialization and, 321 masculinity and, 320 obesity, 323

emergence of, 345 exceptionalism and, 354-355

production and consumption in, 321-324

1845

first wave of, 345-348 future of, 355-356

1846

+»

INDEX

VOLUME VOLUME

critical whiteness studies (Continued) gender and, 352 ignorance and, 351] international, 384-3558

literature and, 349-350

lynchings and, 345-346 McIntosh and, 352 miscegenation and, 346

mobility into whiteness and, 353-354 Morrison and, 349-350

possessive investment and, 351 property and, 350-351 Racial Contract and, 351 second wave of, 348-353 third wave of, 353-355 Wells and, 345-346 white abolitionist movement and, 353 white authors in, 355

white critique, Critique Critique

privilege and, 352 Butler on, 879 of Cynical Reason (Sloterdijk), 1633 of Pure Reason (Kant), 629

Croce, B., 113

Crofts Wiley, Stephen, 1023

cross-cultural adaptation, 358-373 acculturation and, 359-361, 370 assimilation and, 359-360, 370-371

IE Pal ao

VOLUME

3 PPA 7921918

U-curve adjustment and, 372 W-curve adjustment and, 372 Crowley, Sharon, 1407, 1612, 1628

CRT. See critical race theory crypto-anarchists, cyberlibertarianism and, 432-435 cryptocurrencies, 432 CSS. See critical security studies Cult of the Dead Cow, 426, 437 cultural action, Freire’s theories of, 1201

cultural and critical organizational communication, 1163-1176. See also organizational communication class and, 1166 cultural studies and, 1174-1175 Deetz on, 1168

disciplinary affiliations of, 1163-1164 discourse analysis and, 1169-1170 ethnography and, 1166 feminism and, 1170-1172 Foucault and, 1175-1176 functionalism and, 1163-1167 Habermas and, 1167-1168

identity and, 1169-1172 interpretive research on, 1165-1166 metaphors and, 1165 neoliberalism and, 1173-1175 post-Fordism and, 1173-1174

challenges of, 358-359

power and, 1166 queer studies and, 1170-1172

communication factors influencing, 362-363,

race and, 1170-1172

368-369, 368f

conceptual integration of, 359-360 culture shock and, 371-372 deculturation and, 360-361

dimensions and factors of, 368-369, 368f disconnectedness of, 359 environmental factors influencing, 363-366,

368f, 369 functional fitness and, 367 future of, 369-373

general systems theory and, 360 globalization and, 369 immigration and, 358-359 integrative theory of, 361-362, 372-373

intercultural identity and, 367-368 intercultural transformation and, 366-369, 368f literature and, 370

long-term adaptation and, 370-371 predispositions and, 365-366, 369 process of, 360-362 psychological health and, 367 short-term adaptation and, 371-372 stress-adaptation-growth dynamic and, 361-362, 362f

29 2R S765 lis

structuration theory and, 1168-1169 cultural appropriation, Martin-Barbero on, 852 cultural competence, in global health, 748-749 cultural deterritorialization, 764 cultural difference, colonialism and, 815

cultural diversity globalization and, 762-763 internationalized, marginalized communities and, 771-774

Cultural Extension Service (SEC), 1196-1197 cultural cultural cultural cultural

flows, borders and, 760-761 homogenization, globalization and, 124, 126 intelligence (CQ), 118 materialism, 1538-1540

cultural narratives, in global health, 748 The Cultural Politics of Emotion (Ahmed), 13, 1700-1701 cultural psyche, 1384 cultural studies. See also critical cultural studies Althusser and, 308, 994-996

in Australia, 398-399

Berland on limitations of, 577

capitalism and, 396 Carey and, 307

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. $73=1178

INDEX

«

CCCS and, 307

cultural turn, Martin-Barbero and, 840

celebrity politics and, in US and UK, 169-183

cultural variability, Global South and, 228

in China, 398 class in, 979-980 commodity capitalism and, 394 communication and, 390-402 critical theory compared to, 310 cultural and critical organizational communication

culture. See also alternative organizational culture;

and, 1174-1175 definition of, 307, 390-391 Deleuze and, 711-712 discourse and, 309

economic development and, 395-397 environmental communication and, approaches in, $77-S80

environmental communication and, emergence of, $76-5S77

critical cultural studies; cyberculture; popular culture alternative, 1538

as anchor in CCA, 751

autoethnographic performance script and, 1214-1216 as barrier, in global health, 747-748

of capitalism, 911-913 in CCP, 289 clashing, 617-618 communication ethics and, 615-616

community participation and, in global health, 749 conspiracy, 1324 critical theories on labor, communication and, 914-922

forms of, 401

CRT and, 1492-1493

foundations of, 307-310

cultural studies on labor, communication and,

Frankfurt School and, 307-308, 993-994

future and, 1190

geographical histories of, 397-400 Gilroy on black liberation and, 1179-1180 globalization and, 1496-1497 Gramsci and, 308-309, 996-997 Grossberg and, 307, 1475nS Hall, S., and, 308, 1681-1682

Jameson and, 650-662 on labor, culture and communication, 921-922 Lacan and, 308 in Latin America, 397-398 Lukacs and, 992-993 Marxist traditions in, 979-998 neoliberalism in, 948-949

openness of, 979-980 opposition to, 400-402

921-922 Davis, A., on socioeconomic contexts of production

of, 83-84 definitions of, 574-575, 1208-1209

of development, 1589 documentary, 1533 environment as nature and, 573-576 ethics, rhetoric and, 607-620 foodie, 324-327

globalization and diversity of, 762-763

globalization and minorities of, 131-132 globalization of communication and, 759-776 Gramsci on peasant, 684 Hall, S., on, 991

health as interplays of structure, agency, and, 753 historiography of globalization and, 774-776 humanities and, 390-391

political economy of media technologies and,

hypermodernity and, 610-611, 616

1245-1246 politics and, 1180-1182 popular culture and, 391-395, 1267-1285 popular culture and UK, 1274-1277

ideal, 1533

identity, immigration and, 772-773 identity and, 611 identity work and, 923-924

public sphere and, 1447

inclusive borders and, 774

rhetoric and, $79 seminal works in origin of, 987 semiotics and, 309 texts and, 309-310 in UK, 398-399, 987, 993-994, 1020-1021,

Jameson on capitalism and, 919 Jim Crow laws impact on, 84

1180-1187, 1274-1277

in US, 399-400, 1021 Cultural Studies, S77, 997

Cultural Studies in the Future Tense (Grossberg), 1181 cultural territorialization, 764

1847

Kant on, 390

labor, communication and, 911-927

language and, 984 Martin-Barbero on communication from, 847 Marxism and, 988-992 meaning of, 31-32, 390-391 metaethics and, 618 nature contrasted with, 574

1848

+«

INDEX

culture (Continued) origin of, 390 performance of race, whiteness and, 1204-1216

petite narratives, postmodernity and, 608-610 post-structuralism on labor, communication and, 922-923

VOLUME

TPE

iao72

VOLUME

3s) BRy Wi io is

VOLUME

UK and, 379 US and, 379 culture jamming, 1367 culture shock, 371-372 Cunningham, Stuart, 381 Curran, J., 456

power, difference and, 1351-1352

Curry, Tommy, 35S

progress and, 990-991

Cushman, Charlotte, 1232

promotional, 1331-1332

Custer, George, 1553

resistance and, 615-618

customers, in neoliberalism, 1139 Cvetkovich, Ann, 1447 CVI (Centros de Video Indigena), 455

social, 1533

social change and, 994 social relations of, 989 social sciences and, 390-391

space and, 1209 storytelling as narrative imagination and, 607 as surface characteristics, in global health, 748 translation as, 692-693

of US spread through globalization, 762 visual, 1784-1785 Williams, R., on, 990-991, 1532-1535

CWL (Colloque Walter Lippmann), 1135 cyber-arms, 433 Cyber Arms Bazaar, 433 cyberattacks, 433 cyberculture concept of, 407 connections and, 415

emergence of, 410-411 feminism and, 412

Culture (Williams, R.), 1539

game culture and, 413

Culture and Society (Williams, R.), 987, 991, 1532

globalization and, 406-418

culture-centered approach (CCA), 746-747 agency and, 752-753 alternative rationalities of health and, 754 culture as anchor in, 751 Global South and, 755-756 health, dignity, and representation in, 754—75S health as interplays of culture, structure, and

agency in, 753 human rights and, 756 infrastructures of listening in, 7S3-754

marginalized communities and, 750-751 social structures in, 7$1—752

culture industries, 306, 376-387 Adorno and, 377-378, 993, 1019, 1273-1274

consumption and, 1155 creative industries compared to, 381 economic justice and, 1737 Frankfurt School critique on, 916, 1737 globalization and, 380-381

2 PP. 573-1178

Internet expansion and, 412 privacy and, 413 race and, 412 social media and, 412-413 spatial focus in studies of, 413-414 virtual communities and, 411-412, 416 cyberdramas, video games as, 667-668 cyberlibertarianism, 422-440 activism and, 435-436 Anonymous and, 436-437 Assassination Market and, 434 civil liberties and, 425-427, 435-436 critical response to, 438 crypto-anarchists and, 432-435 cyber-arms and, 433 darknet markets and, 432-435 definition of, 422

EFF and, 425-427, 432, 436, 439 emergence of, 424-425

historical torces influencing, 376-377 Horkheimer and, 993, 1019

fall and rise of, in public sphere, 429-430

intellectual property law and, 378

historiography of, 438-439

labor and, 377 literature on, 386-387 middle-range theories and, 379 movies and, 377-378

market-focused, 427-429, 431-432

technology and, 380

3D printable guns and, 434-435 Web 2.0 and, 430-431 whistleblowing and, 435-436

television and, 377-378 turn to, 378-381

hackers and, 425-427

PFF and, 427-429, 431, 439-440 Silk Road and, 432-434 technoliberation and, 422-423

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. 573-1178

INDEX

Cyberlibertarian Myths and the Prospects forCommunity (Winner), 438

on labor, 88-89

cybernetics, 523, 553

media representations of, 85-86, 192 on motherhood, 86-88 in prison, 81

cyberprotest, 1109 Cyberselfish (Borsook), 439 cybertarianism, Garcia Canclini on, 1158 Cyborg Manifesto (Haraway), SS3-5S60, 1296 cyborgs, $52 as bodies, SS3—S60, 1295-1296

disability studies and, $60-S61

«+

1849

legacy of, 79-80

on prison-industrial complex, 89-91 on race, gender, and class, 82-83

on slavery and gender, 82 on socioeconomic contexts of cultural production, 83-84

discourse on, $56

Davis, Diane, 1011

eugenics and, 561 literal compared to metaphorical, SSS—5S6

on rhetoric and affect, 1301-1302 Davis, Lanny, 501

politics and, 557, 562-563 posthumanism and, 1295-1296

Davis, Tracy, 1221-1222

race and, $61-S62

Dawes, Simon, 957 Day, Richard, 600-601

technology and, SS4—S55

DDoS (distributed denial-of-service) attacks, 436-437

Cynics, Foucault on, 1076

DDS (Deccan Development Society), 755

Cyphernomicon (May, T. C.), 440 cypherpunks, 427, 432, 435-436

Dean, Jodi, 893, 1389

DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival), 1605-1606

The Death and Life of Great American Cities (Jacobs), 1764 death drive, 1383, 1390-1391

“The Death of the Author” (Barthes), 1312-1313

Dahl, Robert, 1123

Debs, Eugene V., 1112

Dahlberg, L., 439 The Daily Show, 172

Deccan Development Society (DDS), 755

Dallas, 1277 Damasio, Antonio, S9, 71, 1322 on primary emotions, 3, S—6

Dances with Wolves, 1560 Danchey, Alex, 1801

danger, security and, 1790 Darbar Mahila Swamanyaya Committee (DMSC), 752 Darder, Antonia, 1202-1203

Darker than Blue (Gilroy), 1190, 1193 darknet markets, cyberlibertarianism and, 432-435

decentering, of Derrida and post-structuralism, 1310-1312

de Certeau, Michel, 968, 1279 DeChaine, D. Robert, 11

decisional privacy, 534-535 decision-making, power and, 1345 Declaration of Human Rights, 491

decolonality, 467 decolonial motherhood, 258-259 decolonization academic reasons for, 465-466

Dark Princess (Du Bois), 813

academic system global inequalities and, 477-481

Darwish, Mahmoud, 888 da Silva, Denise Ferreira, 631-632

access to resources and networks for, 478-480 Africa and, 475-476 Arabic world and, 476-477 CEFREC-CAIB in Bolivia and, 453-454, 461 collaborative media and, in Latin America, 445-461

data. See also big data; quantified self definition of, 148 digital cultures and, S07-S08 personal, 536-538 datafication, 508-509

The Daughter ofDawn, 1554-1555 Daughters of Bilitis, 1107 Davis, Angela Y., 189

criticism of, 470-471, 481-482 de-Westernization and, in media studies, 465-482 East and Southeast Asia and, 474-475 empirical research and, 480-481

examples of, 471-472

biography of, 80-82 on Black Power representations in media, 84-86

foundations of discourse on, 467-469 Latin America and, 472-473

communication studies and, 79-91

literature on collaborative media and, in Latin America, 459-461 militant cinema and, 446-450

death threats against, 81 hip-hop and, 85-86

1850

«

INDEX

decolonization (Continued) new lines of inquiry about, 460-461

postcolonialism and, 467-468 process of, 469-470 publishing, politics of citing and, 480 race and, 1498 South Asia and, 473-474 transnationalism and, 1498

urgency of, 482 deconstruction, Spivak and, 679-680 deculturation, 360-361

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3° PPP 1079-1978

VOLUME

27 PPS 736SUL738

on rhizomes, 70S—707 on sense, 704-705

Spivak on, 687-688 on television for surveillance, 710 on thought, 701-703

on virtual, 157

Deleuze and New Technology (Poster and Savat), 713 Delgado Bernal, Dolores, 789

Del Gandio, Jason, 1046 deliberation, public sphere and, 1449 deliberative activism, 502-504

Deep Dish TV, 1654-1655

deliberative democracy, 1449

Deetz, S., 1168 Defense Distributed, 434-435 Defense of Marriage Act, 1061-1062

De los medios a las mediaciones (Martin-Barbero), 840,

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival (DACA), 1605-1606 Deluliis, Sarah, 615

DeLanda, Manuel, 713 de Lauretis, Teresa, 1459-1460 Deleuze, Gilles, 49 on affect, 1, 7-11, 18n1 on art and sensation, 8-9

on assemblages, 707-709, 713-714 on bodies, 1296-1297

850-851

DeLuca, Kevin Michael, 905-906 on bodies and resistance, 1624-1625 on rhetoric and violence, 1625 de Man, Paul, 677

demand, populism and, 603-604 dementia. See also Alzheimer’s disease fear of, S6—S7

media discourses and representations of, 56-75 subjectivity and, 58 types of, 59 democracy

on common sense, 701-702

adversarial model of communication and, 494

communication studies and, 698-714

celebrity politics and values of, 182-183

complexity of, 701 conceptual dynamism and, 700

communication and, 1536 deliberative, 1449 Habermas on, 898-902 neoliberalism and, 953-954, 1145

on control and surveillance, 712 cultural studies and, 711-712 on divergence, 70S

rights in, 902

on economic justice, 1741

Democracy, Deliberation, and Education (Asen), 1753

on encounters, 702—703

Democracy in America (Tocqueville), 616-617 Democracy in an Era of Corporate Colonization (Deetz), 1168

essays of, 710-711 on events, 702-7058

Democracy’s Debt (Bruner), 1753

on film theory, 712-713

democratic iterations, public sphere and, 1450 DeMoss, Mark, 501 Denes, Amanda, 1475n7

Guattari’s collaborations with, 698-700, 705-709, 711-712, 715, 1717

historiography of, 710-714 on identity, 702 on language, 703-704

legacy of, 698 on lines, 706 literature on, 714-715 media studies and, 712-714 on movies and control, 709-710

on multiplicities, 706-707 on networks, 713 on new media, 713

philosophy and, 698-700 on rhetoric, 714

De Niro, Robert, 176

deontological ethics, 240-241 deontology definition of, 528 DME and, 528

ICE and, 524

Department for International Development (DfID), 1360 | Department of Homeland Security, US, 1693

Dependency Road (Smythe), 1254 dependency theory, 124 colonialism and, 449 development communication and, 1580-1581

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. $73-1178

Derrida, Jacques, 677, 1129, 1224, 1316

Althusser eulogized by, 46

INDEX

e«

de-Westernization academic reasons for, 465-466

on constative statements, 882

academic system global inequalities and, 477-481

deconstruction and, 680

access to resources and networks for, 478-480 Africa and, 475-476 Arabic world and, 476-477 criticism of, 470-471, 481-482 decolonization and, in media studies, 465-482 East and Southeast Asia and, 474-475

post-structuralism and decentering of, 1310-1312 Spivak on, 679-680 detachment, de-Westernization and, 471 deterritorialization, cultural, 764

de Tracy, Antoine Destutt, 821 Development 2.0 consumption and, 1812-1813 definition of, 1810

empirical research and, 480-481 examples of, 471-472 foundations ofdiscourse on, 466-467

Milaap and, 1815-1816, 1817n3

Global South and, 466-467

Millennium Development Goals and, 1811

Latin America and, 472-473 objectivity, detachment and, 471 process of, 469-470

models of, 1809

neoliberal empowerment and, 1816 philanthropy and, 1812-1813 strategies of, 1811-1812

women entrepreneurs, microfinance and, 1809-1816

“development biz,” 338 “development buzz,’ 338 development communication

publishing, politics of citing and, 480 South Asia and, 473-474

urgency of, 482 Dewey, John, 899, 904

Dewsbury, J. D., 11 DfID (Department for International Development), 1360

capital logic and, 1577

Dharmasastra, 689-690

Cold War and, 1358-1359

Dialectical and Historical Materialism (Stalin), 1714

culture of development and, 1589 dependency theory and, 1580-1581 dominant compared to minor perspectives on, 1874-1575

dialectical materialism, 822-823, 1711-1712,

Eka Nari Sanghathan and, 1587-1589

The Dialectic of Sex (Firestone), 251

globalization and, 1593n9

dialectics

hypodermic needle model of communication and, 1578-1579 influence and, 1357-1358 modernization theory and, 1358-1359, 1579-1580

noncapitalism and, 1577 origin of, 1360 paradigms of communication and, 1578-1584 paradigms of development and, 1576-1578 participation and, 1581-1584 power, social change and, 1357-1360 praxis and, 1575-1576, 1585S, 1589-1590 psychic writing and, 1585-1586 rethinking, 1574-1590 in Southeast Asia, 475

subjectivity and, 1584-1585 technology and, 1361 for transformative social praxis, 1586-1589 world ofthe third and, 1577, 1580, 1593n8

1851

1714, 1723

Dialectic of Enlightenment (Adorno and Horkheimer),

377, 825, 993, 1019, 1737 Gramsci and, 112-116

Hegel's theory of, 48-49, 1001-1002, 1640-1642

Neogrammarians and, 112-113 Zizek on, 1640-1642 The Dialectics of Nature (Engels), S75 dialogic communication adversarial model of communication replaced by, 503 civility and, $01-S02 Cloud and Lozano-Reich on, $01-S03 deliberative activism and, 502-504 diversity and, 497-498 humility and, 497 “T-It” compared to “I-Thou’” relations and, 502-503 intergroup dialogue and, 499-S01 listening and, 494-498 obstacles to, 498-500

power and, $03

development paradigms, 1576-1578

dialogic ethics, 242, 245

development theory, critical audience studies and, 266

dialogic performance, 1223

Devi, Mahasweta, 683

dialogism, 1223-1224

1852

+¢

INDEX

dialogue, 487-504

in CCP, 292 education and, 1200 intergroup, 499-SO1 listening and, 620 obstacles to, 498-500

Dialogue in Hell between Machiavelli and Montesquieu

VOLUME

VOLUME

2 Ps l=si72

VOLUMES

BPS 79=19is

2) PP: s/3=1I7s

ethical egoism and, $27 ethical monoism and, 531-532

ethical pluralism and, $32—S33 ethical relativism and, 532 frameworks in, 527-531 growth of, $24-S25 ICE and MRE sharing topics with, S26f

identity and, 530-531 as interdisciplinary, 520-521 netiquette and, $22, 525 networked systems ethics and, 530

(Jolly), 100 Diatkine, René, 857-858 DiCaprio, Leonardo, 178 Dickinson, Anna, 1407 Dickinson, Greg, 1412, 1419

privacy and, 534-539

Did Somebody Say Totalitarianism? (Zizek), 1639

self and, 530-S31

Dietz, William, 1566 difference

social robots and, 539-546 utilitarianism and, 527-528 virtue ethics and, 528-530

cultural, colonialism and, 815 feminist organizational communication and, 646 power, culture and, 1351-1352 Difference and Repetition (Deleuze), 157, 698-699, 703

digital platforms, political economy and, 1257-1259

digital cultures. See also quantified self

dignity, health, representation, CCA and, 754-755

working definitions of, 522-523 Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), 424, 429

algorithms and, 508-509

DiGRA (Digital Games Research Association), 667

art and, $13-514, S13f, S14f Baby Lucent and, $15—S16 contextualizing, $07-S09

Diner Dash, 673

critical studies and, 507-517 data and, 507-508 datafication and, S08—-S09

Facial Weaponization Suite and, 516 Fitbark and, 516-517 labor and, 512 Magic Mirror and, 51S material and immaterial, 507

phases of, 510, SIL play and, S09, $10, $12

playful resistance and, 512-S17 quantitative compared to qualitative approaches in,

$09-S10 Unfit Bits and, 514-515 digital environmental communication and archives, $84-S85S

digital ethnography, 508 Digital Games Research Association (DiGRA), 667 digital labor, 1261-1263 digital media. See also social media; technology

power and, 1353-1354 social movement media and, 1656-1659 digital media ethics (DME), 520-546 as bottom-up, 525

challenges of, S20-522

citizen journalism and, 521 consequentialism and, 527-528 deontology and, $28

Dillet, B., 1306

direct development, 1809 disability, of Roosevelt, 1614-1616 disability studies, cyborgs and, 560-S61 disciplinary power, 870-871, 1071 disciplinary society, Foucault on, 710 discipline, in colonial India, 1515-1516 Discipline and Punish (Foucault), 870-871, 1070, 1175, 1700, 1701

discourse cultural studies and, 309 on cyborgs, 556 on decolonization, foundations of, 467-469 on de-Westernization, foundations of, 466-467 feminist cultural studies and, 312 Foucault on power and, 309, 615, 870, 1121, 1346 humanitarian, 330-343 limits of, 595-596 out-law, 1493 post-racial, 1495 power and, 1349 on PT, growth of, 1323-1325 rhetoric compared to, 1395 discourse analysis, cultural and critical organizational communication and, 1169-1170 discourse ethics, 241, 898 discourse theory articulation and, 594

conceptual vocabulary of, 593-594 discursive logics and, 594-595

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2) PP-S73-1178

dislocation and, 594 elements and, 594, S98

empty signifier and, 594, 596 Essex School of Discourse Analysis and, $93-S98 idealism of, 600

immediacy and, $99

INDEX

(Guha), 1526-1527 Donnor, Jamel K., 1207

Donofrio, Theresa Ann, 1413 Don Quixote (Cervantes), 859, 861-863, 865-866 Dorey, Pete, 174-175

populism and, 602-603

Douglas, Mary, 318 Douglass, Frederick, 210, L111, 1412 on Constitution of US, 1087 The North Star and, 1084-1085, 1087 on US flag’s symbolism, 985 on white abolitionists, 1086 women’s rights supported by, 1085 Doxtader, Erik, 1415

the real and, 601 discursive theory of hegemony, 98-602 discursive unconscious, Foucault and, 862-864,

869-872 disempowered peoples, humanitarian discourses and, 334-335 disinformation, misinformation compared to, 1325-1326

disjunctures, globalization and, 124-126 dislocation discourse theory and, 594 Laclau on, $91, S96

disorganized capitalism, 913 displacement, 1382 Dissent, 401

distension, 8-9 distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, 436-437 distributive justice, 1730-1731 distrust, 1333-1337

divergence, Deleuze on, 70S diversity dialogic communication and, 497-498 globalization and cultural, 762-763 internationalized cultural, marginalized communities and, 771-774

Dorfman, Ariel, 1282 Doty, Roxanne, 1794

dramatism, 1223 Dreyfus, Hubert, 1067

Dreyfus Affair, 101-102 drive, psychoanalysis and, 1383, 1389-1391 drones, 554

surveillance in public space and, 1696 Drucker, Susan, 1767 Dryzek, John, 1453 Du Bois, W. E. B., 813

critical whiteness studies and, 345, 347-348

on slavery, 347-348 standpoint theory and, 347 Dubrofsky, Rachel, 1700 Dudemaine, Andre, 1554

du Gay, P., 1174 Dunn, Hopeton, 210-211 Dunn, Thomas R., 1418 During, Simon, 806

video game studies and, 670-671 divine power, 730

Dust Tracks on a Road (Hurston), 1229

DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act),

Dyer-Witheford, Nick, 1045-1046 A Dying Colonialism (Gilroy), 1189 Dynasty, 1277 Dyson, Michael Eric, 1417

424, 429 DME. See digital media ethics DMSC (Darbar Mahila Swamanyaya Committee), 752

Dutta, Mohan, $78, 958

Doctors Without Borders, 335-336

documentary culture, 1533 Dolan, Josephine, 58 Dolar, Mladen, 1396 Dole, Bob, 1616

Dolmage, Jay, 790 domesticity mobile privatization and, 1543

motherhood and, 249 domestic labor, motherhood and, 254-255

Dominance without Hegemony (Guha), 1513, 1515

1853

“Dominance without Hegemony and Its Historiography”

jouissance and, 596-S98 moments and, $94, 598 nodal points and, $94, 919 psychoanalysis and, S$95—S96

«-

Eagleton, Terry, 47, 1547 on ideology, 829, 1632 on Jameson, 650 on Spivak, 681

Earth First!, 1104, 1366, 1602 Earth Liberation Front, 1104 East Asia, de-Westernization, decolonization and, 474-475

East Coast Homophile Organizations, 1107-1108 Eastern Associated Company, 210

1854

-«

INDEX

East India Company, 32-33, 1524 Indian historiography and, 1S13-1S14 Easton, David, 1123 Eberly, Rosa, 90S, 907 Ebert, Teresa, 1281

Ebert, T. L., 563 Ebola, 139

ECD (Environmental Communication Division), 576 Eckersley, Robyn, 1453 Eco, Umberto, 267, 610, 1279, 1691 ecological integration, alternative organizational culture and, 40

economic development cultural studies and, 395-397

popular culture and, 395 Ricardo on, 912

economic justice Althusser on, 1740-1741 Asen on, 1753

VOLUME

IPPs

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

tao72

ViOMUIME

post-structuralism and, 1739-1741 rhetoric and theories of, 1729-1754

totality and, 1731 Turpin on, 1753 Zizek on, 1741 economics

global health and, 752 Hall, S., on markets and, 1682-1683 politics and, 1729 economy. See also political economy attention, PT and, 1329-1330 gig, 1242-1243 homework, 558-559

of power, Foucault on post-structuralism and, 1313-1316

Ecrits (Lacan), 1379

ECS (emotionally competent stimulus), 6 Ecuador, 397 Edelman, Lee, 1397

Aune on, 1750

The Edge of the Sea (Carson), 624n6

autonomist Marxism and, 1743-1744

Edison, Thomas, 1015, 1554 Edsall, Thomas B., 608-609 education in colonial India, 1514

BCCCS and, 1738-1739 Bruner on, 1753

capitalism and, 1732-1734 Cloud on, 1746-1747, 1751

dialogue and, 1200

in communication studies literature, applied use of, 1750-1754

for girls in Global South, 1814-1815

in communication studies literature, theoretical

of Hardt, 1037

discussion of, 1745-1750 commutative, 1730 culture industries and, 1737

Deleuze and Guattari on, 1741 distributive, 1730-1731

RRA S 7om les

Freire’s reforms for, 1199

historical representations of race in, 84 of Warner, 1052 E-E (entertainment education) programs, 748 EFF (Electronic Freedom Foundation), 425-427, 432, 436, 439

emancipation and, 1735

effective speech, 1621-1622

Foucault on, 1742-1743 Frankfurt School and, 1737-1738 Friedman and Galbraith on, 1750-1751 Greene on, 1747-1748, 1751-1752

Ehrenhaus, Peter, 1413-1414, 1419 Eisenhower, Dwight D., 613-614

Hardt and Negri on, 1743-1744

electronic cultures, media and, 1295-1296

Harsin on, 1753-1754

Electronic Freedom Foundation (EFF), 425-427, 432,

Laclau and Mouffe on, 1744-1745 Marxism and rhetorical critique of, post-1968,

Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency in Colonial India

1739-1745 Marxism and rhetorical critique of, pre-1968, 1735-1739 Massumi on, 1741-1742 May, M. S., on, 1748

McChesney on, 1752

Ejército Zapatista de Liberacién Nacional (EZLN), 1109 Eka Nari Sanghathan, 1587-1589

436, 439

(Guha), 685, 1516-1520, 1529 elements, discourse theory and, 594, $98 Elenes, C, Alejandra, 201 Elias, John, 1202 Eliot, T, S., 617

ordoliberalism and, 1743

elitism, Guha on, 1515, 1518, 1525-1526 Ellis, Bret Easton, 1432-1433 elocution, 1222

political economy’s emergence and, 1729-1730 politics and, 1730

Elton, Ben, 177

McKerrow on, 1746

eloquence, 1621-1622

VOLUME

I WP: 1+572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. 573-1178

emancipation, economic justice and, 1735

Emancipation(s) (Laclau), $91

INDEX

«

on materialism, 190-191, 1711-1713 on nature, 575

The Emancipator, 1085

enjoyment, ideology and, 1637-1640

EMB (Empire Marketing Board), 212 embodied control, 1356 embodiment, feminist cultural studies and, 313 emergent meanings, 831

Enlightenment, 739-740

The Enlightenment Cyborg (Muri), 562 An Enquiry into the Principles of the Good Society (Lippmann), 944

Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), 480

entertainment education (E-E) programs, 748

emotionality, bounded, 639

emotionally competent stimulus (ECS), 6

entertainment media, power structures in, 1353 Entertainment Software Association (ESA), 669

emotional truth, trust and, 1335-1336

entrepreneurial self, 913

emotions. See also affect affect compared to, 1S9-160

environment, 573-586

Big Ag and, 321-322

artificial, sexbots and, 543

critical food studies and, 319

background, 5

cross-cultural adaptation influenced by, 363-366, 368f, 369

creative industries and, 385

feelings compared to, $ Massumi on, 11

personal experience and, 6 primary, 3, 5-6 rationality compared to, visual rhetoric and, 1782-1783

secondary, 6

sociality of, 12-13 empathetic engrossment, 239 empathetic identification, 7 empathy, prostitution and, 542-543

Empire (Hardt and Negri), 1029-1030, 1038, 1048, 1743-1744

Empire Marketing Board (EMB), 212 Empire of Dirt, 1564 empowered participation, 1582-1583 empowerment

Internet and, 423 neoliberal, Development 2.0 and, 1816 selfie culture and, 1437-1438 visibility as, ofwomen, 1813-1815

empty signifier discourse theory and, 594, 596

populism and, 604 encoding/ decoding model, for critical audience studies,

definitions of, 57S as nature and culture, 573-576

performance shaped by, 1207 environmental communication approaches in, cultural studies and, 577-580 climate justice and, 583-584 defining, S80-S81 digital, archives and, 584-585 emergence of, cultural studies and, 576-577 ethics of crisis and care and, 581-583 resources for, S85—S86 technology and, 585 Environmental Communication Division (ECD), 576 environmental decision-making, public participation in, $78-S79

Environmental Defense Fund, 1104 environmentalism, 1104-1106

environmental justice, 583-584 movement for, 1104-1106, 1602

public sphere and, 1453-1454 race and, 1105 women and, 1106 environmental mass media studies, 579 environmental organizational communication studies, 578

encounters, Deleuze on, 702-703

environmental personal identity, 578 environmental political economy, 1239 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 1104

Energy Justice Network, 586

environmental racism, 1105

Engelhardt, Tom, 1436 Engels, Friedrich, 1734

environmental regulations, coal industry fighting,

267-268

Encomium of Helen (Gorgias), 1314, 1317

1148-1149

on capitalism, 1001-1002 on collective action, 1712

environmental science, technology, and health communication, 578

on dialectical materialism, 822-823

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), 1104 epideictic landscapes, 970 epistemic crises, 1335S

on ideology, 821-823, 830 on Marx’s legacy, 1713

1855

1856

+«

INDEX

PR tes72

VOLUME

MIME

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

epistemic fallacy, 864

reversibility and, 490

epistemological break, 858-860, 862

rhetoric, culture and, 607-620 shifting perspectives on, 496

epistemology, ofpolitical economy of media, 1255-1256 Equal Rights Amendment, 1091 erasure, communication as, 1351

erotic love, social robots and, $44

ESA (Entertainment Software Association), 669 ESCI (Emerging Sources Citation Index), 480

2) PPS

78— E178

storytelling as narrative imagination and, 607 teleological, 241

Ethics (Badiou), 26-27 Ethics (Spinoza), 54 The Ethics of Ordinary Technology (Puech), 525

Esperanto, 106

The Ethics ofStorytelling (Meretoja), 607

eSports, 278, 670 Essex School of Discourse Analysis, 593-598

ethnic absolutism, 1185-1186

ethical egoism, 241

ethnic interpersonal communication, 363

DME and, $27 ethical monoism, 531-532

ethnicity, in US media, 1477-1487. See also race

ethnic group strength, 364-365

ethnic mass communication, 363

ethical pluralism, 532-533

ethnic proximity, 365-366

ethical relativism, 492

ethnic social communication, 369 ethnography. See also autoethnography collaborative media and, 450 critical audience studies and, 271-272, 279 cultural and critical organizational communication

DME and, $32 ethical state, Hegel on, 1527-1528 ethics, 487-504. See also communication ethics; Digital

Media Ethics; Information and Computing Ethics; Machine Ethics or Robot Ethics; virtue ethics Badiou and, 26-27 Butler on, 891, 893 ofcare, 544-545 of care, environmental communication and, 581-583

of civility and dialogic communication, $02 corporate, 232 of crisis, environmental communication and, 581-583 critical audience studies and, 275-276 Declaration of Human Rights and, 491 definition of, 230 deliberative activism and, 502-504

deontological, 240-241 dialogic, 242, 245 discourse, 241, 898 Foucault and, 1073-1077 Golden Rule and, 490

and, 1166

digital, S08 performance, 1223, 1225-1229 ethnonationalisms, 129-130

ethnoscapes, 125 Etoile nord-africaines, 216 Ettinger, Bracha L., 164

EU. See European Union eugenics, 558, 561

Eurocentrism, 1491

European Union (EU). See also specific countries personal data in, $37

political economy research in, 1240 events

Badiou on, 20-26 conditions for, 21 definition of, 20

hierarchies and, 489

Deleuze on, 702-705 expression and, 1S8—159

hypermodernity and, 610-611 identity and, 611 indigenous peoples and, 490

fidelity to, 22 intensity of, 23-25 laws and, 22-23

interdependence and, 490-492, 503 modes of, 239-242, 245

naming of, 2S political, 21-22

networked systems, $25, 530 origin of, 230 parrhesia and, 1074-1077 petite narratives, postmodernity and, 608-610 postmodern, 241-242 post-structuralism and, 1317 references for, 489 relativism and, 492

subjectivity of, 25-26 temporality of, 26 EverQuest, 667, 671

exceptionalism, critical whiteness studies and,

354-355 exodus, Hardt and Negri on resistance movements and, 1044

expanded empiricism, 156

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2, PP) 573-1178

exploitation digital labor and, 1262 Subaltern Studies and, 1126 expression

communication and, 1S8

events and, 1S8-159 extralinguistic effects and, 158-161 Massumi on, 1S8-15S9

philosophy and, 159 extralinguistic effects, 1S8—161 Eyre, Chris, 1556, 1564, 1565

EZLN (Ejército Zapatista de Liberacién Nacional), 1109

Facebook, 137, 1429, 1812 as big data source, 140-142 digital labor and, 1261-1262 global dominance of, 1263 growth of, 1258

ideology and, 141 privacy and, 140-141, 413

user base on, 142 Faces Cages (Blas), 513, S13f facial recognition software, 1695 Facial Weaponization Suite, $16

Fackenheim, Emil, 99 fact-checking businesses, 1325

“facticity” of history, 1S2S The Factory Girls Voice, 1099 fake news, 180, 182, 1326-1328 Fallows, James, 1323

false consciousness, 1519 false statements, 1326 Fanon, Frantz, 217, 449, 468

Arendt on, 627 black studies and, 627-628

Gilroy on, 1189 on mutual recognition and race, 633-634

INDEX

FDR’ Body Politics (Houck and Kiewe), 1614-1616 fear communication and, 498-499 of dementia, 56—57 of media's damaging effects, 265

xenophobia and, 499 Fear ofSmall Numbers (Appadurai), 129, 131, 134 feelings emotions compared to, 5 structure of, Williams, R., on, 1533, 1538 Feffer, John, 1429 Felafacs (Latin American Federation of Colleges of

Communication), 841 Felman, Soshana, 1398, 1398f, 1399f

Felski, Rita, 711, 1446 Female Labor Reform Associations, 1099 Fembots, 561-562 The Feminine Mystique (Friedan), 250, 1092 feminism. See also Davis, Angela Y.; transnational feminism aging in movies and, 58

alternative organizational culture and, 35, 38-39 Althusser and, 53-54 black, motherhood critiques from, 257-258 Black Power and, 85 CCS and, 310-313 Chicana, 196-203, 779

counterpublics and, 1452 critical audience studies and, 268-269, 273-274 cultural and critical organizational communication and, 1170-1172

cyberculture and, 412 Davis, A., on labor and, 88-89 Davis, A., on motherhood and, 86-88 frames of, 636 French, 682-683

gender, nation and critical cultural, 127-1128

on race and identity, 817-818 on Western thought and white universality, 628-629

gender normativity and, 880-881

ideology and, 1633 imaginary register of unconscious and, 1392-1393

Fargo (television show), 1563 Farrell, James, 1407 Farrell, Thomas, 903

fascino (allure), 105-106 fascism, nationalism and, 1186-1187 Fassett, D. L., 285-292 The Fast Runner, 1565 fatalism, of neoliberalism, 1139-1140

Fawcett, Edward, 956

1857

fax machines, social movement media and, 1655 Fay, Isabel, 1792-1793

race and, 627-634

fantasy

e

Haraway and, 553-554, 563, 1296

hegemonic masculinity and, 313-314 Hijas de Cuauhtémoc and, 164 historical materialism and, 190 ICTs and, 39 imperialism and, 681-682 Indian Princess movies and, 1561-1562

intersectionality and, 314 Jane Eyre and, 681-682 LGBT equality movement and, 1108 media technologies and, 1024, 1367

Mohanty and transnational, 186-188 motherhood critiques in, 250, 251

1858

«

INDEX

feminism (Continued) Plan X and, 1546 popular culture and, 1277-1278 power and, 1347-1348 public sphere and, 1446 Second-Wave, 251 social movement of, 1596 Spivak and, 681-683 standpoint theory and, 189 surveillance and, 1702 techno, 1024 Third World, Marxism and, 191 translation and, 695-696 transnationalism and, 314, 1497 “Under Western Eyes” and, 186-188 visual rhetoric and, 1781 Western, 187, 681

Women's Movement and, 1090, 1093 workerism and, 1051n1 feminist organizational communication, 635-647 approaches to, 636-645 challenging macro-discourses and structures of gender inequality in, 639-645 context and, 645-646 difference and, 646

disrupting online and offline organizations in, 639-640

VOLUME

VOLUME

IPPs 1 SSs72

VOLUMES

BPS 1179-190s

2 2 PAS 76=0i78

Firestone, Shulamith, 251 First Cousin Once Removed, 74-75 First National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit, 1105-1106 Fisher, Mark, 1140, 1435 Fisher, Walter, 619 Fiske, John, 1278-1280, 1281 Fitbark, 516-517 Fitbit, 1812-1813 Flaherty, Robert, 1555-1556 Flew, Terry, 951 FLN (Front de Libération National), 213, 216, 218-219 Flores, Lisa A., 202 Florida, Richard, 382 Florida State University (FSU), 1550, 1567-1568 Floridi, Luciano, 525 Fluxus, 1224-1225

Flynn, Elizabeth Gurley, 1102-1103 EM (frequency modulation), 1015 folk culture, popular culture compared to, 1269 Follett, Mary Parker, 1164 — Fonda, Jane, 178 Foner, Philip, 1110-1111 food. See critical food studies food deserts, 326

foodie culture, 324-327 Food Network, 325

emerging trends in, 645-647 engaging contradiction, 641-643, 645

food safety, 322-323 food systems, 318

knowledge generation and, 641 meritocracy, ideal worker and, 644-645

Forbes, Steve, 400 force, communication ethics and, 237-238

neoliberalism and, 643-644

Ford, Henry, 377

occupations and, 637-638 performing/queering organizing in, 638-639 questioning gender difference in, 636-638

Ford, John, 1$S6-1557 Fordism, 912 foreign policy, nation branding, media and, 768

resistance and, 646-647

feminist political economy, 1239 feminization of labor, 934

Forget Memory (Basting), $6, 58

forgetting, public memory and, 1414-1416 Fort Apache, 1557

#Ferguson, 1374

Foss, Paul, 711

feudal assemblage, 708 Feuerbach, Ludwig, 1711 Fichte, Johann Gottlieb, 1710

Foss, Sonja, 1778-1779, 1786 Foucault, Michel, 242, 559, 956, 1317, 1460, 1700 Althusser and, 856-857, 859-860, 869, 1065-1066 archeology and, 1067-1069 Biesecker on, 1078-1079

fidelity, to events, 22 Fields, Barbara J., 1213 Fields, Karen E., 1213 film festivals, in Latin America, 446, 454, 461

biographical overview of, 1064-1065 on biopolitics, 727, 737, 1071-1073, 1140-1141, 1743

film theory, Deleuze on, 712-713 finance capital, globalization and, 131 finance capitalism, 913 finanscapes, 125

on Borges, 867 Chinese encyclopedia and, 867-868 on civil society, 1072-1073 on clinics, 1068

FindFace, 513 Finnegan, Cara, 906

Cloud on, 1078 communication studies and, 1064-1080

VOLUME VOLUME

9PP: 1-572

VOLUME

2 PP. $73-1178

INDEX

3 PP. 1179-1918

Communism and, 1065

cultural and critical organizational communication and, 1175-1176 on Cynics, 1076

on disciplinary power, 870-871, 1071 on disciplinary society, 710 on discourse and power, 309, 615, 870, 1121, 1346

Frame Up (Davis, A.), 81 framing, security and visuality, 1792 France, 1653

censorship and colonialism of, in Algeria, 21S journalism and colonialism of, in Algeria, 214 materialism in, 171$-1717 movies and colonialism of, in Algeria, 213

discursive unconscious and, 862-864, 869-872

radio and colonialism of, in Algeria, 211

Don Quixote and, 859, 863

structuralism in, 1715-1716

on dynamic power, 1120 on economic justice, 1742-1743

epistemological break and, 858-860, 862 ethics and, 1073-1077

genealogy and, 1069-1073 governmentality and, 949-950, 1141, 1175-1176 Greene on, 1078 Heidegger's influence on, 1066-1067

on history and crime, 1520 on homo oeconomicus, 1142-1143

homosexuality and, 1065 on Horkheimer, 1066

voter turnout in, 1333-1334 Francis, Philip, 1510 Frank, Adam, 6-7 Frank, Robert, 1408 Frankfurt, Harry, 1323, 1331 Frankfurt School, 392, 825

capitalism critiques of, 916-917 CCS and, 1131 critical theory and, 306-307, 1019 cultural studies and, 307-308, 993-994

culture industry critique by, 916, 1737 economic justice and, 1737-1738

on humanism, 1288

Habermas and, 895

ideology and, 687, 826-827 on language, 863-864

ideology approach of, 1347

on liberalism, 940, 1140 Marxism and, 1065-1066, 1078 on Las Meninas, 863

labor and, 915-917 media technologies and, 1019-1020, 1023

on political economy of media, 1251-1252 popular culture and, 1272-1274

on mental illness, 858-859, 1067-1068

Franklin, Benjamin, 1055

neoliberalism and, 875, 949-951, 1140-1144 Nietzsche's influence on, 1065-1066, 1069-1070 on ordoliberalism, 1141-1143

Fraser, Nancy, 892, 905-906, 1445, 1454

Fransen, Jayda, 182 on subaltern counterpublics, 1450 The Frederick Douglass Papers, 1087, 1111

on panopticon, 1071, 1701 on parrhesia, 1074-1077, 1079 Phillips, K., on, 1079

Freedman, Des, 951, 957

popularity of, 856 posthumanism and, 1077-1078

freedom. See also press freedom development as, 1592n2

on post-structuralism and economy of power,

Marx on, 1732-1733 Freedom of Press Index, 802

1313-1316

on psychoanalysis, 863-864 on revolutionary movements, 1075-1076 Rodriguez,J.C., and, 856-875 on space, 970, 1701 Spivak on, 687-688

Free African Society of Philadelphia, 1084

Freedom's Journal, 1085-1086 Freedom's Power (Starr), 956 Freeman, Carla, 932 Free Speech, 346

free trade zones (FTZs), 933

Frames of War (Butler), 886-887

Frei, Eduardo, 1197 Freire, Paulo, 285, 291-292 Brazil return of, 1198-1199 childhood and family of, 1195 in Chile, 1197-1198 collaborations of, 1202 controversy over, 1201-1202 cultural action theories of, 1201

frames of war, Butler on, 886-887

early adulthood of, 1195-1197

structuralism and, 1309

on subjugated knowledge, 1220 theoretical overview of, 1065-1067

on thought, 1068 Foundations for a Metaphysics of Morals (Kant), 240 “four little girls,” 80 Foust, Christina, 1752

e

1859

1860

+

INDEX

Freire, Paulo (Continued) education reforms of, 1199 exile of, 1194

IDAC and, 1198

VOLUME

PPS =s72

VOLUMEss

Rey

VOLUME

2 PR s7o=Uil7s

Mi7Z9 Sons

Galloway, Alexander, 672 game culture

cyberculture and, 413

play and, 510

literature on, 1202-1203

GamerGate, 671

MCP and, 1196 MOVA and, 1199

game studies. See video game studies Gandhi, Mohandas Karamchand, 1516

Pedagogy ofthe Oppressed and, 1198-1201

Garcia, Alma, 779

in Pernambuco, Brazil, 1194-1195

Garcia Canclini, Néstor, 269, 851

posthumous works of, 1202

AMEDI and, 1159

PT and, 1198 SEC and, 1196-1197

communication studies and, 1152-1161 on consumption and citizenship, 1154-1156

SESI and, 1196 The French Chef, 32S French Communist Party (PCF), 43, 45-46 French feminism, 682-683 French Revolution, 21-22, 26, 1$22 frequency modulation (FM), 1015 Freud, Sigmund, 132

on death drive, 1383, 1390-1391 on identity, 1302 Lacan on, 1636 on narcissism, 1432 on prohibition and psychoanalysis, 1382-1383, 1394 psychic writing and, 1585-1586 on repetition, 1387-1388

on repression, 1382 on resistance and psychoanalysis, 1380 rhetoric and, 1379 on transference, 1389 on unconscious and psychoanalysis, 1381-1382 friction, social movements and, 1604 Friedan, Betty, 250, 1092 Friedman, Milton, 36, 956 on economic justice, 1750-1751 Front de Libération National (FLN), 213, 216, 218-219 FSU (Florida State University), 1550, 1567-1568 FTZs (free trade zones), 933 Fuchs, Christian, 1251, 1257, 1262 functional fitness, cross-cultural adaptation and, 367 functionalism organizational communication and, 1163-1167 social movements and, 1598-1599 functional participation, 1582 functioning, 1$92n2 Fundacién Mexicana de Cineastas, 446

on cybertarianism, 1158 on globalization and interculturalism, 1159-1160 honors and awards of, 1152 on hybridity, 1159-1160 legacy and influence of, 1153-1154, 1160-1161 on media, 1157-1189 in Mexico, 1152-1153 on urbanism, 1156-1157 Garcia Espinosa, Julio, 445, 447, 451 Garcia Linera, Alvaro, 452 Gardner, Paula, 1812 Gargantua and Pantagruel (Rabelais), 1649-1650 Garrison, William Lloyd, 1085, 1087 Garrisonians, 1087

Garvey, Marcus, 1083 Gates, Bill, 294 Gaudet, Hazel, 1018 Gay Liberation Front, 1107 gay marriage, 1061-1062 gay rights, 1106-1109 Gayspeak (Chesebro), 1461 Gehrke, Pat, 1612 Geldof, Bob, 178-179 gender. See also sex AD in movies and, 65-66 Butler and, 877 Butler on identity and, 884-885 CCS and, 305-316 conjunctural analysis of, 316 critical food studies and, 319-320 critical whiteness studies and, 352 Davis, A., on labor and, 88-89 Davis, A., on race, class and, 82-83 feminist cultural studies and, 310-313

Gable, Robin, 1547 Gabriel, Teshome, 449

globalization, labor and, 931-934 globalization, minorities and, 131-132 hegemonic masculinity and, 313-314

Gadamer, Hans-Georg, 607-608 Galbraith, John Kenneth, 1750-1751

homework economy and, 558-559 language and, 1780-1781

Gallagher, Noel, 177

leisure activities and, 642

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2. PR. S$73=1178

Martin-Barbero and, 852 nation, critical cultural feminists and, 1127-1128

normativity and, 1614 as performative, 880, 882-883 performativity and, 312, 1212-1213, 1221

questioning differences of, in feminist organizational communication, 636-638 sexbots and, 543, $46

sex compared to, 312 slavery and, 82 Subaltern Studies and, 688-691

INDEX

Getino, O., 446-447, 451 Gibbs, Anna, 7 Gibbs, Lois, 1106 Giddens, Anthony, 407 on active and passive trust, 1335 on globalization, 1416 structuration theory of, 1168-1169

gig economy, 1242-1243 Gilbert, Sandra, 681-682

Gilles Deleuze: An Apprenticeship in Philosophy (Hardt), 1047

Twitter and, 144

Gilles Deleuze: From A to Z, 714

wage inequality and, 932-933

Gillis, John, 1410-1411

Warner on, 10S6—1057, 1060-1061

Gilmore, John, 426-427

work-life priorities and, 642

Gilroy, Paul on black future, 1188-1191

gendered warfare, 340

gender inequality, feminist organizational communication challenging, 639-645

gender normativity Anzaldta on, 782

on black liberation and cultural studies, 1179-1180 on class and race, 1491

on colonialism and politics, 1183-1184 communication studies and, 1179-1193

changing, 491

on cultural studies and politics, 1180-1182

communication ethics and, 235-236 feminism and, 880-881

on ethnic absolutism, 1185-1186 on Fanon, 1189 on fascism and nationalism, 1186-1187

homonormativity and, 315 gender subversion, 880

Gender Trouble (Butler), 877-881, 892-893 genealogies Butler on, 879-880 Foucault and, 1069-1073 of homo politicus, 1145 Nietzsche and, 1069-1070

of performance studies, 1222-1225 power and, 1070-1071 generality, affect and, S

general systems theory, 360 genetically modified (GMO) crops, 322

on future and race, 1181-1182 Grossberg’s story compared to, 1191 on the human, 1182-1183 on identity, 1190 on nationalism, 1183 on postcolonial melancholia, 1184 on racism and nationalism, 1184-1185 UK cultural studies critiqued by, 1182-1187 works of, 1192-1193 Girl Effect, 1813-1815

girls game movement, 667 Giroux, H. A., 285, 287

Geneva Convention, 335

Giving an Account (Butler), 888, 891

The Genius of Universal Emancipation, 1085

Glaeser, Edward, 1761 Glatzer, Richard, 64

Genova, Lisa, 64 gentrification, foodie culture and, 326

“geography of selves,” 786-788 Geomedia (McQuire), 1770 The George Lopez Show, 1481 Georgiou, Myria, 1770

Geras, Norman, $91, 599-600

Gere, Charlie, 507, S09

German Ideology (Marx), 985

Glazner, Gary, 73-74 Glenn, Evelyn Nakano, 258 The Global City (Sassen), 1763 global flows, 124-126 global globalization, 407-408, 410, 417-418 global health acculturation processes in, 749 behaviors and, 750

German media studies, 1022 Germany, ordoliberalism in, 945, 1141-1143, 1743

CCA and, 746-747, 750-756 communication and, 744-746 communities of health in, 749-750 critical studies and, 743-757

Geronimo, 1553

cultural competence in, 748-749

The German Ideology (Engels and Marx), 190,

821-822, 1734

1861

1862

e¢

INDEX

global health (Continued) cultural narratives in, 748

VOLUME

Ip PPs 15572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. 573-1178

labor politics, neoliberalism and, 928-935 localized, 417

culture and community participation in, 749

maritime exploration and, 409

culture as barrier in, 747-748 culture as surface characteristics in, 748 economics and, 752

of media, 1352-1353 methodological nationalism and, 764-765 minorities and, 131-132

HIV/AIDS and, 745 human rights and, 756

mobility and, 415-416

inequalities and, 745-746 neoliberalism and, 743 privatization and, 745 profit and, 744 global health security regime, 336 globalization Appadurai on violence and, 131-134

national as constituent form of, 765—766 nationalism and, 770-771

nation branding and, 766-768, 775-776 optics of, 134 pedagogy and, 135 phases of, 408-410 politics and, 414-417 popular culture, postcolonialism and, 1282-1285

area studies and, 134

privacy and cyberculture in era of, 413

capitalism and, 408

progression of, 759-760

communication of resistance to, 225

public memory and, 1416-1417

concept of, 407 connections in, 414-415, 417

public pedagogy and, 1426 public sphere and, 1454-1455

consumption and, 1155-1156 contradictory forces of, 761-763 critical audience studies and, 272-273 criticism of, 410

race and, 1497 renationalization and, 759-776 restricting forces of, 760 soft power and, 766-769, 775-776

cross-cultural adaptation and, 369

Subaltern Studies and, 692

cultural diversity and, 762-763 cultural homogenization and, 124, 126 cultural studies and, 1496-1497

technology and, 131 territory and, 415 transnational feminism and, 932

of culture and communication, 759-776 culture industries and, 380-381

transnationalism compared to, 123-124, 763 US culture and, 762

cyberculture and, 406-418

global memoryscapes, 1416

development communication and, 1593n9

Global North, 224-228

disjunctures and, 124-126 emergence of, 408

“Global Now,’ 416 global screen, 766

ethnonationalisms as reaction to, 129-130

Global South

feminization of labor and, 934

finance capital and, 131 Garcia Canclini on interculturalism and, 1159-1160 gender, labor and, 931-934 Giddens on, 1416 global, 407-408, 410, 417-418 Global South and, 223 grassroots, 134-135

health and, 743-747

historiography of culture and, 774-776 hybridity and, 1497 identity politics and, 1131 imagination and, 124 inclusive borders and, 774 income inequality and, 131 industrialization and, 409 Internet and, 409-410

academic infrastructures in, 478-480 access to resources and networks in, 478-480 Australia and, 227 CCA and, 755-756 communication and, 223-228 cultural variability and, 228 de-Westernization and, 466-467

dominant conceptualizations of, 226-227 education for girls in, 1814-1815 future of term, 227-228

globalization and, 223 Global North compared to, 224, 226

imperialism, popular culture and, 393-394 language barriers for academia in, 479 neoliberalism and, 224 New Zealand and, 227

noncapitalism in, 1577

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2, PP. S73=1178

INDEX

otherization of, 225

on good sense, 824

population control in, 694-695 scholarship on, 224-227 terminology of, 223-224

on grammar, 11S

glocalization, 765-766

Gloria Evangelina Anzaldua Papers, 790 GMO (genetically modified) crops, 322 Goffman, Erving, 183, 1206-1207, 1223 Goggin, Maureen Daly, 1781-1782

Goldberger, Paul, 1761 Golden Rule, 490 Goldman Sachs, 1167

Guha and, 1508, 1517, 1527 Hall, S., and, 1684 on hegemony, 116-119, 308-309, 392, 590, 598,

800-801, 803-804, 808-809, 824, 844-845, 917, 985-986, 991, 996, 1120-1122, 1537 on ideology, 801, 824 in Italian, 119-120

journalism and, 109 legacy of, 116-119 linguaggio and, 114-115

Golumbia, D., 439

linguistics and, 105-106

Gompers, Samuel, 1101

Marxism and, 106-107, 115-116, 996-997

Gonzales, Rodolfo, 195

on metaphors and language, 114

A Good Day to Die, 1565 good life, 721-722, 725, 732

Neogrammarians and, 112-113 on organic intellectuals, 824

Goodnight, G. Thomas, 904 goods, multiplicity of, 612-614

popular culture and, 392, 1276-1277

good sense, 824. See also common sense good sex, 544-546, 1060

The Good Society (Lippmann), 1135 Google, 137, 417 alternative organizational culture of, 37 as big data source, 145-146 global dominance of, 1263 personal data and, 536-537

Google Doodle, 792, 792f

on peasant culture, 684

on power and hegemony, 1121-1122 Saussure and, 114-115 socialism and, 986-987 on state, 117

Subaltern Studies and, 683-684

on translation and politics, 109-112 Gramsci is Dead (Day), 600-601 Grand Theft Auto series, 668 Grass, Gunter, 1424

Google Trends, 139, 145 Gordon, Lewis, 628 Gordon, Richard, 558 Gore, Al, 424, 429 Gorgias, 1307-1308, 1314, 1317

grassroots development, 1809 grassroots globalization, 134-135

Gorgias (Plato), 1461

Greece, 1653

Goulart, Joao, 1197 governmentality, Foucault and, 949-950, 1141, 17S—1176

governmental rationality, 1145 government legitimacy, Habermas on, 900-901 Government of Self and Others (Foucault), 1074-1075 Graham, Steve, 1769

grammar, 115 A Grammar of Motives (Burke, K.), 1223 Gramsci, Antonio, 1735

on capitalism, 917-918 catharsis and, 111 on class and power, 984, 1736 on common sense, 107-109, 824

communication and, 104-105, 112-116 communication studies and, 104-120 cultural studies and, 308-309, 996-997 dialectics and, 112-116 on Esperanto, 106

-

Gravagne, Pamela, 58, 61, 63

Gray, John, 956 Gray, Kishonna, 671 materialism in ancient, 1706-1707

philosophy and walking in ancient, 1293-1294 green applied media and arts, $79 Greenberg, Gerald, 1307-1308 Greene, Ronald W., S1, 1045 on economic justice, 1747-1748, 17S1-17S2

on Foucault, 1078 on ideology, 1749 on materialist rhetoric, 1007-1009 Greenpeace, 586 Gregg, Melissa, 1412 Grey, Zane, 1555 Gries, Laurie, 1782

grievable lives, Butler on, 885-888 Griffin, Leland, 1596 Griffith, D. W., 1555

Grimké, Sarah, 1088 Grindr, 1062-1063

1864

¢

INDEX

VOLUME

I RPP lS=si72

VOLUME

3) BRS WIS Sons

VOLUME

2 PR S735

Grindstaff, Laura, 386 Gronbeck, Bruce, 1781

on justice in colonial India, 1520-1521 legacy of, 1530

Gross, Alan, 903, 907

Marxism and, 1529

Gross, Daniel, 1079 Grossberg, Lawrence, 11-12, 1020, 1181

on narrative of experience, 1524

on agency, 1671 conjunctural analysis and, 316 cultural studies and, 307, 147SnS

on narrative of wonder, 1524 on nationalism and class, 1515

on organic composition of power in colonial India, 1511-1513, 1SU1t

on Deleuze and Guattari, 700, 711-712

on peasant rebellions in colonial India, 1$16-1520

Gilroy’s story compared to, 1191

on Permanent Settlement of 1793 in Bengal, 1509

on spatial materialism, 1671

on property rights, 1509-1510

Grossman, Jeremy, 1388 group privacy, S35

group subjectivity, AD and, 73 Grover, Bonnie Kae, 1210-1211 growth, cross-cultural adaptation and, 361-362

Grundrisse (Marx), 822 Guadalupe (Lopez, Y.), 198 Guantanamo prison camp, 736 Guattari, Félix, 1037 on affect, 7-11 on art and sensation, 8-9 on assemblages, 707-709, 713-714 on bodies, 1296-1297

Deleuze’s collaborations with, 698-700, 705-709,

id 7

Set ey

on economic justice, 1741 on lines, 706

on rebel consciousness, 1517-1518

style of, 1526 Subaltern Studies and, 1508-1509 on taxation in colonial India, 1510

on world history philosophy, 1522-1524 on world ofcolonialism, 1525-1526 Gumpert, Gary, 1767 Gunn, Joshua, 12, 52, 1386, 1629 on fantasy, 1392 on Long, 1390

on speech and bodies, 1621-1623 guns, 3D printable, 434-435 Gunther, Marc, 1329 Gutierrez-Perez, Robert, 789 Guyot, Arnold, 210 Habermas, Jiirgen, 241, 656

on multiplicities, 706-707

biography of, 895

on rhetoric, 714 on rhizomes, 70S—707

on bourgeois public sphere, 899-900, 904-905,

on subjugated groups, 1588 on transversality, 1594n17

on capitalism, 916-917 communication studies and, 895-908

Gubar, Susan, 681-682 Gudykunst, William B., 617

907-908, 1322, 1440-1450

communication theories of, 895-898

guerrilla video-making, 1654

on communicative action compared to strategic action, 896-897

Guha, Ranajit, 684-685, 1126

on consumption, 1738

colonial India historiography of, 1508-1530 on colonialism and development in India, 1510-1511 on community and patriarchy in colonial India, 1520-1522

on discipline and mobilization in colonial India, 151S-1516

cultural and critical organizational communication

and, 1167-1168 on democracy, 898-902 on discourse ethics, 898 Frankfurt School and, 895

on government legitimacy, 900-901

on education in colonial India, 1514

Holocaust and, 895

on elitism, 1515, 1518, 1518t, 1525-1526

on ideology, 825

on “facticity” of history, 1525

on law and democracy, 901-902

on false consciousness, 1519 Gramsci and, 1508, 1517, 1527

on liberalism, 941-942

historiographical trajectory of, 1526-1530 on Indian historiography of India, 1513-1515 on Indian history in world history, 1524-1525

political theory and, 898 on publicity, 899 on public opinion, 1444 reception of, 902-908

influences on, 1508

rhetoric and, 902-903

iis

VOLUME

1) PP: 1=572

VOLUME

3) PPy 11 79=191'8

VOLUME

2 PP. $73-1178

on rights in democracy, 902 on social imaginary, 1441 speech act theory and, 896 on systems compared to lifeworld, 897 Habermas and the Public Sphere (Calhoun, C.), 1448 Habitat III, United Nations, 1762 habitus, 61S—616

The Hacker Crackdown (Sterling), 439 hackers, cyberlibertarianism and, 425-427

INDEX

Hamer, Fannie Lou, 1103

Hamera, Judith, 1205, 1213 Hanan, Joshua, 1045, 1079, 1754 Handa, Carolyn, 1781

The Handbook of Communication Ethics (Cheney, May, S., and Munshi), 615 Handbook ofInstructional Communication (McCroskey, J., and McCroskey, L. L.), 298 Hansen, Lene, 1800-1801

hacktivists, 436-437

Happe, Kelly, 1079

Haiman, Franklyn S., 1110, 1623

Haraway, Donna, $74

Halbwachs, Maurice, 1405

on Chthulucene, 567

Halkin, Alexandra, 454-455 Hall, Rachel, 1701

communication studies and, 552-569 critics of, 560-563 on cyborgs as bodies, $S3-5S60, 1295-1296 feminism and, 553-554, 563, 1296

Althusser and, 1684

1865

Hamelink, Cees, 1771-1772

Hacktivismo, 426

Hall, Stuart, $0, 57, 186, 379, 801, 1447

«-

conjunctural analysis and, 316

History of Consciousness Program and, $52 homework economy and, 558-559 on identity politics, $7 on kinship, 564 on literal cyborgs compared to metaphorical cyborgs, $S5-5S56 multisectionality of, 56S natureculture and, 553, 564-567 on power, 558 seeding politics and, 567-569

cultural studies and, 308, 1681-1682

socialism and, $53

on culture, 991

on technology, 554-555

on articulation, 1685

on audience reception, 831

books of, 1679-1681

at Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, 1679-1680 on class, 1689

on commodification, 1690

on communication and power, 922 communication studies and, 1679-1691

on conjecture, 1685

encoding/ decoding model for critical audience studies

themes in work of, 583

and, 267-268 Gramsci and, 1684 on hegemony, 806-807, 996, 1537, 1683-1685 on identity, 189, 1130

word play of, 566

on ideology, 830-831, 1683-1685 on intellectuals, 1688-1689

on markets and economics, 1682-1683 Marxism and, 1682 on mass society, 1269 on materialism, 191 on media, 1690-1691 neoliberalism and, 948-949, 1139, 1683 at Open University, 1680

hardcore video games, 669-670 Hardin, Carolyn, 1149

Harding, Nancy, 63, 189 The Hard Road to Renewal (Hall, S.), 1680 Hardt, Michael, 1436 autonomist Marxism influencing, 1030-1031, 1037

on bioplitical production, 1039-1040 on capitalism, 1039 on class, 1043-1044

on command and control in war, 1041-1042 communication studies and, 1029-1048

on politics and cultural studies, 1180-1181

on economic justice, 1743-1744 education of, 1037

on popular culture, 1268, 1274-1276, 1689-1690

on exodus and resistance movements, 1044

on post-structuralism, 1688 on race and ideology, 1490-1491

on materialist rhetoric, 1008-1009

on racism, 1686-1688 on state, 1685-1686 on Thatcherism, 1680, 1700

Halleck, DeeDee, 1654

Halloween, “playing Indian” and, 1552-1553

on modernity, 1029-1030 on multitude, 1042-1045

Negri collaborating with, 1037-1038 on politics and governance, 1044-1045 on post-national sovereignty, 1041 on power, 1038-1039

1866

+«

INDEX

VOLUME, VOLUMES

Hardt, Michael (Continued)

Balas 72

VOLUME

2 PP

S732 0i7s8

PPeli79sl9rs

Hedge, Radha, 256

on social justice, 1029

Heeks, Richard, 1809-1810

on sovereignty, 1040-1041

Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, 630, 632-633, 877-878

workerism and, 1031-1035 works of, 1047-1048

dialectic theory of, 48-49, 1001-1002, 1640-1642 on ethical state, 1527-1528

Hardy, Jonathan, 1257

on logic, 1710

Harlan County U.S.A., 1751

materialism and, 1710-170

Harold, Christine, 1752

on Orientalism, 1528

Harrelson, Woody, 178 Harris, Cheryl I., 350-351

on Spirit, 1523, 1528, 1530

Harrison, Benjamin, 1407 Harsin, Jayson, 1753-1754 Hartley, John, 1324 Hartman, Saidiya, 1183

on totality, 1731

on world history philosophy, 1522-1524 hegemony Althusser on, 801 Butler on, 878, 883

Hartsock, Nancy, 189

civility and, S01

Harvey, Allison, 671 Harvey, David, 956, 1763 on neoliberalism, 1137-1138 Harwood, Ronald, 68 hashtag activism, social media and, 1374 Hasian, Marouf, Jr., 1408 HASS (humanities, arts, and social sciences), 508, S09

as class leadership, in Marxism, 985-987 Cloud on, 119, 803-804 common sense and, 108, 802 communication studies on, 802-803, 807-808 in communication studies on media, 117 competing definitions of, 803 counter, 802-803

Hastings, Warren, 1510 Haug, Wolfgang Fritz, 831 Hauser, Gerard A., 620, 906 on public sphere, 1449-1450 Havelock, Eric, 1017 Hawhee, Debbie, 161, 1623, 1628-1629

criticism of, 599-602 cultural materialism and, 1538-1540 definitions of, 599, 799-802, 985 discursive theory of, 598-602 evolution of, 799-802, 808 Gramsci on, 116-119, 308-309, 392, 590, 598,

on sensation, 1300 Hawk, 1562

800-801, 803-804, 808-809, 824, 844-845, 917, 985-986, 991, 996, 1120-1122, 1537

Hawking, Stephen, 1396 Hayden, Sara, 256

Hall, S., on, 806-807, 996, 1537, 1683-1685 heterosexuality and, 315

Hayek, Friedrich, 36, 956

identity and, 118

neoliberalism and, 943-944

Haymarket Square tragedy, 1100-1101 Hayward, Mark, 1754 health. See also global health alternative rationalities of, 754 communities of, 749-750 critical food studies and, 319 definition of, 1620 dignity, representation and, CCA and, 754-755

globalization and, 743-747 as interplays of culture, structure, and agency, 753 health behaviors, 750 Health Communication, 1617 Hearn, Alison, 1331 Heartfield, John, 1655-1656 “hearts and minds,’ military humanitarianism and, 339 Hechter, Michael, 1119 Heck, Axel, 1801 Heckman, Susan, 191

Laclau and Mouffe on, 590-591, 598-602, 801-802,

804-805, 809 language and, 116 Lenin and, 800, 809 Martin-Barbero on, 845 in Marxist traditions, 799-809 Marx on, 985 masculinity and, 313-314 media definition of, 805-806

mobile privatization and, 1542-1545 neoliberalism as project of, 1137-1140 organizational communication and, 116-117 origin of, 799-802, 985 Plan X and, 1545-1547 populism and, 604-605 post-hegemony and, 601-602 post-structuralism and, 801-802, 804-805 power and, 1121-1122 process of, 1537-1538

VOLUME

1 PR. 1=572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP, 573-1178

rhetorical definition of, 803-804 social movements and, 119

soft power and, 808 structuration of, in political economy of media technologies, 1245 technological determinism and, 1540-1542 translation and, lll UK cultural studies and, 806-807 Williams, R., on, 806-807, 991, 1538-1547

Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (Laclau and Moufte), $90-S91, 593, 598-602, 60S, 804-805, 1744

Heidegger, Martin, 616, 1$27, 1529 Foucault influenced by, 1066-1067

INDEX

Foucault on crime and, 1520

of India in world history, 1524-1525 political economy and, 1255 public memory compared to, 1405 queer studies and, 1467

world, philosophy of, 1522-1524 History and Class Consciousness (Lukacs), 992 History at the Limits of World-History (Guha), 1$22-1525, 1529

History of Consciousness Program, 552 The History of Sexuality (Foucault), 1071, 1141 Hitler, Adolf, 93, 99, 1655-1656

Helmers, Marguerite, 1779-1780

HIV/AIDS, 745, 1063, 1108

Hemispheric Institute, 586 Henderson, Gae Lynn, 1079

1867

history “facticity” of, 1525

Heim, M., 561

Helms, Jesse, 1392-1393

«

activist groups for, 1467 online activism and, 1370

“Hive Mind,” 234-235

Herman, Edward, 1245 Hernandez, Ester, 198-199 Hernandez, Leandra, 789 Hershey, Laura, 561 Herzl, Theodor, 102 Herzog, Herta, 266 Hesmondhalgh, David, 386

Hojas de cine (Fundacién Mexicana de Cineastas), 446 Holding the Line, 1751

heterogeneity, communication ethics and, 232-233,

Holliday, George, 1699

489-490

heteronormativity Butler on, 878 motherhood and, 250

heterosexuality, hegemony and, 315 heterotopias, 970 “hidden transcripts,” 237-238

“high-consensus rapid-discovery” science, 148-149 The Highest Poverty (Agamben), 732 Hijas de Cuauhtémoc, 164

Hill, Charles, 1782, 1783 Hill, Forbes, 832 Hinduism

Platonism compared to, 1707 reversibility and, 490 sati and, 689 Hinduism, in India, 132, 474 hip-hop, Davis, A., and, 85-86 historical materialism. See also materialism

capitalism and, 1001-1002 dialectical materialism compared to, 1712

Hobbes, Thomas, 241, 1042 Hobsbawm, Eric, 1119 Hoerl, Kristen, 254, 1408-1409

Hoggart, Richard, 921, 987, 1274 on class, 990

Holocaust, 9S Agamben on, 729, 735 anti-Semitism and, 93 denial of, 97 Habermas and, 895

memory, denial and, 1417 predatory identities in, 133 totalitarianism and, 729 Holocaust Memorial Museum, US, 1410 home, Anzaldua on, 782-783

homeless people, policing, 1698 homemaking, performance ethnography and, 1227-1228 Homer, 1219, 1290-1291

homework economy, 558-559 homo barbarus, 331 homogenization, globalization and cultural, 124, 126 homo humanus, 331

homonormativity, gender normativity and, 31S homo oeconomicus, 1142-1143 homo politicus, genealogy of, 1145 Homo Sacer project, 721

Marxism and, 980-981, 1001-1002

anthropological machine and, 725-726

Mohanty on, 189-191

ban and, 724-725, 736 bare life and, 734-735 biopolitics and, 726-727, 731

premise of, 1711 historicity, communication ethics and, 233-234, 489-490

critique of, 734-739

1868

-«

INDEX

VOLUME VOMUIMEsS)

Homo Sacer project (Continued)

divine power and, 730

VOLUME

1 PP, 1372 Peal

io

2) PPO S73 =17s

Noies

humanism. See also posthumanism agency and, 1290

origin and meaning of, 723-724

emergence of, 1288-1289 Foucault on, 1288 new materialism and, 1719

powerlessness of sovereignty and, 729-730

posthumanism compared to, 1289-1290

state of exception and, 727-729, 733, 735-736

of Renaissance, 1288

extensive exceptions in, 734-736 media and sovereignty and, 731

homosexuality. See also queer/ing bad sex and, 1060 Chicana feminism and, 197, 199, 202 Foucault and, 1065 gay marriage and, 1061-1062 HIV/AIDS and, 1063

LGBT equality movement and, 1106-1109 motherhood and, 258-259

normativity and, 1061] queer counterpublics and, 1059-1060 queer spaces and, 1062-1063 the Real and, 1397 Warner on shame and, 1061, 1063 Honegger, Hans, 943, 1134

Hongladarom, Soraj, 531

social movements and, 1606 humanitarian discourses

celebrity humanitarianism and, 336-338 contested nature of, 331-335

critical perspectives on, 330-343 definition of, 330 disempowered peoples and, 334-335 medical humanitarianism and, 335-336 military humanitarianism and, 338-340 non-interventionism and, 333-335 R2P and, 340-342, 1796 restorative justice and, 330 humanitas, 331-332, 341-342 humanities, arts, and social sciences (HASS),

$08, S09

Honneth, Alex, 1438

humanities, culture and, 390-391

hooks, bell, 257, 502, 1492, 1787

humanities age studies, 57-58

Hope, Diane, 1787

humanity, meanings of, 331-332

hope, importance of, 285

human rights, 739 Arendt on, 728

Hopi Snake Dance, 1554 Horkheimer, Max, 306-307, 377, 392, 1251-1252, 1737 culture industries and, 993, 1019 Foucault on, 1066

on ideology, 825 Horton, Myles, 1199

CCA and, 756 colonialism and, 332-333 definitions of, 330-331 global health and, 756

historical origins of, 331-332

host communication competence, 362, 368-369

indigenous peoples and, 332

host conformity pressure, 364 host interpersonal communication, 363

liberalism and, 939-940

host mass communication, 363

host receptivity, 364 host social communication, 362, 369

Hotwired, 440 Houck, Davis W., 1614-1616

House Made of Dawn (Momaday), 1551 House on Mango Street (Cisneros, S.), 782

Houston-Grey, Stephanie, 1414

How to Do Things with Words (Austin), 882 How to Read Donald Duck (Dorfman and Mattelart), 1282 Huerta, Dolores, 195, 788, 1103 Huizinga, Johan, 665

the human, Gilroy and, 1182-1183

Human Aspects of Urban Form Towards a Man (Rapoport), 1764 Human Condition (Arendt), 1729

Mill on, 332-333 performance, activism and, 1226 restorative justice and, 330 slavery and, 332 state violence and, 342 Humans (Kadam), 61 humility, receptive listening and, 497 Hunter, Floyd, 1345 Hunter, W. W., 1519 Hurston, Zora Neale, 1224, 1229

Huyssen, Andreas, 1416

hybridity, 816-817

Garcia Canclini on, 1159-1160

globalization and, 1497 identity and, 1131 hybrid literacy, 1782 Hyde, Michael, 245, 619, 1386 Hymes, Dell, 1224

VOLUME

1 PP. 1=—$72

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2) PR S7e= 17.8

hypermodernity, 609-611, 614-616 hypodermic needle model of communication, 1018, 1$78-15S79

INDEX

«

1869

nepantla and, 786-787 online activism, power and, 1373-1375

postcolonial approach to nation and, 1125-1127 postcolonialism, race and, 1127

I am Joaquin (Gonzales), 195

postmodernism and, 1129-1130

ICE. See information and computing ethics ICT4D (information communication technology for

post-national, 128-130, 775

development), 1810 ICTs (information and communication technologies), 39, 408, 410, 417, S07, 929

IDAC (Institute for Cultural Action), 1198 “Ideal Chicana,’ 195-196 ideal culture, 1533 Ideal ego, 1387 idealism, materialism compared to, 1538, 1708, 1713 ideal worker, feminist organizational communication

and, 644-645 identity abjection and, Butler on, 884 Anzaldua on “geography of selves” and, 786-788

Bhabha on race and, 817-818

Burke, K., on, 1301-1302, 1383-1384 Butler on gender and, 884-885 capitalist patriarchy and, 188 in CCP, 288

predatory, 132-133 psychoanalysis and, 1383-1384 social movements and, 1366, 1604-1605 Subaltern Studies, nation and, 1126-1127

symbolic, 1387 zero-subject, 781-782 identity politics, 129 globalization and, 1131 Haraway on, 587 Laclau on, $91

postmodernism and, 1130 resistance and, 1129

Spivak on, 677-678 identity work, 923-924 ideographs, 832 “ideograph” theory, 904 ideological state apparatuses (ISAs), 306, 826, 870, 872-874, 99S

ideological turn, 832

Chicana feminism and, 201-202 collective, Charland on, 1745-1746

“An Ideological Turn in Rhetorical Criticism” (Wander),

critical food studies and, 318-321

ideological unconsciousness Althusser and, 857-858 Rodriguez, J. C., and, 861, 872

cultural and critical organizational communication

and theory of, 1169-1172 Deleuze on, 702 DME and, 530-531

environmental personal, $78 ethics, culture, rhetoric and, 611 Fanon on race and, 817-818 Freud on, 1302

Gilroy on, 1190 Hall, S., on, 189, 1130 hegemony and, 118 hybridity and, 1131 imaginary, 1387 immigration, culture and, 772-773 intercultural, 367-368 intersectionality and, 314 liberalism and, 954-955

locational masking and, 930-931 manufactured, selfie culture and, 1424-1438 Martin-Barbero on, 844

Mohanty on, 188-189 multiculturalism and, 1130-1131 nation, power and, in CCS, 1117-1132 neoliberalism and, 954-955

1749

The Ideologies of Theory (Jameson), 652-653, 660 ideology Adorno on, 825 Althusser on, 51-53, 306, 657-658, 801, 826, 918, 1633, 1740

Aune on, 1749

Baudrillard and Lyotard on, 827-828 Biesecker on, 1749 of Chicanismo, 195-196

of Chicano Movement, 195 common sense and, 108 control and, 1346 Eagleton on, 829, 1632 Engels on, 821-823, 830

enjoyment and, 1637-1640 evolution of, 823-825, 833 Facebook and, 141

fantasy and, 1633 Foucault and, 687, 826-827 Frankfurt School’s approach to, 1347 Gramsci on, 801, 824 Greene on, 1749

1870

+«

INDEX

ideology (Continued)

VOLUME

ERP TiS 572

VOLUMES

—PPal

i799

VOLUME

2 PP. 573-1178

ons

imago, 1387

Hall, S., on, 830-831, 1683-1685

IMC (Independent Media Center), 1658 IME. See International Monetary Fund

Hall, S., on race and, 1490-1491

immanent grammar, 1S

Horkheimer on, 825 Laclau and Mouffe on, 827 language and, 106-107, 115-116

immediacy discourse theory and, 599 security and, 1800 immediate verbal context, 1784-1785 immediate visual context, 1784-1785 immigration

Habermas on, 825

Lenin on, 823 literature on, 833-835 Lukécs on, 823-824 Marcuse on, 825 in Marxist traditions, 821-835

cross-cultural adaptation and, 358-359

Marx on, 821-823, 830, 834, 845, 1632

Mexican Americans and class consciousness associated with, 194 multiculturalism and, 1130

as material, S51-S3 materialism and, 832-834

identity, culture and, 772-773

motherhood critiques and, 253-259

immigration rights activism, Internet and, 1370

neoliberalism as, 1137-1140

imperialism

New Times project and, 830

feminism and, 681-682

PIT and, 831-832

popular culture and, 393-394 postcolonialism and, 1125

post-structuralism and, 827-830, 834-835 power and, in Marxism, 983-985, 1347 racism and, 1491 rhetoric and, 832 structuralism and, 825-826, 833-834 Wander on, 1749

Zizek on, 832, 919-920, 1631-1635 ideoscapes, 125 #IdleNoMore, 1374 IECA (International Environmental Communication

Association), 576, 58S Ignatieff, Michael, 60, 62, 64-65 Ignatiev, Noel, 353, 355-356 ignorance

civic illiteracy and, 1427-1429 critical whiteness studies and, 351 popular culture and, 1429

I Heart Huckabees, 1664-1665

space, whiteness and, 1677-1678 incest prohibition, 1382-1383, 1394 Incident at Oglala, 1565 inclusive borders, 774 inclusivity, alternative organizational culture and, 40

income inequality, globalization and, 131 “incompossibility,’ 70S independent media, 1648 Independent Media Center (IMC), 1658 India Aadhaar card in, 1356 anticolonial mobilizations of media in, 216-217

Bengal historiography in, 1514 Bollywood movies of, 1284 Buddhism in, 474 caste-related violence in, 130

IHL (international humanitarian law), 333

censorship and colonialism of UK in, 215 colonialism and development in, 1510-1511

“T-It” relations, 502-503 Ikas, Karin, 784

colonialism impact in modern, 128, 1283-1284 community and patriarchy in colonial, 1520-1522

Iliad (Homer), 1290-1291 illocutionary, perlocutionary compared to, 882, 896

DDS in, 755

cricket in, 126-128

Illuminating the Blindspots (Smythe), 1254

discipline and mobilization in colonial, 1515-1516

Ilyenkoy, Evald, 1709, 1717, 1728nS

education in colonial, 1514

The Image (Boorstin), 1332 The Image of the City (Lynch, K.), 657 Image Politics (DeLuca), 1624 imaginary identification, 1387 imaginary register of unconscious, 1391-1393 imagination, globalization and, 124 Imagined Communities (Anderson, B.), 814

Guha’s historiography of colonial, 1508-1530 Hinduism in, 132, 474

history of; in world history, 1524-1525 Indian historiography of, 1513-1515 Islam in, 132

justice in colonial, 1520-1521 materialism in antiquity in, 1706-1707

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. $73-1178

INDEX

-

1871

mimic men in colonial, 815-816 Mutiny of 1857, in Bengal, 1519

The Informational City (Castells), 1763 information and communication technologies (ICTs),

offshoring labor in, 929 organic composition of power in colonial,

information and computing ethics (ICE), 520

1SU-1S13, 1SUt

39, 408, 410, 417, $07, 929 deontology and, $24

peasant rebellions in colonial, 1516-1520

DME and MRE sharing topics with, 526f

Permanent Settlement of 1793 in Bengal, 1509 popular culture of, 1282-1284

emergence of, 22-524

property rights in colonial, 1509-1510 Quit India movement and, 1515

South Asian Subaltern Studies group and, 684-685 suicides in, 688-691

taxation in colonial, 1S10

networked systems ethics and, 525 for professionals, 524 utilitarianism and, 524

information communication technology for development (ICT4D), 1810 information sources, online, 137-140

telegraph and colonialism of UK in, 209, 215-216 The Indian, 217

injustice, politics and, 735-736

Indian Americans, media depictions of, 1486 Indian National Congress, 1516

Institute for Cultural Action (IDAC), 1198 Institute for Internet Studies (OI), $09

Indian Ocean Rim Association for Regional

Institute of Social Research, Frankfurt School, 306,

Cooperation, 21S

Indian Princesses, in movies, 1561-1562 “Indian” terminology, Native Americans media

depictions and, 1552 The Indian Wars, 1555 indie games movement, 670

indigenous peoples. See also Native Americans, media depictions of anticolonialism mobilizations of media by in US, 217

Innis, Harold, 207, S76

1251-1252

institutional political economy, 1238-1239 instrumentalist theory of state, 1123 Insurgencies (Negri), 1048 integrative social robotics, $40 integrative theory of cross-cultural adaptation, 361-362, 372-373 integrity, communication ethics and, 234-235

Indigenous Women’s Network (IWN), 189

intellectual property law, 378 intellectuals, Hall, S., on, 1688-1689 intensity, of events, 23-25 intensive mothering, 252 interactivity, promise and peril of surveillance and, 1699-1700

individualism, selfishness compared to, 616-617

interconnectivity, communication ethics and,

individual responsibility, obesity and, 1617 individual security, 1796-1797

233, 489-490 intercultural identity, cross-cultural adaptation

collaborative media in languages of, 450-456 ethics and, 490 human rights and, 332

research on, 1SS0-1SS1

individuation, intercultural identity and, 367

and, 367-368

industrial era, 34 industrialization critical food studies and, 321 globalization and, 409

interculturalism, Garcia Canclini on globalization

Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), 1102-1103, 1112 inequalities global health and, 745-746 power and legitimation of, 1345S space and social, 1354-1355 influence

interdependence, ethics and, 490-492, 503

Cold War, media and, 1358

development communication and, 1357-1358 World War II, media and, 1358

Informal Logic, 489 informational capitalism, 913

and, 1159-1160

intercultural transformation, cross-cultural adaptation and, 366-369, 368f Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), 766

intergroup dialogue obstacles of, S00-S01 research on, 499-S00

Internal Colonialism (Hechter), 1119 International Environmental Communication Association (IECA), 576, 585 international humanitarian law (IHL), 333 inter-nationalism, banal, 771

1872

+«

INDEX

International Monetary Fund (IMF), 743 neoliberal rules of, 928 international outsourcing, 929-931 international relations (IR), 1791 ontological security and, 1793 International Security, 1795 International Socialism, 829-830 International Telegraph Union, 209

Internet. See also cyberlibertarianism; Web 2.0 activism on, characteristics of, 1369-1371 activism on, identity, power and, 1373-1375 activism on, rise of, 1367-1369 affect, social movements and, 1372-1373 collective action, connective action and, 1372 critical insights on social movements and, 1371-1373

VOLUME

IP

VOLUME

3 PRI

las72

VOLUME

2 PP. 573-1178

79 S19Es

Invoking the Invisible Hand (Asen), 1753 IOC (Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission), 766

Ion (Plato), 1219 IoT (Internet of Things), 507 IR. See international relations

IRC (Internet relay chat), 430 Iris, 62-63, 66 ISAs (ideological state apparatuses), 306, 826, 870, 872-874, 995 Islam anti-Semitism in, 96-97 in India, 132

reversibility and, 490

foodie culture and, 326 globalization and, 409-410 immigration rights activism and, 1370

WLUML and, 189 Israel creation of, 95-97 Nazi propaganda and, 97 Zionism and, 103 Israeli-Palestinian border checkpoints, 1698 Isuma TV, 461

LGBT equality movement and, 1107-1108

Italian Communist Party (PCI), 1031-1033

microfinance and, 1811

Italian Marxism, workerism and, 1031-1035

cyberculture and expansion of, 412 development of, 411-412 empowerment an, 423

mobile phone usage of, 146-147

Italy, 1653

netiquette and, $22, 525

“T-Thou” relations, 502-503

progressive social movements and, 1365-1375

PT and, 1324

IWN (Indigenous Women’s Network), 189 IWW (Industrial Workers of the World), 1102-1103, 1112

racism and, 1495-1496 regulation of, 424-425, 429

Izquierda Nacional (National Left), S89 Izzard, Eddie, 177

social movements in 21st century and, 1109 telegraph compared to, 209 television and, 1258 US libertarianism and, 423-424 Internet of Things (IoT), 507 Internet relay chat (IRC), 430 interpellation Althusser and, 51-52, 306, 826 Rodriguez,J.C., and, 872

interpersonal relationships, power and, 1355 intersectionality, 314 Anzaldta on, 785 Collins on, 1492 CRT and, 1493-1494 race and, 1494-1496 Women’s Movement and, 1089

intersubjectivity, affect and, 7 Introducing Freire (Smidt), 1203 invention

memory and, 1407 rhetorical, 1292-1294 The Invention of Traditions (Hobsbawm and Nair), 1119 inversions, communicative, 1351

Jackson, Jonathan, 81 Jackson, Shannon, 1220, 1232

Jacobs, Jane, 1764 Jacobson, Howard, 400-401 Jakobson, Roman, 1395 Jamaica, 218-219 Jamaica Broadcasting Corporation (JBC), 219 James, William, 60 Jameson, Fredric, 2

cognitive mapping and, 687-658, 972 cultural studies and, 650-662

on culture and capitalism, 919 Eagleton on, 650 legacy of, 650-651, 661-662 Marxism and Form and, 651-654 The Political Unconscious and, 654-655

postmodernism and, 655-656, 1539 on Sartre, 651-652 on space, 657

utopianism and, 6S8-661 Jane Eyre (Bronte), 681-682 Jane the Virgin, 1482

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. $73-1178

Japan South Korean media in, 773

uchi/soto and, 475 Jarratt, Susan, 1079

INDEX

«

1873

reversibility and, 490 self-preservation of, 889

theft of enjoyment, anti-Semitism and, 1638-1639 Zionism and, 103

Jawbone, 1812

Judy, Ronald, 632

JBC (Jamaica Broadcasting Corporation), 219

Jung, Carl, 1384

‘The Jeffersons, 1479

jurisgenerative processes, public sphere and, 1450

Jenkins, Eric S., 11, 714

justice. See also economic justice; environmental justice;

Jeremijenko, Natalie, 162 Jezebel, symbol of, 192 Jim Crow laws, 83, 345

cultural impact of, 84 prison-industrial complex and, 89-91 Johnson, E. Patrick, 1227, 1233 queer studies and, 1466 Johnson, Jenell, 1379 Johnson, Richard, 379, 997 Johnson, Roderick A., 1208

social justice climate, S83—S84 in colonial India, 1520-1521 communication ethics and, 236-237 commutative, 1730

distributive, 1730-1731

Rawls’s theory of, 901 restorative, 330

theory of, 241 Juul, Jesper, 672

Johnson, Scott D., 620

Jolie, Angelina, 337

Jolly, Maurice, 100 Jones, Janet, 9S7

Kadam, Steven, 61 Kafer, Allison, $60-S61

Jordan, T., 439

Kafka: Towards a Minor Literature (Deleuze and Guattari), 707 Kagan, Shelly, 241 kairos, 1293

Joseph, Chief, 1553

Kang, Jiyeon, 906

jouissance, 1389-1390, 1394

Kant, Immanuel, 240-241, 528, 731-732, 877-878

Jordan, John, 1419

on plasticity and bodies, 1618-1620

discourse theory and, $96-S98

Journal forLacanian Studies, $97 journalism. See also citizen journalism AD in, 61-62

antislavery movement and, 1084-1085 authority and, 1331 colonialism and new, 214 fake news and, 1326-1328 Gramsci and, 109

integrity and communication ethics in, 234 PT and, 1330-1331 urban communication and, 1770 Web 2.0 and, 430-431

Journal of Communication, 151 Journal of the American Forensic Association, 903-904 Journal of United Labor, 1100 The Journal of United Labor, 1099 Judaism, 92. See also anti-Semitism Butler on Zionism and, 888-890

Council of Nicaea breaking with, 9S early Christianity separated from, 94 global population of, 102 predatory identities in Holocaust against, 133 The Protocols of the Wise Elders ofZion and, 100-101 race and, 102-103

on culture, 390

materialism and, 1709-1710

on public opinion, 938 racism and, 630 on space, 629-630 on time, 630 Kaplan, E. Ann, $8 Kardashian, Kim, 1435 Katz, Elihu, 1018 Keating, AnaLouise, 784-786 Keeling, Diane, 12

Keep America Beautiful, 1566 Keith, William, 1612 Kellner, Douglas, 170-171, 1540

Kelly, Casey Ryan, 254 Kennedy, George, 1300-1301 Keranen, Lisa, 578

Kermode, Frank, 401 Keyes, Ralph, 1323 Keynes, John Maynard, 944

Kids Live Safe, 1699 Kiewe, Amos, 1408

on bodies and ability, 1614-1616 Killers of the Dream (Smith, L.), 352 Kim, Y. Y., 359-360, 373

1874

+«

INDEX

VOLUME VOLUME

IPP, lao 2

VOLUME

QP

Pas iom

las

3S PPril7 9-908

King, Claire Sisco, 1419

gender, globalization and, 931-934

King, Martin Luther, Jr., 230, 1083, 1105, 1408

King, Rodney, 1699 The Kingdom and the Glory (Agamben), 721, 729 kinship, Haraway on, 564

in gig economy, 1242-1243 homework economy and, 558-559 identity work and, 923-924 Laclau and Moufte on, 919

Kirylo, James D., 1202 kisses, public, 1778

materialist rhetoric and, 1008-1009

Kittler, Friedrich, 1022, 1380

neoliberal global economy and politics of, 928-935

KKK (Ku Klux Klan), 1656

neo-Marxism and, 917-918 new forms of organizing and, 925-926

Klein, Naomi, 180, 1333

Marxism and, 914-915, 989

Kluge, Alexander, 1445-1446

in offshoring, 929-931

Knights of Labor, 1099, 1100 knowledge

play and, 509, S10, S12 post-Marxism and, 919-920 post-structuralism on culture, communication

empirical, of PT, 1320-1321

feminist organizational communication and

generation of, 641 public sphere, power and, 1447 subjugated, 1220

and, 922-923

power of, 982-983

precarity and, 931 process theory of, 918-919

Koechlin, Kalki, 1815

Smith, A’s, theory of, 911-912

Koenig Richards, Cindy, 1408

spatial turn and, 967 technology production and, 1361 wage inequality, gender and, 932-933

Kondh, Dongria, 75S Kondo, D., 1171 Koopman, Colin, 1079 “Korean Wave,” 767, 773 Kosik, Kenneth, 71, 74 Kosofsky Sedgwick, Eve, 6-7 Krauss, Bernie, 584-585

Kristeva, Julia, 12, 61, 682, 1388, 1413

on ethics of post-structuralism, 1317 “kuaering,’ 1466 Kucklich, Julian, 509, $10, $12 Kuhn, Thomas, 482, 1537

Women’s Movement and, 1091 workerism, Italian Marxism and, 1031-1035

Labor Day, 1100 labor movements African Americans and, 1100-1102 definition of, 1083

grassroots publications and, 1098-1099 Haymarket Square tragedy and, 1100-1101 international, current, 925

Labor Day and, 1100

Ku Klux Klan (KKK), 1656

new forms of organizing and, 925-926

Kuswa, Kevin, 1752

right to work laws and, 1104 strikes of, 1102-1104 tactics of, 1099 unions and, 1099-1100

labor, See also capitalism alienation and, 915 autonomist Marxism and, 920-921 creative industries and, 384-385 critical theories on culture, communication and, 914-922 cultural studies on culture, communication and, 921-922

culture, communication and, 911-927 culture industries and, 377 Davis, A., on, 88-89

digital, 1261-1263 digital cultures and, 512

in US, 924-925, 1083, 1098-1104, 1112 women and, 1100-1102, 1751 workerism and, 1032-1033 Labor Notes, 1099

Labor of Dionysus (Hardt and Negri), 1037-1038, 1048 labor unions, formation of, 1099-1100

Labour Party, UK, 173-175 The Labyrinth of Solitude (Paz), 197 Lacan, Jacques, 8 on affect, 12, 18n4, 18n5 big-o Other and, 1636

domestic, motherhood and, 254-255 feminization of, 934

cultural studies and, 308

Frankfurt School and, 915-917

on drive, 1389-1391 on Freud, 1636

future of, 926-927

on discourse compared to rhetoric, 1395

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. 573-1178

INDEX

on imaginary register of unconscious, 1391-1393

CSS and, 1791

on love, 22

culture and, 984 Deleuze on, 703-704

on objet petit a, 1633, 1636 on psychoanalysis fundamental concepts, 1386-1391 on the Real register of unconscious, 1396-1397

Esperanto, 106 extralinguistic effects and, 158-161

on repetition, 1387-1388, 1398-1399

Foucault on, 863-864

on retroaction, 1388

gender and, 1780-1781

rhetoric and, 1379

Global South academia barriers with, 479

schema L diagram and, 1394-1395, 1394f

hegemony and, 116

“Seminar on ‘The Purloined Letter” by, 1397-1400,

ideology and, 106-107, 115-6 materialism and, 1717-1718

1398f, 1399f speech theory of, 1386 on symbolic register of unconscious, 1393-1396,

1394f on transference, 1388-1389

on unconscious, 1385-1387, 138Sf Laclau, Ernesto, 12, 1005 communication studies and, 589-605

national, 113-114 Neogrammarians and, 112-113

normativity, communication ethics and, 236 resistance and, 1366

structuralism and, 1309

symbolic register of unconscious and, 1393 Language, Sexuality & Subversion (Foss, P., and

on dislocation, $91, 596 on economic justice, 1744-1745

Morris, M.), 711 The Language and Death (Agamben), 736

Essex School of Discourse Analysis, discourse theory

langue, 1308-1310 Lanier, Jaron, 234-235 Lasch, Christopher, 609, 614, 1432 Lash, Scott, 600-601

on hegemony, 590-591, 598-602, 801-802,

804-805, 809 on identity politics, $91 on ideology, 827 on jouissance, 596-598

1875

metaphors and, 114

discursive theory of hegemony and, 598-602

and, $93-S98

«

The Last Refuge (Townsend), 70 Latin America

CLACPI and, 454, 461

on labor, 919 on Marxism, 592-593

collaborative media in indigenous languages in,

on metaphors, 1396

colonialism unique to, 460-461, 1159-1160

on new social movements, 1110

cultural studies in, 397-398 decolonization and collaborative media in, 445-461

Peronism and, 589 politics and, $89 on populism, 590, $91, 602-605 theoretical evolution of, 591-593

on Zizek, 1643 Laclau: A Critical Reader (Critchley and Marchart), $90-S91 Lacy, Michael, 1078

450-456

de-Westernizaton, decolonization and, 472-473 film festivals in, 446, 454, 461 literature on collaborative media and decolonization

in, 459-461 media specifically for, 1158-1159 mestizaje and, 1160

Ladder, 1107

militant cinema in, 446-450 postcolonialism and, 1160

Ladies’ Federal Labor Union, 1101

radio and social movement media in, 1653

Ladson-Billings, Gloria, 1207 Landau, Paul, 211-212 landscape, urban communication and, 1763-1764

Landscapes of Power (Zukin), 1763 Langellier, Kristin M., 1221

language in CCP, 290-291 collaborative media in indigenous, 450-456 common sense and, 107-108 consciousness and, 1734-1735

telenovelas in, 846-847, 851-852 Latin American Association of Communication

Researchers (ALAIC), 841 Latin American Council of Indigenous Peoples’ Film and Communication (CLACPI), 454, 461 Latin American Federation of Colleges of

Communication (Felafacs), 841 Latin American Indigenous Peoples’ Film Festival, 454 Latin American School of Communication, 842

latinidad, 1227

1876

+«

INDEX

Latinos

VOLUME

LR

VOLUMES

PR

=S72

VOLUME

2 PPS 73-78

i7 OS ors

Lesbian Avengers, 1108

movie portrayals of, 1482-1483 television portrayals of, quality of, 1482 television portrayals of, quantity of, 1481-1482

lesbianism, Chicana feminism and, 197, 199, 202. See also homosexuality The Lesser Blood, 1565 Lethal Autonomous Weapons (LAWS), 543 “A Letter from a Freeholder” pamphlet, 1053-1054 The Letters of the Republic (Warner), 1052-1056

video game characterizations of, 1483

Levinas, Emmanuel, 238-239, 242, 245, 614, 616,

audience exposure to, unfavorable depictions of, 1483-1484

media depictions of, 1481-1484

Latour, Bruno, 407-408, 414, 673, 1011

Law, John, 673

888, 1011

Lévi-Strauss, Claude, 318, 825, 1309, 1311

Law, Thomas, 1510

Levy, David, 541, 546

The Law ofthe Plainsman, 1562 Law & Order: Special Victim's Unit, 1563

Lévy, Pierre, 713 Leys, Ruth, 9

Lawrence v. Texas, 1109

LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) equality

laws

movement, 1106-1109, 1418, 1600, 1603 liberalism. See also human rights; neoliberalism

Agamben on power of, 721-722 corporations and, 33 events and, 22-23 exceptions to, 725

Habermas on democracy and, 901 normativity and, 724-725

advanced, 950

autonomy and, 938 complexity of, 936 conceptualizing, 936-940

critiques of, 940-943

politics and, 722-723, 731-732, 739-740

Foucault on, 940, 1140

religious origins of, 723

as governing rationality, 940-941

security and, 727 sovereignty and, 723, 737-738

Habermas on, 941-942

state of exception and, 728 universal, 240

identity and, 954-955 liberty and, 937-939

LAWs (Lethal Autonomous Weapons), 543 Lazarsfeld, Harold, 1018 Lazarsfeld, Paul, 379

human rights and, 939-940

literature on, 95S—956

Locke and, 936-938

Lazzarato, Maurizio, 712

market mechanics and, 939 Marx on, 941-942

on capitalism, 920 League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), 195

Mill and, 938 neoliberalism and, 936-958

The Leatherstocking Tales (Cooper, J.), 1553

neoliberalism compared to, 1136-1137 neoliberalism critiques avoiding critiques of, 952

Leavis, F. R., 1272

Lebensphilosophie, Lukacs on, 1529 LeDoux, Joseph, 59 Lee, Wenshu, 1466

Lefebvre, H., 1670-1672 legal system, adversarial model of communication and, 494

legitimacy, government, 900-901 Legitimation Crisis (Habermas), 1448 leisure activities, gender and, 642

Lenin, Vladimir, 254 hegemony and, 800, 809

non-interventionism and, 333-334 press freedom and, 938, 942-943

private property and, 939 public sphere and, 938 reinventions of, 936-937 republicanism compared to, 941-942 research possibilities for neoliberalism, communication studies and, 951-955 social freedoms and, 937

Leone, Sergio, 1556

Liberalism Liberalism: Liberalism Liberalism

Lerner, David, 1359

Liberalism: The Life of an Idea (Fawcett), 956

lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) equality

The Liberator, 1085 libertarianism, Internet and US, 423-424

on ideology, 823 materialism and, 1713-1714

movement, 1106-1109, 1418, 1600, 1603

(Gray, J.), 956 A Counter History (Losurdo), 956 and its Critics (Sandel), 956 and the Limits ofJustice (Sandel), 956

VOLUME VOLUME

PR: t=s572

VOLUME

2 PP. §73-1178

INDEX

-

3 PP. 1179-1918

liberty definition of, 422 liberalism and, 937-939 negative, 937-938 positive, 937-938

on Deleuze, 714-715 on economic justice in communication studies,

applied use of, 1750-1754 on economic justice in communication studies,

theoretical discussion of, 1745-1750

Liberty Bell, 1088

on Freire, 1202-1203

lies/lying, 1326, 1327, 1334 Lievrouw, Leah, 1021

on liberalism, 955-956

Life and Labor, 1102 Lifestyle Drugs and the Neoliberal Family (Swenson), 1045-1046 lifeworld, systems compared to, 897

liminality, social drama and, 1225 linear causality, S1 lines, rhizomes and, 706

on ideology, 833-835 on neoliberalism, 955-957

oral interpretation of, performance studies and, 1222-1223

on surveillance of public space, 1700-1702 on visual rhetoric, 1786-1787

on whiteness, approaches to, 1210

lingua, 114-115

on Williams, R., 1547 Little Big Man, 1559

linguaggio, 114-115

A Little Bit Of So Much Truth, 47

linguistics

Little Red Songbook, 1102 Live Aid, 179 Livermore Action Group, 555

conformism and, 115 Gramsci and, 105-106 structural, 114

Livingstone, Sonia, 274

linguistic terrorism, writing in borderlands and, 780-781

Living Wage Campaign, in UK, 925

linguistic turn, 7-8, 923

La Llorona, 201-202, 783

in CSS, 1798-1799

definition of, 1385

psychoanalysis after, 1385-1386 psychoanalysis before, 1380-1385

Lipari, Lisbeth, 489, 492, 496-497 on listening, 620 Lippmann, Walter, 944, 1135

listening, 487-504 dialogic communication and, 494-498

locality, 416 localized globalization, 417 locational masking, identity and, 930-931 Locke, John, 60, 901-902 liberalism and, 936-938 Loehwing, Melanie, 907 logic

capital, 1577 Hegel on, 1710

dialogue and, 620 infrastructures of, CCA and, 753-754

public pedagogy defined by market, 1425 The Logic of Sense (Deleuze), 698-699

Lipari on, 620

Logics of Worlds (Badiou), 22

obstacles to, 498-500

logos, 1291-1292, 1314

partisan, 49S receptive, 49S—497 uncritical subjectivity and, 495 literacy civic illiteracy and, 1427-1429 hybrid, 1782 transnational, 693-695

literary public sphere, 1443 literature. See also writing on bodies, 1628-1629 on collaborative media and decolonization in Latin America, 459-461 critical whiteness studies and, 349-350

The Lone Ranger (2013), 1568 Long, Huey P., 1390 Longinus, Cassius, 1291-1292 Longmire, 1562-1563

The Long Revolution (Williams, R.), 987, 990, 1533 long-term adaptation, 370-371

Looking Awry (Zizek), 1635 Lopez, Alma, 199 Lépez, Sonia A., 196

Lopez, Yolanda, 198 Lorde, Audre, 189, 352, 1597

Los Angeles Times, 1493

cross-cultural adaptation and, 370

Lost in Translation, 12 Losurdo, Domenico, 956

on culture and creative industries, 386-387

Lotta Feminista, 1032

1877

1878

e«

INDEX

VOLUME VOLUMES

love

1 PP. 1-$72 SR

VOLUME

2) PP S735Ut78

PALT79SN0i08

Madison, Kimberly, 1418

Lacan on, 22

Mad Men, 258

sexbots and, 541-542

Madness and Civilization (Foucault), 1064, 1067

Love and Sex with Robots (Levy), 541

Magic Mirror, S1S

Love Canal disaster, 1106 Lovnik, Geert, $09 Lowe, Lisa, 1183 Lowenthal, Leo, 1270-1271, 1428, 1438

Magnavox Odyssey, 666 mainstream media, social movement media and, 1660-1661 Makau, Josina, 245

loyalists, Chicana feminism opposed by, 196-197

The Making of the English Working Class (Thompson,

Lozano-Reich, N. M., 501-503

E. P.), 987

Lucaites, John Louis, 902-903, 1412, 1754

Malabou, Catherine, 61

Lucha Obrera (Workers’ Struggle), S89

Maladie mentale et personalité (Foucault), 858

Ludic Feminism and After (Ebert), 563

Malcolm X, 84-86, 1083, 1408

Lugnones, Maria, 468

MALCS (Mujeres Activas en Letras y Cambio Social), 203

Luhmann, Niklas, 729, 901

La Malinche (Tadolla), 200

Luis, 1481

Lukcas, Georg, 378

Malinches, Chicana feminists as, 197 Malintzin Tenépal, 197 Chicana feminism and, 199-201 La Llorona and, 201 vilification of, 200 Mallarmé, Stéphane, 20 Management Communication Quarterly, 1169

LULAC (League of United Latin American

A Man Called Horse, 1559

Lukacs, Georg, 651, 1735, 1741

on capitalism, 1736 cultural studies and, 992-993

on ideology, 823-824 on Lebensphilosophie, 1529

Citizens), 195 Lumley, Robert, 1047 Lundberg, Christian, 12, 1394 Lundy, Benjamin, 1085 Luow, Eric, 170

Manifesto for Philosophy (Badiou), 19-20 Manjoo, Farhad, 1323 Manley, Norman, 219 Manning, Erin, 155-156 Mansoor, A., 561-562

Lupton, Deborah, 508

manufactured identities, selfie culture and, 1424-1438

Lynch, David, 1638 Lynch, Kevin, 687

Manufacturing Consent (Burawoy), 1167

lynchings, critical whiteness studies and, 345-346 Lyon, David, 1700 Lyotard, Jean-Frangois, 611, 656, 690, 1129, 1322

on ideology, 827-828 on postmodernism, 1670

mapping

activism and, 975 aesthetics and, 973 cognitive, Jameson and, 657-658, 972 contemporary questions in studies on, 974-975

Lysenko, Trofim, 1714-1715

critical regionalism and, 972 place-making and, 967-968

Macaulay, T. B., 81S

resistance and, 973-974 rhetoric and, 965, 973

MacBride Commission, 467 MacCabe, Colin, 650

Macek, Steve, 1754

machine ethics or robot ethics (MRE), $20, 522 emergence of, 525-526

ICE and DME sharing topics with, 526f sexbots and, 540-543 MacIntyre, Alasdair, 609, 616 Mack, A., 256 Mack, Ashley Noel, 1006 Mack, Katherine, 1415 Maddeaux, Sabrina, 1432 Madison, D. Soyini, 1224, 1226-1227, 1233

safe spaces and, 968 spatial studies and, 965-976 spatial turn and, 967 Mapplethorpe, Robert, 1392-1393 Marcel, Gabriel, 614 Marchart, Oliver, 590-591 Marconi, Guglielmo, 1015S Marcuse, Herbert, 80, 1353, 1737

on ideology, 825 on utopianism, 659-660 marginalized communities CCA and, 750-751

internationalized cultural diversity and, 771-774

VOLUME

1) PP. 1=572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. 573-1178

INDEX

Marguilis, Lynn, $56

Hegelian dialectic and, 48-49

Marianismo, 195-196

on hegemony, 985

maritime exploration, globalization and, 409

on ideology, 821-823, 830, 834, 845, 1632

market-focused cyberlibertarianism, 427-429, 431-432

labor process theory and, 918-919

market mechanics liberalism and, 939

on materialism, 190-191, 1711-1713

neoliberalism and, 943-944, 952-953 Marres, Noortje, 510

on moral philosophy, 1237 on nature, $75

on passion and agency, 1733

Marshall, George Preston, 1565-1566

political economy and, 1237-1238 on public opinion, 1444

Martin-Barbero, Jestis, 269, 398, 473, 807

Benjamin's influence on, 847-848 Birmingham School's influence on, 848 career and institutional commitments of, 839-842 collaborations of, 848-849 on communication from culture, 847 communication studies and, 839-853

on cultural appropriation, 852 cultural turn and, 840 gender and, 852

on hegemony, 845 ideas and works of, 842-852

on identity, 844 influences and circumstances of, 842-843 intellectual influences on, 847-849

key books of, 849-852 legacy of, 853 limitations and challenges to project of, 852-853 main concepts of, 843-847 mediations and, 842, 844-845

on modernity, 840 on popular culture, 845-846 on processes, 843 semiotics and, 849

social engagement and, 841

on ruling class, 983-984

on totality, 1731

Marxism. See also specific types agency in, 1299 alternative organizational culture and, 35 Althusser on, 44, 1065-1066 Aune on rhetoric and, 1731-1732, 1750 CCP and, 294-295 class and power in, 982-983 classical, 1720-1722 on class struggle, 1032 Cloud’s defense of, 1005-1006 in cultural studies, 979-998 culture and, 988-992 Foucault and, 1065-1066, 1078 Gramsci and, 106-107, 115-116, 996-997 Guha and, 1529 Hall, S., and, 1682 hegemony as class leadership in, 985-987 hegemony in, 799-809 historical materialism and, 980-981, 1001-1002 ideology in, 821-835 Jameson, Marxism and Form and, 651-654 Jameson, The Political Unconscious and, 654-655 labor and, 914-915, 989 Laclau and Mouffe on, $92-593 materialism and, 190-191, 1713-1719 materialist rhetoric and, 1004-1006 media technologies and, 1020

neoliberalism critique from, 946-948

on telenovelas, 846-847, 851-852 Martinez, Amanda, 789 Martinez, Jacqueline M., 617-618 Marvin, Simon, 1769

popular culture and, 391

Marx, Karl, 44, 45, 47, 376, 1000, 1032, 1123-1124

post-, 1720-1723

on capitalism, 914-915, 1001-1002, 1249, 1732-1734

on collective action, 1712

on commodity fetish, 1632 on dialectical materialism, 822-823

distributive justice and, 1730-1731 Engels on legacy of, 1713 on freedom, 1732-1733

1879

on liberalism, 941-942

marriage, gay, 1061-1062

Marshall, P. David, 171 Marshall, Richard, 1435 Martin, Judith, 1494-1495 Martin, Michael T., 446 Martin, Trayvon, 1698

«

New Left and, 988 overdetermination and, 48

power and, 1344-1347 power and ideology in, 983-985, 1347 rhetorical critique of economic justice and, post-1968, 1739-1745 rhetorical critique of economic justice and, pre-1968, 1735-1739 rhetoric repressed by, 1731-1732

1880

+«

INDEX

VOLUME VOLUMES

Marxism (Continued)

TPR.

TSsi72)

LEM

VOLUME

2) PP: S73=1i7s

O = Noms

in antiquity, 1706-1707

social being as determining consciousness in, 981-982

Aristotle and, 1707

social reproduction theory and, 254-255

collective action and, 1712 communication and, 115-116 communication studies and, 1719-1723 cultural, 1538-1540 definition of, 1705

Third World feminism and, 191

utopianism and, 659-661 Western, 682, 1720-1722 workerism and Italian, 1031-1035

Marxism and Communication Studies (Artz, Macek and

Cloud), 1754

dialectical, 822-823, 1711-1712, 1714, 1723

emergence of, 1705

Marxism and Form (Jameson), 651-654

Engels on, 190-191, 1711-1713

Marxism and Literature (Williams, R.), 806, 1539 Marxism and the Philosophy of Language (Volo8inov),

in France, 171S—1717

mascots. See sports

Hall, S., on, 191 Hegel and, 1710-1711 idealism compared to, 1538, 1708, 1713 ideology and, 832-834

masculinity critical food studies and, 320 hegemony and, 313-314

language and, 1717-1718 Lenin and, 1713-1714

masochistic motherhood, 252

Marxism and, 190-191, 1713-1719

Mason, Paul, 1536

Marx on, 190-191, 1711-1713

mass culture, popular culture and, 1267

in medieval and early modern period, 1707-1709

Massey, Doreen, 971-972, 1186, 1427

in modern era and Enlightenment, 1709-1711 new, 1718-1719

106-107, 1736

MAS (Movimiento Al Socialismo), 452

“massification,’ 921

massively multi-player online game (MMOG), 667 Mass Media and National Development (Schramm), 1359 mass publicity, 10S8-1059 mass society, Hall, S., on, 1269 Massumi, Brian, 712

on affect, 2-3, 9, 1$9-161, 1742 on affect compared to emotion, 159-160

biography of, 154-156 books authored by, 155 communication studies and, 154-164 on economic justice, 1741-1742 on emotion, ll

Kant and, 1709-1710

post-Marxism and, 1722-1723 in Soviet Union, 1713-1719

space and, 1675-1676 speculative nature of, in antiquity, 1707 Spinoza and, 1708-1709 in thought and communication, 1705-1723 Williams, R., on, 921-922 materialist rhetoric, 1000-1012

agency and, 1011 Charland on, 1745-1746 class struggle and, 1008-1009 Cloud on, 1004-1007

on expanded empiricism, 156 experimental thought of, 163-164

corporeal rhetoric and, 1009-1010

on expression, 158-159

Greene on, 1007-1009

legacy of, 154 on microperceptions, 162-163 on Ontopower, 163

on particularity compared to singularity of events, 159 on perception, 161-163 on potential, 156-157 on radical empiricism, 1SS—158 on reason, 161 on sensation, 162

on “thinking-feeling,” 162-163 translation work of, 155 on virtual, 157

materialism. See also historical materialism Althusser on, 54, 1715-1718, 1740

definition of, 1000-1001, 1011-1012

Hardt and Negri on, 1008-1009 labor and, 1008-1009 Marxism and, 1004-1006

McGee, M. C., on, 1002-1004, 1006-1007, 1720, 1745 politics and, 1003, 1005 in postmodern capitalism, 1006-1009 protest rallies and, 1010 psychoanalysis and, 1010-1011 the real and, 1010 social movements and, 1007 space and, 1010, 1671 materiality, 828, 833-834 bodies and, 1625-1628

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOEUME

2) PP: Si7s-1178

modes of, 1626 power, structure and, 1345-1350

INDEX

-

media. See also collaborative media; social movement media AD, dementia, aging representations in, $6-75

“The Materiality of Discourse and Oxymoron” (Cloud), 1746

Adorno on political economy of, 1252

Mather, Cotton, 1552

African Americans depicted in, 1478-1481

Mattachine Society, 1107 Mattelart, Armand, 393, 849-850, 1240, 1282

alternative, social movements and, 1366-1367 anticolonialism organizing through, 215-218

May, Matthew S., 50, 52, 1731

Arab/ Middle Eastern American depictions in,

on economic justice, 1748

adversarial model of communication and, 494

1485-1486

May, Steve, 615

Asian American depictions in, 1484-1485

May, Theresa, 174, 182

Brady’s legacy in political economy of, 1252-1254 celebrity politics and, 169

May, Timothy C., 440 McCarthy, Thomas, 904 McChesney, Robert W., 400, 1250 on economic justice, 17$2

McCormick Massacre, 1100

McCroskey, James, 298 McCroskey, L. L., 298 McDonagh, Margaret, 177 McGee, Alan, 177 McGee, Michael Calvin, 828, 904

on materialist rhetoric, 1002-1004, 1006-1007,

1720, 1745 on social movements, 1598, 1602 on texts, 1003

1881

Cold War, influence and, 1358 community construction of, 760, 775

contemporary trends in political economy of, 1256-1263 corporation policy reforms for, 1659-1660 critical audience studies and consumption of, 264 culture industry and, 306 damaging effects of, fear of, 26S Davis, A., in, 85-86, 192 Davis, A., on Black Power representations in, 84-86

definition of, 1646-1647 digital labor and, 1261-1263 electronic cultures and, 1295-1296

McGovern, George, 176 McGrath, John, 1837 Mcllroy, John, 1847

entertainment, power structures in, 1353

McIntosh, Peggy, 352

foreign policy and, 768 Frankfurt School on political economy of, 1251-1252

McKenzie, Jon, 1225

epistemology of political economy of, 1255-1256 foodie culture and, 324-325

McKerrow, Raymie E., 1005S, 1078

Garcia Canclini on, 1157-1159

on economic justice, 1746 McKittrick, Katherine, 632

globalization of, 1352-1353 green applied, $79

McLaren, P. L., 294, 299 McLuhan, Marshall, 124, 407

Hall, S., on, 1690-1691 hegemony definition in, 805-806 hegemony in communication studies on, 117

on media technologies, 1021-1022 McMahon, Melissa, 701 McMahon, Vince, 180

MCP (Popular Cultural Movement), 1196

Indian/Pakistani American depictions in, 1486

for Latin America specifically, 1158-1189 Latinos depicted in, 1481-1484

McQuire, Scott, 1770

mainstream, social movement media and, 1660-1661 messages of, media technologies and, 1018

McRobbie, Angela, 310, 314

for metropolitans and settlers in colonialism, 213-215

on popular culture, 1277-1278 McVittie, Nancy, 58 MDGs (Millennium Development Goals), 1811 Mead, Margaret, 318

Native American depictions in, 1485, 1550-1569 neoliberalism and, critical perspectives on, 946-951,

McPhail, Mark, 1415-1416

The Meaning of the Built Environment (Rapoport), 1764 “Means of Communication as Means of Production”

(Williams, R.), 1539 MEChA (Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan), 196 The Mechanics’ Free Press, 1099

Médecins Sans Frontiéres (MSF), 335-336

957-958 neoliberalism enabled by, 955 news, elite control and, 1353 oral cultures and, 1294 place-making and, 968 political economy of, 1248-1264 positive implications of audience exposure to racial/ ethnic depictions in, 1486-1487

1882

-e¢

INDEX

media (Continued)

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-S72

VOLUME

3 PPI

VOLUME

2 2P573 >is

79 S198

German media studies and, 1022

in postcolonial Algeria, 219-220

hypodermic needle model of communication and, 1018

postcolonialism and, 218-220 post-colonial modernity and, 127-128

Marxism and, 1020 McLuhan on, 1021-1022

power and control constructions of, 1352-1354

media messages and, 1018 Plato on writing and, 1016-1017

print cultures and, 1294-1295 for propaganda in colonialism, 210-213 public sphere and, 1447 public sphere and modern, 906 queer studies and, 1464 race and ethnicity in US, 1477-1487 Schiller, H., on political economy of, 1254 small-scale, 1647-1648

soft power and, 767-769 of South Korea in Japan, 773 sovereignty and, 731 state policy reforms for, 1659-1660 trust and, 1334

21st century necessity of political economy of, 1263-1264

political economies of, 1236-1246 sociomaterial turn and, 1022-1024

spatialization in political economy of, 1243 structuration in political economy of, 1243-1245 Toronto School and, 1021-1023 20th century schools of study on, 1017-1022 UK cultural studies and, 1020-1021 US cultural studies and, 1021 Mediated Moms, 253 mediations critical audience studies and, 269 Martin-Barbero and, 842, 844-845 Media Worlds, 450 medical humanitarianism, 335-336

urban communication, technology and, 1768-1769 World War II, influence and, 1358 Media, Culture and Society, 1847

medium theory, 523, 1294

media activism, 456-459

memorials, public memory and, 1409

corporate and state policy reforms and, 1659-1660 social movement media and, 1646-1662

Media and the City (Georgiou), 1770 The Media City (McQuire), 1770 media effects research, of 20th century, 1018-1019

Megan's Law, 1699

melancholia, postcolonial, 1184 memory. See also public memory contemporary life and, 58, 60-61 cosmopolitan, 1417

media industries, 377, 379, 390n1

critical, 1417 Holocaust, denial and, 1417 invention and, 1407

Media in the Digital Age (Pavlik), 456

public, 1404-1420

media mix, 276

reversed, 1411 self and, 60-61 social movements and, 1600

mediascapes, 125 media spectacle, 170-172 media studies Deleuze and, 712-714 de-Westernization and decolonization in, 465-482 German, 1022

posthumanism and, 1294-1296 media technologies broadcast radio origins and, 1015-1016 commodification in political economy of, 1241-1243 in communication and CCS, 1014-1025

conceptualization of, 1014-1015 cultural studies challenges to political economy of, 1245-1246

developmentalist theory on political economy

and, 1240-1241 feminism and, 1024, 1367 Frankfurt School and, 1019-1020, 1023

future of scholarship on, 1024-1025 future trends in political economy of, 1246

memory places, 969-970 memory studies, 1405-1406 Menchaca, Martha, 194

Las meninas (Velazquez), 863-865 mental illness, Foucault on, 858-859, 1067-1068 mercantilism, Ricardo on, 912 Meretoja, Hanna, 607

meritocracy, feminist organizational communication and, 644-645

Merleau-Ponty, M., 1673 Merton, Robert K., 379 messianic politics, 733, 738

mestizaje, 202, 1160 mestiza/o, 194-195, 198, 200-202 metaethics, culture and, 618 metaphors cultural and critical organizational communication and, 1165

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. $73-1178

Laclau on, 1396

INDEX

«

1883

on instrumentalist theory of state, 1123

language and, 114

Poulantzas debates with, on state and power, 1122-1125

root, 1165

on ruling class, 1123

storytelling and, 607 trope and, 1395-1396 methodological nationalism, 763-765 metonymy, 1395-1396

militant cinema, in Latin America, 446-450

#MeToo movement, 925, 1600

Mill, John Stuart, 241, 955, 1237

Metz, Christian, 1391-1392 Mexican Americans. See also Chicana feminism; Chicana

studies borderlands and, 202 Chicanismo and, 195-196 colonias and, 194

immigration and class consciousness of, 194 mobility into whiteness and, 353-354 mutualistas and, 194-198

race and, 779 Mexican-American War, 779

Mexican Association for the Right to Information

(AMEDI), 1159 Mexico collaborative media in, 454-4558 CVI in, 455 Garcia Canclini in, 1152-1153

media activism in Oaxaca, 457-458 New Latin American Cinema in, 448

Promedios in, 455, 461 TMA in, 455

military humanitarianism, 338-340 military-industrial complex, 613 Milk, Harvey, 1418 on human rights, 332-333 liberalism and, 938 on non-interventionism, 333-334

Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), 1811 Millennium Journal of International Studies, 1799 Miller, Jacques Alain, 1386 Mills, Charles Wade, 351, 630 Mills, Charles Wright, 1344-1345 Milne, Seamus, 174 mimic men, colonialism and, 815-816 Miniaka, Arnalu, 1587

The Minimal Self (Lasch), 609 minorities. See also gender; race

globalization and, 131-132 power and, 133 predatory identities and, 132-133 The Miracle ofLife, 1780-1781 Mirowski, Philip, 956-957 mirror stage, of childhood, 1387 Mirzoeff, Nicholas, 1699 miscegenation, critical whiteness studies and, 346

Zapatista uprising in, 1368, 1657-1658 Mexico City, urbanism and, 1156

miscommunication, 1S591n1

Meyrowitz, Joshua, 1294-1295

Miss America Pageant, 1092

microblogging, 137, 143-145

Mitchell, William, 1765-1767

microfinance

Development 2.0, women entrepreneurs and, 1809-1816

Internet and, 1811 Milaap and, 1815-1816, 1817n3

PayPal and, 1812 microperceptions, Massumi on, 162-163 Microsoft Xbox, 666

Middle Eastern Americans, media depictions of, 1485-1486

middle-range theories, culture industries and, 379

Midnight's Children (Rushdie), 814 Mifsud, Mari Lee, 620 Mignolo, W. D., 1126

MIGR (Multi-University Intergroup Dialogue Research) Project, 499-500 Milaap, 1815-1816, 1817n3

Milano, Alyssa, 1600 Miliband, Ed, 177

misinformation, disinformation compared to, 1325-1326

Mitchell, W. J. T., 1782, 1802

mixed race studies, 1495 MMOG (massively multi-player online game), 667 mobile phones big data and, 146-147 cameras and, 1695 in China, 1659 critical audience studies and, 272 growth of, 1542-1543

Internet usage on, 146-147 urban communication and, 1769 mobile privatization, 1542-1545

mobility globalization and, 415-416

politics of, 974-975 race and, 975

of subjects, control and, 1356 surveillance in public space and, 1696-1698 into whiteness, critical whiteness studies and, 353-354

1884

+e

INDEX

iS Si72

VOLUME

PP

VOLUMES

PPP U79-19Ns

VOLUME

mobilization, in colonial India, 1515-1516 modding, video games and, 671

Morrison, Toni, 349-350 Morton, T., 1677-1678

The Modernist Papers (Jameson), 660 modernity colonialism and, 126-128, 1126

Mosaic, 429 Mosco, Vincent, 1250, 1255-1256, 1261

Hardt and Negri on, 1029-1030 Martin-Barbero on, 840

space and, 1668-1669 Modernity at Large (Appadurai), 124, 126, 128 modernization theory, development communication and, 1358-1359, 1579-1580

colonialism and, 258 commodification of, 256

critical approaches to, 248-259 Davis, A., on, 86-88

Mohanty, Chandra Talpade CCS and, 192-193

decolonizing and queering, 258-259 domesticity and, 249

on identity, 188-189

domestic labor and, 254-255

early critiques of, 249-251 essentializing norms of, 252 as experience, 2$1—252

solidarity conception of, 189

feminist critiques of, 250, 251 heteronormativity and, 250

transnational feminism and, 186-188

ideological critiques of, 253-259

“Under Western Eyes” by, 186-188 “Under Western Eyes Revisited” by, 189-190

as institution, 251-253

race and, 193

on Western feminism, 187 Momaday, N. Scott, 1551 moments, discourse theory and, 594, 598 Monahan, Torin, 1695 monoism, ethical, 531-532 Montfort, Nick, 672 Mont Pelerin Society (MPS), 744 aims and values of, 1136 neoliberalism and, 1135-1136 mood, 3. See also affect

intensive mothering and, 252

masochistic, 252

neoliberalism and, 255-256 new momism and, 252

as oppressive, 249-250 othermothering and, 257 race and, 256-258

social reproduction theory and, 254-255 Spivak on, 694 total, 252-253, 255-256

Moor, James, $23-524

white Western, critique of, 256-257 women’s health activism and, 250-251 motherwork, 1106

Moore, Michael, 1419

Les mots et les choses (Foucault), 856

MOOs (object-oriented MUDS), 667

Mott, Lucretia, 1088, 1090

background emotions compared to, $

Moraga, C., 203, 779, 783

Motter, Jeff, 907

Morales, Evo, 452

Mouffe, Chantal, 241, 242, 605, 1005 on economic justice, 1744-1745

morality, space and, 1667

W7s

motherhood Baby Lucent and, $1S—S16 black feminist critiques of, 257-258 capitalism and, 253-254

Modi, Narendra, 125

on colonization, 187-188 communication studies and, 186-193 on historical materialism, 189-191

2 PP 57/6

moral responsibility, 242

Essex School of Discourse Analysis, discourse theory and, $93-598

The Moral Rhetoric of Political Economy (Turpin), 1753

on hegemony, 590-591, $98-602, 801-802,

moral spectatorship, 7

804-805, 809 on ideology, 827 on labor, 919

moral philosophy, political economy and, 1237, 1256

moral wisdom, virtue ethics and, 529 More, Samuel, 210 Moreman, Shane T., 789

Morgan, Piers, 180 Moro, Aldo, 1035-1036 Morris, Charles E., III, 620, 1078, 1418, 1628 Morris, Meghan, 696, 711-712, 1279, 1281 Morris, Rosalind, 687

on Marxism, 592-593

on new social movements, 1110

MOVA (Movement of Adult and Youth Literacy), 1199 movement, space and, 968, 974

Movement of Adult and Youth Literacy (MOVA), 1199

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. 573-1178

INDEX

movements. See labor movements; resistance movements; social movements

nation and, 1119-1120 multiplicities, rhizomes and, 706-707

movies

Multitude (Hardt and Negri), 1029, 1041

e

1885

AD in, case studies on, 62-70

multitude, Hardt and Negri on, 1042-1045

African American portrayals in, 1480

Multi-University Intergroup Dialogue Research (MIGR) Project, 499-S00 multi-user domains (MUDs), 667

aging in, feminism and, $8

ofBollywood, 1284 care facilities for AD in, 63-64, 67-70 of CEFREC-CAIB in Bolivia, 453-454, 461 celebrity activism and, 178

Mulvey, Laura, 311

on movies and fantasy, 1393

colonialism and, 212-213

Mumford, Lewis, 1021, 1767 Munshi, Debashish, 615 Murdoch, Iris, 62

counterculture and Native American depictions in,

Muri, A., 562

CLACPI and, 454, 461

1964-1996, 1$S7-1S60

Murphy, George, 179

culture industries and, 377-378 Deleuze on control and, 709-710 fantasy and, 1393

Murray, Janet, 667-668 Murrow, Edward, 624nS

feminist cultural studies and, 311-312 foodie culture and, 325 gender and AD in, 6S—66 Indian Princesses in, 1561-1562 Latinos portrayed in, 1482-1483

Mutiny of 1857, in Bengal, 1519

La Llorona in, 201 of militant cinema in Latin America, 446-450

Mystic Writing Pad, 1585-1586, 1593n13

mixed race studies and, 1495

Nabanari (Basak), 1514

Native American depictions in, 1485, 1554-1562

NACCS (National Association for Chicana and Chicano Studies), 203 Naficy, Hamid, 456 NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), 1109 Nafus, Dawn, 507 Nagin, C. Ray, 1388

of New Latin American Cinema, 446-450, 452

Payne Fund studies of, 264 as philosophy, 709 public memory and, 1419 race and, 459-460

“Redsploitation” features, 1559 runaway production and, 381 silent, Native American depictions in, 1554-1556

social function of, 709-710 social movement media and, 1652, 1654

of Ukamau Group in Bolivia, 447-448 visual rhetoric and, 1780

museums, public memory and, 1409-1410 mutualistas, 194-195

mutual recognition, race and, 633-634 Myles, Norbert A., 1854-1555 Myres, Jason, 1396

Nair, Tom, 1119 Nakayama, Thomas, 1231, 1465-1466, 1494-1495 Nakia, 1562

The Name of the Rose (Eco), 610 Nancy, Jean-Luc, 724 Nandy, Ashish, 127 nanomedia, 1647

Westerns, 1939-1964, Native American depictions in, 1556-1557 Movimiento Al Socialismo (MAS), 452 Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan (MECHA), 196 Mowlana, Hamid, 477 MPS. See Mont Pelerin Society MRE. See machine ethics or robot ethics Mr. Holmes, 66 MSE (Médecins Sans Frontiéres), 335-336

Nanook of the North, 1555-1556

MUDs (multi-user domains), 667 Mujeres Activas en Letras y Cambio Social (MALCS), 203

nation

multiculturalism

identity and, 1130-1131 immigration and, 1130

narcissism

Freud on, 1432 neoliberalism and, 1433

plague of, 1432-1433 selfie culture and, 1427, 1431, 1433

narrative of experience, Guha on, 1524

Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass (Douglass), 1087 narrative of wonder, Guha on, 1524

Anderson, B., on, 1118-1119 Bhabha on, 1119 concept of, 1117-1118

gender, critical cultural feminists and, 1127-1128

1886

«

INDEX

nation (Continued) identity, power and, in CCS, 1117-1132 multiculturalism and, 1119-1120

postcolonial approach to, identities and, 1125-1127 sovereignty and, 1118 state compared to, 1118 Subaltern Studies, identity and, 1126-1127 world history and, 1119 National Association for Chicana and Chicano Studies

(NACCS), 203 National Association of Scholars, 400 National Caucus of Chicano Social Scientists (NCCSS), 203 National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), 585-586 National Civil Rights Museum, 1410 National Communication Association (NCA), 231, 400, 489, $76, 1612

National Congress of American Indians (NCAI), 1566, 1568

Ps tas72

VOLUME

DP

VOLUME

3) PRPs 179-1918

VOLUME

colonialism and, 1550 counterculture and, 1964-1996, 1557-1560

cowboys and, 1553 Indian Princess movies and, 1561-1562 “Indian” terminology and, 1552 in movies, 1485, 1554-1562 Natural Man and, 1552 in paintings, 1SS1-1552

“playing Indian” and, 1552-1553

popular culture and, 1551 “red face” and, 1557 research on, 1550-1551

“rich Indian” stereotype and, 1563 in silent films, 1554-1556 sports mascots and, 1485, 1550, 1565-1568 in television, 1485, 1562-1563

visual sovereignty and, 1563-1565 in Westerns 1939-1964, 1556-1557 Wild West show and, 1553

NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), 1795

national ethnos, 129-130

natural life, 725-726

National Farm Workers Association (NFWA), 195, 1103 nationalism

nature capitalism, space and, 1668

alternative organizational culture and, 36 Anderson, B., on, 814 fascism and, 1186-1187

culture contrasted with, 574 definitions of, $75 Engels on, S75

Gilroy on, 1183 Gilroy on racism and, 1184-1185 globalization and, 770-771

natureculture, 553, $64-567

Guha on class and, 1515

Nazism, 93, 96

methodological, 763-765 popular culture and, 1187 race, transnationalism and, 1490-1498 sports and, 1496

nationality, sovereignty and, 728-729 National Labor Union, 1099-1100 national language, 113-114 National Left (Izquierda Nacional), 589 National Organization for Women, 250, 1092

National September 11 Memorial and Museum, 1413 National Sex Offender Public Registry, 1699 National Trades’ Union, 1100

National Weitare Rights Organization, 1111-1112 National Woman's Party, 1091 National Woman Suffrage Association, 1090

National Women's Trade Union League of America papers, 1112 nation branding, 766-770, 775-776 nation-state, definition of, 1118 Native Americans, media depictions of, 1550-1569

advertising and, 1566 AIM and, 1558, 1566

2 PP. $73=1178

environment as culture and, $73-576 Marx on, 575

Israel and propaganda from, 97 propaganda and, 97, 1187 The Protocols of the Wise Elders of Zion and, 101 social movement media and, 1655-1656 NCA. See National Communication Association

NCAI (National Congress of American Indians),

1566, 1568 NCAR (National Center for Atmospheric Research),

$85-586 NCCSS (National Caucus of Chicano Social Scientists), 203

Nebraska, 66 Neff, Gina, 507

negative liberty, 937-938 negativity, Warner on principle of, 1054 Negri, Antonio, $3, 1436 activism of, 1034

arrest and prison sentence of, 1035-1036 autonomist Marxism influencing, 1030-1031, 1037 on bioplitical production, 1039-1040 on capitalism, 1039 on class, 1043-1044

VOLUME

1 PP, 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2) PP, 573-1178

INDEX

-

1887

on command and control in war, 1041-1042 communication studies and, 1029-1048

as exception, Ong on, 1146-1147

on economic justice, 1743-1744 election of, 1037

feminist organizational communication and, 643-644

on exodus and resistance movements, 1044

Hardt collaborating with, 1037-1038 on materialist rhetoric, 1008-1009

on on on on

modernity, 1029-1030, 1034 multitude, 1042-1045 politics and governance, 1044-1045 post-national sovereignty, 1041

on power, 1038-1039 on social justice, 1029

on social workers, 1035

on sovereignty, 1040-1041 in Soviet Union, 1034

Spinoza and, 1036 on subjectivity and class, 1035

fatalism of, 1139-1140 feminization of labor and, 934 Foucault and, 875, 949-951, 1140-1144 global health and, 743 Global South and, 224

governmentality and, 949-950 Gramsci on state and, 117

Hall, S., and, 948-949, 1139, 1683 Harvey, D., on, 1137-1138

Hayek and, 943-944 as hegemonic project, 1137-1140 identity and, 954-955 as ideology, 1137-1140 labor politics in global economy and, 928-935 liberalism and, 936-958

workerism and, 1031-1035

liberalism compared to, 1136-1137 liberalism critiques avoided for, 952

works of, 1047-1048

literature on, 9SS—957

Negro American Labor Council, 1103

market mechanics and, 943-944, 952-9583

Negt, Oskar, 1445-1446

Marxist critique of, 946-948 media and, critical perspectives on, 946-951, 957-958 media enabling, 95S

Neogrammarians, 112-113

Neoliberal Health Organizing (Dutta), 958 neoliberalism

motherhood and, 255-256

affirmative action and, 1146

MPS and, 1135-1136

alternative organizational culture and, 36-38 as ambient biopower, 1145

narcissism and, 1433

American, 1143-1144

biopolitics and, 1140-1141 biopolitics and, after Foucault, 1144-1147 capitalism and, 913, 949

CCP and, 293-294 celebrity humanitarianism and, 337 coal industry utilizing, in fighting environmental

regulations, 1148-1149 communication and,

1134-1150

complexity of, 946

not-for-profit sector and, 38 offshoring and, 931 ordoliberalism and, 945, 1141-1143 origins of, 943-946, 1134-1137 Plan X and, 1545-1546

play and, $12 political economy and, 946-949 as political project and process, 1147-1150 press freedom and, 953 public pedagogy and, 1426-1428 public sphere and, 1149-1150

consumption, competitiveness and, 1427 contradictions in, 952-953

racism and, 119, 1146

Couldry on, 1145 crisis of agency and, 1424-1426 critical audience studies and, 272

studies and, 951-955 selfie culture and, 1431-1432

critical communication and media research on,

taxpayers and customers in, 1139

957-958

cultural and critical organizational communication

research possibilities for liberalism, communication

as summary label, 951 Washington consensus and, 945

before and after World War II, 1135

in cultural studies, 948-949

WTO and IMF establishing rules of, 928 Neoliberalism, Media and the Political (Phelan, S.), 957

CWL and, 1135 definition of, 759n1, 1135

neoliberalization, 1147-1148 neo-Marxism, labor and, 917-918

democracy and, 953-954, 1145 empowerment in, Development 2.0 and, 1816

neo-racism, 1127

and, 1173-1175

nepantla, 785-787

1888

e¢

INDEX

VOLUME VOLUMES)

WT RR PP

VOI WINE 2

eon?

NES (Nintendo Entertainment System), 666

nodal points, discourse theory and, $94, 919

Netflix, 1258, 1263

noncapitalism, 1577

netiquette, $22, S25

non-interventionism, 333-335

networked development, 1809 networked public sphere, 1454

nonplayer character (NPC), 668

networked systems ethics, $25, 530

non-representational theory (NRT), 10

networks, Deleuze on, 713

Nora, Pierre, 1405, 1409 La norma literaria (Rodriguez, J. C.), 856

network theory, social movements and, 1603 neuroscience

AD in brain and, 58-61

subjectivity and, 59 New England Anti-Slavery Society, 1085 New International Division of Cultural Labor

(NICL), 384 new journalism, colonialism and, 214 New Latin American Cinema, 446-450, 452

New Latin American Cinema (Martin, M. T.), 446 New Left, Marxism and, 989 New Left Review, S99, 829-830, 1122-1125

non-referential linguistics, overdetermination and, 49

normative grammar, 11S normative power, Butler on, 883-885

normativity. See also gender normativity communication ethics and, 235-236 gender and, 1614

homosexuality and, 1061 law and, 724-725 whiteness and, 1348

North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), 1109 North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), 1795 Northern Exposure, 1485, 1562

new media, Deleuze on, 713

The North Star, 1084-1085, 1087 nostalgia, popular culture and, 1270

new momism, 252

not-for-profit sector

new materialism, 1718-1719

New Reflections on the Revolution of our Time (Laclau), $91, $93, 596 New Science (Vico), 107 News from Nowhere (Pinkney), 1547 news media, elite control and, 1353

new social movements (NSMs), 1595, 1602 New Times project, 830 Newton, Isaac, 630 The New World, 1561 New World Information and Communication Order

(NWICO), 467 New York Anti-Slavery Society, 1085 New York Times, 61, 70, 172, 681 New Zealand, Global South and, 227 NFWA (National Farm Workers Association), 195, 1103 NICL (New International Division of Cultural Labor), 384 Nicomachean Ethics (Aristotle), 240 Niebuhr, Reinhold, 99, 235 Nieto Gomez, Anna, 197

Nietzsche, Frederick, 242

on forgetting, 1414 Foucault influenced by, 1065-1066, 1069-1070 genealogy and, 1069-1070 on will to power, 609 1984 (Orwell), 1430, 1660 Nineteenth Amendment, 1083, 1090

Nintendo Entertainment System (NES), 666 Nintendo Wii, 666, 672 Nissenbaum, Helen, 535-536

Voom lene

L779 SKouks

alternative organizational culture and, 37-38 neoliberalism and, 38 resistance movements

and, 38

novels, subversive, 1649-1650

NPC (nonplayer character), 668 NRT (non-representational theory), 10 NSMs (new social movements), 1595, 1602 Nussbaum, Martha, 241, 892 NWICO (New World Information and Communication Order), 467 Nye, Joseph, 767 Oaxaca, media activism in, 457-458 Obama, Barack, 203, 1408 birth certificate rumor bomb and, 1326

celebrity endorsers and, 175-176 as CP1, 172

Hope image of, 1782

media spectacle and, 172 Obergefell v. Hodges, 1061 obesity, 319 bodies and, 1617-1618

consumption and, 1617-1618 critical food studies and, 323 individual responsibility and, 1617 objectification, feminist cultural studies and, 311

objectivity, de-Westernization and, 471 object-oriented MUDS (MOOs), 667 object-voice, 1396 objet petit a, 1633, 1636

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOTUME

2S PPES73— 178

O’Brien Hallstein, Lynn, 251, 256 Occidentalism, 477, 772 occupations, feminist organizational communication and, 637-638

Occupy Wall Street, 1079, 1657, 1699 O’Connor, Alan, 1547 Oculus Rift, 674

INDEX

openness as adaptive personality trait, 366 alternative organizational culture and, 40 Open University, 1680 operaismo, 53-54

Odyssey (Homer), 1290 offensive speech, abusive speech compared to, $02

Operation Wetback, 194

Office ofStrategic Services (OSS), 1358

Ophelia, 61

Office of War Information (OWI), 1358

oppression Anzaldua on intersecting modes of, 779

offline organizing, feminist organizational communication disrupting, 639-640 offshoring, labor in, 929-931

OfGrammatology (Derrida), 677, 679 Oficio de cartégrafo (Martin-Barbero), 848-849

La Ofrenda II (Hernandez, E.), 199 Of Woman Born (Rich), 251

OI] (Institute for Internet Studies), $09 oikonomia, 730 oikos, 725-726 Oliver, Jamie, 178 O'Loughlin, Ben, 1803 Olson, Lester, 1786 Oluo, Ijeoma, 1208

O’Malley, Tom, 957 omnitopias, 970-971 On Bullshit (Frankfurt), 1323 One-Dimensional Man (Marcuse), 825, 1353, 1737

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, 1559 Ong, Walter, 1017, 1021-1022 on neoliberalism as exception, 1146-1147

On Liberty (Mill), 95S online activism characteristics of, 1369-1371

hashtag activism and, 1374

identity, power and, 1373-1375 rise of, 1367-1369 online information sources, 137-140 online organizing, feminist organizational

communication disrupting, 639-640

CCP challenging forms of, 290 power and, 1120-1121 oral cultures, media and, 1294 oral history, performance studies and, 1226-1227, 1231-1233

oral interpretation of literature, performance studies and, 1222-1223

oramedia, 475-476

The Order of Things (Foucault), 862, 864, 867, 1064-1065, 1068

Ordine Nuovo, 109 ordoliberalism, 945, 1141-1143, 1743

O'Reilly, Bill, SO1 O'Reilly, Leonora, 1090, 1102 OReilly, Tim, 430

organic composition of power, in colonial India, 1511-1513, 1S11¢

organic intellectuals, Gramsci on, 824 organizational, meaning of, 30-31. See also alternative organizational culture organizational communication cultural and critical, 1163-1176 feminist, 635-647 functionalism and, 1163-1167

hegemony and, 116-117 power and, 1349 organizational history, 32-35 organizational sites, of power and control, 1355 organizational structure, 33-34

Ono, Kent, 1078

organized capitalism, 912

mixed race studies and, 1495 On Populist Reason (Laclau), 591, 597, 602-603

Onto-Cartography (Bryant), 1666-1667

Orientalism Hegel on, 1528 Occidentalism countering, 477, 772 Said and, 476-477, 772, 814, 1129 The Ortegas, 1481 Orwell, George, 1430, 1437, 1660 Osceola, Chief, 1550, 1567

ontogenesis, 155

OSS (Office of Strategic Services), 1358

ontological security, 1793

Ossandén, Carlos, 852

On the Ice, 1565 On the Picketline, 1751

On the Reproduction of Capitalism (Althusser), 53 ontic fallacy, 864

1889

Ontopower, 163

operational competence, 363 Operation Avenge Assange, 436 Operation Payback, 436

O'Donnell, Casey, 673

-

1890

e«

INDEX

VOLUME VOLUME?

the Other, Said on, 1491 othermothering, 257 Ott, Brian L., 12, 1412

El Ouma, 216

Our Lady (Lopez, A.), 199 Our Lady of Guadalupe Defending the Rights ofXicanos (Hernandez, E.), 198 Our-Space (Harold), 1752 out-law discourse, 1493 outsourcing, international, 929-931 overdetermination, Althusser and, 48-S1 Oviedo,J.,489 Owens, A. Susan, 1413-1414

OWI (Office of War Information), 1358 Oxford Handbook of Transnational Feminist Movements, 38-39 Packer, Jeremy, 1023 paideia, 331 Paine, Tom, 1650 paintings

Native Americans depictions in, 1$51-1552 social movement media and, 1651 Pakistani Americans, media depictions of, 1486 Palacios, Monica, 201 Palczweski, Catherine, 1784-1785 Palfrey, Colin, 63 Palin, Sarah, 118-119 Palmer-Mehta, Valerie, 252

Panofsky, Erwin, 1801 panopticon, 1071, 1701 Paper Tiger Television, 1654 Parables for the Virtual (Massumi), 9, 159, 1742 Park, Robert E., 1763 Parks, Rosa, 624n6 Parks, William, 1053

Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP), 174

IE

VOLUME

Palas

PP. 179

738s U7

space and, 1674

participatory media, 1647-1648 particularity, of events, 159 Partido dos Trab alhadores (PT), 1198 Parting Ways (Butler), 888-889 partisan listening, 49S

The Passing of Traditional Society (Lerner), 1359 passion, agency and, 1733 The Passion of the Christ, 12 passive participation, 1582 passive trust, 1335

paticca samuppada, 474 Patraeus, David, 339 patriarchy capitalist, 188 in colonial India, community and, 1520-1522 power of, 1821 Patriot Act, 435

Paul, Alice, 1091 Paul, Christopher A., 672 Paulo Freire. Pedagogue ofLiberation (Elias), 1202

Paulo Freire: The Man from Recife (Kirylo), 1202 Pavlik, John, 456

Payne Fund studies, 264 PayPal, 1812 Paz, Octavio, 197, 200

PCF (French Communist Party), 43, 45-46 PCI (Italian Communist Party), 1031-1033

The Peacock Committee and UK Broadcasting Policy (O’Malley and Jones), 957 peasant culture, Gramsci on, 684 peasant rebellions, in colonial India, 1516-1520

Peck, J., 1147-1148 pedagogy. See also critical communication pedagogy communication activist, 295-296

critical communication, 285-301

globalization and, 135 Pedagogy of the Oppressed (Freire), 1198-1201

Parnet, Claire, 714 parole, 1310

Peeples, Jennifer, 905-906

Parramore, Lynn Stuart, 1433

Peloponnesian War (Thucidides), 808

parrhesia, 1074-1077, 1079

Pels, Dick, 172

Parsons, Lucy, 194 Parsons, Talcott, 1019 partiality, 495 participation alternative organizational culture and, 40 by consultation, 1582 culture and community, in global health, 749 development communication and, 1581-1584 empowered, 1582-1583 functional, 1582 passive, 1582

2 PPS

19rs

Pender, John, 210 Penelope, 73

Pennsylvania Abolition Society, 1084 People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), 1366, 1596 People in Search of Safe and Accessible Restrooms

(PISSAR), 975

people of color, policing, 1696 The People’s Choice (Berelson and Gaudet), 1018

people's culture, popular culture as, 1267-1268 perception, Massumi on, 161-163

—

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VMORUME

23PP

S73 —ias

INDEX

«

Perelman, Chaim, 1379

Performing Queer Latinidad (Rivera-Servera), 1227

Perez, Domino Renee, 201

perlocutionary, illocutionary compared to, 882, 896 Permanent Settlement of 1793, in Bengal, 1509

Pérez, Emma, 200

performance, 312 autoethnographic, script of, 1214-1216

Pernambuco, Brazil, 1194-1195 Peronism, Laclau and, $89

as constitutive, 1206

Perry, Katy, 176

contested nature of, 1221-1222

personal authenticity, celebrity politics and, 171 personal computers, 410-411, 1542-1543 personal data, $36-S38

as critical, 1206

definitions of, 1205, 1220-1222

dialogic, 1223 environment and audience shaping, 1207 as epistemic, 1206 gender and, 880, 882-883, 1212-1213 human rights, activism and, 1226

as object and method ofstudy, 1219 present and, 1231

as process and product, 1205-1206 queer studies and, 1464-1466

of race, culture, and whiteness,

1204-1216

performance ethnography, 1223, 1225-1229 performance studies, 1205 antitheatrical prejudice and, 1219-1220 archives and, 1231-1233

autoethnography and performative writing in, 1229-1231

bodies and, 1610-1611 in communication studies, 1218-1234 dramatism and, 1223 elocution and, 1222

genealogies of, 1222-1225 interdisciplinary features of, 1218-1219 oral history and, 1226-1227, 1231-1233 oral interpretation of literature and, 1222-1223 performance ethnography and, 1223, 1225-1229

personal experience, emotions and, 6

Personal Influence (Katz and Lazarsfeld, H.), 1018 personal information, on social media, 1430

personal narrative, performativity of, 1221 The Perverts Guide to Ideology, 1634-1635 PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), 1366, 1596 Peterson, Richard, 379 Peterson, Valerie, 1779

petite narratives, postmodernity and, 608-610 pets, Fitbark and, $16-S17 Pezzullo, Phaedra, 1451, 1604, 1629 PFF (Progress and Freedom Foundation), 427-429, 431,

439-440 Phaedrus (Plato), 1016, 1291, 1461, 1475n3 Phelan, Peggy, 1231 Phelan, Sean, 957

phenomenology, space and, 1672-1673 Phenomenology of Perception (Merleau-Ponty), 1673 Phenomenology of Spirit (Hegel), 632 philanthropy, Development 2.0 and, 1812-1813 Phillips, Kendall, 1079, 1416, 1419 Phillips, Wendell, 1084 philosophical parrhesia, 1075 philosophy

performativity theories in, 1221

Deleuze and, 698-700

productions in, 1219

expression and, 159

productive plurality of, 1233-1234

movies as, 709

race and, 1224 social drama and, 1225, 1228

truth and, 20-21

subjugated knowledge and, 1220 performative writing autoethnography and, 1229-1231 queer studies and, 1464-1466 performativity Butler on, 312, 1221 gender and, 1221 gender as, 880, 882-883, 1212-1213

of personal narrative, 1221 queer studies and, 1464-1466 theories of, 1221

performing/queering organizing, in feminist organizational communication, 638-639

1891

rhetoric and, 619 walking and, in ancient Greece, 1293-1294

of world history, 1522-1524

Philosophy of Right (Hegel), 1523 Philosophy of the Encounter and Later Works (Althusser), $4, 1740 photography colonialism and, 212 social movement media and, 1652 urban communication and, 1769

Picturing Empire (Ryan, J.), 212 Pierce, Charles Sanders, 620

Pilger, John, 1428 Pinkney, Tony, 1547

1892

-+

INDEX

VOLUME VOLUMES

PIPA (Protect Intellectual Property Act), 430 Pipeline: Letters from Prison (Negri), 1047

PISSAR (People in Search of Safe and Accessible Restrooms), 975

PIT (Projekt Ideologietheorie), 831-832 place

1 PP. 1-572 2 Pn

79

VOLUME?

PR s7o=l iis

ols

homeless people, 1698 people of color, 1696 Policing the Crisis (Hall, S.), 1680 polis theory, 725-726 political, politics compared to, 737-739 political aesthetics, of celebrity politics, 171-172

activism and, 975

political communication, professional, 1331-1333

bodies and, 969

political economy

definition of, 967

Adorno on media and, 1252 big data and, 1257, 1259-1261

concept of, 969 epideictic landscapes and, 970

Brady’s legacy in media and, 1252-1254

genres of, 969-971 memory, 969-970

commodification in media technologies and,

public memory and, 1409-1410 relational theory of, 971-972 space compared to, 967-969

of communication, 1239, 1249-1251

as stable environment, 968

cultural studies challenges to media technologies and,

place-making, 967-968 place-making and public spaces (PPS), 1766

1241-1243

contemporary trends in media and, 1256-1263 control and survival in, 1236-1237 1245-1246

definition of, 1236-1237

Plan X, 1545-1547 plasticity, bodies and, 1618-1620

developmentalist theory on media technologies and,

plastic surgery, 1431-1432, 1619-1620 platform studies, 672

digital labor and, 1261-1263 digital platforms and, 12$7-1259

Plato, 529, 544, 721, 1076, 1219, 1291, 1719-1720

economic justice and emergence of, 1729-1730 emergence of, 1248-1249, 1729-1730

queer studies and, 1461-1462, 1475n3 on writing, 1016-1017 Platonism, Hinduism compared to, 1707

play digital cultures and, $09, 510, $12 game culture and, 510 labor and, 509, 510, $12 neoliberalism and, 512 resistance and, 512-517

Play between Worlds (Taylor, T. L.), 671 “playing Indian,” 1$S2-1553 Playing in the Dark (Morrison), 349 Playstation, Sony, 666 Pleasantville, 1419

pleasure, enjoyment compared to, 1638 The Pleasure of the Text (Barthes), 1231 pleasure principle, 1381 Plehwe, Dieher, 957

1240-1241

environmental, 1239 epistemology of media and, 1255-1256 EU research on, 1240 feminist, 1239 Frankfurt School on media and, 1251-1252 future trends in media technologies and, 1246

history and, 1255 institutional, 1238-1239 Marx and, 1237-1238 of media, 1248-1264 of media technologies, 1236-1246 moral philosophy and, 1237, 1256 neoliberalism and, 946-949 research approaches of, 1238-1241 Schiller, H., on media and, 1254 Smith, A., and, 1237-1238

pluralism, ethical, $32-533 Pocahontas, 1485, 1493, 1561 Poe, Edgar Allan, 1397-1400

Smythe on communication and, 1254 social praxis and, 1256 social totality and, 1255 spatialization in media technologies and, 1243 structuration in media technologies and, 1243-1245

The Poetics of Social Forms (Jameson), 660

21st century necessity of media and, 1263-1264

PLP (Parliamentary Labour Party), 174

poiesis, praxis compared to, 1575 Pokemon, 671 Pokemon Go, 1769

policing citizens monitoring, 1698-1699

US research on, 1239-1240 political endorsers, CP2s as, 175-177

political events, 21-22 political parrhesia, 1075 political rationality, 1145

VOLUME

1! PP. 1=572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2) PRY S73=1178

political theory of Agamben, 721-740 Habermas and, 898

The Political Unconscious (Jameson), 654-655, 6S8-659 politics. See also biopolitics; celebrity politics; identity politics

INDEX

popular culture Adorno on, 1273

art and, 1270-1271 class and, 1272-1273

consumption and, 1280-1281 cultural studies and, 391-395, 1267-1285

adversarial model of communication and, 494

definitions of, 1267-1269

of archives on Anzaldua, 791 of assembly, Butler on universalism and, 890-892

economic development and, 395 emergence of, 1271

celebrity, in US and UK, 169-183

feminism and, 1277-1278 Fiske on, 1278-1280

of citing, 480 of cohabitation, 888-890 coming community and, 731 cultural studies and, 1180-1182 cyborgs and, $57, 562-S63

folk culture compared to, 1269 Frankfurt School and, 1272-1274 globalization, postcolonialism and, 1282-1285 Gramsci and, 392, 1276-1277

economic justice and, 1730

Hall, S., on, 1268, 1274-1276, 1689-1690

economics and, 1729 enjoyment, ideology and, 1638-1640

as historical object, 1270-1272 in history, 1269-1270

Gilroy on colonialism and, 1183-1184 globalization and, 414-417 good life and, 725

ignorance and, 1429

Gramsci on translation and, 109-112 Hardt and Negri on governance and, 1044-1045 injustice and, 73S—736

imperialism and, 393-394 of India, 1282-1284 as inferior, 1267

Laclau and, $89 law and, 722-723, 731-732, 739-740

Martin-Barbero on, 845-846 Marxism and, 391 mass culture and, 1267 McRobbie on, 1277-1278 nationalism and, 1187

as life, 732

Native American media depictions

materialist rhetoric and, 1003, 1005

and, 15S] nostalgia and, 1270 as people's culture, 1267-1268

oflabor in neoliberal global economy, 928-935

messianic, 733, 738

of mobility, 974-975 neoliberalism as project and process of, 1147-1150 non-representational theory and, 10 political compared to, 737-739

pure, 731-732, 738-739

queer counterpublics and US, 1059 queer studies, activism and, 1467 reformist, 25

seeding, Haraway and, 567-569 social movement studies and, 1594

thanatopolitics and, 737 of translation, 693 UK cultural studies and, 1180-1182

Zizek on, 1639-1640 The Politics ofDocumentary (Chanan), 449 The Politics of Pictures (Hartley), 1324

populism and, 1278-1281 public memory and, 1418-1419 quantitative definition of, 1267 Storey on, 1267-1268 surveillance and, 1700 Thompson, E. P., on, 1271-1272 UK cultural studies and, 1274-1277

US production of, 1282 Popular Culture in a Globalised India, 1283 population control, 558 in Global South, 694-695 populism articulation and, 603 critical audience studies and, 270 demand and, 603-604

Polley, Sarah, 63 Pollock, Della, 1231, 1233 Polonsky, Abraham, 1558 Pong, 666

discourse theory and, 602-603 emergence of, 603-605 empty signifier and, 604 hegemony and, 604-605

Poor Richard's Almanac (Franklin), 1055 Popular Cultural Movement (MCP), 1196

popular culture and, 1278-1281

Laclau on, 590, 591, 602-605

-

1893

1894

+«

INDEX

VOLUME VOLUMERB

pornography, foodie culture and, 324 portable video camera (camcorder), 1654 Portugal, 1653

positionality, space and, 1674 positive liberty, 937-938 positivism Neogrammarians and, 112-113 Saussure on, 1308

positivity, adaptive personality and, 366

IPP

Patss72

VOLUME

2° PPR. 57351178

PEP aL i7 919s

Postman, Neil, 170 post-Marxism, 1720-1721 labor and, 919-920 materialism and, 1722-1723 postmodern capitalism, materialist rhetoric in, 1006-1009 The Postmodern Condition (Lyotard), 656, 828, 1322

postmodern ethicists, 241-242 postmodernism

possessive investment, critical whiteness studies and, 351

affect and, 2

post-Cold War checkpoints, surveillance and, 1697-1698 postcolonialism

hypermodernism compared to, 609-610

identity and, 1129-1130

Bhabha and, 812-813, 817-818

identity politics and, 1130

colonialism and, 207-220 decolonization and, 467-468

Jameson and, 655-656, 1539

imperialism and, 1125 Latin America and, 1160 media and, 218-220 melancholia and, 1184 nation and identity in, 1125-1127 popular culture, globalization and, 1282-1285 race, identity and, 1127 scholarship on, 220 terminology of, 208 transnationalism and, 1498 truth and, 1126

Lyotard on, 1670 petite narratives and, 608-610 posthumanism and, 1287

PT and, 1322 security and, 1796 Trump and, 608-609

Postmodernism, or, the Cultural Logic ofLate Capitalism (Jameson), 655-656, 919 Postmodernism Debate in Latin America (Beverley and Oviedo), 459 The Postnational Constellation (Habermas), 1449 post-national identities, 128-130, 775

Postcolonial Melancholia (Gilroy), 1192

post-national sovereignty, 1041

Poster, Mark, 713 post-Fordism, 1173-1174 post-hegemony, 601-602

post-racial discourse, 1495 post-structuralism, 8, 1306-1317. See also structuralism Barthes on death of author and, 1312-1313 Butler on, 1310 criticisms of, 1306

Posthegemony (Beasley-Murray), 601-602 posthumanism, $63, 1286-1303 aesthetics and, 1299-1300 affect and, 1301-1302

animals and, 1300-1301 bodies in, 1296-1298 communication and, 1287

definition of, 1306-1307 Derrida, decentering and, 1310-1312 economic justice and, 1739-1741 ethics and, 1317

Foucault on economy of power and, 1313-1316

cyborgs and, 1295-1296 emergence of, 1289-1294

Gorgias and, 1307-1308

Foucault and, 1077-1078

Hall, S., on, 1688

humanism compared to, 1289-1290 interdisciplinary research with, 1302-1303 media studies and, 1294-1296

postmodernism and, 1287 rhetorical agency and, 1290-1292 rhetorical invention and, 1292-1294 in rhetorical studies, 1299-1302 sensation and, 1300 sublime rhetoric and, 1291-1292 terminology and origin of, 1286-1288

transhumanism compared to, 1298-1299 postindustrial capitalism, 913

Greenberg on, 1307-1308

hegemony and, 801-802, 804-805 ideology and, 827-830, 834-835 on labor, culture and communication, 922-923

origins of, 1307 power and, 1347 space and, 1670 structuralism leading to, 1308-1310

post-truth (PT) academic and public discourse on, growth of, 1323-1325

audience fragmentation and, 1323 Bush and, 1328, 1332-1333

—

VOLUME 1 PP. 1=572 VOLUME

VOEUME

29PR

S73 =1i078

INDEX

«

1895

3 PP. 1179-1918

citizen journalism and, 1330 communication studies and, 1320-1338 condition, 1322-1323

development communication, social change and, 1357-1360 dialogic communication and, $03

conspiracy culture and, 1324 critical synergy theory of, 1335

difference, culture and, 1351-1352 digital media and, 1353-1354

disinformation and, 1325-1326 empirical knowledge of, 1320-1321 epistemic crises and, 1335S

disciplinary, 870-871, 1071 discourse and, 1349 divine, 730

fake news and, 1326-1328 four synergistic agents of, 1328-1333

economy of, Foucault on post-structuralism and, 1313-1316

Internet and, 1324

entertainment media structures of, 1353

journalism and, 1330-1331 lies and, 1326, 1327 misinformation and, 1325-1326

feminism and, 1347-1348 Foucault on discourse and, 309, 615, 870, 1121, 1346 Foucault on dynamic, 1120

as misleading, 1320

genealogy and, 1070-1071

origins of, 1344n3 postmodernism and, 1322

Gramsci on class and, 984, 1736 Hall, S., on communication and, 922

precedents for, 1321-1322

Haraway on, 558

professional political communication and, 1331-1333 promotional culture and, 1331-1332

Hardt and Negri on, 1038-1039 hegemony and, 1121-1122

rumor bombs and, 1326

ideology and, in Marxism, 983-985, 1347

solutions to, 1336-1338

interpersonal relationships and, 1355

techno-curative solutions to, 1336-1337 technology, attention economy and, 1329-1330

of labor, 982-983 of law, Agamben and, 721-722

trust and, 1333-1337 The Post-Truth Era (Keyes), 1323

legitimation of inequalities and, 1345 Marxism and, 1344-1347

potential, Massumi on, 156-157 Poulakos, John, 1299-1300 Poulantzas, Nicos, 1122-1125 Pouliot, Vincent, 1795

materiality, structure and, 1345-1350 media constructions of control and, 1352-1354 Miliband-Poulantzas debates on state and, 1122-1125 minorities and, 133

poverty. See also class foodie culture and, 326-327

nation, identity and, in CCS, 1117-1132 Nietzsche on will to, 609

tourism, 1156

normative, Butler on, 883-885

Powell, Enoch, 1185

online activism, identity and, 1373-1375

power affect and, 161

Ontopower and, 163 oppression and, 1120-1121

capitalism, state and, 1123

organizational communication and, 1349

capitalism and, 1345-1346

organizational sites of, 1355S

in CCP, 288-289

of patriarchy, 1521

class and, in Marxism, 982-983 in colonial India, organic composition of, 1511-1513, 1SUt colonialism and, 1348 common sense and, 1122 communication and, 488, 1346-1349 communication ethics and, 235-238

post-structuralism and, 1347 public sphere, knowledge and, 1447 race and, 1348 radical empiricism and, 157-158 resistance and, 1315-1316 societal sites of control and, 1354-1356 soft, 766-769, 808

communication strategies of, 1350-1352

state apparatus compared to state, 1125S

in communication studies, 1344-1362 critical discourse analysis and, 1121 cultural and critical organizational communication

and, 1166 decision-making and, 1345

technologies of control and, 1360-1362 The Power Elite (Mills, Charles Wright), 1344-1345 Powers, Nina, 53-54

PPA (Algerian People’s Party), 215 PPS (place-making and public spaces), 1766

1896

+

INDEX

VO PUME

ME?

VOLUME

PR. See public relations The Practice ofEveryday Life (de Certeau), 968 pragmatic communication, $80-S81 praxis

CCP, pedagogy and research as, 291-292 development communication and, 1575-1576, 1585,

1589-1590 development communication for transformative

Pom

VOLUME

group, 53S

personal data and, $36-S38 protecting, S38—-S39 QS and, S16 self and, 530-531, $35-536 social media and, 1430 utilitarianism and, $39 virtue ethics and, $39

privacy paradox, 538-S39 private property, liberalism and, 939

political economy and social, 1256

privatization

definitions of, 1544

Precarious Life (Butler), 886

global health and, 745

precariousness, Butler on, 887-888

mobile, 1542-1545

precarity, labor and, 931 predatory identities, 132-133 predispositions, cross-cultural adaptation and, 365-366, 369 Prelli, Lawrence J., 1628 preoriginary rhetoricity, 1011 preparedness, 365 present, performance and, 1231

The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (Goffman), 1206-1207, 1223

press freedom Freedom of Press Index and, 802 liberalism and, 938, 942-943 neoliberalism and, 953

safe spaces and, 953 primary affects, 3-6 primary emotions, 3, 5-6 Primate Visions (Haraway), 564

Principles of Political Economy and Taxation (Ricardo), 912 principles of supervision and negativity, Warner on, 1054

print cultures, media and, 1294-1295

printing press, 207 print technology, Warner on development of, 1052-1053 The Prison-House of Language (Jameson), 652

prison-industrial complex, 89-91 The Prison Notebooks (Gramsci), 683, 801, 803, 809, 917, 1276

privacy big data issues with, 1260-1261

in China, $36

contextual integrity and, 535 cyberculture and, 413 decisional, 534-535

7s

PPeli79SLoNs

social, 1586-1589 poiesis compared to, 1575S social, 1237-1238, 1256, 1586-1589

2) PR: S73=

in ordoliberalism, 1142 privilege communities of, CCP and, 296-297 white, 352

Production of Space (Lefebvre), 1671 Professing Performance (Jackson, S.), 1220

professional political communication, 1331-1333 profit global health and, 744

labor process theory and, 918 Ricardo’s theory of, 912 progress, culture and, 990-991 Progress and Freedom Foundation (PFF), 427-429, 431, 439-440

progressive social movements, Internet and, 1365-1375 prohibition, psychoanalysis and, 1382-1383, 1394 Projekt Ideologietheorie (PIT), 831-832 Promedios (Chiapas Media Project), 455, 461 promotional culture, PT and, 1331-1332

propaganda colonialism and media for, 210-213 Nazism and, 97, 1187 property

in colonial India, 1509-1510 private, liberalism and, 939 whiteness as, 350

Proposition 8, 1600 “The Prose of Counterinsurgency” (Guha), 1517, 1519 prostitution, empathy and, 542-543 Protect America Act, 435

Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA), 430 Protest and Popular Culture (Triece), 1272, 1751 protest movements, 1083. See also resistance movements; social movements

definitions of, 534-535 DME and, 534-539 Facebook and, 140-141, 413

protest rallies. See also activism body rhetoric and, 1110

flight from, 1429-1430, 1436-1437

The Protocols of the Wise Elders of Zion, 100-101

materialist rhetoric and, 1010

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2, PP. 573-1178

INDEX

protopublic spaces, 907 Proust, Marcel, 157

commemoration and, 1410-1412 disputes in, 1406

PSA (Argentinian Socialist Party), $89

forgetting and, 1414-1416

PSIN (Socialist Party of the National Left), 589 psychic writing, 1585-1586 psychoanalysis, 3 agency and, 1400-1401

globalization and, 1416-1417

archetypes and, 1384

CCS and, 1378-1401 condensation and, 1382

memorials and, 1409 movies and, 1419 museums and, 1409-1410

drive and, 1383, 1389-1391

Foucault on, 863-864

rhetoric and, 1406-1407

foundations of, 1380

social movements and, 1417-1419

identity and, 1383-1384 imaginary register of unconscious and, 1391-1393

sports and, 1419-1420

Lacan's fundamental concepts of, 1386-1391

after linguistic turn, 1385-1386 before linguistic turn, 1380-1385 materialist rhetoric and, 1010-1011 prohibition and, 1382-1383, 1394 the Real register of unconscious and, 1396-1397

repetition and, 1387-1388, 1398-1399 resistance and, 1380

study of, 1404-1406 trauma and, 1413-1414

public opinion, 938, 1444 public pedagogy Arendt on, 1427

civic illiteracy and, 1427-1429 globalization and, 1426 market logic defining, 1425 neoliberalism and, 1426-1428 selfie culture and, 1424-1438

rhetoric of CCS compared to, 1378-1380 in RS, 1383-1385

public reason, 1446

“Seminar on “The Purloined Letter” and, 1397-1400,

public relations (PR)

1398f, 1399f the signifier and, 1385, 1388-1389, 1391, 1399-1400 symbolic register of unconscious and, 1393-1396, 1394f

celebrity politics and, 170 publics

alternative organizational culture and, 34

future directions for, 1453-1455

transference and, 1380-1381, 1388-1389 unconscious and, 1381-1382, 1385, 1386-1387

multiple, public sphere and, 1445-1446 public sphere, counterpublics and, 1440-1455

Zizek and, 1635-1637

theorization of, 1450-1453 Warner on, 1451-1452

psychological health, cross-cultural adaptation and, 367 psychology borderlands and, 779-780

Publics and Counterpublics (Warner), 1052, 1056-1060, 1451 public space, surveillance and, 1693-1702

scapegoating and, 99 PT. See post-truth PT (Partido dos Trab alhadores), 1198 Puar, Jasbir, 161 public address, public memory and, 1406-1409

amateurs and, 1697

Public Conversations Project, 49S

facial recognition software and, 1695 interactivity and, promise and peril of, 1699-1700

Public Culture, 123 Public Deliberation (Bohman), 1449

publicity Habermas on, 899 Warner on mass, 1058-1059

public kisses, visual rhetoric and, 1778 public memory, 1404-1420 affect and, 1412-1413

1897

history compared to, 1405 LGBT equality movement and, 1418

new directions for study of, 1417-1420 place and, 1409-1410 popular culture and, 1418-1419 public address and, 1406-1409

discourse theory and, S95-S96 displacement and, 1382

-«

camera phones and, 1695 CCTV and, 1694-1695, 1702 citizens monitoring policing and, 1698-1699 drones and, 1696

literature on, 1700-1702

mobility and, 1696-1698 policing homeless people and, 1698 policing people of color and, 1696

popular culture and, 1700 post-Cold War checkpoints and, 1697-1698 satellites and, 1694

1898

«

INDEX

public speech, 1057-1058

public sphere agency and destruction of, 1425 Benhabib on, 1450 bodies and, 1446-1447 case studies on, 905 class and, 1443

Pl o72

VOLUME

Tee

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

Baby Lucent and, S1S-S16 datafication and, 508

Facial Weaponization Suite and, 516

cultural studies and, 1447

Fitbark and, 516-517

cyberlibertarianisms fall and rise in, 429-430

interdisciplinary debates on, $09

deliberation and, 1449

Magic Mirror and, 51S

emergence of, 1442

movement of, 507-508

environmental activism and, 1453-1454

environmental justice and, 1453-1454

playful resistance and, $12—S17 privacy and, S16

feminist, 1446

surveillance and, 516

future directions for, 1453-1455 globalization and, 1454-1455 Habermas on bourgeois, 899-900, 904-905,

907-908, 1322, 1440-1450 Hauser on, 1449-1450

P5763 uns

Qiu, Jack, 386 QS. See quantified self Quaderni (Gramsci), 113 Quaderni Rossi (Red Notebooks), 1034 quantified self (QS)

criticisms of, 1445-1447

Franklin in, 10SS

27°2

Unfit Bits and, $14-S15 quantitative social science, 148 “quare, 1466 Quartet, 68, 70

Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, 1464 queer/ing. See also homosexuality

jurisgenerative processes, democratic iterations

CCS roots and, 1461-1464

and, 1450 liberalism and, 938

counterpublics, 1059-1060

literary, 1443

LGBT equality movement and, 1106-1109

media and, 1447

motherhood, 258-259

modern media impact on, 906 multiple publics and, 1445-1446

organizing, in feminist organizational communication,

definitions of, 1459-1461

neoliberalism and, 1149-1150

638-639 public sphere participation and, 1447

networked, 1454

the Real and, 1397

power, knowledge and, 1447 public and private division and, 1446 public opinion and, 1444 publics, counterpublics and, 1440-1455 queer participation in, 1447 revisions to theory of, 1448-1450 space and, 1443 state authority and, 1444 visualizing, 1453 visual rhetoric and, 1780 Warner on, 1053-1054, 1057

public-supposed-to-believe, 1389

spaces, 1062-1063 terminology of, 1064n1 Queering Public Address (Morris, C. E.), 1078 Queer Nation, 1460, 1467 queer studies Aristotle and, 1463

Butler on, 147Sn4

in CCS, 1459-1467 cultural and critical organizational communication and, 1170-1172 definitions in, 1459-1461 future directions for, 1467

public-supposed-to-know, 1389

history and, 1467

publishing, de-Westernization and, 480 Puech, Michel, 525 Pukar, 135

Johnson, E. P., and, 1466 media and, 1464

punishment, prison-industrial complex and, 89-91 pure politics, 731-732, 738-739 “The Purloined Letter” (Poe), 1397-1400 Purple Moon Interactive, 667 The Pursuit ofLoneliness (Slater), 614 Pussy Riot, 1695

performance, performativity and performative writing in, 1464-1466

Plato and, 1461-1462, 1475n3 politics, activism and, 1467 queer theory, 1459-1461 questioning gender difference, in feminist organizational communication, 636-638

—

VOMUNE

LPP:

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

672

VOLUME

2 PP. $73=1178

INDEX

«

1899

Quijano, Anibal, 459, 468

The Racial Contract (Mills, Charles Wade), 630

Quit India movement, 1515

racial formations, 1490

R2P (responsibility to protect), 340-342, 1796 Rabelais, Francgois, 1649-1650 race

racism. See also Jim Crow laws CARED and, 1211 Condit on scientific, 1627 Davis, A., on prison-industrial complex and, 89-91

anti-Semitism and, 102-103

environmental, 1105

autoethnographic performance script and, 1214-1216 Bhabha on identity and, 817-818

“four little girls” and, 80 Gilroy on nationalism and, 1184-1185

Chicana feminism and, 197 critical food studies and, 320

Hall, S., on, 1686-1688 ideology and, 1491

CRT and, 1170-1172, 1207-1208, 1492-1494

Internet and, 1495-1496

cultural and critical organizational communication

Kant and, 630

and, 1170-1172

cyberculture and, 412

Native American sports mascots and,

1566-1567

cyborgs and, $61—S62

neo-, 1127

Davis, A., on gender, class and, 82-83

neoliberalism and, 119, 1146

Davis, A., on motherhood and, 86-88

“reverse, 1146

decolonization and, 1498

in UK, 1686-1688

definition of, 1207

“Unite the Right” rally and, 1212-1213

environmental justice and, 1105

radical empiricism, Massumi on, 155-158

Fanon and, 627-634 Fanon on identity and, 817-818

Radical Innocence (Bernstein, R.), 1232-1233 Radical Monarchs, 1607

Gilroy on class and, 1491

Radical Thought in Italy (Hardt and Virno), 1038

Gilroy on future and, 1181-1182 globalization and, 1497

radio activism and, 456

globalization and minorities of, 131-132 Hall, S., on ideology and, 1490-1491 historical representations of, in education, 84

intersectionality and, 1494-1496

broadcast, origin of, 1015-1016 colonialism and, 210-211, 217-218 social movement media and, 1652-1654

technological determinism and, 1542

Mexican Americans and, 779 mobility and, 975 Mohanty and, 193 motherhood and, 256-258 movies and, 459-460 mutual recognition and, 633 nationalism, transnationalism and, 1490-1498 performance of culture, whiteness and, 1204-1216 performance studies and, 1224 postcolonialism, identity and, 1127

Radway, Janice, 268, 312, 1277 Ramirez Berg, Charles, 448 Ranciere, Jacques, 1699 Rand, Ayn, 1432, 1435 Rand, Erin, 1418, 1459 Randolph, A. Philip, 1101-1103 Rapoport, Amos, 1764 Rawls, John, 237, 241-242, 901, 939 raw materials, technology and, 1361 Rawson, K. J., 1418

power and, 1348

Ray, Angela, 1407

social construction of, 1207, 1212 space and, 630-632

Raymond, Eric, 434 Read, Jason, 50

time and, 631

Reading Capital (Althusser), 44, 45, 47, 54

in US media, 1477-1487 voice-of-color thesis and, 1208

Readings on the Rhetoric of Social Protest (Morris, C. E., and Browne), 1628

Western conceptions of, 632

Reading the Romance (Radway), 268, 1277

Women’s Movement and, 1089, 1091-1092 racecraft, 1213 Race Traitor, 353

Reagan, Ronald, 81, 53-554, 1407-1408 as celebrity turned politician, 179 US libertarianism and, 424

Rachels, James, 535 Racial Contract, 351

the real discourse theory and, 601

1900

«

INDEX

VOLUME VORUME

the real (Continued) materialist rhetoric and, 1010

Zizek on capitalism and, 1643 reality, radical empiricism and, 1S7 reality principle, 1381 the Real register of unconscious, 1396-1397

2 Pl ssv72

VOLUME

2 PRT S73=1178

8) PPS 79—19 8

Warner on, 1053

Resch, Paul, 856

residual meanings, 831 resistance

bodies and, 1623-1625 culture and, 615-618

Reaney, Patricia, 1431

everyday, 1604

Reason, 440

feminist organizational communication and, 646-647 identity politics and, 1129

reason, Massumi on, 161

rebel consciousness, 1$17-—1518

receptive listening, 495-497 recognition, time, space and, 633-634 Red Brigades, 1035-1036, 1047 Red Crescent, 335

Red Cross, 335 “red face,’ 1557 The Redman and the Child, 1555

Red Notebooks (Quaderni Rossi), 1034

language and, 1366 mapping and, 973-974

performance ethnography and, 1228 playful, $12-S17 power and, 1315-1316 psychoanalysis and, 1380 rhetoric and, 620 social movements in US and, 1800 to present, 1083-1112

reification, 378, 379

resistance movements. See also social movements anticolonialism mobilization of media by, 215-218 counterspaces and, 967 against globalization, communication of, 225 Hardt and Negri on exodus and, 1044 not-for-profit sector and, 38 types of, 1083-1084

Reinventing Paulo Freire (Darder), 1202-1203

resonance, 8-9

“Redsploitation” features, 1559

reduplication, 1388 Reel Injun, 1554 reflexivity, in CCP, 291

reformist politics, 2S

Reidenberg, Joel, $28

relation, communication ethics and, 238-239

responsibility to protect (R2P), 340-342, 1796

relational theory ofspace and place, 971-972

restorative justice, 330

relativism. See ethical relativism religion. See also specific types globalization and minorities of, 131-132 law origins in, 723

retroaction, Lacan on, 1388

reversibility and, 490

reversed memory, 1411 “reverse racism,” 1146 reversibility, religion and, 490

Review of International Studies, 1801

Remember, 66 Remnants ofAuschwitz (Agamben), 729

The Revolution, 1090 revolutionary movements, Foucault on, 1075-1076

Renaissance, humanism of, 1288

Revolution Retrieved (Negri), 1047 Les Révolutions du Capitalisme (Lazzarato), 712

renationalization banal inter-nationalism and, 771 globalization and, 759-776 methodological nationalism and, 763-765 nation branding and, 769-770, 776 Reordering the World (Bell, D.), 956

repetition, psychoanalysis and, 1387-1388, 1398-- 1399 Report on the Future ofaMulti-Ethnic Britain

(Runnymede Trust Commission), 1686-1688 repression Freud on, 1382 social movement media and, 1655-1656

Reyes, G. Mitchell, 1408, 1416 Rheingold, H., 439 rhetoric, 488-489. See also materialist rhetoric; visual rhetoric

agency and, 1735 as art, 1606-1607 Aune on Marxism and, 1731-1732, 1750 Badiou on, 1404n1 bodies and, 1610-1629

body, 1110 ~

repressive state apparatuses (RSAs), 306, 995

capitalism and, 1734 of CCS compared to psychoanalysis, 1378-1380

The Republic (Plato), 529, 1076 republicanism

corporeal, 1009-1010

liberalism compared to, 941-942

communication ethics and, 618-620

cultural studies and, 579

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. §73-1178

Davis, D., on affect and, 1301-1302 definition of, 1300-1301 Deleuze and Guattari on, 714 discourse compared to, 1395 economic justice theories and, 1729-1754 ethics, culture and, 607-620 Freud and, 1379

INDEX

Rickert, Thomas, 1011, 1292-1293 on rhetoric and space, 1676 Ricoeur, Paul, 660 The Ridiculous Six, 1563 The Rifleman, 1562

Righi, Andrea, 1047 rights in democracy, 902

hegemony definition in, 803-804

right to work laws, 1104

hypermodernity and, 610-611 identity and, 611

Rincén, Omar, 841

Lacan and, 1379

mapping and, 965, 973

The Rise of the Network Society (Castells), 1763 Risse, Thomas, 1795 ritual, communication and, 1761 Rivera-Servera, Ramon H., 1227-1228

Marxism repressing, 1731-1732

Rix, Brian, 178

in Marxism’s critique of economic justice, post-1968,

#RMF (Rhodes Must Fall) campaign, 1374

1739-17458

in Marxism’s critique of economic justice, pre-1968,

1735-1739

1901

“rich Indian” stereotype, 1563

Habermas and, 902-903

ideology and, 832

«©

Roach, Joseph, 1231-1233

The Road from Mont Pelerin (Mirowski and Plehwe), 957 The Road to Paloma, 1565

material theory of, 828

The Road to Serfdom (Hayek), 944, 956

meaning through, 1602-1603 petite narratives, postmodernity and, 608-610

Robbins, Bruce, 73 Robertson, Roland, 422n2

philosophy and, 619 posthumanism in studies of, 1299-1302

robots. See Machine Ethics or Robot Ethics; social robots Rocha, Glauber, 447

public memory and, 1406-1407

Rodriguez, Juan Carlos

resistance and, 620 social movements and, 1594-1608, 1746 space and, 1676-1677

storytelling as narrative imagination and, 607 sublime, 1291-1292 violence and, 1625

Althusser and, 856-857, 860

on Borges, 867-868 on capitalism, 87S Chinese encyclopedia and, 867-868 Don Quixote and, 861-862, 865-866

Rhetoric (Aristotle), 1463

Foucault and, 856-875 ideological unconsciousness and, 861, 872

Rhetoric, Materiality, and Politics (Biesecker and

interpellation and, 872

Lucaites), 1754 rhetorical agency, posthumanism and, 1290-1292

Rhetorical Bodies (Crowley and Selzer), 1612, 1628 The Rhetorical Foundations of Society (Laclau), 591 rhetorical invention, posthumanism and, 1292-1294

rhetorical studies (RS), 1383-1385, 1493 Rhetoric and Marxism (Aune), 1731, 1750

Rhetoric and Philosophy, 489 Rhetoric forRadicals (Del Gandio), 1046 rhetoricity, preoriginary, 1011 A Rhetoric of Motives (Burke, K.), 1383-1384

Rhetorics of Display (Prelli), 1628 rhizomes, 70S—707

Rhodes Must Fall (#RMF) campaign, 1374 Ricardo, David, 911-912, 1237 Rice, Jenny Edbauer, 13, 1302 Rice, Jonah, 1779 Rich, Adrienne, 251-252 Richardson, Kathleen, 540, 542-543, 546

ISAs and, 872-874

on Las Meninas (Velazquez), 864-865 popularity of, 856 on state and stage, 873-874 Rodriguez, Marta, 451-452 Rogers, Richard, 1298 Rojek, Chris, 171 Roloff, Leland, 1224-1225 romance novels, 312 Romanticism, space and, 1667-1668 Romer v. Evans, 1109 Rony, F. T., 460 Roosevelt, Franklin D., 1614-1616

root metaphor analysis, 1165 Rorty, Richard, 1385 Rosales, F. Arturo, 194

Rose, Nikolas, 950 Rosenfeld, Gavriel, 1406 Rostow, Walt W., 1359

1902

e«

INDEX

Rothberg, Michael, 1417

Rouch, Jean, 451 Roudinesco, Elizabeth, 1400 Rouse, Roger, 763

Rousseau, Jeans-Jacques, 241 Rove, Karl, 1332 RS (rhetorical studies), 1383-1385, 1493 RSAs (repressive state apparatuses), 306, 995

Ruberg, Bonnie, 673 Ruddick, Sara, $29, 544-546

Rude, Georges, 1517 Ruiz, Vickie, 193-194

A Rule of Property forBengal (Guha), 1509, 1527, 1529 ruling class Marx on, 983-984

Miliband on, 1123 rumor bombs, 1326

runaway production, movies and, 381 Runnymede Trust Commission, 1686-1688 Rushdie, Salman, 814, 816 Russwurm, John B., 1085

Ryan, James, 212 Ryan, Mary, 905 Rytmann, Héléne, 43

VOUUME

WP

VOLUME

3 PP

Pal ss72

VOLUME

2 IRE sea

Saussure, Ferdinand de, 46, 594-595, 652 Gramsci and, 114-115 on positivism, 1308

structuralism and, 1308-1309

theory of the sign of, 1385, 1385f Savat, David, 713 Saving Private Ryan, 1411, 1419 Scanlon, Thomas, 241

scapegoating, anti-Semitism as, 97-101 Scar Tissue (Ignatieff), 60, 64-65 Schechner, Richard, 1221, 1225 Schelling, Friedrich, 1710 schema L diagram, 1394-1395, 1394f Schiller, Dan, 1250, 1253 on big data, 1259-1260 Schiller, Herbert I., 394, 1239

on political economy of media, 1254 Schiwy, F., 455, 457-458 Schlag, Gabi, 1801

Schmitt, Carl, 724-725, 729, 731, 1183 Scholte, Jan Aart, 422n2 Schooling as a Ritual Performance (McLaren), 299 Schrag, Calvin, 619

Sabido, Miguel, 266

Schramm, Wilbur, 1359 Schrems, Max, 538 Schygulla, Hanna, 61

safe spaces mapping and, 968

science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), 508, $09

press freedom and, 953 Sagan, Dorion, 556

science technology studies (STS), 673, 1023

Said, Edward, 128, 888 Orientalism and, 476-477, 772, 814, 1129 on the Other, 1491 Saint Chrysostom, 94 Saldivar-Hull, Sonia, 783-784

Salinas, Raquel, 199 Salt of the Earth, 1751 Sampson, Robert, 1766 Sandel, Michael, 956

Sanders, Sarah, 182 Sandler, Adam, 1563 Sandoval, Chela, 557 Sanjinés, Ivan, 453 Sanjinés, Jorge, 447 Sanjuro, Kuwabatake, 434 Sarkar, Sumit, 1508 Sartre, Jean-Paul, 102

The Science of Logic (Hegel), 1641 Scott, James, 1517

Scottsboro Nine, 80

screen theory, 311 Scruton, Roger, 400

search engines, 137, 1259. See also Google as big data source, 145-146 The Searchers, 1586-1557 Searle, John, 896

SEC (Cultural Extension Service), 1196-1197 secondary emotions, 6 Second Life, 277, 667 The Second Sex (Beauvoir), 249-250, 624n6, 880-881, 1092

Second-Wave feminism, 251 securitization theory, 1797-1801

security. See also critical security studies ambiguity and, 1800-1801 big data and,-1803

Jameson on, 651-652 Sassen, Saskia, 1763

border, 1792-1793

The Satanic Verses (Rushdie), 814, 816

communication and, 1791-1792

satellites, surveillance and, 1694

danger and, 1790 framing visuality of, 1792

sati (widow sacrifice), 688-690

las

W179 =19is

circulability and, 1800

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2° PR, S73=1178

immediacy and, 1800 individual, 1796-1797 law and, 727

ontological, 1793 origins of, 1790 postmodernism and, 1796

INDEX

self-obsession, 1431 self-reflection, receptive listening and, 495-496 self-shock, 371

Selling the Free Market (Aune), 1750 Selzer, Jack, 1612, 1628 “Seminar on ‘The Purloined Letter” (Lacan),

1397-1400, 1398f, 1399f

R2P and, 1796 social construction of, 1791

Seminole Tribal Council, 1550, 1567

state, 1794-1795

semiotics

surveillance and, 1793

visuality, surveillance and, 1801-1802

visuality and, 1790-1803 Security, Territory, Population (Foucault), 956, 1072, 1742 security communities, 179S

Security Dialogue, 1799 seeding politics, Haraway and, 567-569 Seigworth, Greg, 160, 1412

cultural studies and, 309 Martin-Barbero and, 849 sensation

art and, 8-9 Hawhee on, 1300 Massumi on, 162

posthumanism and, 1300 sense, Deleuze on, 704—705

selective tradition, 1533-1534

SenseLab, 155

self. See also quantified self; subjectivity

senso commune, 108, 112-113

AD and absence of, 61-62, 66-67

sensus communis, 107-109

brain—mind—body and, 59, 72-73, 75 DME and, $30-S31 entrepreneurial, 913 hypermodernity and, 610-611

September 11, 2001, 1413 SESI (Social Services for Industry), 1196 set theory, 21, 27 Seventh Letter (Plato), 1016, 1291

loss of, S8—59, 75

sex. See also gender

memory and, 60-61

Butler on, 881-883

privacy and, 530-531, 535-536

CCS and, 305-316 conjunctural analysis of, 316

self-care, 1431 self-definition, Chicana feminism and, 197-198

self-esteem

of African Americans, unfavorable depictions and, 1480-1481

of Latinos, unfavorable depictions and, 1484 selfie culture civic illiteracy and, 1427-1429 consumption and, 1434 contradictions of, 1433-1435

feminist cultural studies and, 310-313

gender compared to, 312 performativity and, 312 sexbots, 540 artificial emotions and, 543 erotic love and, 544 gender and, 543, 546 good sex, complete sex and, 544-546 love and, 541-542

empowerment and, 1437-1438

therapeutic value of, 546

Kardashian and, 1435 narcissism and, 1427, 1431, 1433 neoliberalism and, 1431-1432 public pedagogy, manufactured identities and,

virtue ethics and, 543

1424-1438

rise of, 1431-1432 self-obsession and, 1431-1432

as site of struggle, 1437-1438 surveillance and, 1430, 1435-1436 time and, 1434 self-interest, in communication, 498-499

sexism

Chicana studies and, 196

Chicanismo and, 196 feminist cultural studies and, 311

video games and, 671 Sex Offender Tracker, 1699

sexual desire, mutuality of, 545 sexuality. See also homosexuality bodies and, 1613-1614 La Llorona and, 201

Selfish (Kardashian), 1435

Malintzin Tenépal and, 200

selfishness, individualism compared to, 616-617 self-memory system (SMS), 60

Warner on, 1056-1057, 1060-1061 Women’s Movement and, 1089

1903

1904

+

INDEX

VOLUME

LRP:

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1903

15s72

VOLUME

2) PP. S73SUL7s

shame, Warner on homosexuality and, 1061, 1063

journalism opposed to, 1084-1085

Shame and Its Sisters (Kosofsky Sedgwick and Frank, A.), 6-7

movement to abolish, 1084-1089 social movement media and, 1650-165] societies opposing, 1085-1086 surveillance and, 1696 time and, 631

Shapiro, MichaelJ.,1799

Sharma, Aradhana, 1816

Shary, Timothy, $8 Shaw, Adrienne, 671 Sheridan, Thomas, 1222 Shils, Edward, 1019

Shocking and Awful, 1655 Shome, Raka, 208-209, 258 Shore, John, 1510

short-term adaptation, 371-372 Shouting Secrets, 1564 Showalter, Elaine, 1281 Shugart, Helene, 1617-1618 Shuler, Sherianne, 252 Siegelaub, S., 1240 Sierra Club, 1104 the sign, Saussure’s theory of, 1385

The Signature of All Things (Agamben), 722 the signifier

Underground Railroad and, 1089 women opposed to, 1087-1088 Sloan, Thomas, 1612 Sloop, John, 1078

on bodies and sexuality, 1613-1614 Sloterdijk, Peter, 406, 417-418, 1633 Slow Food movement, 324

Small Acts (Gilroy), 1193 small media, 1647 small-scale media, 1647-1648 Smidt, Sandra, 1203 Smith, Adam, 498

labor theory of, 911-912 on moral philosophy, 1237 political economy and, 1237-1238 Smith, Craig, 619

arbitrariness of, 1639

Smith, Lillian, 352

empty, 594, 596, 604 psychoanalysis and, 1385, 1388-1389, 1391, 1399-1400

Smith, Michael Peter, 763 Smith, Sharon, 254 Smoke Signals, 1556, 1564

silent films, Native American depictions in, 1554-1556

SMS (self-memory system), 60

Silent Spring (Carson), 1104

Smythe, Dallas, 1239, 1261 audience commodity theory of, 1262 on political economy of communication, 1254 SNCC (Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee), 81 Snopes, 1325

Silko, Leslie, 1551 Silk Road, 432-434

Silverman, Kaja, 1379-1380 Simmel, Georg, 1333, 1334, 1763 Simons, Herbert, 1379 Simonsen, Peter, 73

Snowden, Edward, 436, 538, 1660

simple notification services (SNSs), 1257

SNSs (simple notification services), 1257

Simpson, Tim, 1765

Snyder, Dan, 1566, 1$67 social anarchism, 1239 social being, as determining consciousness in Marxism,

The Sims, 671

The Simulation ofSurveillance (Bogard), 1702 Singer, Peter, 241

singularity, of events, 159 A Singular Modernity (Jameson), 660 Sioux Ghost Dance, 1554

SIR (Society for Individual Rights), 1108 SIU (Southern Illinois University), 298-299 Skinner, Quentin, 1435 Slack, Jennifer, 713 slacktivism, 1370 Slater, Philip, 614 slavery Du Bois on, 347-348 gender and, 82

human rights and, 332

981-982 social change collective action, connective action and, 1372 culture and, 994 power, development communication and, 1357-1360 technological determinism and, 1541 social culture, 1533 social drama, 1225, 1228 social emotions. See secondary emotions social engagement Martin-Barbero and, 841

mobile privatization and, 1544 principles of, 1204 social freedoms, liberalism and, 937

VOLUME

1 PP) 1—572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. $73=1178

INDEX

social imaginary, Habermas on, 1441

subversive, small-scale analogue media and,

social inequalities, space and, 1354-1355

1649-1656 subversive novels and, 1649-1650 television and, 1654-1655 tunnels and, 1652

socialism Gramsci and, 986-987 Haraway and, $53 totalitarianism and, 944

Socialist Party of the National Left (PSIN), 589 social justice

-e«

Zapatista uprising and, 1657-1658 social movements. See also activism; labor movements;

resistance movements

Hardt and Negri on, 1029

affect, Internet and, 1372-1373

as process in CCP, 289-291, 296

AIM and, 1558, 1566 alternative media and, 1366-1367 antislavery, 1084-1089, 1111 Battle in Seattle, WTO and, 1368-1369, 1658 body rhetoric and, 1110 Civil Rights movement, 1083, 1093-1098, 1111

truth and, 471 The Social Life of Things (Appadurai), 13S

social media alternative organizational culture and, 39 celebrity humanitarianism and, 337

communication ethics in, 234-235

Corbyn and, 173 CPs and, 179-182, 183 critical audience studies and, 275

collective action, connective action and, 1372 communication studies and, 1365-1367, 1752

critical insights on Internet and, 1371-1373

culture jamming and, 1367

cyberculture and, 412-413

DACA and, 1605-1606

digital labor and, 1261-1262

definition of, 1083-1084, 1595-1596, 1648

foodie culture and, 326-327

Eka Nari Sanghathan and, 1587-1589 environmental justice, 1104-1106, 1602

hashtag activism and, 1374 mobile privatization and, 1544 personal information on, 1430 privacy and, 1430

feminism and, 1596 as fictions, 1599-1601, 1607-1608

rise of, 12S7-12S8 social movements and, 1600-1601

friction and, 1604

Social Movement 2.0, 1605-1606, 1608 social movement media

abolitionist movement, slavery and, 1650-1651 antiwar movement and, 1651

Arab Spring and, 1657-1659 authoritarianism and, 1656 Battle in Seattle, WTO and, 1658 in Brazil, 1662

Catholic hierarchy and, 1649 definition of, 1648 digital media and, 1656-1659 fax machines and, 1655 guerrilla video-making and, 1654 IMC and, 1658 KKK and, 1656 mainstream media and, 1660-1661 media activism and, 1646-1662

movies and, 1652, 1654 Nazism and, 1655-1656

Occupy Wall Street and, 1657 paintings and, 1651 photography and, 1652

everyday resistance and, 1604

Foucault on revolutionary, 1075-1076 functionalist theory of, 1598-1599 future research directions on, 1605-1607

hegemony and, 119 historiography of, 1109-1110 humanism and, 1606 identity and, 1366, 1604-1605

Internet and 21st century, 1109 Laclau and Mouffe on new, 1110 LGBT equality, 1106-1109, 1418, 1600, 1603 materialist rhetoric and, 1007 McGee, M. C., on, 1598, 1602

memory and, 1600 #MeToo movement and, 925, 1600

network theory and, 1603 new, 1595, 1602 non-Western, 1605-1606 noun version of, 1596-1601, 1608 online activism, characteristics of, 1369-1371

online activism, identity, power and, 1373-1375 online activism, rise of, 1367-1369

politics and study of, 1594 primary sources on, 1110-1112

radio and, 1652-1654

progressive, Internet and,

repression and, 1655-1656

public memory and, 1417-1419

136-1375

1905

1906

+

INDEX

WAOMULOB MME, vk AONE Iles 7/74 VOLUME

social movements (Continued)

Radical Monarchs and, 1607 resource mobilization of, 1596-1597 rhetoric and, 1594-1608, 1746 rhetoric as art and, 1606-1607

VOLUME

PPRiS7e sans

3 PP. 1179-1918

soft power globalization and, 766-769, 775-776

hegemony and, 808

Soja, E., 1667, 1670, 1672 Solanas, F., 446-447, 451

types of, 1083-1084 University of Missouri protests, 2015, 1606-1607 in US, 1800 to present, 1083-1112

Soldier Blue, 1558 solidarity alternative organizational culture and, 40 Mohanty’s conception of, 189 A Song for Martin, 65-66, 75 Sony Playstation, 666 SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act), 430

verb version of, 1601-1605, 1608

Sources of the Self (Taylor, C.), 608

Women’s March, 2017, 1599-1600, 1606

South Africa apartheid and alternative media in, 1367, 1661 journalism in colonial, UK and, 214

scale and longevity of, 1648-1649 social media and, 1600-1601

symbols, activism and, 1366 tactics of, 1083-1084, 1598, 1603

Women’s Movement, 1083, 1089-1093, L11-1112

Zapatista uprising and, 1368, 1657-1658 social networking, 137, 140-142

social praxis, 1237-1238 development communication for transformative, 1586-1589

political economy and, 1256 social reproduction, $3 social reproduction theory, motherhood and, 254-255 social robots artificial emotions and, 543 carebots and, 540 communication and, 539-540

DME and, 539-546 erotic love and, 544 integrative, 540

love and, 541-542 sexbots and, 540-543 therapeutic use of, 542, 546 warbots and, 540, $43 social sciences culture and, 390-391 quantitative, 148

Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), 480 Social Services for Industry (SESI), 1196 social space, 113-114 social structures, in CCA, 751-752 social time, 113

social totality, political economy and, 1255 social workers, Negri on, 1035

societal security, 1795-1796 Society for Conservation Biology, $81

Society for Individual Rights (SIR), 1108 sociology, Anzaldua and, 789 sociomaterial turn, media technologies and, 1022-1024 Socrates, $44, 721, 1076, 1219

Sofia, Zoe, 711

#RMEF campaign in, 1374

Truth and Reconciliation Commission in, 1415 South Asia, de-Westernizaton, decolonization and, 473-474

South Asian Subaltern Studies group, 684-685 Southeast Asia development communication in, 475 de-Westernization, decolonization and, 474-475 Southern Christian Leadership Conference, 1105

Southern Illinois University (SIU), 298-299 South Korea media of, in Japan, 773

soft power of, 767 sovereignty Agamben on, 723-724 ban and, 724 exceptions to, 725 Hardt and Negri on, 1040-1041 law and, 723, 737-738 media and, 731

nationality and, 728-729 nation and, 1118 post-national, 1041

powerlessness of, 729-730 visual, Native American media depictions and, 1563-1565 Soviet Union materialism in, 1713-1719

Negri in, 1034 Sowards, Stacey, 195, 788 space agential realism and, 1674-1675 authenticity and, 972 autoethnography and, 1673 capitalism, nature and, 1668 colonialism and, 634 in communication studies, 1664-1678

—

VOLUME

1 PP, 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. 573-1178

contemporary questions in studies on, 974-975 control and, 1349-1350 counterspaces, resistance movements and, 967

cracks and connections in, 1664-1667 culture and, 1209

INDEX

securitization theory and, 1798 Women's Movement and, 1089 speech act theory, 896

speech communication, 1621 Speech Communication Association, 231 “speech hygiene,” 231

gay marriage and, 1062 heterotopias and, 970

Speed, Shannon, 460-461 Spence, L., 459-460

Jameson on, 657

Spencer, Herbert, 1555

Kant on, 629-630

Spinoza, Baruch, 5, 1042 on affect, 1-2, 11

materialism and, 1675-1676 materialist rhetoric and, 1010, 1671

Althusser and, 54 idealism and, 1708

modernity and, 1668-1669 morality and, 1667

materialism and, 1708-1709 Negri and, 1036

movement and, 968, 974

Spinoza: The Savage Anomaly (Negri), 1036

omnitopias and, 970-971 participation and, 1674 phenomenology and, 1672-1673 place compared to, 967-969 positionality and, 1674

Spirit, Hegel on, 1523, 1528, 1530

post-structuralism and, 1670

proper, 1667 public sphere and, 1443 queer, 1062-1063

race and, 630-632 recognition, time and, 633-634

relational theory of, 971-972 rhetoric and, 1676-1677 Romanticism and, 1667-1668 social inequalities and, 1354-1355

social production of, 1672 spatial turn and constitution of, 966-967

subjectivity and, 1672 surveillance and public, 1693-1702 temporalities and, 971 urban communication and, 1763-1764 US frontier and, 1669-1670

Western conceptions of, 632 whiteness, imperialism and, 1677-1678

Spacewar!, 666 Span, Paula, 61 spatialization, in political economy of media technologies, 1243 spatial turn, 966-967 speech abusive compared to offensive, 502 bodies and, 1621-1623 control of bodies and, 1622-1623 effective, 1621-1622

Lacan's theory of, 1386

1907

public, 1057-1058

definition of, 967 Foucault on, 970, 1701

mapping and studies of, 965-976

e-

Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty, 314 biography of, 677 communication studies and, 677-696 deconstruction and, 679-680 on Derrida, 679-680

Eagleton on, 681 feminism and, 681-683 on Foucault and Deleuze, 687-688 on French feminism, 682-683

on identity politics, 677-678 on Jane Eyre and feminism, 681-682 legacy of, 677-678, 696 on motherhood, 694

on population control in Global South, 694-695 recognition of, 69S

on Subaltern Studies and gender, 688-691 Subaltern Studies intervention of, 685-687 on suicides in India, 688-691 translation and, 692-693 on transnational literacy, 693-695 writing style of, 680-681 sports nationalism and, 1496 Native American mascots in, 1485, 1550, 1565-1568

public memory and, 1419-1420 Spry, Tami, 1229-1230 Squire, Lorene, 214

Squires, Chatherine, 907, 1446

SSCI (Social Sciences Citation Index), 480 Stacey, Judith, 254 Stagecoach, 1557

The Stages ofEconomic Growth (Rostow), 1359 stakeholder responsibility, alternative organizational culture and, 40

1908

+«

INDEX

Stalin, Joseph, 1714 Stam, R., 459-460 Stamp Act, US, 1054-1055

standpoint theory Du Bois and, 347

feminism and, 189

VOLUME

TY PRI t=s72

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLRUME

Stora, Benjamin, 219 Storey,J.,1267-1268 Stormer, Nathan, 1414-1415 on language and gender, 1780-1781 on space and materialism, 1675-1676

Storming Heaven (Wright), 1047

Stanton, Elizabeth Cady, 1090

storytelling hypermodernity and, 610-611

STAR TV, 383

Pr s73

Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), 430

Stand Your Ground Laws, 1698

Starr, Paul, 956

QP

as narrative imagination, 607 strategic action, communicative action compared to,

state

capitalism, power and, 1123

896-897

control and, 1355

strategic whiteness, 1495

embodied control and, 1356

Straw, Jack, 1686 Street, John, 170, 171, 182

ethical, Hegel on, 1527-1528

Gramsci on role of, 117 Hall, S., on, 1685-1686

instrumentalist theory of, 1123 media activism reforming media policies of, 1659-1660 Miliband-Poulantzas debates on power

strength adaptive personality and, 366 ethnic group, 364-365 stress, cross-cultural adaptation and, 361-362

stress-adaptation- growth dynamic, 361-362, 362f strikes, of labor movements, 1102-1104

mobility of subjects and, 1356 nation compared to, 1118

Stroud, Scott R., 619 Stroupe, Craig, 1782 structural causality, Althusser on, 1716

power compared to apparatus of, 1125S

structuralism, 8. See also post-structuralism

and, 1122-1125

public sphere and authority of, 1444 structuralist theory of, 1123 surveillance, 1355-1356, 1660

center in, 1310-1312

in communication studies, Althusser and, 43-54, 825-826

State, Stage, Language (Rodriguez, J. C.), 873-874 The State in Capitalist Society (Poulantzas), 1123 Statement of Aims of the Mont Pelerin Society, 1136

Foucault and, 1309 in France, 1715-1716 future directions for, 52-54

state of exception, 727-729, 733, 735-736

ideology and, 825-826, 833-834

state security, 1794-1795

language and, 1309 origins of, 1308

States ofEmergency (Lumley), 1047 state violence, human rights and, 342 Staying with the Trouble (Haraway), 554, 562, 564 Stearney, Lynn, 252 Stedman Jones, Gareth, 1275 Steele, Brent, 1793 Steinem, Gloria, 1092 Stella Artois, 1812-1813

STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), 508, 509 Stenger, Isabelle, 163

Sterling, Bruce, 439 Stewart, Jon, 172

overdetermination, Althusser and, 48-51 overview of, 46-48 post-structuralism arising from, 1308-1310 Saussure and, 1308-1309

state theory of, 1123 structural linguistics, 114

The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere (Habermas), 900, 902-907, 1440-1441, 1447-1450

structuration, in political economy of media technologies, 1243-1245 structuration theory, 1168-1169

Stewart, Kathleen, 1209 Stewart, Maria, 1090

structure

Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1426

health as interplays of culture, agency, and, 753 power, materiality and, 1345-1350 Struthers, James, 67 STS (science technology studies), 673, 1023

Still Alice, 64, 66

Stonewall uprising, 1107 Stop-and-Frisk policies, 1698

of feeling, Williams, R., on, 1533, 1538

iis

VOEUVE

IESE

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

Pe il=572)

VOBUME

2 PPS 73—1178

Stuckey, Mary, 1413 Student Homophile League, 1107 Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee

(SNCC), 81 Students For A Democratic Society, 1084, 1112

INDEX

-

control and, 712, 1355-1356 drones and, 1696

facial recognition software and, 1695 feminism and, 1702

Sturken, Marita, 1413

interactivity and, promise and peril of, 1699-1700 literature on, 1700-1702

subaltern counterpublics, 1450

mobility and, 1696-1698

Subaltern Studies, 473-474

personal data and, 537-538

archives and, 691-692 communication and, 696

policing homeless people and, 1698 policing people of color and, 1696

consciousness and, 686 exploitation and, 1126

popular culture and, 1700 post-Cold War checkpoints and, 1697-1698

gender and, 688-691

public space and, 1693-1702 QS and, S16

globalization and, 692 Gramsci and, 683-684 Guha and, 1508-1509

satellites and, 1694

South Asian group, 684-685

security and, 1793 selfie culture and, 1430, 1435-1436 slavery and, 1696

nation and identity in, 1126-1127 Spivak’s intervention in, 68S—687

state, 1355-1356, 1660

suicides in India and, 688-691

technology and, 1693-1694

transnationalism and, 1497-1498

television for, 710

Subaltern Studies series (Guha), 1515S, 1526, 1528-1529 subcultures, 1681-1682

subjectivity in CCP, 292 critical audience studies and, 270, 273 dementia and, 58 development communication and, 1584-1585 of events, 25-26

group, AD and, 73 Negri on class and, 1035 neuroscience and, 59 parrhesia and, 1076

space and, 1672 uncritical, listening and, 495

subjects, mobility of, 1356

in US daily life, 1429-1430 visuality, security and, 1801-1802 surveillance capitalism, 947

Surveiller et punir (Foucault), 856 survival, political economy and, 1236-1237

Sweet Tea (Johnson, E. P.), 1233 Swenson, Kristin, 1045-1046 on ASA, 1144 Swinnen, Aagje, 73-74

symbolic identification, 1387 symbolic order, Zizek on, 1636-1638 symbolic register of unconscious, 1393-1396, 1394f symbols activism and, 1366 Burke, K., on, 1777, 1780

subjugated groups, Guattari, 1588 subjugated knowledge, Foucault on, 1220

Jezebel as, 192

The Sublime Object of Ideology (Zizek), 1633

visual rhetoric and, 1784

of US flag, Douglass on, 985

sublime rhetoric, 1291-1292 subversive novels, 1649-1650

Synk, Daniel, 50 systematically distorted communication, 903

The Suffragist, 1091

systems, lifeworld compared to, 897

suicides, in India, 688-691

Sullins, John, $43-544 Sunkel, Guillermo, 848 supervision, Warner on principle of, 1054 surveillance amateurs and, 1697 authoritarianism and, 1436

camera phones and, 1695 CCTV and, 1694-1695, 1702 citizens monitoring policing and, 1698-1699

tablets, 1543 Tadolla, Carmen, 200 Tagore, Rabindranath, 1522, 1525S Taintor, Anne, 1781 Tavani, Herman, 534

taxation, in colonial India, 1510 taxpayers, neoliberalism and, 1139

Taylor, Bryan, 1801 Taylor, Charles, 608

1909

1910

-«

INDEX

Taylor, Diana, 1221, 1231

Taylor, Frederick, 919

Taylor, Nicholas, 670 Taylor, T. L., 670-671, 673 techno-curative solutions, to PT, 1336-1337 technofeminism, 1024 technoliberation, 422-423 technological determinism, 1540-1542

technology. See also media technologies colonialism and, 207 culture industries and, 380

cyborgs and, 554-555 development communication and, 1361 disembodying nature of, 561 disposal of, 1361-1362 environmental communication and, S85

VOTIVE

eee

L572)

NiO UI

GENS ALLO nlpleiasleoalis

VOLUME

of events, 26

space and, 971 Tenayuca, Emma, 194 Tennis, 666 Teoria e historia de la produccién ideolégica (Rodriguez, J.C.), 856 Terms ofService (ToS), 538 Terranova, Tiziana, 385, 1045

Terrill, Robert, 1412 territorialization, cultural, 764 territory, globalization and, 415 terror, affect and, 3-4 terrorism, 739

Appadurai on global, 130-131 linguistic, writing in borderlands and, 780--781 Tetris, 668

Haraway on, 554-555

texts

labor and production of, 1361

cultural studies and, 309-310 feminist cultural studies and, 311 McGee, M. C,, on, 1003 video games as, 672-673 textualism, 8 thanatopolitics, 737 Thatcher, Margaret, 1139-1140, 1425 Thatcherism Hall, S., on, 1680, 1700 Plan X and, 1545-1546

PT, attention economy and, 1329-1330 raw materials and, 1361

surveillance and, 1693-1694 transhumanism and, 1298-1299 urban communication, media and, 1768-1769 technoscapes, 125 Telecommunications and the City (Marvin and Graham), 1769

telegraph, 207, 209-210, 215-216 Telegraphic Imperialism (Choudhury), 209 telenovelas, Martin-Barbero on, 846-847, 851-852 teleological ethics, 241 television

African American portrayals on, quality of, 1479-1480 African American portrayals on, quantity of, 1478-1479

Asian Americans depictions on, 1484

Ps 7oe irs

temporality. See also time

globalization and, 131

of power and control, 1360-1362

22

theft of enjoyment, anti-Semitism and, 1638-1639 Theological-Political Treatise (Spinoza), 54 Theory, Culture and Society, 601

Theory and History (Rodriguez, J. C.), 872 The Theory of Communicative Action (Habermas), 895-898, 1448

Theory of Ideological Production (Rodriguez, J. C.), 860

social movement media and, 1654-1655

theory of justice, 241 Theory ofMoral Sentiments (Smith, A.), 1237 theory of the sign, Saussure and, 1385, 1385f Theory of the Subject (Badiou), 19, 25 therapeutic forgetting, 1415 There Ain't No Black in the Union Jack (Gilroy), 1185, 1192 there is no alternative (TINA), 1538 There Was a Woman (Perez, D. R.), 201 Theses on Feuerbach (Marx), 823 They Live, 1634

for surveillance, 710 technological determinism and, 1540-1542

Thiel, Peter, 440 thing-power, 11>

culture industries and, 377-378 foodie culture and, 325-326

Internet and, 1258

Latinos portrayed on, quality of, 1482 Latinos portrayed on, quantity of, 1481-1482

mobile privatization and, 1543 Native American depictions in, 1485, 1562-1563 “rich Indian” stereotype and, 1563

Television (Williams, R.), 1544-1546 Televisibn y melodrama (Martin-Barbero), 847, 851-852 Tell, David, 1079-1080

Tell Them Willie Boy Is Here, 1SS8-1559 telos, 1491-1492

thinking, political dimension of, 733-734 “thinking-feeling,’ Massumi on, 162-163 third cinema, 446-450, 452, 459-460

Thirdspace (Soja), 1670, 1672 third wave capitalism, 913

VOLUME

1 PP. 1=572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. $73-1178

INDEX

Third World feminism, 191

Holocaust and, 729

This Bridge Called My Back (Moraga and Anzalduta), 203, 783

objectives of, 727 socialism and, 944

This May Be the Last Time, 1565

totality, 1731

THOA (Andean Oral History Workshop), 452

total motherhood, 252-253, 255-256 tourism, poverty, 1156

Thomas, Deborah, 630-631

e-

1911

Thompson, E. P., 987, 1267-1268, 1508, 1543

Toward a Rational Society (Habermas), 1448

on popular culture, 1271-1272 Thompson, John, 17S

“Toward a Third Cinema” (Solanas and Getino), 446-447

Thornton, Davi Johnson, 256

Townsend, Peter, 70

thought

toxic tours, 1106

Deleuze on, 701-703 Foucault on, 1068 materialism in communication and, 1705-1723

political dimension of, 733-734

Thought in the Act (Manning and Massumi), 15S-156 A Thousand Plateaus (Deleuze and Guattari), 698-699,

707, 715

Towards 2000 (Williams, R.), 1545-1546

Toxic Wastes and Race at Twenty, 1987-2007, 1105

Toxic Wastes and Race in the United States, 1105 Traber, Michael, 242, 245 Trachtenberg, Joshua, 102 tradition, selective, 1$33-1534 transference, psychoanalysis and, 1380-1381, 1388-1389 Transferencia de Medios Audiovisuales (TMA), 455

3D printable guns, 434-435 Thrift, Nigel, 10

transformation, receptive listening and, 496-497

Thucidides, 808

transhumanism, posthumanism compared to, 1298-1299

thumos, 1290-1291

transition shock, 371

The Ticklish Subject (Zizek), 1643

transitive causality, S1-S2 translability, 109-111 translation

Till, Emmett Louis, 624n6

Tilly, Charles, 1594 time

class and, 1426-1427 Kant on, 630 race and, 631 recognition, space and, 633-634 selfie culture and, 1434

slavery and, 631 Western conceptions of, 630-631

Transgression as a Mode of Resistance (Foust), 1752

as culture, 692-693 feminism and, 695-696

Gramsci on politics and, 109-112 Malintzin Tenépal and, 200-201 Massumi’s work in, 155 politics of, 693 Spivak and, 692-693 universalism and, 891

Time and Narrative (Ricoeur), 660

transmedia, 274

Times Literary Supplement, 400 TINA (there is no alternative), 1538

The Transmission ofAffect (Brennan), 7 transnational corporations (TNCs), 118, 928

Ting-Toomey, Stella, 617-618

transnational feminism

TMA (Transferencia de Medios Audiovisuales), 455 TNCs (transnational corporations), 118, 928 Tocqueville, Alexis de, 616-617 Toffler, Alvin, 430 Tomkins, Silvan S.

on primary affects, 3-6 TOMS Shoes, 1813

topos, 1292 Tor browser, 538 Torgerson, Douglas, 1453 Toronto School, media technologies and, 1021-1023

ToS (Terms of Service), 538 totalitarianism

Arendt on, 728-729, 737, 1437 control and, 1355

globalization and, 932 Mohanty and, 186-188 wage inequality and, 932-933 transnationalism capitalism and, 1496 critical audience studies and, 269-270 decolonization and, 1498 feminism and, 314, 1497 globalization compared to, 123-124, 763

postcolonialism and, 1498 race, nationalism and, 1490-1498 Subaltern Studies and, 1497-1498

transnational literacy, Spivak on, 693-695 transphobia, homonormativity and, 315 transversality, Guattari on, 1594n17

1912

+«

INDEX

ViOTIUIME

IOMe

VOLUME

3) PPS IN 79-19Ns

Ps ssi

ViOIUME

trauma, public memory and, 1413-1414 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, borderlands and, 779, 781 Trends of Economic Ideas (Honegger), 1134

as big data source, 143-145 China banning, 14S

Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire, 1103

literature on, 151 representativeness of, 143-144

Triece, Mary E., 833, 1006, 1272, 1749

2° RE s73 eis

gender and, 144

on women and labor movements, 1751 trope, symbolic register of unconscious and, 1395-1396

Trump and, 180-182 “Two Concepts of Liberty” (Berlin), 955-956

tropicalization, 1492 tropological organization, 1395-1396

Two Rode Together, 1557

The Trouble with Normal (Warner), 1052, 1060-1063

UAA (Urban Affairs Association), 1766 UAVs (unpiloted aerial vehicles), 554

The True and Only Heaven (Lasch), 614 Trujillo, Carla, 197, 199

Trump, Donald, 294, 1435 The Apprentice and, 179-180

celebrity endorsers and, 176 as celebrity turned politician, 179-180 Clinton, H., criticized by, 181 fake news and, 180, 182 postmodernism and, 608-609 Twitter and, 180-182 WWE and, 180

Zizek on, 1644 trust

active, 1335

communication ethics and, 234-235 emotional truth and, 1335-1336 media and, 1334

passive, 1335 PT and, 1333-1337 truth. See also post-truth communication ethics and, 234-235 emotional, trust and, 1335-1336

philosophy and, 20-21 postcolonialism and, 1126 social justice and, 471 Truth, Sojourner, 1090 Truth and Reconciliation Commission, South Africa, 1415 truthfulness, communication ethics and, 234-235 “truthiness,’ 1324 “truth markets,” 1324-1325 Tsvetkov, Egor, 513, S14f Tuan, Yi Fu, 967 Tunisia, 1658-1659 tunnels, social movement media and, 1652

Turkle, Sherry, 1544 Turner, Frederick Jackson, 1669 Turner, Victor, 1209, 1221, 1225, 1228

Turpin, Paul, 1753 Twilight saga, 1568 Twitch, 278 Twitch Plays Pokemon, 671 Twitter, 137

Ubuntuism, 475-476 uchi/soto, 475

U-curve adjustment, cross-cultural adaptation and, 372 UEW (United Farm Workers of America), 195 Ugly Betty, 1481, 1493 UK. See United Kingdom Ukamau Group, 447-448 Ulbricht, Ross, 432-434

UMAS (United Mexican American Students), 196 unconscious

communication and, 1591n1

imaginary register of, 1391-1393 Lacan on, 1385-1387, 1385f

psychoanalysis and, 1381-1382, 1385, 1386-1387 the Real register of, 1396-1397 symbolic register of, 1393-1396, 1394f uncritical subjectivity, listening and, 49S underground media, 1648 Underground Railroad, 1089 Understanding Media (McLuhan), 1022 “Under Western Eyes” (Mohanty), 186-188

“Under Western Eyes Revisited” (Mohanty), 189-190

UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization), 383-384, 482, 766

Unfit Bits, 514-515 Union Advocate, 1099 Union News, 1099 United 93, 1419

United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice, 1108

United Farm Workers of America (UFW),

195 United Kingdom (UK) Brexit and, 174 celebrity politics and cultural studies in, 169-183 censorship and colonialism of, in India, 215 Corbyn as CP1 in, 173-175

CP2s in, 176-177

creative industries and, 381-382

cultural studies in, 398-399, 806-807, 987, 993-994, 1020-1021, 1180-1187, 1274-1277

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2, PPS 573-1178

culture industries and, 379 Indian anticolonial mobilizations of media against, 216-217

journalism in South Africa and colonialism of, 214 Living Wage Campaign in, 925 popular culture and cultural studies in, 1274-1277

INDEX

social movements and resistance in, 1800 to present, 1083-1112

racism in, 1686-1688

Report on the Future ofaMulti-Ethnic Britain and,

voter turnout in, 1333-1334

soft power of, 767 telegraph and colonialism of, in India, 209, 215-216 voter turnout in, 1333-1334 United Mexican American Students (UMAS), 196 United Nations celebrity humanitarianism and, 337 Declaration of Human Rights and, 491 Habitat III, 1762

military humanitarianism and, 339 Millennium Development Goals and, 1811 R2P and, 340-342 on urbanization, 1761-1762 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural

Organization (UNESCO), 383-384, 482, 766 United States (US) anticolonialism mobilizations of media by indigenous peoples in, 217 antislavery movement in, 1084-1089, l111 celebrity politics and cultural studies in, 169-183 civic illiteracy in, 1427-1429 Civil Rights movement in, 1083, 1093-1098, 1111

Women’s Movement in, 1083, 1089-1093, W1-1112

United States Agency for International Development

(USAID), 225, 1360 “Unite the Right” rally, 1212-1213 universalism Badiou and, 19-27 Butler on politics of assembly and, 890-892 translation and, 891 universalization, intercultural identity and, 367 universal law, 240 University of Missouri protests, 2015, 1606-1607

unpiloted aerial vehicles (UAVs), 554 Urban Affairs Association (UAA), 1766 urban communication, 1761-1772 architecture and, 1764

augmented reality and, 1769 communicative city concept and, 1771-1772 communities and, 1765-1766

development of research on, 1763-1767 grants for, 1767-1768 Habitat III and, 1762

Constitution of, 10SS—105S6, 1087

interdisciplinary nature of, 1767, 1772

CP2s in, 175-176

journalism and, 1770 landscape and, 1763-1764 media, technology and, 1768-1769

creative industries and, 382 cultural studies in, 399-400, 1021 culture industries and, 379

Department of Homeland Security of, 1693 Douglass on symbolism of flag of, 985 environmental justice movement in, 1104-1106

frontier in, space and, 1669-1670 globalization and culture of, 762

Holocaust Memorial Museum of, 1410 labor movements in, 924-925, 1083,

1098-1104, 1112 LGBT equality movement in, 1106-1109 libertarianism, Internet and, 423-424 neoliberalism of, 1143-1144 Obama as CP1 in, 172

personal data in, $37—-538 political economy research in, 1239-1240 popular culture produced by, 1282 print technology development and colonialism in, 1053

1913

queer counterpublics and politics in, 1059 race and ethnicity in media of, 1477-1487

soft power of, 767 Stamp Act in, 1054-1085 surveillance in daily life in, 1429-1430

1686-1688

e

mobile phones and, 1769 photography and, 1769 scope of, 1767-1768 space and, 1763-1764 Urban Communication Foundation, 1766-1767, 1770-1771

urban health, 1766 urbanism, Garcfa Canclini on, 1156-1157 urbanization, 1761-1762 urban studies, 1766

urgency, affect and, 4 Uruguay, 1653, 1659-1660 US. See United States

USAID (United States Agency for International Development), 225, 1360

The Uses of Literacy (Hoggart), 921, 987 The Uses ofPleasure (Foucault), 1073-1074 usury, anti-Semitism and, 98-99

1914

«

INDEX

VOLUME 1 PP. 1-572 VOLUME

utilitarianism, 241 DME and, 527-528

ICE and, 524

privacy and, $39 utopianism, Jameson and, 658-661

VOLUME

27 PRS 7SSl178

3 PPIII79S10"s

subfields of, 673-674

textual analysis and, 672-673 on video game industry, 669-670 wordplay and, 672 Vietnam Veterans Memorial, 1409

Village Voice, 400 Vale, Lawrence, 1765 Valences of the Dialectic (Jameson), 660-661 Vallor, Shannon, 525, 529

VanderHaagen, Sara, 1407 The Vanishing American, 1555 The Vanishing West, 400 Vatican II Council, 95 Vautier, René, 216 veil of ignorance experiment, 237

Velazquez, Diego, 863 Verbeek, Peter-Paul, 525 Vernacular Voices (Hauser), 1449 Veyne, Paul, 1067 vibration, 8-9

Vico, Giambattista, 107-108

video game industry, 669-670 video games active engagement with, 276 casual, 669-670 communities around, 277 critical audience studies and, 276-278, 670-672

as cyberdramas, 667-668 eSports and, 278, 670 game culture and, 413 GamerGate and, 671 hardcore, 669-670

A Vindication of the Rights of Women (Wollstonecraft), 1090 violence Appadurai on globalization and, 131-134 caste-related, in India, 130 rhetoric and, 1625

VIPRS (Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response squads), 1698 Virgin of Guadalupe Anzaldua on, 784 in art, 198-199

Chicana feminism and, 196-199

in Christianity, 198 Ideal Chicana and, 196 myth of, 198 scholarly writing on, 199 Virno, Paolo, 1038, 1047 virtual affect and, 159 communities, 411-412, 416 Deleuze on, 157 Massumi on, 157

video games and, 277

virtual reality (VR), 674 virtue ethics, 239-240, $24

DME and, 528-530

history of, 666-667 indie games movement and, 670

moral wisdom and, 529 origin of, $28-S29

Latino characterizations in, 1483 modding and, 671 narrative elements in, 665, 668

privacy and, 539

noninteractive consumption of, 278 sexism and, 671 as texts, 672-673 virtual and, 277 women and, 667 on YouTube, 671

video game studies, 665-674 assemblage and, 673 audiences and, 276-278, 670-672

complexity of, 667-668 diversity and, 670-671 emergence of, 665-666 future and evolution of, 674

history of, 666-667 platform studies and, 672

sexbots and, 543

The Virtue of Selfishness (Rand, A.), 1435 visibility, as empowerment of women, 1813-1815 Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response squads (VIPRS), 1698 Visions of Poverty (Asen), 1753 visual arguments, 1783-1785 visual culture, 1784-1785 visuality colonialism and, 212

framing security of, 1792 securitization theory and, 1800-1801 security and, 1790-1803 surveillance, security and, 1801-1802 visual rhetoric, 1777-1788 Burke, K., and, 1786 Cloud on, 1778-1779

VOLUME

1 PP. 13572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. $73-1178

context and, 1784-1785

definitions of, 1778-1780

INDEX

-

1915

Hardt and Negri on command and control in,

feminism and, 1781 hybrid literacy and, 1782

1041-1042 warbots, 540, 543 Wark, McKenzie, 701

literature on, 1786-1787

Warner, Michael, 907

movies and, 1780

on common sense, 1058

Obama's Hope image and, 1782 public kisses and, 1778 public sphere and, 1780 rationality compared to emotion in, 1782-1783

communication studies and, 1052-1063 on consumption, 1059 on counterpublics, 1057, 1059-1060, 1452 education of, 1052

symbols and, 1784

on Franklin in public sphere, 1055

tension of words and images in, 1780-1782

on gay marriage, 1061-1062 on gender and sexuality, 1056-1057, 1060-1061 on good and bad sex, 1060 on homosexuality and shame, 1061, 1063 on “A Letter From a Freeholder” pamphlet, 1053-1054 The Letters of the Republic and, 1052-1056 on mass publicity, 10S8-1059 on principles of supervision and negativity, 1054 on print technology development, 1052-1053 on publics, 1451-1452

visual arguments and, 1783-1785 vividness and, 1783

visual sovereignty, Native American media depictions and, 1863-1565 visual turn, in CSS, 1797-1800

Vivian, Bradford, 1140, 1408, 1411, 1415 vividness, visual rhetoric and, 1783

Vogel, Lise, 254 voice, authenticity and, 1494 voice-of-color thesis, 1208

The Voice of Industry, 1099 Voice of the People and Industrial Worker, 1099, 1102

Volosinov, V.N., 106-107, 1735-1736 Voltaire, 1650

von Mises, Ludwig, 943-944 Voorhees, Gerald, 673

Publics and Counterpublics and, 1052, 1056-1060 on public speech, 1057-1058 on public sphere, 1053-1054, 1057 on queer counterpublics, 1059-1060 on queer spaces, 1062-1063 on queer theory, 1460-1461 on republicanism, 1053

voter turnout, 1333-1334

The Trouble with Normal and, 1052, 1060-1063

VR (virtual reality), 674 vulnerability, Butler on awareness of, 888

on US Constitution, 1055-1056

wage inequality, gender and, 932-933 Wagon Master, 1SS7 Wajcman, Judy, 1024 Wales, Jimmy, 440 Walker, David, 1086

Walker, Texas Ranger, 1562 walking, philosophy in ancient Greece and, 1293-1294 Wallace, Karl R., 612-613 Wallerstein, I., 459 Wall Street, 1432 Walrath, Dana, 71-72 Walt, Stephen, 1795 Waltz, Kenneth, 1795 Walzer, Arthur, 1079-1080 Wammiack Weber, B., 455

Wander, Philip, 832, 1004 on ideology, 1749 war borderlands and, 781 frames of, Butler on, 886-887

war of maneuver, 917

war of position, 917-918 War on Drugs, 90 Warren, John T., 285-292, 1210 Warren, Samuel, 534 Washington consensus, neoliberalism and, 945

Washington Post, 1325 Washington Redskins, 1566 Waskik, John F., 61

Watching Dallas (Ang), 1277 Watkins Harper, Frances Ellen, 1089

Watson, John B., 3 Watts, Eric King, 1

Wayne, John, 1556 WCTU (Women’s Christian Temperance Union), 346-347 W-curve adjustment, cross-cultural adaptation and, 372 We Act For Environmental Justice, 1105, 1112 The Wealth ofNations (Smith, A.), 911 wearables. See quantified self We Are the Union (Cloud), 1752

Weather Underground, 1112

1916

e¢

INDEX

Weaver, Richard, 1311] Web, as big data source, 142-143

Web 2.0, 412 cyberlibertarianism and, 430-431

Vi@RUME

Tae

VOMUME

SSP

Rito Pat

VOLUME

2 PP. 573-1178

79 tous

Whitehouse, Peter, 59, 71 whiteness. See also critical whiteness studies

autoethnographic performance script and, 1214-1216

CARED and, 1211

definition of, 430

communication studies and, 1494-1495

journalism and, 430-431

definition of, 1210

Weber, Cynthia, 1794 weeping woman, La Llorona, 201-202 Weil, Simone, 617 Wekker, Gloria, 354-355

literature on, approaches to, 1210 mobility into, 353-354 normativity and, 1348

Welcome to the Desert of the Real, 1634

privileges of, 1211 shifting constructions of, 121-1212

welfare capitalism, 73 welfare rights movement, 1083 well-being, 1592n2

Wells, Ida B., 84 critical whiteness studies and, 345-346 Welter, Barbara, 249 Wendt, Alexander, 1794 Wertham, F., 265 West, Cornel, 502, 1492 West, definition of, 469

performance of race, culture and, 1204-1216

space, imperialism and, 1677-1678 strategic, 1495 “Unite the Right” rally and, 1212-1213 Whiteness: The Communication of Social Identity

(Nakayama and Martin, J.), 1494-1495 white privilege, 352 white studies, 1210. See also critical whiteness studies

West, Kanye, 176

white universality, Western thought and, 628-629 white Western motherhood, critique of, 256-257 Whitson, Steve, 1299-1300

Western, definition of, 469 Western feminism, 187, 681

Whyte, William, 1764

WHO (World Health Organization), 335, 694

Western Journal of Communication, 835

widow sacrifice (sati), 688-690

Western Marxism, 652, 1720-1722 Westerns, 1939-1964, 1556-1557

Wiener, Norbert, 523-524, $29, 530 WikiLeaks, 39, 436, 1079

Western thought, white universality and, 628-629 Westin, Alan F., 534

Wikipedia, 137, 470 accessibility of, 139 as big data source, 138-140

West Virginia University (WVU), 298 Westwood, Sallie, 1547 Whale Rider, 450 Wharton, Theodore, 1555

What Animals Teach Us About Politics (Massumi), 163

What Do Pictures Want? (Mitchell, W. J. T.), 1782 What Is an Apparatus? (Agamben), 722 What is Philosophy? (Deleuze and Guattari), 8, 699 What Is To Be Done? (Lenin), 823 “What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?” (Douglass), 1412 When Presidents Lie (Alterman), 1323, 1328 When Romeo Was a Woman (Cushman), 1232

When the Devil Knocks (Craft), 1228 whistleblowing communication ethics and, 235

cyberlibertarianism and, 435-436

contributors to, 139-140 literature on, 151 Wilderson, Frank B., III, 1427 Wild West show, 1553 Williams, James, 701, 704-705 Williams, Michael C., 1799 Williams, Raymond, 573, 576-577, 801, 987, 1185

on advertising as art, 1537 childhood of, 1532 on class, 990

on communication compared to communications, 1835-1537 communication studies and, 1532-1548 on cultural materialism, 1538-1540 on culture, 990-991, 1532-1535 on democracy and communication, 1536

white abolitionist movement, 353

on hegemony, 806-807, 991, 1538-1547

White Fawn'’s Devotion, 1554

literature on, 1547 on materialism, 921-922

White Feminists and Contemporary Maternity (O’Brien Hallstein), 251 white guilt, Baldwin on, 348-349 Whitehead, Alfred North, 162

on mobile privatization, 1542-1545 on Plan X, 1545-1547 on selective tradition, 1533-1534

VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

VOLUME

3 PP. 1179-1918

VOLUME

2 PP. $73=1178

on structure offeeling, 1533, 1538 on technological determinism, 1540-1542 Williamson, Judith, 1281 Willis, Paul, 1537 will to power, Nietzsche on, 609

Wilson, Cody, 434-435 Winfrey, Oprah, 175-176 Winner, L., 438

Winseck, Dwayne, 1251, 1256-1257, 1263 Winslow, Luke, 1139

Wired, 440 Wisconsin Historical Society, 1112 Wiseman, Rob, 1291

WITCH (Women’s International Terrorist Conspiracy from Hell), 1092

INDEX

-

women’ rights, Douglass’s support of, 1085 Women's Trade Union League, 1102

Wood, Andrew, 970-971

wordplay, video game studies and, 672 work, identity, 923-924 workerism, 1031-1035, 10S1n1 Workers’ Struggle (Lucha Obrera), 589 Working Women’s Society of New York, 1102 work-life priorities, gender and, 642 World Bank, 225, 743 World Economic Forum, 416-417

World Health Organization (WHO), 335, 694

world history Indian history in, 1524-1525 philosophy of, 1522-1524

WJEC (World Journalism Education Council), 482 WLUML (Women Living under Muslim Law), 189

World Journalism Education Council (WJEC), 482

Wobblies, 1102, 1112

World of Warcraft, 667, 671 World Trade Organization (WTO), 743

Wolf, Gary, S07 Wolf, Joan, 255-256

Wolf, M. J. 276 Wollstonecraft, Mary, 1090 women. See also feminism; gender; motherhood

in AFL, 1101 in antislavery movement, 1087-1088 critical food studies and, 319

early critical audience studies and, 265 education for girls in Global South, 1814-1815

world ofthe third, 1577, 1580, 1593n8

Battle in Seattle and, 1368-1369, 1658

neoliberal rules of, 928 World War II media, influence and, 1358 neoliberalism before and after, 1135 World War II] Memorial, 1411

World Wide Web, as big data source, 142-143 World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), 180 The Wretched ofthe Earth (Fanon), 627

entrepreneurs, Development 2.0 and, 1809-1816

Wright, Steve, 1047 Wrinkles, 68-70

environmental justice and, 1106

writing. See also literature

Eka Nari Sanghathan and, 1587-1589

globalization, labor and, 931-934

in borderlands and linguistic terrorism, 780-781

in IWW, 1102

performative, autoethnography and, 1229-1231

labor movements and, 1100-1102, 1751

performative, queer studies and, 1464-1466 Plato on, 1016-1017

Milaap and, 1815-1816, 1817n3

psychic, 1585-1586 Spivak’s style of, 680-681

military humanitarianism and, 340 video games and, 667 visibility as empowerment of, 1813-1815 wage inequality and, 932-933

WTO. See World Trade Organization

Women’s Movement in US, 1083, 1089-1093

WVU (West Virginia University), 298

on Virgin of Guadalupe, 199

Women in Toxics Organizing conference, 1106 Women Living under Muslim Law (WLUML), 189 Women’s Christian Temperance Union (WCTU), 346-347 Women’s Emergency Brigade, 1103 women’s health activism, motherhood and, 250-251 Women’s International Terrorist Conspiracy from Hell (WITCH), 1092 Women’s Liberation Movement Print Culture, 1111

WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment), 180 Wyatt-Brown, Anne M., 64 Wynter, Sylvia, 631, 1189

Women’s March, 2017, 1599-1600, 1606 Women’s Movement, 1083, 1089-1093, 1111-1112

Yancy, George, 356

Women's Oppression Today (Barrett), 53

Young, James, 1409

Xbox, Microsoft, 666

xenophobia, 499 banal inter-nationalism and, 771 Yahoo!, 139, 146 Yates, Francis, 1407

1917

1918

+«

INDEX

VOLUME VOLUME

1 PP. 1-572

Vi@TSUIME

2eeP

Ba S:7o

E78

=i O18 REP allo

Young, RobertJ.C., 1187

communication studies and, 1631-1644

Young Lords, 1606 Your Face Is Big Data (Tsvetkov), $13, S14f

critiques, limitations and controversies of, 1642-1644 on dialectics, 1640-1642

YouTube, 1815 video games on, 671

on economic justice, 1741 on enjoyment and ideology, 1637-1640 on fantasy, 1392 on fantasy and ideology, 1633 Hegel’s dialectic theory and, 1640-1642

Zaccaria, Paola, 780 Zapatista uprising, in Mexico, 1368, 1657-1658 Zelizer, Barbie, 1406, 1414 Zemlicka, Kurt, 1396 Zenger, John Peter, 1054 zero-subject identity, borderlands and, 781-782 Zevenbergen, Bendert, 530

on ideology, 832, 919-920, 1631-1635 influences on, 1631-1632 Laclau on, 1643 The Pervert’s Guide to Ideology and, 1634-1635 on politics, 1639-1640

Zhang, Peter, 714 Zionism, 103

psychoanalysis and, 1635-1637 on symbolic order, 1636-1638

Butler on Judaism and, 888-890 Zionist Congress, 102 Zizek, Slavoj, 591, 1391

on Trump, 1644 zoe, 725-726 Zoellner, Anna, 386

Caesarism and, 1388

Zola, Emile, 102

on capitalism, 920

Zoonen, L. Van, 1324

on capitalism and the real, 1643

Zukin, Sharon, 1763

\\

Me

Ry ?"

Tn i 52

HM

The Oxford

623

encyclopedia of

.094 2019 vol. 3

communication and critical cultural studies

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication

OXFORD UNIVERSITY

PRESS

www.oup.com

Cover design: Martyn Schmoll