Introduction

Participatory Media and Discourse in Heritage Museums: Co-constructing the Public Sphere?

“…Indeed, the museum is quite successful in establishing a shared discourse , with 84% of the texts repeating and (re)using the main terms the museums presents, often multiple times, and addressing the questions (i.e., the display) without questioning them. This suggests a museums‐induced “speech community.” So while the CIF turns visitors into writing interlocutors, they are mostly “convenient interlocutors” with limited potential for contestation (Bellier, 2013, in Adell et al, , p. 12).…”

“…This suggests a museums-induced "speech community." So while the CIF turns visitors into writing interlocutors, they are mostly "convenient interlocutors" with limited potential for contestation (Bellier, 2013, in Adell et al, 2015.…”

“…Participation emerges as a two‐edged term, which potentially carries highly positive meaning yet has been adapted and co‐opted by various cultural and other institutions. The “participation paradigm,” Adell, Bendix, Bortolotto, and Tauschek () summarize, “has been re‐politicized in the service of a neoliberal agenda” (p. 11).…”

The interpretation and utilization of cultural heritage and Its values by young people in Slovenia

“…This means that when researchers talk about tangible and intangible cultural elements, the focus is not only on the element itself, but more on the attitude that local people have towards the past: which reflections, attitudes, memories, emotions and other stories these elements trigger among individuals or the community, and how visiting heritage sites or researching past events can change knowledge, behaviour and attitudes toward the past, present and future (Lowenthal 1985;Smith 2006). In this context, researchers have started to highlight and examine the values that people, experts and other heritage makers are connecting with the past, the processes of its construction, and the consequences that heritage practices have on people's ways of life (Bold and Pickard 2018) as well as how heritage practices foster a sense of cultural identity and diversity, community building and wellbeing (Adell et al 2015;Onciul, Stefano and Hawke 2017). Here the most important notion is the following statement, also argued by Fairclough (2008: 299): "what 'ordinary' people value might be different from what experts value, or they might value the same things but for quite different reasons, such as for reasons of association, memory, or locality".…”

“…Indeed, national-level cultural heritage protection policies and practices must not be removed from these stakeholders (Bold and Pickard 2018: 7). Moreover, stakeholders from different sectors ought to be involved from the very beginning of such heritage activities (Bold and Pickard 2018; Court and Wijesuriya 2015;Adell et al 2015;Cahill and Dadvand 2018). However, in practice this is not an easy approach to achieve and many practical questions among stakeholders are raised.…”