The Performativity of “Media Logic” in the Mass Mediation of Science

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Resumé

Studies of the use of research-based expertise in the mass media often demonstrate how experts are used to confirm journalists’ angles on particular stories or how research-based knowledge claims are twisted. Both among practitioners and science communication scholars, such practices are often explained with reference to a pervasive “media logic.” “Media logic” is constructed as governing choices and interactions of researchers and journalists. This article critically examines the extensive use of the term “media logic” to explain choices, changes or content in media production, and presents Actor-Network-Theory as an approach that invites us to ask what takes place in practice without resorting to such generalizing explanatory devices. The article argues that a quick jump to “media logic” as an explanation may imply that we forget its contingency and ignore what actually takes place in journalists’ and researchers’ negotiations about texts and facts in the mass mediation of science.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftPublic Understanding of Science
Vol/bind21
Udgave nummer6
Sider (fra-til)674-688
ISSN0963-6625
DOI
StatusUdgivet - aug. 2012

Citer dette

@article{c670ae6bf2b14b8fa6e33c7cb0f4f82c,
title = "The Performativity of “Media Logic” in the Mass Mediation of Science",
abstract = "Studies of the use of research-based expertise in the mass media often demonstrate how experts are used to confirm journalists’ angles on particular stories or how research-based knowledge claims are twisted. Both among practitioners and science communication scholars, such practices are often explained with reference to a pervasive “media logic.” “Media logic” is constructed as governing choices and interactions of researchers and journalists. This article critically examines the extensive use of the term “media logic” to explain choices, changes or content in media production, and presents Actor-Network-Theory as an approach that invites us to ask what takes place in practice without resorting to such generalizing explanatory devices. The article argues that a quick jump to “media logic” as an explanation may imply that we forget its contingency and ignore what actually takes place in journalists’ and researchers’ negotiations about texts and facts in the mass mediation of science.",
keywords = "Actant, Actor-Network-Theory, Media Logic, Mass Mediation, Professional Identities, Science Communication",
author = "Ursula Plesner",
year = "2012",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1177/0963662510385309",
language = "English",
volume = "21",
pages = "674--688",
journal = "Public Understanding of Science",
issn = "0963-6625",
publisher = "Sage Publications Ltd.",
number = "6",

}

The Performativity of “Media Logic” in the Mass Mediation of Science. / Plesner, Ursula.

I: Public Understanding of Science, Bind 21, Nr. 6, 08.2012, s. 674-688.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Performativity of “Media Logic” in the Mass Mediation of Science

AU - Plesner, Ursula

PY - 2012/8

Y1 - 2012/8

N2 - Studies of the use of research-based expertise in the mass media often demonstrate how experts are used to confirm journalists’ angles on particular stories or how research-based knowledge claims are twisted. Both among practitioners and science communication scholars, such practices are often explained with reference to a pervasive “media logic.” “Media logic” is constructed as governing choices and interactions of researchers and journalists. This article critically examines the extensive use of the term “media logic” to explain choices, changes or content in media production, and presents Actor-Network-Theory as an approach that invites us to ask what takes place in practice without resorting to such generalizing explanatory devices. The article argues that a quick jump to “media logic” as an explanation may imply that we forget its contingency and ignore what actually takes place in journalists’ and researchers’ negotiations about texts and facts in the mass mediation of science.

AB - Studies of the use of research-based expertise in the mass media often demonstrate how experts are used to confirm journalists’ angles on particular stories or how research-based knowledge claims are twisted. Both among practitioners and science communication scholars, such practices are often explained with reference to a pervasive “media logic.” “Media logic” is constructed as governing choices and interactions of researchers and journalists. This article critically examines the extensive use of the term “media logic” to explain choices, changes or content in media production, and presents Actor-Network-Theory as an approach that invites us to ask what takes place in practice without resorting to such generalizing explanatory devices. The article argues that a quick jump to “media logic” as an explanation may imply that we forget its contingency and ignore what actually takes place in journalists’ and researchers’ negotiations about texts and facts in the mass mediation of science.

KW - Actant

KW - Actor-Network-Theory

KW - Media Logic

KW - Mass Mediation

KW - Professional Identities

KW - Science Communication

U2 - 10.1177/0963662510385309

DO - 10.1177/0963662510385309

M3 - Journal article

VL - 21

SP - 674

EP - 688

JO - Public Understanding of Science

JF - Public Understanding of Science

SN - 0963-6625

IS - 6

ER -