“…These communication practices are certainly undermined in the above participant's words. The space between the speaker and the minorities he talks about is one of “uncommitted observation and impersonal witnessing” (Frosh, , p. 281), associated with established hierarchies and divides. Relative indifference is most visible in another participant's words:I don't lose sleep over it, but it's quite easy to sort of feel that…although I live in a very very diverse area to be in a bit of a ghetto.…”
Section: Communicating Togetherness and Separationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A certain level of disengagement from the proximate other also affirms preexisting barriers—defined along linguistic, technological, and perceived or real cultural difference. The ambivalence expressed here opens up to a discourse of conviviality through inattention—a space where uncommitted relations with others neutralize hostility and fear (Frosh, ) and enhance civility. Urban separation along ethnic and social lines becomes ordinary, as the words of a British White female participant also attest:The people running around in the shops and the restaurants, that's where I really have it [exposure to difference] in my life, rather than the people that I am actually really good friends with.…”
Section: Communicating Togetherness and Separationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In positive or negative ways, different modes of communication constantly expose the urban dweller to difference and its diverting claims to belonging. Thus difference becomes banal, either because in its physical and symbolic expressions it is regularly encountered in the street, or because it appears in mediated communication as fleeting and unremarkable ephemera (Frosh, 2007). City dwellers immersed in the routines of city life are often inattentive and indifferent to the range of urban sounds, languages, and media surrounding them.…”
Section: Communicating and Miscommunicating Togethernessmentioning
This article interrogates the ways in which urban communication enables or prevents politics of conviviality in the multicultural city. A multimethod, primarily qualitative study in a London neighborhood exposed extensive communicative fragmentation along ethnic and class lines. Does such communicative separation lead to segregation? Is togetherness ever possible? Rather than a togetherness/separation binary, our study revealed a dialectic that rests upon diverging distribution of modes of communication in the city: Media often separate urban dwellers and face‐to‐face communication brings them together in momentary but important association. This dialectic and its various incarnations give rise to a spectrum of politics of conviviality: civility through Othering; civility through negotiation of We‐ness and Otherness; and politics of civic engagement and solidarity.
“…These communication practices are certainly undermined in the above participant's words. The space between the speaker and the minorities he talks about is one of “uncommitted observation and impersonal witnessing” (Frosh, , p. 281), associated with established hierarchies and divides. Relative indifference is most visible in another participant's words:I don't lose sleep over it, but it's quite easy to sort of feel that…although I live in a very very diverse area to be in a bit of a ghetto.…”
Section: Communicating Togetherness and Separationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A certain level of disengagement from the proximate other also affirms preexisting barriers—defined along linguistic, technological, and perceived or real cultural difference. The ambivalence expressed here opens up to a discourse of conviviality through inattention—a space where uncommitted relations with others neutralize hostility and fear (Frosh, ) and enhance civility. Urban separation along ethnic and social lines becomes ordinary, as the words of a British White female participant also attest:The people running around in the shops and the restaurants, that's where I really have it [exposure to difference] in my life, rather than the people that I am actually really good friends with.…”
Section: Communicating Togetherness and Separationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In positive or negative ways, different modes of communication constantly expose the urban dweller to difference and its diverting claims to belonging. Thus difference becomes banal, either because in its physical and symbolic expressions it is regularly encountered in the street, or because it appears in mediated communication as fleeting and unremarkable ephemera (Frosh, 2007). City dwellers immersed in the routines of city life are often inattentive and indifferent to the range of urban sounds, languages, and media surrounding them.…”
Section: Communicating and Miscommunicating Togethernessmentioning
This article interrogates the ways in which urban communication enables or prevents politics of conviviality in the multicultural city. A multimethod, primarily qualitative study in a London neighborhood exposed extensive communicative fragmentation along ethnic and class lines. Does such communicative separation lead to segregation? Is togetherness ever possible? Rather than a togetherness/separation binary, our study revealed a dialectic that rests upon diverging distribution of modes of communication in the city: Media often separate urban dwellers and face‐to‐face communication brings them together in momentary but important association. This dialectic and its various incarnations give rise to a spectrum of politics of conviviality: civility through Othering; civility through negotiation of We‐ness and Otherness; and politics of civic engagement and solidarity.
“…We also come to know much about our world and how we should function in it through media engagements. The media provide an ‘unremitting exposure to the discourse of strangers’ (Frosh, 2006, p. 266) as we are caught up through media in witnessing stories, events, and episodes at which we are not present. Frosh suggests that such witnessing has important consequences for people, intertwining the impersonal and the personal in this imaginative engagement (we know about ‘the imagined lives of strangers’ only through the media engagement).…”
Section: Problem Three: Losing (And Regaining) the Social Contextmentioning
In this paper, we argue that media saturate everyday living, and that people engage with and are engaged by media in diverse and complex ways. We suggest a need for an informed social psychology of media that conceptualises media as social practice, and attends to media practices as they occur. We propose that much media psychology research is limited because it: (i) focuses too strongly on documenting causal, and usually negative, media effects; (ii) continues to apply unsuitable research methodologies and theories to investigating media and ignores advances in media research and theory arising outside the discipline; and (iii) largely ignores the social contexts in which media engagements occur. These arguments are illustrated by studies that take a more social and critical approach to media research and that show possibilities for overcoming these limitations and developing insights into psychological concerns enmeshed in media practices.
“…Mas a preocupação com a presença à maneira de um mecanismo de atestação da realidade narrada midiaticamente permanece restrita ao entendimento do testemunho como estratégia retórica do jornalismo, obliterando o que autores apontam ser o moral point do testemunho midiático, a saber, a possibilidade de encontro com o outro. Nesse sentido, o testemunho midiático cria um espaço comum através do qual reconhecemos o outro como igualmente humano e, ao mesmo tempo, interpõe uma distância espacial e temporal entre nós e esse outro (FROSH, 2009).…”
Resumo: Busca-se compreender como o testemunho midiático pode ser concebido como ação potencialmente política, isto é, em sua capacidade de produzir cenas polêmicas e de evidenciar simultaneamente um comum partilhado e uma separação. Tal movimento é fortemente inspirado na perspectiva política de Rancière. Nesse sentido, analisa-se a narrativa sobre o cotidiano do jovem viciado Paulo "Treze", contada no programa televisivo A Liga, como evidência da coexistência e da contradição de mundos instaurada pelo testemunho midiático.Palavras-chave: testemunho midiático; televisão; narrativa.Abstract: Scenes of testimony on television: the (non)encounter of worlds -This paper seek to understand how the media testimony can be conceived as a potentially political action in its ability of producing controversial scenes and simultaneously demonstrating a shared common and a separation. Such movement is inspired by the J. Rancière's political perspective.In this sense, we analyze the narrative about the daily routine of the young addict Paul "Thirteen" as told in the television show A Liga, or the Team as an evidence of the coexistence and contradiction of worlds established by the media testimony.Keywords: media testimony; television; narrative.
Primeira cena:Paulo "Treze" e o jornalista Rafinha Bastos estão sentados na calçada, recostados em um muro pichado. "Treze" fuma um cigarro e aparenta irritação. A tomada de imagens é feita do outro lado da rua.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
