Stakeholder Discourses About Critical Literacies and Audience Participation

  • Maria José Brites
  • Niklas Alexander Chimirri
  • Inês Amaral
  • Gilda Seddighi
  • Marisa Torres da Silva
  • Maria Francesca Murru
Chapter

Abstract

The next section of this book looks into the horizons that lie ahead for audiences, a short while from today, towards 2030. In chapters  11 through to 14, colleagues will look at key societal drivers of future change, such as the increasing ubiquity of connected gadgets attendant to the Internet of Things, and critical concerns around datafication and the arrival of Big Data. In this chapter, we conclude presenting work on the here and the now, hereby presenting outcomes from the stakeholder consultation part of our foresight work. We distil and discuss themes that emerged from stakeholder interviews around micro and macro forms of action, the inherent technological implications, ensuing academic social responsibilities, and the relevance of investing in critical thinking as part of critical literacies, more broadly, as a fundamental component for positive action. These findings, around the importance of critical literacies, irrespective of technological conditions, resonate into the very futures that The Future of Audiences considers in the chapters that follow.

References

  1. Amaral, I. (2016). Redes sociais: Sociabilidades emergentes [Social networks: Emergent sociabilities]. Covilhã: Editora LabCom.IFP.Google Scholar
  2. Barnes, R. (2013). Understanding the affective investment produced through commenting on Australian alternative journalism website New Matilda. New Media as Society, 17(5), 810–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bimber, B. (2017). Three prompts for collective action in the context of digital media. Political Communication, 34(1), 6–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bimber, B., Flanagin, A. J., & Stohl, C. (2005). Reconceptualizing collective action in the contemporary media environment. Communication Theory, 15(4), 365–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brites, M. J. (2015). Jovens e culturas cívicas: Por entre formas de consumo noticioso e de participação [Youth and civic cultures: In between forms of news consumption and participation]. Covilhã: Livros LabCom.Google Scholar
  7. Carpentier, N. (2011a). Media and participation: A site of ideological-democratic struggle. Bristol: Intellect Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carpentier, N. (2011b). The concept of participation. If they have access and interact, do they really participate? Communication Management Quarterly, 21, 13–36.Google Scholar
  9. Chimirri, N. A. (2013). Who do we think we (and they) are? The audience and the researcher as participants in sociomaterial practice. The Communication Review, 16(1–2), 81–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dahlgren, P. (2009). Media and political engagement: Citizens, communication, and democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Dahlgren, P., & Álvares, C. (2013). Political participation in an age of mediatisation: Towards a new research agenda. Javnost, 20(2), 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Das, R., & Ytre-Arne, B. (Eds.). (2017). Audiences, towards 2030: Priorities for audience analysis. Guildford: CEDAR.Google Scholar
  13. Emirbayer, M., & Goldberg, C. A. (2005). Pragmatism, Bourdieu, and collective emotions in contentious politics. Theory and Society, 34(5–6), 469–518.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-005-1619-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. European Audiovisual Observatory. (2016). Mapping of media literacy practices and actions in EU-28. Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory/European Commission. Retrieved from www.obs.coe.int/documents/205595/8587740/Media+literacy+mapping+report+-+EN+-+FINAL.pdf/c1b5cc13-b81e-4814-b7e3-cc64dd4de36c.
  15. Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (2011). Alfabetização: Leitura do mundo, leitura da palavra [Alphabetization: Reading of the world, reading of the world]. Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra.Google Scholar
  16. Funk, S., Kellner, D., & Share, J. (2016). Critical media literacy as transformative pedagogy. In M. N. Yildiz & J. Keengwe (Eds.), Handbook of research on media literacy in the digital age (pp. 1–30). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.Google Scholar
  17. Goodwin, J., & Pfaff, S. (2001). Emotion work in high-risk social movements: Managing fear in the US and East German civil rights movements. In J. Goodwin, J. M. Jasper, & F. Polletta (Eds.), Passionate politics: Emotions and social movements (pp. 282–302). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  18. Höijer, B. (2008). Ontological assumptions and generalizations in qualitative (audience) research. European Journal of Communication, 23(3), 275–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ianelli, L. (2016). Hybrid politics: Media and participation. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kellner, D., & Share, J. (2017). Critical media literacy is not an option. Learn Inquiry, 1(1), 59–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Livingstone, S. (2005). On the relation between audiences and publics. In S. Livingstone (Ed.), Audiences and publics: When cultural engagement matters for the public sphere (pp. 17–41). Bristol: Intellect Books.Google Scholar
  22. Mathieu, D., Brites, M. J., Chimirri, N. A., & Saariketo, M. (2016). In dialogue with related fields of inquiry: The interdisciplinarity, normativity and contextuality of audience research. Participations. Journal of Audience & Reception Studies, 13(1), 462–475.Google Scholar
  23. Micheletti, M. (2003). Shopping with and for virtues. In M. Micheletti (Ed.), Political virtue and shopping: Individuals, shopping, and collective action (pp. 149–168). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Papacharissi, Z., & Oliveira, M. F. (2012). Affective news and networked publics: The rhythms of news storytelling on #Egypt. Journal of Communication, 62, 266–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Selander, L., & Jarvenpaa, S. L. (2016). Digital action repertoires and transforming a social movement organization. MIS Quarterly, 40(2), 331–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria José Brites
    • 1
  • Niklas Alexander Chimirri
    • 2
  • Inês Amaral
    • 3
  • Gilda Seddighi
    • 4
  • Marisa Torres da Silva
    • 5
  • Maria Francesca Murru
    • 6
  1. 1.Universidade Lusófona do PortoPortoPortugal
  2. 2.Department of People and TechnologyRoskilde UniversityRoskildeDenmark
  3. 3.University of MinhoBragaPortugal
  4. 4.Western Norway Research Institute (Vestlandsforsking)SogndalNorway
  5. 5.NOVA FCSHLisbonPortugal
  6. 6.Università Cattolica del Sacro CuoreMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations