Spike Lee, Corporate Populist

Christensen, Jerome

doi:10.1086/448598

Cited by 9 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, besides cartoons, political communication has incorporated widely circulated elements of popular culture, which Street (1997) aptly calls "political pleasures" (p. 191), such as pop music (Street 1997), documentary films (Corner 1996), or popular TV shows (Delli Carpini and Williams 2001). Such "political pleasures" have not escaped controversies, for example, films (Christensen 1991) or stand-up comedy (Boudana 2015). Hirsch's distinction between meaning and significance could be fruitfully exported from literary criticism to media studies, and used to illuminate the argumentative structure of controversies much beyond cartoons.…”

Section: Appendix a Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Controversial Cartoons in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Bourdon

Boudana

2016

The International Journal of Press/Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyzes the controversies triggered by sixteen cartoons about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, published in nine western countries between 2001 and 2014. For this, we use E.D. Hirsch’s distinction between the meaning of a text—which refers to the author’s intentions—and its significance—which emphasizes the contexts of production and reception. Critics focused mostly on significance, defenders on meaning. Using this distinction, we first examine the rhetoric of cartoons: stereotypes linked to antisemitism (accusations of deicide and blood libel), use of the Star of David as metonym of Israel, disputed historical analogies (between Israeli policy and Nazism or Apartheid). Second, we analyze four levels of contextual interpretations that have framed the debates: the cartoon as genre, the ethotic arguments about the cartoonist and/or newspaper’s track record, the cartoons’ historical and transnational intertextuality (especially with the Arab press), and the issue of audiences’ sensitivities. We analyze the complex exchanges of arguments that led mostly to a dialogue of the deaf, but also, in some cases, to partial agreement on the offensive character of the cartoons. We conclude that this methodology can be applied to other controversies around popular political texts, which offer similar characteristics.

show abstract

Section: Appendix a Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%