Public discourse is of enormous importance in democratic
societies and has for many years been primarily medial in nature. The current
transformation in the media landscape, in particular in the online world,
raises a number of questions regarding the significance of media for the
processes involved in formation of opinions. Some examples here are
network-specific forms of communitization in homogenous interest groups or in
groups which are dominated by highly polarizing extremist positions, the
significance of filter bubbles and filter clash, alternative facts and fake
news. With a particular eye to social networking services, another example is
the role of social media influencers, the impact of information intermediaries
as well as the use of image-based and audio-visual messages such as memes, GIFs
and video clips as arguments in discourse. Structurally speaking other agents
appear in addition to journalistic providers. In spite of the hope of
democratizing public discourse through new possibilities for participation for
all potentially informed citizens, currently the power of algorithms and the
granularization of message contact give reason to ask:
- How do opinion formation processes take place in the light of this structural transformation?
- Which agents play which roles?
- What does this mean for medial discourse in democratic societies?
Articles addressing such questions make it possible among
other things to identify appropriate points of departure for the promotion of
necessary skills in adolescents as well as adults and to outline conducive
basic parameters for formation of opinions.
merzWissenschaft 2019 wants to help improve understanding of
the role played by media transformation, in particular as made more dynamic by
the Internet, in opinion formation processes. In this context the treatment of
the following focus points appears sensible; the following are however only a
selection of possibilities, some of which may overlap in scope:
Focus point: Agents and structures
- To what extent can the diversity of opinions present in the Internet also represent the diversity of opinions found in the population and be integrated in a public discourse?
- What challenges emerge, for example with regard to the transparency of the influence of certain agents, to the particularization of sub-audiences or to the accessibility of information as well as the possibilities for participation?
- What role do new agents and content ranges
in the Internet play in opinion formation processes? Examples here are
algorithms, information intermediaries and social network services as well as
social media influencers including the associated networks, etc.
Focus point: Substance and Discourse
- How can substantive discourse in the Internet be characterized in terms of its significance for the process of opinion formation?
- What (new) strategies and phenomena are emerging from current network-based discourse? What are their specific respective objectives?
- What is the significance of the various types of arguments and representational forms in current discourse? What change processes can be observed here (e.g. fake news, alternative facts, GIFs, memes, etc.)?
- What conclusions can be drawn based on the
analysis of processes and argumentation structures with regard to the opinion
formation process?
Focus point: Individual opinion formation processes
- What is the significance of the Internet for opinion formation processes in different segments of the population? To what extent are aspects such as social control, forms of communitization, reflection or critical evaluation relevant?
- To what extent do individuals or groups use participative opportunities in the Internet? Why do (don't) they use these opportunities?
- To what extent do individuals fully understand network-based information in terms of sources and intentions? To what extent can they gain a complete and deep understanding of medial participation structures?
- What skills does the individual require in
order to deal productively with information and interpretation possibilities
among the diversity of agents? What are the associated challenges?
merzWissenschaft provides a forum advancing scientific
analysis in media education and promoting progress in the theoretical
foundation of the discipline. For this purpose qualified articles are called
for from various relevant disciplines (including media-educational,
communications sciences, (developmental) psychological, legal and philosophical
perspectives), also with an interdisciplinary approach, for the continuing
development of expert media-educational dialog. Of interest are original papers
with an empirical or theoretical foundation, presenting new findings, aspects
or approaches to the topic and which are explicitly related to one of the topic
areas or questions outlined above or which explore a separate topic within the
scope of the overall context of the Call.
Abstracts with a maximum length of 6,000 characters
(including blank spaces) can be submitted to the merz-editorial team (merz@jff.de) until February 18, 2019.
Submissions should follow the
merzWissenschaft layout specifications, available here.
The length of the articles should not exceed a maximum of approximately 35,000
characters (including blank spaces). Please feel free to contact Susanne
Eggert, tel. +49.89.68989.152, e-mail: susanne.eggert@jff.de with any
questions.
Summary of deadlines
- February 18, 2019: Submission of abstracts to merz@jff.de
- March 01, 2019: Final decision on acceptance/rejection of the abstracts
- June 07, 2019: Submission of papers
- June 10 to July 22, 2019: Assessment phase (Double-blind peer review)
- August/September 2019: Revision phase (with multiple cycles, when appropriate)
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario