Broadcasting and national imagination in postcommunist Latvia: defining the nation, defining public television by Janis Juzefovics
Broadcasting and national imagination in postcommunist Latvia: defining the nation, defining public television by Janis Juzefovics
复制标题
后共产主义拉脱维亚的广播和国家想象力：定义国家，定义公共电视作者：Janis Juzefovics
DOI：
10.1080/01629778.2018.1499996
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
0.4
通讯作者：
Andrejevs D
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Andrejevs D
自2013年乌克兰危机登上国际新闻头条以来，拉脱维亚对讲俄语人口的忠诚度和俄罗斯人在该地区的意图的焦虑达到了新的高度。在前几年的内部动态中，不信任程度几乎没有变化。这本书的开头几页提醒我们(9-13)，2011年议会选举的结果和2012年语言全民投票的筹备工作有助于提高公众对现有族裔语言(媒体)冲突的认识。在社会根深蒂固的裂痕和两个族裔语言群体的媒体偏好两极分化的背景下，L摆在约尼斯·朱泽福维·S面前的任务是确定说拉脱维亚语的多数人和说俄语的少数人公众为应对拉脱维亚公共电视LTV作为国家建设项目而采取的最新行动(11,131)。这本书解决了一个双重挑战--波罗的海国家讲俄语的人中关于媒体实践的研究不足的文献，以及对中欧和东欧媒体变革的宏观结构分析的主导地位(3-4)。因此，本研究的新颖性在于其方法论方法。在这方面，感兴趣的读者将能够在导言章节和附录中找到对Jãny Juzefoviçsls重点小组和人种学家庭观察的简明和反思的描述。下一章以本尼迪克特·安德森和菲利普·施莱辛格等作家的作品为基础，展示公共广播公司在国家单位(Y)的创建和划分中的作用。虽然Michael Billigls在这里讨论了Lbanal NationalisM的开创性工作，但考虑到对受众代理的关注，更广泛地参与LDaily National hoodL的学术活动将提供一个有价值的补充。本章的后半部分恰如其分地概述了拉脱维亚媒体的情况，并勾勒出拉脱维亚公共广播公司拉脱维亚电视台(LTV)作为一个国家建设项目的历史，该项目建立在国家想象的制度化材料L(即拉脱维亚语言和文化)的基础上(27)。值得注意的是，这第一章的最后几页概述了阿尔伯特·赫希曼尔斯关于语言、声音和忠诚的理论(37-39)。该框架为本书的其余部分提供了理论基础，其中Juzefoviçsls将LExit作为VoiceL的概念尤其值得注意。虽然作者为使用Hirschmanls模型提供了一个很好的案例，但如果更全面地考虑它的局限性，以及更重要的是，它在消费者/公民代理研究中的丰富选择，本可以使讨论受益。总体而言，尽管该模型提供了一个有用的启发式工具，但它在很大程度上是人种学研究的背景下，有点不舒服。
Since the Ukraine crisis seized international news headlines in 2013, Latvian anxieties about the loyalty of its Russian-speaking population and RussiaLs intentions in the region reached new heights. The internal dynamics of the preceding years saw little change in levels of mistrust. As the opening pages of the book remind us (9-13), the results of the parliamentary elections in 2011 and the preparation for the language referendum of 2012 contributed to public awareness of existing ethnolinguistic (media) conflicts. In this context of Ldeep-seated rifts in the society and the polarized media preferences of both ethno-linguistic communities, L the task before Jãnis Juzefoviçs was to identify the Lattitudes and actions Latvian-speaking majority and Russian-speaking minority publics have taken as a response to the Latvian public television LTV as a nation-building projectL (11, 131). The book addresses a twofold challenge-the under-researched literature on media practices among Russian-speakers in the Baltic states and the dominance of macrostructural analyses of media transformations in central and eastern Europe (3-4). The claim to novelty of the present study, therefore, lies in its methodological approach. In this respect, the interested reader will be able to find a concise and reflective description of Jãnis JuzefoviçsLs focus groups and ethnographic family observations in the introductory chapter and appendices. The following chapter builds upon the works of authors such as Benedict Anderson and Philip Schlesinger to demonstrate the role of public broadcasters in the creation and demarcation of national unit (y). While Michael BilligLs seminal work on Lbanal nationalismL is discussed here, wider engagement with the scholarship on Leveryday nationhoodL would have provided a valuable addition, considering the focus on audience agency. The second half of the chapter aptly surveys the Latvian media landscape and sketches a history of the Latvian public broadcaster Latvian Television (LTV) as a nation-building project based on the institutionalized Lraw material of national imaginationL (ie the Latvian language and culture)(27). Saliently, the concluding pages of this first chapter outline Albert HirschmanLs theory of Lexit, voice and loyaltyL (37-39). The framework provides a theoretical foundation for the rest of the book, whereby JuzefoviçsLs notion of Lexit as voiceL is particularly notable. While the author makes a good case for the use of HirschmanLs model, the discussion could have benefited from a more exhaustive consideration of its limitations and importantly, its rich alternatives in the study of consumer/citizen agency. Overall, while the model provides a useful heuristic tool, it sits somewhat uncomfortably in the context of a largely ethnographic study.