What’s Wife Swap got to do with it? Talking politics in the net-based public sphere
What’s Wife Swap got to do with it? Talking politics in the net-based public sphere
复制标题
换妻与网络公共领域谈论政治有什么关系？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Johnson
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Johnson
本研究的目的是超越政治导向的讨论论坛，也研究参与者的交流实践中的球迷为基础的论坛。重点是参与者如何在在线非正式讨论论坛上谈论政治。通过非正式讨论论坛，我指的是那些不受任何正式预定议程约束的论坛，如电子协商或电子陪审团，而是指那些主要目的只是提供一个交流空间的论坛，例如基于粉丝的讨论论坛，新闻媒体留言板和Usenet新闻组。我所说的政治谈话，指的是在这些网络空间中参与者之间自由进行的日常、非正式的政治谈话，这种谈话通常是自发的，除了为了谈话而谈话的目的之外，没有任何目的，代表了哈贝马斯（1984，第327页）所说的交往行动的实际交往形式。正是通过这种日常政治谈话，公民实现了对自我和彼此的相互理解，它代表了公共领域的基本要素。本研究的目的首先是规范性的;它是根据公共领域的一套规范条件来审查这一基本要素的民主质量，即在线讨论论坛中参与者的交流实践。这也是为了超越正式的审议概念（通过论证超越理性）通过提供一个更准确的说明如何政治出现在网上讨论（特别是在非政治导向的论坛中），人们如何在这些讨论中谈论政治，最后，如何选择其他的交流形式，如幽默，情感评论，和辩论相互作用，并影响更“传统”的审议要素（如理性批判的辩论和互惠）。因此，我提出了以下三个研究问题，这是本研究的核心：在线政治讨论的传播实践在多大程度上满足公共领域审议过程的规范条件？如果有的话，表达（幽默、情绪化评论和回应）在网络政治讨论中以及与审议的规范条件有关的情况下扮演什么角色？政治话题是如何出现在非政治导向的讨论论坛中的？总之，这些问题的答案提供了一个更全面的在线政治谈话。他们不仅试图提供洞察这种谈话的质量，而且还提供了一个更好的理解其表达和情感的性质。此外，他们试图提高我们的理解，政治谈话如何发生在政治导向的讨论论坛的领域之外，以及它如何出现在这样的交流空间。因此，为了回答这些问题并提供这种见解，我检查并比较了卫报，老大哥和换妻三个在线讨论论坛中的政治言论。采用了具有规范性、描述性和探索性特征的比较研究设计。内容分析与定性和定量的特点作为主要的工具进行检查。还进行了额外的文本和网络分析，以提供更深入的调查。
The aim of this study then is to move beyond politically oriented discussion forums by also examining the communicative practices of participants within fan-based forums. The focus is on how participants talk politics in online informal discussion forums. By informal discussion forums, I am referring to those forums that are not bound to any formal predetermined agendas such as e-consultations or e-juries, but rather to forums who’s primary purpose is to simply provide a communicative space for talk, e.g. fan-based discussion forums, news media message boards, and Usenet newsgroups. By political talk, I am referring to everyday, informal, political conversation carried out freely between participants in these online spaces, which is often spontaneous and lacks any purpose outside the purpose of talk for talk sake, representing the practical communicative form of what Habermas (1984, p. 327) calls communicative action. It is through this type of everyday political talk whereby citizens achieve mutual understanding about the self and each other, and it represents the fundamental ingredient of the public sphere. The purpose of this study first is a normative one; it is to examine the democratic quality of this fundamental ingredient, of the communicative practices of participants within online discussions forums in light of a set of normative conditions of the public sphere. It is also to move beyond a formal notion of deliberation (beyond rationality via argumentation) by providing a more accurate account of how the political emerges in online discussions (particularly within nonpolitically oriented forums), how people actually talk politics in those discussions, and finally, how alternative communicative forms such as humor, emotional comments, and acknowledgements interact and influence the more ‘traditional’ elements of deliberation (e.g. rational-critical debate and reciprocity). Consequently, I present the following three research questions, which are central to this study: To what extent do the communicative practices of online political discussions satisfy the normative conditions of the process of deliberation of the public sphere? What role, if any, do expressives (humor, emotional comments, and acknowledgements) play within online political discussions and in relation to the normative conditions of deliberation? How does political talk emerge in nonpolitically oriented discussion forums? Together, the answers to these questions present a more comprehensive account of online political talk. They seek not only to offer insight into the quality of such talk, but also to provide a better understanding of its expressive and affective nature. Moreover, they seek to improve our understanding of how political talk occurs outside the realm of politically oriented discussion forums, and how it emerges in such communicative spaces. Therefore, in order to answer these questions and provide this insight, I examine and compare political talk within three online discussion forums of the Guardian, Big Brother, and Wife Swap. A comparative study design with normative, descriptive, and explorative characteristics was utilized. A content analysis with both qualitative and quantitative features was employed as the primary instrument for examination. Additional textual and network analyses were carried out to provide more depth to the investigation.