De-westernizing Political Communication: Why? How?

This article addresses the need for de-westernizing political communication studies, emphasizing the integration of non-Western perspectives to challenge the dominance of Western scholarship. It highlights the epistemological and methodological disparities between the Global North and South, particularly the limited engagement with Global South research in Western academia. It proposes steps towards inclusivity, including forming global research partnerships and diversifying academic structures. Achieving this goal requires a collective, strategic effort to broaden the field's scope and embrace global diversity

Polarisation and the network harassment of science journalists

Reporting on their qualitative research into the online abuse faced by science journalists in the USA, Lisa Palmer and Silvio Waisbord, find an uptick in the online harassment of science journalists alongside a lack of institutional support, especially for reporters working in precarious freelance contracts

[BigDataSur-COVID] COVID-19 Pandemic and biopolitics in Latin America

Does the COVID-19 pandemic mark the birth of a new form of biopolitics? The Latin American case shows important departures from Europe and the United States, both in the adoption of surveillance technologies and in the types of biopolitical control enacted through them.Fil: Waisbord, Silvio. George Washington University. School of Media and Public Affairs; United States.Fil: Segura, María Soledad. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales; Argentina.Fil: Segura, María Soledad. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación; Argentina

Como enfrentar as desigualdades da academia global nos estudos de comunicação?: colaborações, críticas e curiosidades

Existem profundas desigualdades e hegemonia da academia do Norte Global a partir de publicações, referências e órgãos editoriais de periódicos. O lugar preponderante do inglês como língua franca da academia global coroa a hegemonia de acadêmicos, perspectivas e temas em universidades norte-americanas e europeias. Isso mostra a constante marginalização e invisibilidade de acadêmicos e “estudos do Sul”. Este trabalho propõe como estratégias: consolidar espaços de reconhecimento e apoio; cultivar redes de colaboração e pesquisa com perspectivas comparativas e integradoras; e participar de espaços compartilhados (corpos editoriais, liderança de associações, avaliação/crítica de trabalho e propostas).Hay profundas desigualdades y hegemonía de la academia del Norte Global ejemplificadas por publicaciones, referencias y cuerpos editoriales de revistas, y el lugar preponderante del inglés como lingua franca de la academia global. Esto contribuye a la persistente marginalización e invisibilidad de académicos y “estudios del Sur”. Frente a esta situación, este trabajo plantea tres estrategias: Consolidar espacios de reconocimiento y apoyo; Cultivar redes de colaboración e investigación con perspectivas comparativas e integradoras; y Participar en espacios compartidos

Mais que uma infodêmia: Pandemia, pós-verdade e os perigos do irracionalismo

The pandemic reveals the post-truth condition and the crisis of trust and conflicts between multiple forms of expertise, including those of the health sciences, which make it difficult to solve planetary problems. The posttruth analysis of the pandemic allows us to understand essential aspects of contemporary public communication: the (dis) informational disorder, the questions and conflicts about expertise, and the mixed consequencesthat the abundance of communication brings to face common problems such as health global public. The pandemic demonstrates the problems for the collective use of public reason. Public reason demands communicative conditions, such as truthful information, epistemological agreements on data and facts, and citizen participation. However, public communication, fractured and fragmented, without norms of participation or shared epistemological principles, dynamites the chances of achieving significant consensus on a variety of topics: the identification of problems, the diagnosis of causes, the debate of solutions. The propaganda stubbornness of power added to irrational currents that question essential aspects of the pandemic, such as its existence, origin, methods of care and resolution, expose this problem. These conflicts are traversed by contemporary communication chaos that, as well as enhances opportunities for expression, also makes it difficult to find consensus. The problem is that the resolution of public goods presupposes basic consensus on shared mechanisms for public debate and principles for determining and resolving common goods.La pandemia deja al descubierto la condición de posverdad y la crisis de confianza y los conflictos entre múltiples experticias, incluidas aquellas de las ciencias de la salud, que dificultan la solución de problemas planetarios. El análisis de la pandemia en la posverdad permite comprender aspectos esenciales de la comunicación pública contemporánea: el desorden (des)informativo, los cuestionamientos y los conflictos sobre la experticia, y las consecuencias mixtas que trae la abundancia comunicativa para enfrentar problemas comunes como la salud pública global. La pandemia demuestra los problemas para el uso colectivo de la razón pública. La razón pública demanda condiciones comunicativas, como información veraz, acuerdos epistemológicos sobre datos y hechos, y participación ciudadana. Sin embargo, la comunicación pública, fracturada y fragmentada, sin normas de participación o principios epistemológicos compartidos, dinamita las chances de lograr consensos significativos sobre una variedad de temas: la identificación de problemas, el diagnóstico de causas, el debate de soluciones. El empecinamiento propagandístico del poder sumado a corrientes irracionales que cuestionan aspectos esenciales de la pandemia, tales como su existencia, origen, métodos de atención y resolución, dejan al descubierto este problema. Estos conflictos están atravesados por el caos comunicacional contemporáneo que, así como potencia las oportunidadespara la expresión, también dificulta la búsqueda de consensos. El problema es que la resolución de bienes públicos presupone consensos básicos sobre mecanismos compartidos para el debate público y principios para determinar y resolver bienes comunes.A pandemia revela a condição pós-verdade e a crise de confiança e os conflitos entre as múltiplas competências, inclusive as das ciências da saúde, que dificultam a solução dos problemas planetários. A análise pós-verdade da pandemia nos permite compreender aspectos essenciais da comunicação pública contemporânea: o distúrbio (des) informacional, as questões e conflitos sobre a especialização e as consequências mistas que a abundância comunicativa traz para enfrentar problemas comuns, como a saúde pública global. A pandemia demonstra os problemas para o uso coletivo da razão pública. A razão pública exige condições comunicativas, como informações verídicas, acordos epistemológicos sobre dados e fatos e participação cidadã. Porém, a comunicação pública, fraturada e fragmentada, sem normas de participação ou princípios epistemológicos compartilhados, dinamita as chances de se chegar a um consenso significativo sobre uma variedade de temas: a identificação dos problemas, o diagnóstico das causas, o debate das soluções. A teimosa propaganda de poder somada a correntes irracionais que questionam aspectos essenciais da pandemia, como sua existência, origem, métodos de atendimento e resolução, expõem esse problema. Esses conflitos são atravessados pelo caos da comunicação contemporânea que, além de potencializar as oportunidades de expressão, também dificulta o consenso. O problema é que a resolução de bens públicos pressupõe consenso básico sobre mecanismos compartilhados de debate público e princípios para determinar e resolver bens comuns

COVID-19 pandemic and biopolitics in Latin America

Given our longstanding interest in the datafied society in Latin America,we are interested in assessing the applicability in the region ofarguments about contemporary biopolitics in Europe and the UnitedStates. Even if it is early to draw categorical conclusions giventhat we are in the middle of the pandemic and its evolution andaftermath are unpredictable, there are indications that the currentsituation in the region does not match recent conclusions about the escalation of biopolitics. At the time of this writing, Latin America has become the new epicenterof the pandemic (Burki 2020) with growing number of reported cases ofinfections and deaths. Various governments in Latin America (Perú,Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador, México, Colombia and Brasil) andthe Inter-American Development Bank have deployed digitaltechnologies to control the transmission of the virus and to supporttesting and tracing. They have collaborated with private companiesand universities in setting up mobile applications for geolocalizingand contact-tracing possibly infected people. Expectedly, theseactions have raised concerns about the negative impact of massivesurveillance.However,while we recognize the legitimacy of these concerns, the problem inLatin America takes different dimensions than in Europe, NorthAmerica, and East Asia. For the moment, the governments in the regionhave significant problems to launch and maintain massive digitalsurveillance apparatuses. What stands in the way of pandemic-drivenbiopolitics is not a firm official commitment to protecting personaldata or to balancing public health objectives and democratic rights.The obstacles are rather technological and institutional, namely,poor reach and limited effectiveness of digital and mobiletechnologies as well as deep-seated problems of state performance interms of governmentality and the provision of health services in theregion.Fil: Waisbord, Silvio Ricardo. No especifíca;Fil: Segura, Maria Soledad. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba; Argentin

The need to reconsider the orthodoxy of freedom of speech in digital communication

El presente este artículo discute las limitaciones de la concepción ortodoxa y maximalista de libertad de expresión a la luz de la controversia sobre la inmunidad de la que gozan las plataformas digitales como Facebook, Google o Twitter, que configuran los espacios hoy masivos de mediación de los flujos de información y comunicación pública. Mediante la exposición de casos notorios de edición problemática de contenidos en el contexto de la pandemia Covid-19 por parte de las compañías dueñas de las redes sociales digitales, y a propósito del decreto del presidente de los Estados Unidos, Donald Trump, quien en mayo de 2020 ordenó revisar las normas legas que las alcanzan, se exploran las paradojas y contradicciones propias del sistema emergente de comunicación pública, con la premisa de que “más comunicación” no equivale a “mejor comunicación”.This article discusses the limitations of the orthodox and maximalist conception of freedom of expression in light of the controversy over the immunity enjoyed by digital platforms such as Facebook, Google or Twitter, as massive mediation spaces of information and public communication flows. By exposing notorious cases of problematic content edited in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic by these companies, and in connection with the Executive Order of the US president, Donald Trump, that in May 2020 ordered to refresh the legal norms that reach them, the article explores the paradoxes and contradictions of the emerging public communication system, with the premise that “more communication” is not equivalent to “better communication”.Fil: Becerra, Martin Alfredo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Quilmes; ArgentinaFil: Waisbord, Silvio Ricardo. The George Washington University; Estados Unido

International Sales of UK Television Content: Change and Continuity in ‘the space in between’ Production and Consumption

Focusing on the UK, this article addresses key issues facing the international distribution industry arising from over-the-top digital distribution and the fragmentation of audiences and revenues. Building on the identification of these issues, it investigates the extent to which UK distribution has altered over a ten-year period, pinpointing continuities in the destination and type of sales alongside changes in the role and structure of the industry as UK-based distributors adapt to a changing UK broadcasting landscape and global production environment. At one level increasing US ownership of UK-based distributors and the arrival of OTT players like Netflix, highlight the tensions between the national orientations of UK broadcasters and the global aspirations of independent producers and distributors. At another level VOD has boosted international sales of UK drama. Although the full impact of SVOD on content and rights has yet to materialise, significant changes in the industry predate the arrival of SVOD

Foundation funding and the boundaries of journalism

Private foundations are an important source of funding for many news outlets. It has even been suggested that they may offer a partial solution to journalism’s economic crisis. Yet we do not know how foundation funding shapes journalistic practice. In this article, we show that foundation funding has a significant effect on the ‘boundaries of journalism’. That is, the ways in which journalists understand, value and practice their journalism. This argument is based on 74 interviews with the most active foundations funding international non-profit news and the journalists they support. In general, we found that these foundations did not try to directly influence the content of the journalism they funded. However, their involvement did make a difference. It created requirements and incentives for journalists to do new, non-editorial tasks, as well as longer-form, off-agenda, ‘impactful’ news coverage in specific thematic areas. As a result, foundations are ultimately changing the role and contribution of journalism in society. We argue that these changes are the result of various forms of ‘boundary work’, or performative struggles over the nature of journalism. This contrasts with most previous literature, which has focused on the effects of foundation funding on journalistic autonomy