Suchergebnisse

Drawing on social science and communications theory, Gonzo Governance offers a new interpretation of presidential power that shifts focus to the media dynamics that surrounded Donald Trump. The former president's unhinged behavior and skilled media and digital manipulations changed the nature and process of significant governance at the federal and state levels, including denying election results and restricting voting opportunities. He went "Gonzo" - promoting himself without regard for conventional norms and practices - and blasted ideological fault lines into explosive political fragments, resulting in so much dissensus that numerous legislators would not recognize the newly elected President Biden, nor would they agree to take a potential life-saving vaccine because it had been associated with a politicized virus, COVID-19. Nurtured by media logic and a communications ecology that has wedded people to digital technologies and formats that govern the structure, grammar, form, expectations, and meanings of messages that can entertain, enlighten, and disinform, this form of governance alters the fundamental way that information is communicated. David L. Altheide emphasizes how these changes informed Donald Trump's electoral strategies as well as the insurrection attempt on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

Dedication -- Preface and acknowledgements -- Introduction -- The social reality of fear -- The mass media as a social institution -- Crime and terrorism -- Consuming terrorism -- Terrorism and the politics of fear -- Mediated interaction and the control narrative of the internet -- Propaganda of fear, the Iraq war, and the islamic state -- Constructing heroes : Pat Tillman and Chris Kyle -- Conclusion: beyond the politics of fear -- References -- Index -- About the author

ch. 1. Introduction -- ch. 2. The Eagleton and Watergate stories -- ch. 3. The Iranian hostage crisis, the news code, and mediated diplomacy -- ch. 4. Gonzo justice -- ch. 5. The missing children problem : a case study in media sensationalism -- ch. 6. The Gulf War and the military-media complex -- ch. 7. The Columbine shootings and terrorism -- ch. 8. The propaganda project and the Iraq War -- ch. 9. Consuming terrorism and the politics of fear -- ch. 10. Mediated fear : digital booty, WikiLeaks, ISIS, and ebola.

Edward Snowden was castigated by government officials and mainstream mass media as a traitor, spy, and international criminal when he released information about the National Security Agency (NSA) secret and massive surveillance of virtually all U.S. electronic communication. More than "wiretapping" is involved in the spin being put on Snowden's revelations. A lot of institutional duplicity has been revealed. The reaction of United States officials can be seen as a dramatic performance to demonstrate their moral resolve and complete power (even as Snowden challenged it) in order to dissuade other whistleblowers from following suite, as well as maintain authority and a discourse of fear about terrorism that justifies surveillance and other forms of social control.

The tragic events on April 20, 1999, in Littleton, Colorado, provide an opportunity to reflect on the nature and consequences of not just the shootings but also the meanings that were ascribed to various facets of those events, including an emergent definition of the "Columbine Syndrome." Based on a qualitative media analysis, this article examines part of the public presentations and news accounts of the "meanings of Columbine," with particular emphasis on violence, crime, youth, popular culture, surveillance, social control, and terrorism. Analysis suggests that Columbine was merged with terrorism as part of the broader frame of fear and national security.

The Iraq War was presented to the audiences through an exhaustive propaganda campaign. Analysis of news coverage suggests that this war was presented as a feature of war programming, or the selective use of claims makers/news sources within a normative pattern, which includes occasional detractors to give the appearance of debate. It is suggested that social scientists help discredit propaganda efforts in the future by articulating this narrative with journalists and audiences.