Lost in the stream? Professional efficacy perceptions of journalists in the context of dark participation

Online comments and contributions from users are not always constructive nor rational. This also applies to content that is directed at journalists or published on journalistic platforms. So-called ‘dark participation’ in online communication is a challenge that journalists have to face because it lowers users’ perceived credibility of media brands and hinders a deliberative discourse in comment sections. This study examines how journalists perceive themselves in relation to dark participation, what measures they take against it, and how they assess the efficacy of these measures. Based on in-depth interviews ( N = 26), we find that journalists overall considered themselves to be effective in handling dark participation. The perceived efficacy differed according to the grade of engagement with users. Journalists who interacted very much or very little with users perceive the efficacy of their interventions to be highest, whilst those with medium levels of interaction rate their efficacy to be lower. Furthermore, the perceived amount of dark participation also affected the perceived efficacy.

The wound’s future

While we so commonly frame our public/civic wounds as past (or passed), we are used to talking about healing and mending existing wounds. This language also affects how we conduct deliberative discourse around current crises. However, I am more curious about the wound’s future. Specifically, I want to explore the wound’s future as it emerges in two different types of deliberation: prescriptive deliberation and descriptive deliberation. Rather than seeing the wound (only) as something that has already happened, or even as something that lingers on into the present, I want to address the wound’s future: a tactical future-oriented rhetoric that creates a broader deliberative practice.

THE STATE OF DEVELOPMENT OF DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY IN UKRAINE

The relevance of the state of deliberative democracy development in Ukraine is connected with the low efficiency of interaction between civil society and public authorities in Ukraine, as well as the inadequate level of functioning of existing deliberative democracy instruments. Since the decision-making system that was developed in recent years in Ukraine does not provide a rational approach, but is based on a one-sided understanding of political realities without taking into account the views of civil society, it is necessary to explore the deliberative democracy in Ukrain, by which the author understands the model of democracy, which is based on institutionalized dialogue between government and civil society, rational discourse, discussion, persuasion, argumentation, compromise, in which compliance ensures rational decisions. The comparative method was used in comparing the procedural consolidation and, in particular, the actual holding of public hearings by the Ternopil City Council and the Ladyzhyn City Council. The structural-functional method allowed to study the main mechanisms of deliberative democracy (local initiatives, general meetings of citizens, public hearings) as a factor in increasing the level of citizen involvement in political decision-making. Based on this, an absence of the mechanism to control the decision-making process on local initiatives was identified. The article proved the incapacity of deliberative instruments in Ukraine, without overcoming which it is impossible to count not only on the ideal, but also, at least, on the optimal model of development of deliberative democracy. As a result, the author presented ways to improve the legal regulation of the general meetings of citizens at the place of residence in order to increase the level of citizens involvement in the deliberative discourse in Ukraine.

The Deliberative Action in the Labor Market of Iraqi Art The Concepts and the Application

The analysis of the orientations of Iraqi art commodification contributed to the discovery of deliberation, which was founded in the deliberative discourse in the trends towards commodification in the Iraqi art, since the important transformations in social structures and relations produced a dictionary with new vocabulary and tools that replaced the traditions and norms that have been in circulation for a century. Deliberation and commodification have become more prevalent in the mechanics and trends of the art where the pace of change is becoming increasingly frantic towards the market. The general market for art constitutes one of the most effective phenomena within contemporary art, that there has been a proliferation of sales auctions, markets and halls and became part of the production process, and there is a general agreement on the deliberative consumerism and the functional use which has reverted the course of art in different directions in its procedural form. The research has adopted the descriptive analytical approach that determines the image which the phenomenon of deliberation must take. This approach is not limited to knowing the characteristics of the phenomenon, but extends beyond that to know the variables and factors that cause its existence, diagnosis and description, and the research will has adopted the applied approach in the analysis of some of its outputs.

The President Is in: Public Opinion and the Presidential Use of Twitter

Analyzing President Trump’s Tweets ( N = 30,386) with the first tweet starting from 4 May 2009, this article looks at the nature of his conversations with the public and the building of public support for his candidacy, till he assumed office on January 2017. Drawing theoretically on deliberative democracy and technological populism as performance, this study, among the earliest to use interpretative qualitative analysis, reveals the different themes in his discourse, rather than only highlight specific attributes of his tweets. Our analysis shows that Trump tweets frequently and casts himself as a political outsider who can alone save America. His racist and sexist language with his confrontational style leaves no room for deliberative discourse. His messages may be populist in character, but they are aversive and uncivil and lack normative attributes of deliberation that one would expect in the leader of a powerful nation, such as the United States. These characteristics have been present in his tweets even as a private citizen. This research makes a new contribution to our understanding of how Trump uses Twitter, starting from before he emerged as a contender for the presidential office, and the discourses that emanate from his use of Twitter to make broader inferences about the messages the public is receiving from Trump.

Breakdown of Democratic Norms? Understanding the 2016 US Presidential Election Through Online Comments

This study examined how comments posted on news stories about the 2016 presidential election reflected the disruptive discourses of the campaign itself. A quantitative content analysis and a qualitative textual analysis of user-generated comments ( N = 1,881) showed that while incivility was less frequent than impoliteness, overall there was ample evidence of the violation of democratic norms of political talk in these comment streams. Findings also showed that comments posted on stories in The New York Times were less uncivil than those posted on either Fox News or USA TODAY stories. However, comments posted on USA TODAY stories were more impolite than those posted on stories on the Times’ or Fox News’ websites. Norms of political talk that ascribe to some aspects of deliberative discourse were more frequent in comments posted later in the campaign, except among comments posted on Fox News stories.

Public deliberative discourse as an instrument for political modernization

The article provides a comprehensive analysis of public deliberative discourse as one of the leading instruments for political modernization. The emphasis is placed on the fact that deliberative communication became possible in practical terms as a result of consolidation of postmodern as a world outlook. It is emphasized that deliberative discourse is a communicative act of equal members, aimed at achieving a compromise in the form of a concrete public decision. The author argues that deliberative discourse contributes to the strengthening of civil society, which, in turn, acts as a kind of trigger for political modernization. After all, the consolidated community is better aware of its own interests, properly formulates common requirements and communicates them to the state and other political institutions. Deliberation offers a new interpretation of rationality, legitimacy, publicity, etc. Public policy is a sphere of partnership interaction of public entities, including the state as a carrier of political power and civil society as a carrier of communication power. It is systematically proved that deliberative discourse has a complex effect on the political system, which is objectified at the level of its individual components. Political modernization is understood as the logical existential deployment of the political system, which states the dynamics and denies the static of the latter. In the course of a deliberative discourse, changes take place in the political consciousness of a citizen, emotional expressions turn into logical and rational beliefs. It is argued that inclusiveness, equality and transparency of deliberative measures allow a citizen to become an active actor of public policy, suggesting a new political culture. Changing values provokes a new way of action. Therefore, a delibearative political culture leads to a new format of political relations – cooperation. As a result, a number of changes take place at the institutional level (the public administration model and its tools are updated). That is how the paradigm of good governance is strengthened and the e-governance method is activated. Modernization measures at the level of political consciousness and culture, political relations and institutions with necessity lead to the improvement of the normative and legal basis for the functioning of the political sphere of public life.