Debating “what out to be”: The comic frame and public moral argument

On using humor to market higher education: at whose expense is the clowning?

“…To illustrate, Toker (2002) documents the work of an individual citizen who uses comedy in a legal battle with a nuclear power plant. Christiansen and Hanson (1996) describe the potential of comedy to 'cure' tragedy in their study of the rhetoric of the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power.…”

Science and Public Participation: An Analysis of Public Scientific Argument in the Yucca Mountain Controversy

“…As Toker (2002) suggests, ''Through criticism we can identify the specific rhetorical strategies that people actually use'' (p. 79). Understanding specific rhetorical strategies is important for further refining our understanding of the relationship between science and policy making.…”

“…In these models, decision makers are set aside from members of the ''public,'' a monolithic conception of the public that means anyone who is not a decision maker or expert. 6 Technocratic models of public participation construct science as the most important form of evidence, the public as a monolithic and passive body (despite the heterogeneity of multiple publics seeking an active role in decision making), and a hierarchical divide between experts and the public Farrell & Goodnight, 1981;Fiorino, 1990;Fischer, 2000;Fisher, 1987;Goodnight, 1982;Katz & Miller, 1996;Ratliff, 1997;Toker, 2002;Waddell, 1990Waddell, , 1996. Technocratic models of public participation constrain participation and dialogue between publics and decision makers.…”

“…Building from the assumption that publics can and should be able to understand scientific argument, scholars have shown examples of publics successfully demonstrating their technical competence (Fabj & Sobnosky, 1995;Hamilton, 2003;Kinsella & Mullen, 2007;Toker, 2002). Kinsella and Mullen's (2007) analysis reveals how Hanford downwinders engaged in forms of public expertise.…”

“…Raising a question, Science and Public Participation 61 although it usually follows the syntactical form of a question, does not have to appear in the form of a question. Toker's (2002) analysis of Lisa Crawford's rhetoric in the Fernald nuclear weapons facility public meetings suggests that Crawford strategically raised questions during a face-to-face meeting with decision makers and scientists as a form of the comic frame (à la Kenneth Burke). Toker argues that despite her technical competency, Crawford asked seemingly ignorant questions as a means of disrupting the public meeting and forming an identification with fellow public participants.…”