Inclusion as Deliberative Agency
Inclusion as Deliberative Agency
复制标题
纳入审议机构
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Ong
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nicole Curato;J. Ong
大众媒体在促进协商民主方面发挥着双刃剑的作用：它们通过优先考虑特定群体的声音来加强公共讨论中的等级制度，但它们仍然是最好的，如果不是唯一的机构，可以缓和审议中的不平等，特别是在它们给予普通人在审议环境中表达意见的机会方面。我们提出了两个标准，可以评估媒体的能力，以执行公共审议的包容性。一个调解的审议系统是包容性的，如果它（1）积极主动地让弱势群体的能见度和声音被看到和听到他们的条件，（2）允许那些权力较小的人作为“审议代理人”能够面对他们的对话者，阐明，辩护，并考虑自己的观点。我们提供的经验背景下，这一论点，通过在菲律宾的生殖健康辩论的情况下，因为他们发挥了两种不同的电视类型，不同地强调审议机构。
Mass media play a double-edged role in promoting deliberative democracy: they enforce hierarchies in public discussion by prioritizing the voice of particular groups, yet they remain the best, if not the only institution that can temper inequalities in deliberation, particularly in their capacity to grant ordinary people opportunities for voice in deliberative settings. We put forward two criteria that can assess media’s capacity to enforce inclusiveness in public deliberation. A mediated deliberative system is inclusive if it (1) proactively gives visibility and voice to vulnerable groups to be seen and heard on their terms and (2) allows those with less power to act as “deliberative agents” capable of facing their interlocutors, articulating, defending, and considering one’s views. We provide empirical context to this argument through the case of the Reproductive Health debates in the Philippines, as they played out in two different television genres that differently accentuate deliberative agency.