The Uses of Stance in Media Production: Embodied Sociolinguistics and Beyond

While many conversation analysts, and scholars in related fields, have used video-recordings to study interaction, this study is one of a small but growing number that investigates video-recordings of the joint activities of media professionals working with, and on, video. It examines practices of media production that are, in their involvement with the visual and verbal qualities of video, both beyond talk and deeply shaped by talk. The article draws upon video recordings of the making of a feature-length documentary. In particular, it analyses a complex course of action where an editing team are reviewing their interview of the subject of the documentary, their footage is being intercut with existing reality TV footage of that same interviewee. The central contributions that the article makes are, firstly, to the sociolinguistics of mediatisation, through the identification of the workplace concerns of the members of the editing team, secondly showing how editing is accomplished, moment-by-moment, through the use of particular forms of embodied action and, finally, how the media themselves feature in the ordering of action. While this is professional work it sheds light on the video-mediated practices in contemporary culture, especially those found in social media where video makers carefully consider their editing of the perspective toward themselves and others

Rethinking Practices and Structures

Social theory remains puzzled by the relation between practices and structures, or the link between ‘micro’ and ‘macro’. Grand theorists including Giddens and Bourdieu have gained distinction for their writings on these questions, trying to marry insights and concerns of a ‘micro’ sociological nature with traditional ‘macro’ structural questions including inequality, power relations, and social reproduction. These theorists arguably fail, however, in their attempts to move social theory beyond traditional dualisms. Relevant but neglected contributions from ethnomethodology are introduced and compared to the work of Giddens and Bourdieu in an attempt to identify and outline an approach to practices and structures that more reliably avoids problems of dualism and reification, and at the same time offers an understanding of structures and their relations to practices that can be much more closely grounded in empirical studies