scholarly journals “They Say One Thing and Mean Another” How Differences in In-Group Understandings of Key Goals Shape Political Knowledge

2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-34
Author(s):  
Miika Vähämaa ◽  
Mark D. West

Abstract Journalists and politicians play different roles in the functional structure of the Habermasian public sphere; as such, they might be expected to have different understandings of what knowledge production and transmission might mean. This difference of understanding is more than a conflict over definitions; it is an epistemic divergence à la Fuller (2002:220), where already defined groups hold divergent understandings of what constitutes understanding. While a substantial body of work has been based on the idea of epistemic communities in the context of science and expert organizations in general, little empirical research exists to demonstrate the validity and adaptability of the concept of epistemic communities in comparative political communication research. Here, we show the cross-national validity of the concept of epistemic communities in the context of professional groups of politicians and political journalists in Austria, Finland, France, Denmark, Germany, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland.

Author(s):  
John Street

This chapter examines the ways in which music acts as political communication and plays an important role in politics. It notes that the contemporary study of political communication has tended to overlook the role that sound plays and provides an account of the ways in which music has been associated with political communication through protest, propaganda, and resistance. The chapter then explains how music can be understood to communicate politics and discusses how political communication scholars might study music’s role in the public sphere and civic engagement. It concludes by arguing that sound should be featured more prominently in political communication research than it is currently.


Author(s):  
Claes H. de Vreese

This chapter provides an overview of comparative political communication research (CPCR). CPCR is a growing field since there is wide acknowledgement that many questions are not answered satisfactorily with single case studies. The chapter explains why political communication researchers should care about cross-national comparisons and outlines types of CPCR—descriptive, explanatory, and comparison of relation—explaining variation in relations across units. Then the areas of CPCR are reviewed: media and political systems, political and elections news, political communication in the European Union, and political journalists. Finally, the chapter identifies unanswered questions for CPCR to address.


Communication ◽  
2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lindsay Hoffman

Political knowledge is one of the primary variables in political communication research. In the United States, as well as other democratic nations, the study of political knowledge is rooted in democratic theory, which suggests that citizens should be informed if they are to participate in a democratic society. Political knowledge is also sometimes referred to as political sophistication or political expertise, but knowledge is generally defined as holding correct information—whether that is civic, issue, or candidate information, or the structural relationships among cognitions. Scholars often examine political knowledge as a dependent variable—for example, by examining media effects on political knowledge—but knowledge can also be examined as a predictor, moderator, or mediator in a variety of communication relationships. In this sense, political knowledge may lead to political discussion, or it may moderate the relationship between media use and political participation. However, just as general knowledge cannot be directly measured—rather, it is assessed via test scores or grades—political knowledge is directly immeasurable. In other words, the content of political knowledge, generally, cannot be fully captured in a series of test questions. For that reason, scholars often conceptualize political knowledge in varying ways. However, scholars have come to agree on some measures of political knowledge as good representations of the information citizens must have to participate fully in a democratic society.


Author(s):  
Frank Möller

Art can be understood as a form of political discourse; as a descriptive, an interpretive, or an explicitly critical approximation; or as a vehicle with which to transcend the political. Art complicates our understandings and perceptions of the world, altering the discursive frames within which the political is negotiated. Research on politics and art explores art’s engagement with politics and its vision of the world; it analyzes art’s contribution to both our understanding of politics and problem solving. Current research also explores art’s critical and emancipatory potentialities, as well as participatory art and social activism in light of new forms of political communication. Such research is interdisciplinary and open to methodological pluralism and innovation. This article discusses artistic and performative imaginations of the political; knowledge production through art; art’s engagement with violence and peace; the art-audience interface; ethics and aesthetics of political art; and art’s function as a political witness.


2021 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-91
Author(s):  
Nicholas Popper

Abstract This article analyzes the View as an example of knowledge production, rather than plumbing it for representation or ideology as scholars have traditionally done. Tracing the process of construction, sources, and generic conventions that Spenser wielded not only illuminates some of the more curious elements of the View, but also reveals his practices and motivations for it. As this article suggests, such an approach reinforces the idea that Spenser designed the View as an appeal for the patronage and support of Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex, by modeling specific forms of expertise and counsel characteristic of the Essex circle.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 109-138
Author(s):  
Kelly L. Winfrey ◽  
James M. Schnoebelen

Women gained the right to vote nearly 100 years ago, but it was not until 1980 that political scholars and practitioners began paying much attention to the role of women in elections and it was the so-called “Year of the Woman” in 1992 that sparked increased scholarly attention on women as political communicators. A record number of women, 117, ran for the U.S. Congress in 1992, but the number of women running and serving has been slow to increases since that time. One reason may be the unique challenges gender poses for female political communicators. Over three decades of research has proven gender stereotypes and expectations play a key role in how women (and men) communicate with voters. This review of research summarizes major findings and changes in gender and political communication research over the past three decades. Our focus is on communication by candidates and how gender shapes that communication. In all, 119 scholarly sources were reviewed; these sources included scholarly journals from related disciplines as well as books. Gender stereotypes in political communication have also been studied using a variety of methodologies, and to reflect that the research reviewed in this essay include both quantitative and qualitative methods. This summary of existing research includes a discussion of the gender stereotypes faced by candidates and how candidates present themselves to the public in light of these stereotypes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document