Suchergebnisse

Media, Ethnicity, and Electoral Conflicts in Kenya examines the interplay between the media, ethnicity, and electoral conflicts in Kenya. The author argues that politicians in Kenya and other deeply divided societies in Africa use mainstream and digital media to weaponize ethnicity as they invoke issues of belonging, inclusion, and exclusion.

"Cover" -- "Title" -- "Copyright" -- "Dedication" -- "Contents" -- "Acknowledgments" -- "Introduction" -- "1 Community Media and Identity in Ireland" -- "Identity, Community, and Geography" -- "Fundamental Constructs" -- "Identity, Community, Symbolic Construction, and Modernization" -- "2 Construction and Evolution of Irish Identity" -- "Irish Ireland: Constructing Identity From Geography and Culture" -- "Shifting Identity: Entering a Modern Age" -- "A Nation Once Again? Or at Last?" -- "Conclusion" -- "3 Irish Media and Irish Identity" -- "Media Articulations of Cultural Nationalism" -- "Government Policy and Media Control" -- "Opening Up: Media and Modernization" -- "Conclusion" -- "4 Contemporary Irish Media" -- "Three Systems Comparative Model" -- "Media System Overview" -- "Conclusion" -- "5 Community Media Theory and Project Methodology" -- "Community Ties Hypothesis" -- "Research Questions and Methodology" -- "6 Local Media Reflections of Identity" -- "No Place Like Home" -- ""All News Is Local"" -- "Game On!" -- "Conclusion" -- "7 Irish-Language Media and Identity" -- "From Cultural Nationalism to Community Expression" -- "Preserving "Who We Are"" -- "Language Integration" -- "Conclusion" -- "8 Local Focus in a Global Society" -- "Symbolic Construction of Identities" -- "Problems of the Business Model" -- "Conclusion" -- "Appendices" -- "Appendix A Quoted Interviewees" -- "Appendix B Content Reviews

People have worried for many years about the concentration of private power over the media, as evidenced by controversy over Federal Communication Commission rulings on broadcast ownership limits. The fear, it seems, is of a media mogul with a political agenda: a new William Randolph Hearst who could help start wars or run for political office using the power of the media. In the light of these concerns about freedom of speech, Eli Noam provides a comprehensive survey of media concentration in America, covering everything from the early media empire of Benjamin Franklin to the modern-day cellular phone industry.

"It was the French philosopher, Voltaire, who wrote: 'We owe respect to the living; to the dead we owe only truth.' In the case of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, the news media accomplished neither of Voltaire's admonitions. Confronted by Rwanda's horrors, Western news media for the most part turned away, then muddled the story when they did pay attention. And hate media organs in Rwanda--through their journalists, broadcasters and media executives--played an instrumental role in laying the groundwork for genocide, then actively participated in the extermination campaign. On the eve of the tenth anniversary of the Rwanda genocide, the School of Journalism and Communication at Carleton University in Ottawa hosted a one-day symposium on 13 March 2004, entitled 'The Media and the Rwanda Genocide.' The symposium examined in tandem the role of both the international media and Rwanda's domestic news organizations in the cataclysmic events of 1994. The Carleton symposium brought together for the first time an international collection of experts as well as some of the actors from the Rwandan drama; it also inspired this collection of papers. Many of the contributions found here are based on papers delivered at the Carleton event, but others were commissioned or have been reprinted here because of their valuable contribution to the debate. The symposium was made possible by generous contributions from the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) and the Government of Canada, through the Global Issues Bureau of the Foreign Affairs department and the Canadian International Development Agency. The IDRC has also played a key role in the publication of this collection; it continues to support Carleton's efforts to build a Media and Genocide Archive and to establish a partnership with the School of Journalism and Communication at the National University of Rwanda in Butare through a project called The Rwanda Initiative."--Excerpted from preface

"Recent discussion of democratization in Africa has focused primarily on the reform of formal state institutions: the public service, the judiciary, and the legislature. Similarly, both scholars and activists have shown interest in how associational life-and with it a civil society-might be enhanced in the countries of the African continent. Much less concern, however, has been directed to the communications media, although they form a vital part of this process. Media and Democracy in Africa provides the first comprehensive and up-to-date assessment of the role of the media in political change in sub-Saharan Africa. The central argument of the volume is that while the media may still be relatively weak compared to their positions in liberal democracies, they have come to play a much more important role than ever before since independence. Although they have not yet demonstrated sufficient effectiveness as public watchdogs and agenda setters, they have succeeded in creating new communicative spaces for people who have previously been intimidated or silent. Building on this the contributors argue that a different conceptualization of democratization than the mainstream currently uses may be necessary to capture the process in Africa where it is characterized by contestation rather than consolidation. This volume shows that the media scene in Africa is diverse. It stretches from the well-developed and technologically advanced situation in South Africa to the still fledgling media operations that are typical in sub-Saharan Africa. In these countries, print media as well as television and radio are just beginning to take their place in society and do so using simple and often outdated technology. The volume also examines how these growing outlets are supplemented by informal media, the so-called radio trottoir, or rumor mill whereby the autocratic and bureaucratic direction of public affairs are subject to private speculation and analysis. Media and Democracy in Africa is organized to provide a historical perspective on the evolution of the African media, placing the present in the context of the past, including both colonial and post-colonial experiences. It will be of interest to Africa area specialists, students of media and communications, political scientists and sociologists."--Provided by publisher.

""Contents""; ""Dedication""; ""Acknowledgements""; ""ONE: Putting the Media Under the Spotlight""; ""TWO: Media, Citizens, and Democracy""; ""THREE: Convergence and the High Waves of Media Change""; ""FOUR: Fragmentation Bombs: The New Media and the Erosion of Public Life""; ""FIVE: Chilled to the Bone: The Crisis of Public Broadcasting""; ""SIX: The Worst Assignment: Reporting National Unity""; ""SEVEN: Bringing You Hollywood: Private Broadcasters and the Public Interest""; ""EIGHT: The Winds of Right-Wing Change in Canadian Journalism""; ""NINE: Confronting the Future""

This book introduces an archaeological approach to the study of media - one that sifts through the evidence to learn how media were written about, used, designed, preserved, and sometimes discarded. Edited by Erkki Huhtamo and Jussi Parikka, with contributions from internationally prominent scholars from Europe, North America, and Japan, the essays help us understand how the media that predate today's interactive, digital forms were in their time contested, adopted and embedded in the everyday. Providing a broad overview of the many historical and theoretical facets of Media Archaeology as an emerging field, the book encourages discussion by presenting a full range of different voices. By revisiting 'old' or even 'dead' media, it provides a richer horizon for understanding 'new' media in their complex and often contradictory roles in contemporary society and culture.

"Demokratie und Massenmedien stellen in den gegenwärtigen europäischen Gesellschaften ein wichtiges Interaktionsfeld dar. Die Legitimation eines demokratischen Systems speist sich nicht nur aus der Beteiligung der Bürger an den regelmäßig stattfindenden Wahlen (sog. Input-Legitimation) und der unter ihnen vorhandenen Unterstützung des politischen Systems (Legitimation durch Identität). Sondern beides setzt zur Meinungsbildung wiederum die Möglichkeit eines regelmäßigen Zugangs zu Informationen über das politische Geschehen voraus (Legitimation durch Öffentlichkeit und Transparenz). Da aber die Bürger in modernen Demokratien nicht unmittelbar am politischen Prozess beteiligt sind, treten Journalisten als Vermittler von Information und damit auch als entscheidende Einflussnehmer in diesen Prozess der politischen Kommunikation ein. Ihnen obliegt die Funktion der Recherche, Selektion und Veröffentlichung relevanter politischer Informationen, für das sie ein professionelles Arbeitsfeld entwickelt haben. Im Hinblick auf die Europäische Union wird von unterschiedlicher Seite seit geraumer Zeit eine kommunikative Krisensituation diagnostiziert, was zuletzt an der Diskussion um die Ursachen der gescheiterten Verfassungsreferenden in Frankreich und den Niederlanden sichtbar wurde. Die erhobenen Vorwürfe sind mannigfaltig: Gerade über die Medien werde die EU innenpolitisch gedeutet, sie sei nach wie vor schwer kommunizierbar, da zu weit weg vom Alltag der Bürgerinnen und Bürger und noch immer sei es kaum möglich, politische Zuständigkeiten zuzurechnen. Wie aber sieht die Öffentlichkeitsorientierung der EU aus? Wie gestaltet sich der Informationszugang zu den EU-Institutionen und wie hat er sich im Laufe der zunehmenden politischen Integration entwickelt? Wie arbeiten die EU-Korrespondenten in Brüssel und wie schätzen sie die Institutionen im Hinblick auf ihre Zugänglichkeit ein? - Das Ziel des Beitrags ist die Analyse des professionellen Arbeitsfelds der EU-Korrespondenten in Brüssel unter der Prämisse von Transparenz und Öffentlichkeit als legitimatorischer Grundlage der EU. Dazu wird zunächst Skizze der Öffentlichkeitsstruktur und -aktivitäten der verschiedenen Institutionen sowie der Struktur des EU-Korrespondentencorps präsentiert. Darüber hinaus soll auf der Grundlage zahlreicher Interviews mit deutschen EU-Korrespondenten sowie Pressesprechern der jeweiligen Institutionen eine Einschätzung der gegenwärtigen Öffentlichkeitsorientierung der Europäischen Union und ihrer jeweiligen Institutionen gegeben werden." (Autorenreferat)

The article defines and analyzes political factors that at the end of the twentieth century exacerbated the problem of de-ideologization of the postcommunist society, as well as outlines the media discourse on the harmfulness of ideology. Among the reasons for the rhetoric about the need for de-ideologization is the need of society to get out of the negative (Soviet) continuity, accompanied by the confusion between totalitarianism and totality, violence with force.The author considers the controversial nature of confrontation between such concepts as human rights vs national rights, civil society vs national state in modern media discourse. He asserts that it is impossible to exercise the human right without realizing the national right, first of all the right to an independent state.The article also presents examples of argumentative simplification of the problem of de-ideologization in some liberal media, in particular Russian service of Radio Liberty, as well as attempts to deideologize some liberal-democratic ideologems and give them the features of normality and ideological neutrality. According to the article, the ideological uncertainty of the new independent states contributed to the strengthening of the effects of the revived Russian imperialism, in particular, its ideology of the Russian world. Russia has created powerful mediaresources for the establishment and spread this ideology in the post-communist space.The blocking of the development of the national-orientated ideology and the critique of national-centered media first led to ideological uncertainty, particularly in Ukrainian society (where well-organised elections offered voters a choice between technologies instead of ideologies), and then to the appearance of a false system of axiological protection against the corrupting influence of the West, initiated by Russian media and their neo-imperial discourse, which created the ground for the events of 2014, that is, for the annexation of the Crimea and the Russian-Ukrainian war in Donbas.Key words: ideology, mass media, deideologization, reideologization, liberalism. ; У статті визначено й проаналізовано політичні чинники, які наприкінці ХХ століття загострили проблему деідеологізації посткомуністичного суспільства, а також окреслено медійний дискурс про шкідливість ідеології. Серед причин риторики про необхідність деідеологізації названо потребу суспільства вийти з негативної (радянської) континуальності, що супроводжувалася переплутуванням тоталітаризму з тотальністю, а насилля з силою. Також наведені зразки аргументаційного спрощення проблеми деідеологізації у деяких ліберальних ЗМІ, зокрема «Радіо Свобода» й показано спроби деідеологізувати ідеологеми ліберально-демократичного спектру, надати їм рис нормальності та еволюційної закономірності.Ключові слова: ідеологія, ЗМІ, деідеологізація, реідеологізація, лібералізм.