scholarly journals Gender and Media Studies: Progress and Challenge in a Vibrant Research Field

Anàlisi ◽  
2014 ◽  
pp. 5
Author(s):  
Milly Buonanno
Keyword(s):  
Media Studies ◽  
Research Field ◽  
Gender And Media

scholarly journals Imaginary economies: the case of the 3D printer

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 357-370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jens Schröter
Keyword(s):  
Science Fiction ◽  
Media Studies ◽  
Science And Technology Studies ◽  
Evolutionary Process ◽  
Research Field ◽  
3D Printer ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Media Technology ◽  
Social Imaginaries ◽  
3D Printers

AbstractIn the call for the special issue for the EAEPE Journal, we can find the word “scenario.” The question is if the authors can imagine scenarios in which “potential strategies for the appropriation of existing capitalist infrastructures […] in order to provoke the emergence of post-capitalist infrastructures” can be described. Obviously, the call verges on the border of science fiction—and this is not a bad thing. Diverse strands of media studies and science and technology studies have shown (e.g., Schröter 2004; Kirby 2010; Jasanoff and Kim 2015; McNeil et al. 2017) that not only the development of science and (media) technology is deeply interwoven in social imaginaries about possible outcomes and their implicated futures, but there is a whole theoretical tradition in which societies as such are fundamentally constituted by imaginary relations (Castoriadis 1975/2005). But in all these discussions, one notion very seldom appears: that of an “imaginary economy,” meaning a collectively held system of more or less vague or detailed ideas, what an economy is, how it works, and how it should be (especially in the future; but see the somewhat different usage recently in Fabbri 2018). The aim of the paper is to outline a notion of “imaginary economy” and its necessary functions in the stabilization of a given economy, but even more so in the transformation to another economy—how should a transformation take place if there’s not at least a vague image where to go? Of course, we could also imagine a blind evolutionary process without any imaginary process but that seems not to be the way in which human societies—and economies—work. Obviously a gigantic research field opens up—so in the proposed paper, only one type of “imaginary economy” can be analyzed: It is the field that formed recently around the proposed usages and functions of 3D printing. In publications as diverse as Eversmann (2014) and Rifkin (2014), the 3D printer operates as a technology that seems to open up a post-capitalist future—and thereby it is directly connected to the highly imaginary “replicator” from Star Trek. In these scenarios, a localized omnipotent production—a post-scarcity scenario (see Panayotakis 2011)—overcomes by itself capitalism: But symptomatically enough, questions of work, environment, and planetary computation are (mostly) absent from these scenarios. Who owns the templates for producing goods with 3D printers? What about the energy supply? In a critical and symptomatic reading, this imaginary economy, very present in a plethora of discourses nowadays, is deconstructed and possible implications for a post-capitalist construction are discussed.

scholarly journals Gender and the Media

Communication ◽  
2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cynthia Carter
Keyword(s):  
Media Studies ◽  
Gender Relations ◽  
Social Inequalities ◽  
Sex Role ◽  
Sense Of Self ◽  
Central Field ◽  
Political Movement ◽  
The Media ◽  
Media Research ◽  
Gender And Media

Gender and media research has been a central field of academic inquiry since the 1970s. It is notable that two distinctive, and yet often overlapping, approaches characterize this field. The first is that of mainstream forms of gender and media studies research, which has been grounded in large part by assumptions about the ways in which the media contribute to the individual acquisition of gendered attitudes and behaviors and how sex-role stereotypes can impact negatively on an individual’s life chances, especially in terms of a person’s sense of self-worth, and social perceptions of women and their career prospects. The other field is that of feminist media studies, which is characterized as a political movement for gender justice, examining how gender relations are represented, the ways in which audiences make sense of them, and how media practitioners contribute to perpetuating gender injustice. At the center of this is the view that hierarchical gender relations (re)produce social inequalities across time and cultures, thereby making it difficult for men and women to be equal partners in a democratic society. In recent years, gender and media research has become much more globally oriented, with increasing attention paid to cultural, social, and economic differences as well as a greater awareness of the importance of interrogating media and masculinity.

Researching intersectionality in media studies: Theoretical approaches, methods and applications in communication and media research practice

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 345-360
Author(s):  
Assimina Gouma ◽  
Johanna Dorer
Keyword(s):  
Media Studies ◽  
Social Power ◽  
Research Field ◽  
Communication Studies ◽  
Research Practice ◽  
Critical Approach ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Social Discourses ◽  
Media Research ◽  
Race Ethnicity

Abstract Intersectionality is a critical approach to theorizing and exploring the interlocking of social inequality categories such as gender, race, ethnicity, class and sexuality in various levels of policies, social discourses, institutions and subject positionings. While social discourses do not arise in isolation from an all-encompassing media world, media, as co-producers of social power relations, are particularly interesting for the concept of intersectionality. However, the intersectional approach is rather a research field at the margins of German communication studies. This article discusses the theoretical prerequisites and methodological implications of intersectionality and provides examples of how an empirical implementation is possible in media research.

scholarly journals Joining Forces: European Periodical Studies as a New Research Field

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marianne Van Remoortel ◽  
Kristin Ewins ◽  
Maaike Koffeman ◽  
Matthew Philpotts
Keyword(s):  
Gender Studies ◽  
Media Studies ◽  
Cultural Production ◽  
Art History ◽  
Legal History ◽  
Research Field ◽  
Literary Studies ◽  
Periodical Studies ◽  
The Press ◽  
New Research

In recent decades, periodical studies have burgeoned into a vibrant field of research. Increasing numbers of scholars working in disciplines across the humanities — literary studies, history, art history, gender studies, media studies, legal history, to name a few — are exploring the press as a key site for cultural production, public debate and the dissemination of knowledge. [...]

scholarly journals Ways of cross-media research formation

2020 ◽  
pp. 3-27
Author(s):  
Lesia Heneraliuk
Keyword(s):  
Literary Criticism ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
Media Studies ◽  
Research Direction ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Research Field ◽  
Cross Media ◽  
Leading Role ◽  
Media Research ◽  
The Cross

The paper offers to extend the historical time frame of modern cross-media studies formation. The start of this research direction dates not from the 1950-60s, as it is usually considered to be, but from the early 20th century, the ‘synthesis epoch’. Development of neosyncretism was accompanied by creating bright theories in aesthetics and art criticism and promoting the concept of arts’ interaction by the humanities. Three scholars — H. Wolfin, M. Dessoir, and A. Warburg were the pioneers of the modern interdisciplinary research field. The author considers that the range of influences on the cross-media studies in literary criticism should be broadened with the works of philosophers and art critics who started to use the cross-media strategies (not the term itself) when analyzing the works of literature and arts. The leading role belonged to the Iconology school (E. Panofsky, R. Wittkower, E. Gombrich et al.). Their methods were based on applying tools of various disciplines. In the first place, they took into account connections between literature and visual arts. Henceforth, philology interpolated the iconological method into visual and comparative studies. One of the contemporary leading cross-media researchers, W. J. T. Mitchell, named his first book “Iconology: Image, Text, Ideology” (1986). In the middle of the 20th century, philosophy had a considerable influence on the cross-media research formation. In particular, literary critics referred to phenomenology (the works by M. Dufrenne, R. Ingarden. M. Merleau-Ponty) and actualized the analysis of interacting arts once more. A visual turn in culture caused growing attention to the issues of apperceptive cross-sensual experience. The newest works in the fields of perception psychology, gestalt psychology, neurolinguistics, and neurophysiology also support the general cross-media theory. It is possible that, due to the mutual influences of sciences, a uniform platform for studying syncretic phenomena will be created.

scholarly journals Media Studies in Russia: Defining its Academic Status

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denis Dunas ◽  
Anna Gureeva
Keyword(s):  
Media Studies ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Research Field ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Academic Status ◽  
Media Communication ◽  
Independent Field ◽  
Communication Processes ◽  
Russian Media ◽  
Media Communications

In the last decades Russian media scholars have attempted to identify a research field that focuses on media: defining it as "theory of journalism" (teoriya zhurnalistiki), "communicativistics" (kommunikativistika) (the russism from "communication science"), "media theory" (mediateoriya), etc. Such a definition as the "theory of mass communications" (teoriya massovoj kommunikacii) has not expanded outside the sociological field. The history of media studies development in Russia demonstrates, how media researchers, focusing on different fields — from journalism and mass media to media communications — have sought to indicate a unique field of knowledge — outside of sociology and even humanitarian knowledge — with its own theoretical and conceptual apparatus and methodological tools. As a result a deeply rooted in Soviet philological tradition and strongly established system of theoretical views was formed under the name of "theory of journalism". However, the "theory of journalism" has not become a leading name in the field, unlike "communicativistics", which studies the humanitarian aspects of the development of media processes in different regions of the world. The communicativistics (together with communication theory, or communicology) occupies a priority place in the academic discourse and creates a large system of knowledge that analyzes and explores the universal laws of communication in the information society. This field of research connects journalism with a huge amount of communication processes and issues. Widely spread determination is "mediology", whose task is "the synthesis of the theory of the media and the theory of journalism. But "mediavistics" as a study of the aggregate of real and virtual communication processes that provides to a public a sociocultural dialogue in the society is not a widely spread title. The theoretical consideration of media communication has become topical recently. Media communication is not tied to either a mass audience or to mass information, as well as to exclusively interpersonal communication, but it is accurately characterized by the availability of a media channel, digital channel, first of all. Nevertheless, the theory of media communications as an independent field of knowledge takes a quite modest place. It is obvious that at present in the Russian academic community there is no consolidated position on the definition of the research area, which studies media. This is a direct evidence of the activity of the four-level fermentation process in the Russian media studies. The research aims to identify the place of media studies in Russian scientific classifiers, in fundamental academic institutions and in the system of basic scientific funds. The authors relate the designation of the field of knowledge by media researchers to the sections of organization classifiers, raise questions about the academic status of media research in comparison to other humanities research areas. This appears to be highly important in the context of scientometric challenges of modern science.

scholarly journals Food, Gender and Media - the Trinity of Bad Taste: A Conversation with Karen Klitgaard Povlsen

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonatan Leer ◽  
Katrine Meldgaard Kjær
Keyword(s):  
Everyday Life ◽  
Media Studies ◽  
Food Studies ◽  
Associate Professor ◽  
Current Status ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Gender And Media ◽  
The Trinity

Food, Gender and Media – the Trinity of Bad Taste:Since she began working in the field in the mid-1980s, associate professor in media studies at Aarhus University Karen Klitgaard Povlsen has been one of most important scholars in the field of cultural food studies in Denmark. She is particularly interested in food in relation to gender and media, and has published widely on the subject. In this interview, she provides a Danish perspectiveon the study of food and gender, including a brief history of the area and her thoughts on its current status and potentials. Povlsen argues that while gender studies do not enjoy the same prominence today as they did in the 1970s and 1980s, food studies has gained terrain and offers new ways of doing innovative, intersectional analyses of identity and everyday life in contemporarymediatized societies.

scholarly journals Contemporary Research on Gender and Media: It’s All Political

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Sofie Van Bauwel ◽  
Tonny Krijnen
Keyword(s):  
Research Field ◽  
Gender Inequalities ◽  
Social Changes ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Media Audiences ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Media ◽  
And Gender ◽  
New Research ◽  
Gender And Media

Recent global social changes and phenomena like #MeToo and Time’s Up Movement, the visibility of feminism in popular media (e.g., Beyonce or the TV series <em>Orange is the New Black</em>), the increase of datafication and fake news have not only put pressure on the media and entertainment industry and the content produced, but also generated critique, change and questions in the public debate on gender in general and (the backlash on) gender studies around the world. But are these phenomena also game changers for research on media and gender? In this thematic issue we want to provide insight in recent developments and trends in research on gender and media. What are the dominant ideas and debates in this research field and how do they deal with all of the changes in the media scape (e.g., platformization, the dominance of algorithms and datafication, slacktivism, and gender inequalities in media production). Moreover, how do current debates, theoretical insights and methods communicate with those in the past? The research field has changed rapidly over the last 10 years with repercussions on the conceptualisation of gender, its intersections with other identities markers (e.g., age, ethnicity, class, disabilities, sexualities, etc.), and media audiences’ responses to these developments. We welcome contributions within the scope of gender and media and which are topical in the way they introduce new concepts, theoretical insights, new methods or new research subjects.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document