Abstract
This chapter discusses the epistemic and theoretico-methodological bases of the project that we, in this book, broadly term ‘Communicology of the South’, which follows the path outlined and furthered by different proposals through the wide-ranging and complex relations between communication and culture. Indeed, the challenge was and always has been to comprehend the development and recognition of cultural identities within the framework of miscegenation, understood as processes of continuity in discontinuity and reconciliations between rhythms excluded from where cultural forms and senses are conceived; this while considering epistemic and theoretico-methodological elements distinct from those developed in the academic spaces of Europe and the United States by virtue of a hybridisation that caters for historical specificity and the emergence of syncretisms and new logics of modernisation marked by the plurality of mass-mediatised popular cultures.
This paper was funded by the National Research and Development Agency of Chile (ANID-Chile), specifically the Associative Research Programme (PIA) via the Ring Project entitled: ‘Converging Horizons: Production, Mediation, Reception and Effects of Representations of Marginality’ [PIA-ANID/ANILLOS SOC180045].
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Change history
05 January 2023
The original version of the chapter was inadvertently published without incorporating the author’s correct name. The chapter has now been corrected.
Notes
- 1.
Harking back to Marques de Melo’s suggestion (2004) and Marques de Melo et al. (2005), we define ELACOM here as the analytical corpus of communication and culture with a conceptual framework and theoretical practice that have emerged as rupture and deconstruction of such mainstream foreign theories as North American functionalism or the Marxist critical theory of the Frankfurt School. ELACOM develops agendas of its own adapted to the context of political and social movements and struggles constructed upon a dialectic of hybridisation and miscegenation that recognises praxis, diversity and participation as fundamental in communication as social mediation. The chief exponents of these interpretations are Pasquali, Mattelart, Freire and others, whose studies in communication gain the perspective of localisation in the social and cultural life of Latin American reality. In the particular case of Freire, this is a proposal that “points to the core of the process of social domination: the absence of dialogicity in everyday communication and its projection in the secular silence of oppressed populations across the continent” (Marques de Melo 2000: 286). Two trends mark the development of communication research in Latin America between the 1970s and ‘90s: on the one hand, analyses based on over-ideologised frameworks and, on the other, culturalism that undermines ideological value, in which ethnographic excess prevailed as a new form of cultural populism with an acritical defence of all consumption as resistance.
- 2.
Although the 1994 Bolivian Constitution incorporated cultural recognition of the multi-ethnic and multicultural condition, it was the 2009 Constitution and its declaration of the condition of pluri-national state that achieved a redistribution of political power.
- 3.
With this Constitution, for the first time in its history, Ecuador declared itself pluri-cultural and multi-ethnic, but the most significant advances in the inclusion and recognition of its indigenous communities were achieved with the 2008Constitution, drawn up by the National Constituent Assembly in Montecristi.
- 4.
Based on the recognition of alterity and difference, Martin Barbero gives shape to the idea of a different modernity for Latin America: in short, a modernity unfinished for the dominant and different gaze, or novel for the alternative gaze. According to Mattelart, this relationship in Latin America ‘has raised original questions around the connections between popular cultures and the industrial production of culture’ (Mattelart and Mattelart 1997: 115)
- 5.
This epistemology of the South is not only Latin American; it is inspired and marked by the post-colonial proposals of Subaltern Studies in Asia and the East with the works of Guha, which question the way history is constructed from the inclusion and exclusion of voices is contested (1982), Chatterjee’s ideas about the need to rethink the state as a structure that reproduces colonial power (1993), Said’s writings on the tensions, associations and ways of understanding the East-West relationship (1995), Spivak’s thoughts on deconstructing historiography (1988), and the works of Chakravarty (2007) and Bhabha (1994). The interaction between these Asian and Latin American South-South ideas can be seen through the South-South Exchange Programme for Research on the History of Development (SEPHIS), established in 1994 to promote South-South dialogue. This alliance spawned the compilation by Silvia Rivera Cusicanqui and Rossana Barragán (1997), Debates postcoloniales: una introducción a los estudios de la subalternidad La Paz: Editorial Historias; Rotterdam: SEPHIS; La Paz: Ediciones Aruwiyiri.
- 6.
Other notable Latin American authors who also critique Anglo-American hegemony from the 1970s to the present today are: Juan Díaz Bordenave, who spoke of the need to view communication from the perspective of the Latin American reality (1976); Mario Kaplún, who identified the problem of the remarkable external influence in radio and television in the 1970s as evidence of cultural dependency (1978); Rosa María Alfaro, who, through the notion of struggle over cultural inheritance, revealed the tensions to which Peruvian radio was subjected, striking a balance between the traditional and the modern, cultural homogenisation and identities (1985); Manuel Calvero, with his questioning of the hegemony of the linear ‘emitter-receiver medium’ model of communication (2003); Gustavo Cimadevilla, with his explanation of the issues that fuel the negation of the rural, like the civilising concept of urban progress centred on Western hegemonic thought (2000); Xavier Albó, with his reflections on the need to bolster indigenous languages by strengthening their foothold in the media (1999); and other authors whose contributions can be traced through the landmark text compiled by Alfonso Gumucio and Thomas Tufte (2008): Antología de comunicación para el cambio social: lecturas históricas y contemporáneas [An Anthology of Communication for Social Change: Historical and Contemporary Readings].
- 7.
While it is this paper’s stated intention to start from the convergence that could be established between ELACOM and the Modernity/Coloniality Group’s proposal for decolonising power-knowledge, the differences between these two sides cannot be ignored. One of the most significant divergences is associated with the concepts of hybridisation and multiculturalism which, as Silvia Rivera Cusicanqui (2006) points out, are no more than rhetorical acknowledgments and do not address the underlying causes of the exclusion imposed by colonisation through subordination; on the contrary, discourses of multiculturalism and hybridisation contribute to indigenous cultures’ subjection to pre-existing dynamics of subordination. On top of decolonial studies’ perception of communication and especially the media as instruments of continuity of colonial hegemony and power in order to subalternise through the strengthening of belief systems (Castro-Gómez 2000).
- 8.
For critical reviews of the original premises of ELACOM and its theoretical foundations, see the following publications: José Marques de Melo (1988), ‘Communication Theory and Research in Latin America’, Culture, Media & Society, vol. X, no. 4: 405–18, London, Sage; José Marques de Melo and Cristina Gobbi (orgs.) (2000), Gênese do pensamento comunicacional latino-americano: o protagonismo das instituições pioneiras CIESPAL, ICINFORM, ININCO, São Bernardo do Campo, UMESP/UNESCO; Raúl Fuentes Navarro (2005), La emergencia de un campo académico. Continuidad utópica y estructuración científica de la investigación de la comunicación en México, Doctoral Thesis, Department of Social Sciences, University of Guadalajara (UdG), Mexico; Raúl Fuentes Navarro (1992), Un campo cargado de futuro. El estudio de la comunicación en América Latina, Mexico, CONEICC; José Marques de Melo (ed.) (1996), ‘O pensamento latino-americano em comunicaçao’, Comunicaçao e Sociedade 15, São Bernardo do Campo: UMESP; José Marques de Melo (1998). Teoría da comunicaçao: paradigmas latino-americanos, Petrópolis, Vozes; Gustavo León Duarte (2008), ‘ELACOM. Referente histórico y conquista de la hegemonía en el pensamiento latinoamericano de comunicación’, Revista Razón y Palabra, vol. 13, no. 61, March-April, ITEMS-CEM, State of Mexico; José Marques de Melo (2009), Pensamiento Comunicacional Latinoamericano. Entre el saber y el poder, Sevilla, Comunicación Social Ediciones y Publicaciones; Gustavo León Duarte (2011), La escuela latinoamericana de la comunicación: La Nueva Hegemonía en el Pensamiento Latinoamericano de la Comunicación, Madrid, Editorial Académica Española; Luis Ramiro Beltrán (2000), Investigación sobre comunicación en Latinoamérica. Inicio, Trascendencia y Proyección, La Paz, Plural Editores.
- 9.
For an analysis of the importance of such processes in the emergence of a new form of communicational and alternative resistance, see Francisco Sierra (ed.) (1997), Comunicación e insurgencia. La información y la propaganda en la guerra de Chiapas, Donostia, Iru; Francisco Sierra and Tommaso Gravante, (2012), ‘Apropiación tecnológica y mediación. Líneas y fracturas para pensar otra comunicación posible’, in Javier Encina and María Ángeles Ávila (eds.), Autogestión de la vida cotidiana, Sevilla, UNILCO, 130–138.
- 10.
Historically, the antagonistic drift of the practices of appropriation of regional communication has tended to privilege first practical studies, as defended by Luis Ramiro Beltrán, and then theoretical studies of participatory communication and communitarian communication for social change. See Francisco Sierra (2002), Comunicación, educación y desarrollo. Apuntes para una historia de la comunicación educativa, Sevilla: Comunicación Social Ediciones y Publicaciones; Francisco Sierra (2010), Comunicación y Desarrollo, Loja, UTPL; Carlos del Valle (2013), ‘La participación como mediación para el desarrollo social y público. Tensiones y convergencias entre discurso y materialidad’, in Francisco Sierra (coord.), Ciudadanía, tecnología y cultura. Nodos conceptuales para pensar la nueva mediación digital, Barcelona, GEDISA; Carlos del Valle (2012), ‘Criticidad y complejidad en el campo de la comunicación: Aproximaciones epistémicas sobre la Comunicación Participativa y para el Cambio Social desde América Latina’, in Marcelo Martínez and Francisco Sierra (coords.), Comunicación y desarrollo local. Nuevas prácticas de empoderamientos social, Barcelona, GEDISA.
- 11.
The theorisations on culture in Latin America in relation to miscegenation and hybridisation (García-Canclini, 1987) now make it possible to understand the interplay of syncretism, resignification, reconfiguration, deconstruction and reconstruction between what is folkloric, cultured, popular and massive on our continent. It is this Latin American condition that inspires and orients reflections on other modernities, from José Joaquín Brunner’s viewpoint (1988) to Arturo Escobar’s critique of development in La invención del Tercer Mundo [The Invention of the Third World] (1996), identifying the bases of another cultural matrix steeped in carnival, syncretisms, the diversity of popular cultures, scenography, participation and productive cooperation that today has to be rethought from the perspective of indigenous cosmogonies.
- 12.
For an analysis of forms of collective action and the newly emerging culture of protest, see Raúl Zibechi (2012), Territoires in Resistance: A Cartography of Latin American Social Movements, Baltimore, AK Press; María Isabel Neuman de Segan (2008), La apropiación tecnológica como práctica de resistencia y negociación en la globalización, IX Congreso Latinoamericano de Investigadores de la Comunicación [Ninth Latin American Conference of Communication Researchers], Mexico, AMIC; Tommaso Gravante (2010), Ciberactivismo y Guerra de Baja Intensidad. Un análisis de las experiencias de netactivismo en la ciudad de Oaxaca en un conflicto de contrainsurgencia (2006–2009), Master’s Thesis in Coummunication and Culture, University of Sevilla; Jorge Regalado (2010), Política y acciones colectivas en el Occidente de México, University of Guadalajara, Mexico; Jorge Regalado (2011), ‘Los movimientos sociales en México. La vía autonomista y comunitaria’, ‘New Perspectives for the Study of Social Movements in Latin America’ Seminar, Mexico City, UAM-X
- 13.
The rediscovery of what is one’s own as the empowerment of Latin American thought and reality translates, in Latin American communicology, into a vindication of difference, but also into a questioning and antagonism of the norm and dominant thought of Western modernisation and hegemonic positive science in the North. At the outset, for instance, the emergence and deconstructive critical power of the Latin American Critical School shows that ‘a thought of borders and margins – which is where the grammar of power is most visible—is on the roads, squares, towns and people’s marches, as well as the forums, summits and discussion sessions in the constituent assemblies over all these breakneck years’ (De Sousa Santos, 2010b: 5), which interrogated the Anglo-American hegemony. So, for example, with the New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO) movement and later the defence of the McBride Report, Latin America would lead a debate on access to information and the democratisation of communication as a fundamental component of human rights marking a turning point in research agendas. Consequently, and as a result of the debate championed by prominent thinkers and activists like Luis Ramiro Beltrán, the region would see, in the framework of theory, the emergence of the dependency of public policies in countries such as Mexico for access to indigenous communities’ media, legitimising a know-how which, as Luis Ramiro Beltrán remarked, constitutes an original distinctive element in Latin American communicology: namely, the praxeological dimension.
- 14.
See Francisco Sierra, Carlos Del Valle and Javier Moreno (eds.) (2010), Cultura latina y revolución digital. Matrices para pensar el espacio iberoamericano de comunicación, Barcelona, Gedisa; Francisco Sierra, Carlos Del Valle and Javier Moreno (coords.) (2011), Políticas de comunicación y ciudadanía cultural iberoamericana, Barcelona, Gedisa. Francisco Sierra and Marcelo Martínez (eds.) (2012), Comunicación y Desarrollo. Prácticas comunicativas y empoderamiento local, Barcelona, Gedisa.
- 15.
See Francisco Sierra (2013), ‘Teoría y políticas de comunicación en Latinoamérica. Nuevos lineamientos y perspectivas de investigación’, in Isidoro Moreno and Pablo Palenzuela (coords.), América Latina. Una aproximación pluridisciplinar, Sevilla, Aconcagua Libros/IEAL, 63–84.
- 16.
This is true, for example, of cultural policies in Brazil, which, subverting the Anglo-American conceptualisation of creative industries, proposes planning of development based on the integration of the Afro-Brazilian population and original communities for a new cultural policy agenda based on the participation and autonomy of these traditionally marginalised groups. See Alexandre Barbalho et al. (orgs.) (2011), Cultura e desenvolvimento. Perspectivas políticas e económicas, Salvador, EDUFBA; Antonio Rubim et. al. (orgs.) (2007), Politicas Culturais, Democracia e Conselhos de Cultura, Salvador, EDUFBA.
- 17.
The incursion of so-called ‘alternative communication’, based on the opposition to the constituted, the alternative to the established, the other distinct from the institutional as opposed to the mainstream media, opened up one of the most important windows for discussion and contribution to the debate on communication in Latin America, and in some ways, for the first time made indigenous cultures visible. Analysis of and research into the issue of communication and indigenous cultures are most apparent in Mexico, Bolivia and Ecuador, and focus on studying the processes of appropriation of communication and information technologies, from radio programmes to the most recent technologies, as processes of cultural recognition. Another line of work studies the incidence and scope of media discourses from the point of view of the informative treatment of indigenous issues, the forms of inclusion/exclusion and invisibilisation of ethnicity, and the folklorisation and exoticisation of native cultures. From the alternative communication perspective, a communicology of praxis takes shape—that is, a knowledge for action, a new logic of meaning, the bases of reflexivity and meta-cognition—anticipating many of the contemporary debates of constructivism through its emphasis on context, connected history, and the complex and recursive triangulation in the emergence of an ‘Other Communicology’.
- 18.
One of the pending tasks in communication research is to systematise the state-of-the-art in the subject. Accordingly, it is striking that, although landmark journals of the 1970s like CIESPAL’s CHASQUI promoted the debate on indigenous culture and the mass media, the specialist literature on the subject in Latin America has been almost episodic, being limited to either wider-ranging networks on popular or traditional culture, which might include forms of indigenous communication, as with folkcommunication studies in Brazil, or centring upon two fundamental problems: indigenous community radio stations or media, mainly addressed in Mexico and Colombia, and studies of the impact of technological innovation on traditional communities, as in Brazil and Chile. Few research studies have looked at the meaning of communication from the perspective of what is unique to indigenous communities’ cosmogonies (identified below), rather than from the perspective of the technologies and media viewed by decolonial studies as fundamental landmarks created by literate Western culture for the understanding of communication.
- 19.
The scientific literature on Latin American communication studies differs on this point regarding the evolution and nature of ELACOM’s specific contribution. We can identify three basic positions: those like Guillermo Orozco, who deny the existence of a Latin American School like Palo Alto or the Chicago School for various reasons (diversity of approaches, territorial dispersion, absence of a common programme and so on); those like Raúl Fuentes, who, while recognising the persistence of a current of studies and certain common parameters in Latin American communicology, nevertheless detect weak or inadequate institutionalisation; and last, those like Luis Ramiro Beltrán or José Marques de Melo, who identify the difference of the Latin American tradition in its theoretico-methodological hybridisation, in its defining, unlike the scientific traditions of the North, of a sociocultural approach to mediations and a theory of mediation based on a unique re-reading of the popular in defence of autonomy and a unique style of research of its own. Our approach is based on this third interpretation in the recognition of institutions’ coherence, spaces of their own and common histories, recognised by Dependency Theory, as pointed out by Marques de Melo, León Duarte and others.
- 20.
For each mono-culture and logic, De Sousa proposes five ecologies: the ecology of knowledge to accept the value of other types of knowledge and other essential criteria which lend contextual credibility; the ecology of temporalities to recover the meaning of cycles and circular time typical of biological processes and nature; the ecology of recognitions in social movements, social and cultural diversity, struggles for emancipation and collective action; the ecology of trans-scales as a simultaneous recovery of the tensions and connections between the local and the global; and the ecology of productivities to recover and valorise the alternative systems of production created in popular economic organisations through self-management, cooperative organisation and solidarity. See De Sousa Santos, 2009: 103–126.
- 21.
The reference to the philosopher Santiago Castro Gómez is entirely pertinent here: the new way of organising work in Cognitive Capitalism, the post-Fordist model of production, valorises the symbolic, social, affective, communicative and emotional dimensions as forms of communication, as demonstrated by indigenous cultures.
- 22.
Decolonisation based on all the ecologies proposed by De Sousa is possible within the framework of inter-culturality as interaction, as reciprocal action between subjects, social groups, different cultural knowledge and practices; ‘an interaction grounded in the conflict inherent in social, economic, political and power asymmetries. To actively drive processes of exchange which, by means of social, political and communicative mediations, enable the construction of meeting spaces for people and knowledge, meanings and different practices.’ (Walsh, 2005: 45). This is not to trivialise and folklorise cultural differences through the idea of tolerance, but to interact through pluriversality in order to generate ‘processes of constructing and lending impact to “other” thoughts, voices, knowledge, practices and social powers, an “other” way of thinking and acting.’
References
Appadurai, A. (1997). La globalización y la imaginación en la investigación. Retrieved from: http://www.unesco.org/issj/rics160/appaduraispa.html#aa
Bakhtin, M. (ed.). (1981). The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays by M.M. Bakhtin, 269–422. Texas: University of Texas Press.
Barbalho, A. et al. (orgs.). (2011). Cultura e desenvolvimento. Perspectivas políticas e económicas. Salvador: EDUFBA
Barranquero, A. (2009). Latinoamérica: la arquitectura participativa de la Comunicación para el cambio. Diálogos de la Comunicación, 78: 1–14.
Bartolomé, M. (2003). En defensa de la etnografía. El papel contemporáneo de la investigación intercultural. Revista de Antropología Social, 12.
Bhabha, H. (1994). The Location of Culture. London: Routledge.
Beltrán Salmón, L. (2000). Investigación sobre Comunicación en Latinoamérica. Inicio, trascendencia y proyección. La Paz: Plural Ediciones
Beltrán Salmón, L. and Zeballos, R. (2001). Estrategias de educación y comunicación para el desarrollo. La Paz: ERBOL.
Beltrán Salmón, L.R. (2005). La comunicación para el desarrollo en Latinoamérica. Un recuento de medio siglo. Retrieved from: http://www.portalcomunicacion.com
Beltrán Salmón, L.R., Herrera, K., Pinto, E. and Torrico, E. (2008). La comunicación antes de Colón. Tipos y formas en Mesoamérica y los Andes. La Paz: Centro Interdisciplinario de Estudios de la Comunicación.
Beltrão, L. (1971). Comunicación y folklore. São Paulo: Contra-capa.
Beltrão, L. (1980). Folkcomunicación, la comunicación de los marginalizados. São Paulo: Cortez Editora.
Beltrão, L. (1987). la folkcomunicación no es una comunicación clasista (entrevista). Revista Brasileña de Comunicación, 10(57): 13–14.
Beltrão, L. (2001). Folkcomunicação. Um estudo dos agentes e dos meios populares de informação de fatos eexpressão de idéias. Porto Alegre: EDIPUCRS.
Beltrão, L. (2004). Folkcomunicação. teoria e metodologia. São Bernardo do Campo: UMESP.
Brunner, J. (1988). Un espejo trizado. Ensayos sobre cultura y políticas culturales. Santiago de Chile: FLACSO.
Brunner, J. (1992). América Latina: cultura y modernidad. Mexico City: Grijalbo.
Burke, P. (2010). Hibridismo cultural. Madrid: Akal.
Castro-Gómez, S. (1997). ‘La filosofía de los Calibanes o ¿qué significa una Crítica de la razón latinoamericana’. Revista Iberoamericana, LXIII (180), 537–41. https://doi.org/10.5195/reviberoamer.1997.6212
Castro-Gómez, S. (2000). La reestructuración de las ciencias sociales en América Latina (pp. 93–107). Pensar, Instituto de Estudios Sociales y Culturales.
Castro-Gómez, S., & Mendieta, E. (1998). Teorías sin disciplina. Latinoamericanismo, poscolonialidad y globalización en debate. México: Porrúa
Castro-Gómez, S., Guardiola, O. y Millán, C. (1999). Pensar (en) los intersticios. Teoría y práctica de la crítica postcolonial. Bogotá: CEJA.
Castro-Gómez, S. and Grosfoguel, R. (2007). El giro decolonial: reflexiones para una diversidad epistémica más allá del capitalismo global. Bogotá: Siglo del Hombre Editores, Editores; Universidad Central, Instituto de Estudios Sociales Contemporáneos and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Instituto Pensar.
Chakrabarty, D. (2007). Provincialising Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Chatterjee, P. (1993). The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
De Certeau, M. (1984). The Practice of Everyday Life. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Del Valle, C. (2005). ‘Mediacentrismo e invisibilización de lo étnico como objeto de estudio: una genealogía crítica de la comunicación intercultural’. Signo y Pensamiento, XXIV (46), 51–64.
Del Valle, C. (2004). ‘Genealogía crítica de la comunicación intercultural: mediocentrismo e invisibilizaciónde lo étnico en los estudios interculturales’. Sphera Pública. Revista de Ciencias Sociales y de la Comunicación, 4: 171–96.
Del Valle, C. and Poblete, T. (2009). ‘Genealogía Crítica de los Estudios interculturales y la ‘Comunicación intercultural’ en América’. IC—Revista Científica de Información y Comunicación, 6: 193–214.
De Sousa Santos, B. (2009). Una epistemología del sur: la reinvención del conocimiento y la emancipación social. Mexico City: Siglo XXI and CLACSO.
De Sousa Santos, B. (2010a). Para descolonizar occidente: más allá del pensamiento abismal. Buenos Aires: Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales (CLACSO) and Prometeo Libros.
De Sousa Santos, B. (2010b). Refundación del Estado en América Latina: perspectivas desde una epistemología del sur. Buenos Aires: Antropofagia.
Dussel, E. (1998). Ética de la liberación en la edad de la globalización y de la exclusión. Madrid: Editorial Trotta.
Escobar, A. (1996). La invención del tercer mundo, construcción y deconstrucción del desarrollo. Bogotá: Editorial Norma.
Escobar, A. (2010). Una minga para el post desarrollo: lugar, medioambiente y movimientos sociales en las transformaciones globales. Lima: Programa Democracia y Transformación Global and Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos. Retrieved from: http: //www.unc.edu/~aescobar/text/esp/escobar.2010.UnaMinga.pdf
Fals Borda, O. (1999). ‘Orígenes universales y retos actuales de la IAP (Investigación Acción Participativa)’. Análisis Político, 38: 73–89.
Ferreira, L. (2000). Los códices y la ley de expresión precolombina. Diálogos de la Comunicación, 58: 80–93.
Fuentes, R. (1992). Un campo cargado de futuro. El estudio de la Comunicación en América Latina, Mexico City: CONEICC.
Fuentes Navarro, R. (2005). La emergencia de un campo académico. Continuidad utópica y estructuración científica de la investigación de la comunicación en México. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Universidad de Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Mexico.
García-Canclini, N. (1987). ‘Ni folklórico ni masivo. ¿Qué es lo popular?’ Revista Diálogos de la Comunicación.
Gargurevich, J. (2002). La Comunicación imposible: información y comunicación en el Perú (siglo XVI). Lima: Universidad Mayor de San Marcos.
Gravante, T. (2010). Ciberactivismo y Guerra de Baja Intensidad. Un análisis de las experiencias de netactivismo en la ciudad de Oaxaca en un conflicto de contrainsurgencia (2006–2009). (Unpublished master’s thesis). Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla.
Grosfoguel, R. (2006). ‘La descolonización de la economía política y los estudios postcoloniales. Transmodernidad, pensamiento fronterizo y colonialidad global’. Tabula Rasa, 4: 17–48.
Guber, R. (2004). El salvaje metropolitano, reconstrucción del conocimiento social en el trabajo de campo. Buenos Aires: Paidós Estudios de Comunicación.
Guha, R. (1982). Subaltern Studies I: Writing on South Asian History and Society. Delhi. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/001946468302000209
Gumucio, A. and Tufte, T. (eds.) (2006). Communication for Social Change Anthology: Historical and Contemporary Readings. New Jersey: CFSC.
Gumucio, A., & Tufte, T. (2008). Antología de comunicación para el cambio social: lecturas históricas y contemporáneas. Bolivia: Consorcio de Comunicación para el cambio social.
Hall, E.T. (1959). The Silent Language. New York: Doubleday.
Herrera Huérfano, E. and Sierra Caballero, F. (2012). ‘La investigación social y comunidades indígenas, la necesidad de un diálogo de saberes.’ III Encuentro Latinoamericano de metodología de las ciencias sociales. Universidad de Caldas, Universidad de Manizales, Red Latinoamericana de Metodología de las Ciencias Sociales Manizales: 30 August–1 September. Retrieved from: https://sites.google.com/site/ccsociedad/iii-elmec
Herrera Huerfano, E., and Caballero, F. S. (2016). Comunicación y pueblos indígenas en Colombia: Apuntes sobre la necesidad de una política pública.Blanco, C. M., & Ramos Rodríguez, J. M. (editors) Miradas propias: Pueblos indígenas, comunicación y medios en la sociedad global, 45–58.
Kontopoulos, K. (1993). The Logics of Social Structure. London: Routledge.
Lander, E. (comp.) (2001). La colonialidad del saber. Eurocentrismo y Ciencias Sociales. Buenos Aires: CLACSO and CICCUS.
León, G. (2008). ‘ELACOM. Referente histórico y conquista de la hegemonía en el pensamiento latinoamericano de comunicación‘, Revista Razón y Palabra, 13: 61, March–April, ITEMS-CEM, Estado de México.
León, G. (2011). La Escuela Latinoamericana de Comunicación. Madrid: Editorial Académica Española.
Martín-Barbero, J. (1993). Communication, Culture and Hegemony. From Media to Mediations. London: SAGE Publications.
Martín-Barbero, J. (2002). Oficio de cartógrafo. Travesías latinoamericanas de la comunicación y la cultura. Santiago de Chile: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Marques de Melo, J. (1988). ‘Communication Theory and Research in Latin America’. Culture, Media & Society, X, 4: 405–18. London: SAGE.
Marques de Melo, J. (org.) (1996). O pensamento latino-americano en Comunicaçao, Comunicaçao e Sociedade, 15. São Bernardo do Campo: UMESP.
Marques de Melo, J. (1998). Teoría da Comunicaçao. Paradigmas Latino-Americanos. Petrópolis: Vozes.
Marques de Melo, J. (2000). Los tiempos heróicos. In Beltrán Salmón, L.R., Investigación sobre comunicación en Lationoamérica. Inicio, trascendencia y proyección, 283–89. La Paz: Universidad Católica Boliviana and Plural editores.
Marques de Melo, J. and Gobbi, C. (Orgs.). (2000). Gênese do pensamento comunicacional latino-americano: o protagonismo das instituições pioneiras—CIESPAL, ICINFORM, ININCO, São Bernardo do Campo: UMESP and UNESCO.
Marques de Melo, J. and Gobbi, M. (2004). Pensamento Comunicacional Latino—Americano. São Paulo, Brasil. UNESCO and UMESP, VII CELACOM, 15–18.
Marques de Melo, J., Tarsitano, P., Sathler, L. and Gobbi, M. (2005). Sociedade do Conhecimento. São Paulo, Brasil. UNESCO and UMESP. VIII CELACOM, 9–12.
Marques de Melo, J. (2009). Pensamiento Comunicacional Latinoamericano. Entre el saber y el poder. Sevilla: Comunicación Social Ediciones y Publicaciones.
Mattelart, A. and Mattelart, M. (1997). Historia de las teorías de la comunicación. Barcelona: Paidós.
Neuman de Segan, M. (2008). La apropiación tecnológica como práctica de resistencia y negociación en la globalización, IX Congreso Latinoamericano de Investigadores de la Comunicación, AMIC, Mexico.
Overing, J. (2007). La reacción contra la descolonización de la intelectualidad. Amazonía Peruana, (30), 17–49.
Quijano, A. (1998). Modernidad, identidad y utopía en América Latina. Quito: Editorial El Conejo.
Ramos, A. (2011). ‘Por una antropología ecuménica’. In Grimson, A., Merenson, S. and Noel, G. (ed.). Antropología Ahora, 97–124. Buenos Aires: Siglo XXI Editores.
Rancière, J. (2010). El espectador emancipado. Pontevedra: Ellago Editores.
Rappaport, J. (2004). Retornando la mirada: Una investigación colaborativa interétnica sobre el Cauca a la entrada del milenio. Popayán: Editorial Universidad del Cauca.
Regalado, J (2010). Política y acciones colectivas en el Occidente de México. Universidad de Guadalajara, Mexico.
Regalado, J. (2011): ‘Los movimientos sociales en México. La vía autonomista y comunitaria’. Seminario Nuevas perspectivas para el estudio de los movimientos sociales en América Latina. UAM-X. Mexico City
Rivera Cusicanqui, S. and Barragán, R. (eds.). (1997). Debates Post Coloniales: Una Introducción a los Estudios de la Subalternidad. La Paz: Editorial Historias, Ediciones Aruwiyiri and SEPHIS.
Rivera Cusicanqui, S. (2010). Ch’ixinakax utxiwa: una reflexión sobre prácticas y discursos descolonizadores. Buenos Aires: Tinta Limón. Retrieved from: http://www.tintalimon.com.ar/descargar.php?libro=978-987-25185-4-7
Rodríguez Oliva, L. (2005). ‘Comunicação pública pre-colombiana em sociedades meso-americanas: fontes históricas para seu estudo entre Maias y Astecas’. Revista brasilera de Ciências da Comunicação, XXVIII (2), 43–68.
Rubim, A. et al. Iuri (orgs.). (2007). Politicas Culturais, Democracia e Conselhos de Cultura. Salvador: EDUFBA.
Said, E. (1995). Orientalism. London: Penguin.
Sierra Caballero, F. (coord.). (1997). Comunicación e insurgencia. La información y la propaganda en la guerra de Chiapas. Guipúzcoa: Editorial Hiru Argitaletxe.
Sierra Caballero, F. (2006a). Comunicación y desarrollo social. Fundamentos teóricos y prácticos. Madrid: UNED.
Sierra Caballero, F. (2006b): ‘Information Society and Social Movements: Democratic Alternatives to the Dominant Social Development Model’. In Gumucio, A. and Tufte, T. (eds.), Communication for Social Change Anthology: Historical and Contemporary Readings (1360–1373). New Jersey: CFSC.
Sierra, F, Del Valle, C. and Moreno, J. (coords.). (2011). Políticas de comunicación y ciudadanía cultural iberoamericana. Barcelona: Gedisa.
Sierra Caballero, F., Del Valle, C. and Moreno, J. (coords.) (2011). Cultura latina y revolución digital. Matrices para pensar el espacio iberoamericano de comunicación. Barcelona: Gedisa.
Sierra Caballero, F. and Gravante, T. (2012). ‘Apropiación tecnológica y mediación. Líneas y fracturas para pensar otra comunicación posible’. In Encina, J and Ávila, M. (Eds). Autogestión de la vida cotidiana, 130–38. Sevilla: UNILCO.
Sierra Caballero, F. and Martínez, Marcelo. (eds.). (2012). Comunicación y Desarrollo. Prácticas comunicativas y empoderamiento local. Barcelona: Gedisa
Sierra Caballero, F., Bolaño, C. and Mastrini, G. (eds.) (2012). Political Economy, Communication and Knowledge. A Latin American Perspective. London: Hampton Press.
Sierra Caballero, F. and Martínez, M. (eds.) (2012b). Comunicación y Desarrollo. Prácticas comunicativas y empoderamiento local. Barcelona: Gedisa.
Spivak, G.C. (1988). ‘Can the Subaltern Speak? Speculations on Widow-Sacrifice’. In Nelson, C. and Grossberg, L. (eds.). Marxism and Interpretation of Culture. London: Macmillan.
Tuhiwai Smith, L. (1999). Decolonising Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. London: Zed Books and Otago Press University.
Valencia, J.C. (2012). ‘Mediaciones, comunicación y colonialidad: encuentros y desencuentros de los estudios culturales y la comunicación en Latinoamérica’. Signo y Pensamiento, XXX (60), 156–65.
Veblen, T. (2004). Teoría de la clase ociosa. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
Viveiros de Castro, E. (1986). Araweté: os deus es canibais. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahor Editor.
Viveiros de Castro, E. (2010). Metafísicas caníbales. Línea de antropología posestructural. Buenos Aires: Katz
Walsh, C. (2005). ‘Interculturalidad, conocimientos y decolonialidad’. Signo y Pensamiento, XXIV (46), 39–50.
Yehia, E. (2007). ‘Descolonización del conocimiento y la práctica: un encuentro dialógico entre el programa de investigación sobre modernidad/colonialidad/decolonialidad latinoamericanas y la teoría del actor-red’. Tabula Rasa, 6: 85–115.
Zibechi, R. (2012). Territories in Resistance: A Cartography of Latin American Social Movements. Baltimore: AK Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sierra Caballero, F., Herrera Huérfano, E., Del Valle Rojas, C.F. (2022). Communicology of the South: The Bases of a New Critical Theory of Communication. In: Del Valle Rojas, C.F., Sierra Caballero, F. (eds) Communicology of the South . Global Transformations in Media and Communication Research - A Palgrave and IAMCR Series. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08117-0_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08117-0_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-08116-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-08117-0
eBook Packages: Literature, Cultural and Media StudiesLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)