Book contents
- Rethinking Media Research for Changing Societies
- Communication, Society and Politics
- Rethinking Media Research for Changing Societies
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figure
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Living in a Datafied World
- Part II Journalism in Times of Change
- Part III Media and Problems of Inclusion
- Part IV Engagement with and through Media
- Part V The Role of Scholars
- Other Books in the Series (continued from page ii)
- References
Part IV - Engagement with and through Media
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 September 2020
Book contents
- Rethinking Media Research for Changing Societies
- Communication, Society and Politics
- Rethinking Media Research for Changing Societies
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figure
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Living in a Datafied World
- Part II Journalism in Times of Change
- Part III Media and Problems of Inclusion
- Part IV Engagement with and through Media
- Part V The Role of Scholars
- Other Books in the Series (continued from page ii)
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Rethinking Media Research for Changing Societies , pp. 137 - 168Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
References
Althaus, Scott L. (2012). “What’s Good and Bad in Political Communication Research? Normative Standards for Evaluating Media and Citizen Performance.” In Semetko, H. A. and Scammell, M. (eds.), Sage Handbook of Political Communication (pp. 97–145). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Baker, C. Edwin (2002). Media, Markets, and Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bennett, W. Lance and Pfetsch, Barbara (2018). “Rethinking Political Communication in a Time of Disrupted Public Spheres.” Journal of Communication, 68, 243–253.Google Scholar
Brady, William J., Wills, Julian A., Jost, John T., et al. (2017). “Emotion Shapes the Diffusion of Moralized Content in Social Networks.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(28), 7313–7318.Google Scholar
Craft, Stephanie and Vos, Tim P. (2018). “Have You Heard?” Journalism Practice, 12(8), 966–975.Google Scholar
Dobson, Andrew (2014). Listening for Democracy: Recognition, Representation, Reconciliation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dovidio, John F., Love, Angelika, Schellhaas, Fabian M. H., and Hewstone, Miles (2017). “Reducing Intergroup Bias through Intergroup Contact: Twenty Years of Progress and Future Directions.” Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20, 606–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubiel, Helmut (1999). “Integration durch Konflikt?” In Friedrichs, J. and Jagodzinski, W. (eds.), Soziale Integration. Sonderheft 39 der Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie (pp. 132–143). Opladen, Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
Ferree, Myra Marx, Gamson, William Anthony, Rucht, Dieter, and Gerhards, Jürgen (2002). Shaping Abortion Discourse: Democracy and the Public Sphere in Germany and the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fraser, Nancy (1992). “Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy.” In Calhoun, C. (ed.) Habermas and the Public Sphere (pp. 109–142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Freelon, Deen (2015). “Discourse Architecture, Ideology, and Democratic Norms in Online Political Discussion.” New Media & Society, 17(5), 772–791.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen (1996). Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Katriel, Tamar (2004). Dialogic Moments: From Soul Talks to Talk Radio in Israeli Culture. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar
Mouffe, Chantal (2013). Agonistics: Thinking the World Politically. London: Verso Press.Google Scholar
Oliver, Mary Beth, Raney, Arthur A., Slater, Michael D., et al. (2018). “Self-Transcendent Media Experiences. Taking Meaningful Media to a Higher Level.” Journal of Communication, 68, 380–389.Google Scholar
Papacharissi, Zizi (2015). Affective Publics. Sentiment, Technology, and Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rinke, Eike Mark (2017). A Framework for Critical-Empiricist Research in Political Communication. Paper presented at the annual conference of the International Communication Association (ICA), May 24–28, San Diego. https://osf.io/8u5vb/Google Scholar
Rinke, Eike Mark and Moy, Patricia (2018). Political Correlates of Apophatic and Cataphatic Listening Styles. Paper presented the annual conference of the American Political Science Association (APSA), August 30–September 2, Boston. https://osf.io/aqk6d/Google Scholar
Schieferdecker, David and Wessler, Hartmut (2017). “Bridging Segregation Via Media Exposure? Ingroup Identification, Outgroup Distance and Low Direct Contact Reduce Outgroup Appearance in Media Repertoires.” Journal of Communication, 67(6), 993–1014.Google Scholar
Scudder, Mary F. (2016). “Beyond Empathy: Strategies and Ideals of Democratic Deliberation.” Polity, 48(4), 524–50.Google Scholar
Stellar, Jennifer E., Gordon, Amie M., Piff, Paul K., et al. (2017). “Self-Transcendent Emotions and Their Social Functions: Compassion, Gratitude, and Awe Bind Us to Others through Prosociality.” Emotion Review, 9(3), 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Aelst, Peter, Strömbäck, Jesper, Aalberg, Toril, et al. (2017). “Political Communication in a High-Choice Media Environment: A Challenge for Democracy?” Annals of the International Communication Association, 41(1), 3–27.Google Scholar
Wessler, Hartmut and Rinke, Eike Mark (2014). “Deliberative Performance of Television News in Three Types of Democracy: Insights from the U.S., Germany, and Russia.” Journal of Communication, 64(5), 827–851.Google Scholar
References
Anyon, Yolanda, Bender, Kimberly, Kennedy, Heather, and Dechants, Jonah (2018). “A Systematic Review of Youth Participatory Action Research (YPAR) in the United States: Methodologies, Youth Outcomes, and Future Directions.” Health Education & Behavior, 45(6), 865–78.Google Scholar
Boczkowski, Pablo, Michelstein, Eugenia, and Matassi, Mora (2017). “Incidental News: How Young People Consume News on Social Media.” Paper presented at the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, University of Hawaii at Manoa.Google Scholar
Bruns, Axel and Burgess, Jean E. (2011). “The Use of Twitter Hashtags in the Formation of Ad Hoc Publics.” In Proceedings of the 6th European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR) General Conference 2011. University of Iceland, Reykjavik. www.ecprnet.eu/conferences/general_conference/reykjavikGoogle Scholar
Cammarota, Julio and Fine, Michelle (2010). Revolutionizing Education: Youth Participatory Action Research in Motion. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Campbell, Ana (2018). “Independent Monitor Nick Mitchell Polices the Police.” Westword. www.westword.com/news/nick-mitchell-independent-monitor-in-denver-polices-the-police-10601350Google Scholar
Chouliaraki, Lilie (2013). “Re-mediation, Inter-mediation, Trans-mediation.” Journalism Studies, 14(2), 267–283.Google Scholar
Clark, Lynn Schofield (2016). “Participant or Zombie? Exploring the Limits of the Participatory Politics Framework through a Failed Media-Rich Youth Participatory Action Research (YPAR) Project.” The Information Society, 32(5), 343–353.Google Scholar
Clark, Lynn Schofield and Marchi, Regina (2017). Young People and the Future of News. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Lynn Schofield and Margaret, Thompson (2021). “Media-Rich Participatory Action Research: Employing Media Research to Foster Youth Voice.” In Handbook of Media and Communication, 2nd ed.Google Scholar
Dahlgren, Peter (2009). Media and Political Engagement: Citizens, Communication and Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Diemer, Matthew A. and Cheng-Hsien, Li. (2011). “Critical Consciousness Development and Political Participation among Marginalized Youth.” Child Development, 82(6), 1815–1833.Google Scholar
Edgerly, Stephanie, Thorson, Kjerstin, Bighash, Leila, and Hannah, Mark (2016). “Posting about Politics: Media as Resources for Political Expression on Facebook.” Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 13(2), 108–125.Google Scholar
Edgerly, Stephanie, Vraga, Emily K., Bode, Leticia, Thorson, Kjerstin, and Thorson, Esther (2018). “New Media, New Relationship to Participation? A Closer Look at Youth News Repertoires and Political Participation.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(1), 192–212.Google Scholar
Engle, Corey, Nisle, Stephanie, Kennedy, Heather, Jimenez, Carlos, and Clark, Lynn Schofield (2019). “Bringing Youth Voice to Policy: A Review of Bridge Project Youth and Interactions with Denver Decision-Makers.” Paper presented at the University of Denver Graduate Research Symposium.Google Scholar
Fals Borda, Orlando (2006). “Participatory (Action) Research in Social Theory: Origins and Challenges.” In Reason, Peter and Bradbury, Hilary (eds.), Handbook of Action Research: Concise Paperback Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 27–37.Google Scholar
France-Presse, Agence (2019). “‘The Climate Doesn’t Need Awards’: Greta Thunberg Declines Environmental Prize.” The Guardian, October 29, 2019.Google Scholar
Gomez, Esteban and Zyphers, Tribal (2018). This Is My Denver. www.du.edu/irise/ourinitiatives/artinsociety.htmlGoogle Scholar
Horton, Gianina (2019). “Annual Report, Office of the Independent Monitor.” Denver: UNESCO Child and Family Research Centre, National University of Ireland Galway.Google Scholar
Jimenez, Carlos, Clark, Lynn Schofield, Engle, Corey, and Kennedy, Heather (forthcoming). “The Art of Youthful Restraint: How Young People Take Control of Their Digital Story.”Google Scholar
Kligler-Vilenchik, Neta and Literat, Ioana (2018). “Distributed Creativity as Political Expression: Youth Responses to the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election in Online Affinity Networks.” Journal of Communication, 68(1), 75–97.Google Scholar
Levine, Peter (2008). “A Public Voice for Youth: The Audience Problem in Digital Media and Civic Education.” In Bennett, Lance (ed.), Civic Life Online: Learning How Digital Media Can Engage Youth (pp. 119–38). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Marcuse, Herbert (1964). One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society. New York: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Papacharissi, Zizi (2015). Affective Publics: Sentiment, Technology, and Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rosen, Jay (2006). “The People Formerly Known as the Audience.” HuffPost. www.huffpost.com/entry/the-people-formerly-known_1_b_24113.Google Scholar
Thevenin, Benjamin (2017). “Remix Politics: Political Remix as an Analytic Framework for Critical Media Literacy.” In De Abreu, Belinha S., Mihailidis, Paul, Alice, Y.L. Lee, Jad Melki, and Julian, McDougall (eds.), International Handbook of Media Literacy Education. New York: Routledge, 174–192.Google Scholar
Thorson, Kjerstin (2014). “Facing an Uncertain Reception: Young Citizens and Political Interaction on Facebook.” Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 203–216.Google Scholar
Thorson, Kjerstin, Edgerly, Stephanie, Kligler-Vilenchik, Neta, Xu, Yu, and Wang, Luping (2016). “Seeking Visibility in a Big Tent: Digital Communication and the People’s Climate March.” International Journal of Communication, 10, 23.Google Scholar
Vermeersch, Peter. (2011). “Mobilization, Political.” In Kurlan, George T. (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Political Science (pp. 1048–1048). Washington DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Vraga, Emily K., Bode, Leticia, Wells, Chris, Driscoll, Kevin, and Thorson, Kjerstin (2014). “The Rules of Engagement: Comparing Two Social Protest Movements on YouTube.” Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17 (3), 133–140.Google Scholar