To Read an Introduction to Political Science By

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

To Read an Introduction to Political Science By An Introduction to Political Science Jonathon York Introduction This project is intended to constitute an Introduction to the formal study of politics and political science, being a variation of what I wish I had when I first entered the discipline. All institutions of higher education tend to focus on a specific subfield or set of subfields, not necessarily intentionally, but over time these institutions produce what can best be described as a disciplinary orthodoxy, distorting the student’s vision of the discipline as a whole such that he or she may conceive of the whole of the discipline as constituting merely what the professors parade in front of their classrooms, in their textbooks, and in their supplemental materials. Knowing this to be the case it is my intention to present as broad a picture of the discipline as I can manage, in order that I may avoid the potential damage of the prejudices ingrained by a too-narrow view of the discipline as a whole. My own exposure to the discipline of political study was largely hampered by the blinders of those self-described students of politics at the University of Dallas who followed in the footsteps of the students of Leo Strauss, who on one hand insisted that in order to understand a thinker one must, if at all possible, closely read everything that thinker ever wrote (a laudable though difficult task for many)1, but on the other openly derided other methodological currents in the discipline, especially those that forsook the political philosophical tradition of the field and instead sought to adapt or emulate the quantitative methods of the natural sciences. This position placed blinders on Strauss’ followers and those intellectual descendants who, in the half-century since this scholar’s death, purport to instruct in the mode of Dr. Strauss, and today call themselves “Straussians.” I know this because I too was once so limited, without even having been fully aware the blinders were there in the first place. Imagine my surprise, nay chagrin, when I would hear in a graduate course in political science methodology from my professor, Dr. Tom Little of the University of Texas at Arlington, that “philosophy is wrong because it is normative; only through the empirical scientific method can we learn the truth.”2 Surely this was not so! Within a semester I withdrew and returned to Irving and the safety of the familiar to complete my professional degree. Looking back on it, I realize that both institutions were blinded by their respective orthodoxies, both of which emerged from what is sometimes called “The Chicago School”: On one hand, the University of Dallas rests squarely on the side of Leo Strauss and his disciples originally from the University of Chicago and now prominent at other institutions such as Claremont-McKenna and Hillsdale College; on the other, the University of Texas at Arlington adheres to the views of another Chicago political scientist, Charles E. Merriam, whose efforts to define political science as an empirical study of political behavior alone would dominate the discipline in the United States throughout much of the last century. About the same time as my graduate work neared its culmination in a thesis on Montesquieu’s view of the concept of liberty, the American Political Science Association was wracked with division, in the form of a revolt against the empiricists and statisticians in the discipline, especially by the students of political theory, the foundations of political philosophy and those who focused on both normative and contextual analysis of political phenomena. This division, from my perspective as a newly minted would- be scholar in the field, threatened to split in twain the Association I had just joined, especially when I first attended the annual conference in Philadelphia in 2003 and saw the publishers’ booths split between two separate floors in the convention space: one floor dominated by empirical, quantitative and statistical publishers, the other by normative, theoretical and philosophical publishers.3 Neither side appeared aware of the other’s existence; never the twain should meet it so seemed. Having noted this division, I resolved to attend as wide a variety of presentations and panel discussions as I had time for over the next three days, and in subsequent annual conferences I would repeat the same exercise. What I found in that first conference of my professional existence was a clear division with clearly ludicrous expectations on the part of the convention planners concerning which panels would draw the largest numbers. I saw that the quantitative and statistical analytic panels that year were assigned the largest conference rooms in the convention center, with row upon row of neatly arranged pink padded chairs and high ceilings to accommodate the expected crush of warm bodies hearing the latest advances in empirical political science. The normative, the theoretical, philosophical and text-based panels were relegated to much smaller venues, presumably a judgement on the planners’ part of the paltry interest these other, lesser historical relics of a bygone prescientific era in the discipline would elicit. However, when I attended these panels a consistent pattern would emerge: the large venues were nearly empty, the panelists at times outnumbering the audience in those yawning chasms, while the smaller ones were so crowded as to leave standing room only. For too long, it seemed, political scholars had been left “in the wilderness” in the United States by what appeared in the wake of the Second World War to be the triumph of quantitative empiricists over all other methodological approaches to political phenomena. The War effort had demanded commitment from every discipline in order to defeat the Nazis and the Empire of Japan, and while many were indeed up to the task, arcane fields such as political science could allegedly only provide institutional analysis and philosophical underpinnings for the justice of the Allied cause, neither of which were directly useful on the road to victory. Consequently, in an effort to secure support from the federal government through categorical research grant money, the entire discipline apparently retooled itself along the lines of the empirical and quantitative approaches pioneered by Merriam and others, leaving other research methods in scholarly exile. What I did not know at the time, and what I was only beginning to learn from having spoken with fellow conference attendees, was that a movement had formed in a prior APSA conference in San Francisco seeking to reform the methodological orientation of the discipline as a whole.4 A counter-conference panel was called across the street from the main venue more or less by word-of-mouth and, from what I have been told, had to be moved to a much larger conference room when the organizers, believing they would only attract a dozen or so dissidents from the Empire of the Empiricists, suddenly faced a crowd of around three hundred. In the twenty years or so since this reform movement, dubbed the “Perestroika” movement thanks to an anonymous eleven-point email sent by an individual calling himself “Mr. Perestroika” to the editors of the American Political Science Review on 17 October 2000, and calling for “a dismantling of the Orwellian system that we have in APSA”,5 I witnessed a change in the manner in which the discipline represented itself at the APSA annual conference, with greater attention to methodological diversity evident in the conference’s offerings, and what seemed to me a more balanced representation of different approaches among its members, and in particular, its leadership. However, as an instructor of government and political science at a community college in Dallas, when I started my search for a fitting introductory text for the political science discipline, I found that on the whole, this reform had nearly completely failed to extend to the available offerings. By and large, these texts broadly fell into one of two distinct emphases: Scope of observables and Methods of research. In the first camp I found one text (Rosskin/Cord) 6 that presented the breadth of observables well enough, but since it lacked a unifying sense of a theory of political inquiry, a student could be forgiven for having learned next to nothing about how to approach the observables and view political science as a form of “civics for grown-ups”. Furthermore, I noted an implicit bias in this text toward the empirical quantitative method of political inquiry, disconnecting the reader and future scholar from the axiological and epistemological roots of the study of politics. In the second camp I found a greater myopia: one text (Shively)7 emphasized only empirical research methods, another (Colomer)8 emphasized Rational Choice Game Theory, a third (Danziger)9 attempted to contextualize political science in a comparative framework and thus present either comparative politics or the broader discipline only poorly. What’s more, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board had prescribed five distinct outcomes for the introductory political science course which no text currently in print appears to address explicitly: 1) Define and apply political terms and concepts, 2) Define political science and identify the subfields, 3) Compare and contrast different political systems and institutions, 4) Apply the methods used to study politics, and 5) Critically interpret and analyze contemporary political issues and problems.10 In order to open up my students’ eyes to the breadth, depth and relevance of this discipline, as well as meet the outcomes defined in the state’s Lower Division Academic Course Guide Manual, I would either have to assign multiple texts, a stack whose total price would preclude its purchase, given the economic realities of an undergraduate student enrolled in a community college, or else I would have to develop my own resources.
Recommended publications
  • The Impact of Guided Practice in Argument Analysis And
    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Theses and Dissertations Summer 2020 The Impact of Guided Practice in Argument Analysis and Composition via Computer-Assisted Argument Mapping Software on Students’ Ability to Analyze and Compose Evidence-Based Arguments Donna Lorain Grant Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd Part of the Curriculum and Instruction Commons Recommended Citation Grant, D. L.(2020). The Impact of Guided Practice in Argument Analysis and Composition via Computer- Assisted Argument Mapping Software on Students’ Ability to Analyze and Compose Evidence-Based Arguments. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/6079 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you by Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE IMPACT OF GUIDED PRACTICE IN ARGUMENT ANALYSIS AND COMPOSITION VIA COMPUTER -ASSISTED ARGUMENT MAPPING SOFTWARE ON STUDENTS’ ABILITY TO ANALYZE AND COMPOSE EVIDENCE -BASED ARGUMENTS by Donna Lorain Grant Bachelor of Arts University of South Carolina—Upstate, 2000 Master of Education Converse College, 2007 Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Education in Curriculum and Instruction College of Education University of South Carolina 2020 Accepted by: Rhonda Jeffries , Major Professor Yasha Becton, Committee Member Leigh D’Amico, Committee Member Kamania Wynter-Hoyte, Committee Member Cheryl L. Addy, Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School © Copyright by Donna Lorain Grant, 2020 All Rights Reserved. ii DEDICATION To my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ who made me for a purpose and graced me with the ability to fulfill it To my father, Donald B.
    [Show full text]
  • 12Th, ' .Developmental St
    r . DOCUMENT RESUME , - .ED.176. 292 , CS 205 131 AUTHOR .Millere*Susan 'TITLE Rhetorical Maturity: Definition and Development. PUB DATE. May.79 NOTE. 23p.; Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Council of Teachers tf English (12th, ' Ottawa, Canada, May 8-11, 1979) EDRS ?RICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS /.College Freshmen; *Conposition (Literary) ; / .Developmental Stages;'*Educational Theoried; Higher Education; *Moral Develcpment; Persuasive Disqourse; ,*Rhetoric; *Student Developnent; ItNriting Skills IDENTIFIER'S. *Kohlberg (Lawrence) . ABSTRACT Lawrence Kohlterg4s stageS of moral development, when appliedito theories'of teaching Ccmpositien,_support any method or material that refers to, the age 4nd prior experience o4 the writer ,and the newness of th.e task.the writer is attempting. Rhetorical development and maturation, in%the ability to write and argue . persuasively are partly 'conc'eptual and partly related to the ability .to "decanter." College freshmin writers' responses to A classic moral 'dilemma ptoblen all stayed between Kohlberg's Conventional stages 3 and 4. The content.of their papers end its relationshiy ic Kohlberg!s. .'stagea'show that the movement.trom egocentric tc explanatory to persuasive'discourse-is evmovement from the writer's astumption of union with an audiehce to the writer's recognitiot cf ano'ther as an msudience and finally to the mriter0s.analysis of a distant4 oirunfaniliaT, universalized series.of valued as an audience.. complete Sample of class reiponses referred.to is appetded.) (AEA) I. sl 4 14341*************41****************************************************** * 200roductions supplied by.EDES are th,e best that can be aade., * from the original document. 4 , * 1 c. U.S. OSPAISTIAINT Of IIIIALTN.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Accountability, Communication and Democracy: a Fictional Mediation?
    Türkiye İletişim Araştırmaları Dergisi • Yıl/Year: 2018 • Özel Sayı, ss/pp. e1-e12 • ISSN: 2630-6220 DOI: 10.17829/turcom.429912 Political Accountability, Communication and Democracy: A Fictional Mediation? Siyasal Hesap Verebilirlik, İletişim ve Demokrasi: Medyalaştırılmış bir Kurgu mu? * Ekmel GEÇER 1 Abstract This study, mostly through a critical review, aims to give the description of the accountability in political communication, how it works and how it helps the addressees of the political campaigns to understand and control the politicians. While doing this it will also examine if accountability can help to structure a democratic public participation and control. Benefitting from mostly theoretical and critical debates regarding political public relations and political communication, this article aims (a) to give insights of the ways political elites use to communicate with the voters (b) how they deal with accountability, (c) to learn their methods of propaganda, (d) and how they structure their personal images. The theoretical background at the end suggests that the politicians, particularly in the Turkish context, may sometimes apply artificial (unnatural) communication methods, exaggeration and desire sensational narrative in the media to keep the charisma of the leader and that the accountability and democratic perspective is something to be ignored if the support is increasing. Keywords: Political Communication, Political Public Relations, Media, Democracy, Propaganda, Accountability. Öz Bu çalışma, daha çok eleştirel bir yaklaşımla, siyasal iletişimde hesap verebilirliğin tanımını vermeyi, nasıl işlediğini anlatmayı ve siyasal kampanyaların muhatabı olan seçmenlerin siyasilerin sorumluluğundan ne anladığını ve onu politikacıları kontrol için nasıl kullanmaları gerektiğini anlatmaya çalışmaktadır. Bunu yaparken, hesap verebilirliğin demokratik toplumsal katılımı ve kontrolü inşa edip edemeyeceğini de analiz edecektir.
    [Show full text]
  • Writing Real World
    WRITING FOR A REAL WORLD Writing for a Real World 2010–2011 A multidisciplinary anthology by USF students PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO DEPARTMENT OF RHETORIC AND LANGUAGE www.usfca.edu/wrw Writing for a Real World (WRW) is published annually by the Department of Rhetoric and Language, College of Arts and Sciences, University of San Francisco. WRW is governed by the Rhetoric and Language Publication Committee, chaired by David Holler. Members are: Brian Komei Dempster, Michelle LaVigne, Michael Rozendal, and David Ryan. Writing for a Real World: 9th edition © 2011 The opinions stated herein are those of the authors. Authors retain copyright for their individual work. Essays include bibliographical references. The format and practice of documenting sources are determined by each writer. Writers are responsible for validating and citing their research. Cover image courtesy of Marti S. This photograph was taken in Havana, Cuba. Printer: DeHarts Printing, San Jose, Calif. To get involved as a referee, serve on the publication committee, obtain back print issues, or to learn about submitting to WRW, please contact David Holler <[email protected]>. Back issues are now available online via Gleeson Library’s Digital Collections. For all other inquiries: Writing for a Real World, University of San Francisco, Kalmanovitz Hall, Rm. 202, 2130 Fulton Street, San Francisco, CA, 94117. Fair Use Statement: Writing for a Real World is an educational journal whose mission is to showcase the best undergraduate writing at the University of San Francisco. Student work often contextualizes and recontextualizes the work of others within the scope of course- related assignments.
    [Show full text]
  • Siyaset Bilimi Ve Kamu Yönetimi (Siyaset Bilimi) Anabilim Dali
    TÜRKİYE CUMHURİYETİ ANKARA ÜNİVERSİTESİ SOSYAL BİLİMLER ENSTİTÜSÜ SİYASET BİLİMİ VE KAMU YÖNETİMİ (SİYASET BİLİMİ) ANABİLİM DALI POST-TRUTH SİYASETİN POPÜLİZM, KAMUSALLIK VE GÜVEN EKSENİNDE İNCELENMESİ Doktora Tezi Mehmet Burak ÜNAL Ankara 2021 TÜRKİYE CUMHURİYETİ ANKARA ÜNİVERSİTESİ SOSYAL BİLİMLER ENSTİTÜSÜ SİYASET BİLİMİ VE KAMU YÖNETİMİ (SİYASET BİLİMİ) ANABİLİM DALI POST-TRUTH SİYASETİN POPÜLİZM, KAMUSALLIK VE GÜVEN EKSENİNDE İNCELENMESİ Doktora Tezi Mehmet Burak ÜNAL Tez Danışmanı: Prof. Dr. Aykut ÇELEBİ Ankara 2021 TÜRKİYE CUMHURİYETİ ANKARA ÜNİVERSİTESİ SOSYAL BİLİMLER ENSTİTÜSÜ SİYASET BİLİMİ VE KAMU YÖNETİMİ (SİYASET BİLİMİ) ANABİLİM DALI POST-TRUTH SİYASETİN POPÜLİZM, KAMUSALLIK VE GÜVEN EKSENİNDE İNCELENMESİ Doktora Tezi Tez Danışmanı: Prof. Dr. Aykut ÇELEBİ Tez Jürisi Üyeleri Adı ve Soyadı: İmzası: 1) Prof. Dr. Aykut ÇELEBİ ..……………….. 2) Prof. Dr. Filiz ZABCI ..……………….. 3) Doç. Dr. Cem DEVECİ ..……………….. 4) Prof. Dr. Filiz KARTAL ..……………….. 5) Doç. Dr. Ruhtan YALÇINER ..……………….. Tez Sınavı Tarihi: 28.06.2021 TÜRKİYE CUMHURİYETİ ANKARA ÜNİVERSİTESİ SOSYAL BİLİMLER ENSTİTÜSÜ MÜDÜRLÜĞÜNE, Prof. Dr. Aykut ÇELEBİ danışmanlığında hazırladığım “Post-Truth Siyasetin Popülizm, Kamusallık ve Güven Ekseninde İncelenmesi (Ankara 2021)” adlı doktora tezimdeki bütün bilgilerin akademik kurallara ve etik davranış ilkelerine uygun olarak toplanıp sunulduğunu, başka kaynaklardan aldığım bilgileri metinde ve kaynakçada eksiksiz olarak gösterdiğimi, çalışma sürecinde bilimsel araştırma ve etik kurallarına uygun olarak davrandığımı ve aksinin ortaya çıkması durumunda her türlü yasal sonucu kabul edeceğimi beyan ederim. 28.07.2021 Mehmet Burak ÜNAL TEŞEKKÜR Tez danışmanım Prof. Dr. Aykut ÇELEBİ’ye tez konusunun kararlaştırılması ve tezin yazım sürecinin tüm aşamalarındaki yardımları için teşekkür ederim. Tez izleme komitesi üyesi Prof. Dr. Filiz ZABCI ile tez jürisi üyeleri Prof. Dr. Filiz KARTAL ve Doç. Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 MAY Commencement
    2021 MAY Commencement May 7, 8 and 9, 2021 May 14, 15 and 16, 2021 UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI 2021 MAY Commencement TABLE OF CONTENTS University Officials and Committee Members . 3 Master of Music . 30 Master Occupational Therapy . 31 The University of Missouri Profile . 4 Master of Public Affairs. 31 Mizzou Alumni: New Partners in the Enterprise Master of Public Health .. 32 Schools & Colleges . 5 Master of Science .. 33 Master of Social Work . 36 Academic Regalia . 8 Candidates for Professional Degrees Honorary Degree Recipients School of Law . .. 38 Dan Hagan . 9 School of Medicine . 38 John D . Graham . 10 School Veterinary Medicine . 39 Candidates for Graduate Degrees Candidates for Baccalaureate Degrees Doctor of Philosophy . 11 College of Agriculture, Food & Natural Resource . 40 Doctor of Education . 17 College of Arts & Science .. 42 Doctor of Nursing Practice . 18 Robert J . Trulaske, Sr . College of Business . 48 Doctor of Physical Therapy . 19 College of Education . 51 Educational Specialist . 20 College of Engineering . 52 Master of Accountancy . 21 School of Health Professions . 54 Master of Arts . 22 College of Human Environmental Sciences . 57 Master of Business Administration . .. 24 School of Journalism . 58 Master of Education . 25 Sinclair School of Nursing . 59 Master of Engineering . 28 Master of Fine Arts . 28 Reserve Officers Training Master of Health Administration . .. 28 Corps Commissions . 61 Master of Health Science . 29 Alma Mater . 62 Master of Laws . 29 Master of Library and Information Science. 30 Candidates who applied by the application deadline are listed in this program. Candidates who missed this deadline can participate in the commencement ceremonies but are not listed in the program.
    [Show full text]
  • Against the Hegemony of Pol Comms Research Developed in Anglo Saxon
    Review of Gianpietro Mazzoleni and Anna Sfardini, Politica Pop: Da “Porta a Porta” a l’ “Isola dei Famosi” (Bologna: Il Mulino, 2010) Archetti, C Title Review of Gianpietro Mazzoleni and Anna Sfardini, Politica Pop: Da “Porta a Porta” a l’ “Isola dei Famosi” (Bologna: Il Mulino, 2010) Authors Archetti, C Type Article URL This version is available at: http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/12432/ Published Date 2010 USIR is a digital collection of the research output of the University of Salford. Where copyright permits, full text material held in the repository is made freely available online and can be read, downloaded and copied for non-commercial private study or research purposes. Please check the manuscript for any further copyright restrictions. For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please contact the Repository Team at: [email protected]. DRAFT The final version was published as follows: Archetti, C. (2010) Review of Gianpietro Mazzoleni and Anna Sfardini, Politica Pop: Da “Porta a Porta” a l’ “Isola dei Famosi” (Bologna: Il Mulino, 2010), Bulletin of Italian Politics 2(1): 196-198. Gianpietro Mazzoleni and Anna Sfardini, Politica Pop: Da “Porta a Porta” a “L’Isola dei Famosi”, Bologna: Il Mulino, 2010. € 14.00, pp.182, ISBN 978-88-15-13273-4. Politica Pop examines the conundrum of politics, media, and popular culture in the Italian context since the beginning of the 1990s. It particularly analyzes the way in which TV has changed the nature of political processes and how political actors have both adapted to the logic of the visual medium and attempted to manipulate it in order to pursue their own agendas.
    [Show full text]
  • Revisiting Listening Rhetoric Through Mindfulness, Empathy, and Non-Violent Communication
    The Journal of the Assembly for Expanded Perspectives on Learning Volume 23 Winter 2017-2018 Article 10 1-1-2018 Rhetorics of Reflection: Revisiting Listening Rhetoric through Mindfulness, Empathy, and Non-violent Communication Renea Frey Xavier University Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/jaepl Recommended Citation Frey, Renea (2018) "Rhetorics of Reflection: Revisiting Listening Rhetoric through Mindfulness, Empathy, and Non-violent Communication," The Journal of the Assembly for Expanded Perspectives on Learning: Vol. 23 , Article 10. Available at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/jaepl/vol23/iss1/10 This Special Section is brought to you for free and open access by Volunteer, Open Access, Library Journals (VOL Journals), published in partnership with The University of Tennessee (UT) University Libraries. This article has been accepted for inclusion in The Journal of the Assembly for Expanded Perspectives on Learning by an authorized editor. For more information, please visit https://trace.tennessee.edu/jaepl. JAEPL, Vol. 23, Winter 2017–2018 Rhetorics of Reflection: Revisiting Listening Rhetoric through Mindfulness, Empathy, and Nonviolent Communication Renea Frey ayne Booth described “Listening Rhetoric” as a rhetorical stance based in eth- Wics, connection, and understanding—which he termed rhetorology—and he saw it as as imperative in a world filled with potential global conflict and crisis. Krista Ratcliffe, too, has called for developing deeper listening skills as a means of generating understanding across lines of race and gender, and she describes rhetorical listening “as a trope for interpretive invention…[which]… signifies a stance of openness that a person may choose to assume in relation to any person, text, or culture” (17).
    [Show full text]
  • Prosumidores Mediáticos En La Comunicación Política: El «Politainment» En Youtube | Media Prosumers in Political Communicat
    Recibido: 30-11-2013 Código RECYT: 23687 Revisado: 13-01-2014 Preprint: 15-05-2014 Aceptado: 24-02-2014 Publicación: 01-07-2014 DOI: 10.3916/C43-2014-06 Salomé Berrocal, Eva Campos y Marta Redondo Valladolid (España) Prosumidores mediáticos en la comunicación política: el «politainment» en YouTube Media prosumers in political communication: Politainment on YouTube Resumen Este artículo analiza la figura del prosumidor del «infoentretenimiento» político en Internet. Si du- rante la segunda mitad del siglo XX predomina la «telecracia», un modelo de comunicación unidi- reccional que supone la popularización de la política pero también su conversión en espectáculo o «politainment», el siglo XXI se inicia con el convencimiento de que Internet conducirá a un modelo comunicacional bidireccional en el que se establezca un diálogo real entre el poder político y la ciudadanía. Esta investigación explora un nuevo campo de estudio, como es el «politainment» en la Web 2.0 y la actuación del prosumidor en esta nueva esfera comunicativa. El interés del estu- dio es detectar qué contenidos políticos consumen y producen los usuarios en red. Para ello, se realiza un estudio de caso sobre la información política producida y consumida en YouTube sobre la comparecencia de la alcaldesa de Madrid, Ana Botella ante el Comité Olímpico Internacional (COI) en septiembre de 2013. Se analizan los 40 vídeos más vistos en YouTube la semana de su comparecencia y un mes después, así como 3.000 comentarios a estos vídeos. Las conclusiones señalan que el prosumo del «politainment» en Internet se caracteriza por un consumo masivo de información pero un comportamiento muy pasivo en su producción y participación.
    [Show full text]
  • What Are Political Parties Doing on Tiktok? the Spanish Case Laura Cervi; Carles Marín-Lladó
    What are political parties doing on TikTok? The Spanish case Laura Cervi; Carles Marín-Lladó How to cite this article: Cervi, Laura; Marín-Lladó, Carles (2021). “What are political parties doing on TikTok? The Spanish case”. Profesional de la información, v. 30, n. 4, e300403. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2021.jul.03 Manuscript received on 12th March 2021 Accepted on 26th May 2021 Laura Cervi * Carles Marín-Lladó * https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0376-0609 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7456-5889 Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Universidad Rey Juan Carlos Dept. of Journalism and Communication Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación Sciences, Serra-Húnter professor Camino del Molino, 5 Carrer de la Vinya, 738 28943 Fuenlabrada (Madrid), Spain 08193 Cerdanyola del Vallès [email protected] (Barcelona), Spain [email protected] Abstract TikTok, already widely used before the pandemic, boomed during the quarantine that locked down large parts of the world, reaching 2 billion downloads and 800 million monthly active users worldwide by the end of 2020. Of these 800 million users, 41% are aged between 16 and 24 years. This social network, widely known for its entertainment videos, is increasingly becoming a place for political discussion and therefore a unique opportunity for political actors to (re) connect with young people. Acknowledging that the political uses of TikTok are still understudied, this paper aims to explore whether and how Spanish political parties are includingTikTok as part of their communication strategy. Through an affordance-centered content analysis of all the posts published by the five most important Spanish political parties (PP, PSOE, Ciudadanos, Podemos, and Vox), the current results show that, although all Spanish political parties have adopted this platform, their usage is unequal.
    [Show full text]
  • Rogerian Argument
    RHETORIC Rogerian Argument Traditional Argument Rogerian Argument Basic Strategy Writer states the claim and Writer states the opponent’s gives reasons to prove it. claim and points out what Writer refutes the opponent is sound about the reasons by showing what is wrong used to prove it. or invalid. Ethos Writer builds own character Writer builds opponent’s (​ethos​) by citing past character, perhaps at the experience and expertise. expense of his or her own. Logos Writer uses logic (all the Writer proceeds in an proofs) as tools for explanatory fashion to presenting a case and analyze the conditions refuting the opponent’s under which the position of case. either side is valid. Pathos Writer uses emotional Writer uses descriptive, language to strengthen the dispassionate language to claim. cool emotions on both sides. Goal Writer tries to change Writer creates cooperation, opponent’s mind and the possibility that both thereby win the argument. sides might change, and a mutually advantageous outcome. Use of Argumentative Writer draws on the Writer throws out Techniques conventional structures and conventional structures and techniques taught in techniques because they argument papers. may be threatening. Writer focuses, instead, on connecting empathetically. Questions to Consider Before Drafting: 1. Who is my intended audience? Is it the person I am directly writing to or some imagined third party? 2. What do I know about my intended audience? 3. What do my readers know about the subject at hand? 4. Why do they believe what they do? Why do they think and feel that my position is wrong? 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    Bibliography Adorno, Teodor W., Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel Levinson, and Nevitt Sanford. 1950. Te Authoritarian Personality. Studies in Prejudice. New York: Harper & Row. Alexander, Jefrey C. 1995. Fin de Siècle Social Teory. Relativism, Reduction, and the Problem of Reason. London: Verso. ———. 2003. Te Meanings of Social Life. A Cultural Sociology. Oxford: Oxford Uni- versity Press. Altglas, Véronique, and Matthew Wood. 2018a. “Introduction: An Epistemology for the Sociology of Religion.” In Bringing Back the Social into the Sociology of Reli- gion: Critical Approaches, edited by Véronique Altglas and Matthew Wood, 1 – ​34. Leiden/Boston: Brill. ———, eds. 2018b. Bringing Back the Social into the Sociology of Religion: Critical Ap- proaches. Leiden/Boston: Brill. Alvaredo, Facundo, Lucas Chancel, Tomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman. 2018. “World Inequality Report 2018.” World Inequality Lab. https:// wir2018.wid.world/ (retrieved 2019-3-13). Ammon, Ulrich, ed. 2006. Sociolinguistics. An International Handbook of the Science of Language and Society. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter. Anderson, Benedict. 1991. Imagined Communities: Refections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Rev. and extended ed. London; New York: Verso. Appleby, R. Scott. 2000. Te Ambivalence of the Sacred. Religion, Violence, and Recon- ciliation. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefeld Publishers. Archer, Maragret. 2004. “Models of Man: Te Admission of Transcendence.” In Tran- scendence. Critical Realism and God, edited by Margaret Archer, Andrew Collier, and Douglas Porpora, 63 – ​81. London: Routledge. Aristotle. 1938. Te Categories. On Interpretation. Translated by Harold P. Cooke and Hugh Tredennick. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ———. 1960. Metaphysics. Translated by Richard Hope. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Atkinson, Will. 2015.
    [Show full text]