Public Deliberation in Russia: Deliberative Quality, Rationality and Interactivity of the Online Media Discussions

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Filatova, Olga
Data de Publicação: 2019
Outros Autores: Kabanov, Yury, Misnikov, Yuri
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i3.1925
Resumo: Deliberation research is now undergoing two emerging trends: deliberation is shifting from offline to online, as well as from an inherently democratic concept to the one applicable to less competitive regimes (He & Warren, 2011). The goal of this article is to study the peculiarities of deliberative practices in hybrid regimes, taking online discourse on the Russian anti-sanctions policy as a case. We use the Habermasian concept of basic validity claims to assess deliberation quality through the lens of argumentation and interactivity. Our findings suggest that deliberative practices can exist in non-competitive contexts and non-institutionalized digital spaces, in the form of intersubjective solidarities resulting from the everyday political talk among ordinary citizens. Such deliberations can be counted as argumentative discourses, although in a special, casual way—unlike the procedural rule-based debates. Generally, as in established liberal democracies, deliberation in Russia tends to attract like-minded participants. While the argumentative quality does not seem to vary across the discussion threads sample, the level of deliberative interactivity is higher on pro-government media, accompanied with the higher level of incivility. On the other hand, discourses on independent media are distinctively against the government policy of food destruction. The democratic value of such deliberations is unclear and might depend on the political allegiance and ownership of the media. Though some discourses can be considered democratic, their impact on decision-making remains minimal, which is a key constraint of deliberation.
id RCAP_6fb0fb51b4afe6e9d6eba9954fec6360
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/1925
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Public Deliberation in Russia: Deliberative Quality, Rationality and Interactivity of the Online Media Discussionsargumentation; authoritarian deliberation; civility; deliberation; interactivity; internet discussions; media; online discourse; validity claimsDeliberation research is now undergoing two emerging trends: deliberation is shifting from offline to online, as well as from an inherently democratic concept to the one applicable to less competitive regimes (He & Warren, 2011). The goal of this article is to study the peculiarities of deliberative practices in hybrid regimes, taking online discourse on the Russian anti-sanctions policy as a case. We use the Habermasian concept of basic validity claims to assess deliberation quality through the lens of argumentation and interactivity. Our findings suggest that deliberative practices can exist in non-competitive contexts and non-institutionalized digital spaces, in the form of intersubjective solidarities resulting from the everyday political talk among ordinary citizens. Such deliberations can be counted as argumentative discourses, although in a special, casual way—unlike the procedural rule-based debates. Generally, as in established liberal democracies, deliberation in Russia tends to attract like-minded participants. While the argumentative quality does not seem to vary across the discussion threads sample, the level of deliberative interactivity is higher on pro-government media, accompanied with the higher level of incivility. On the other hand, discourses on independent media are distinctively against the government policy of food destruction. The democratic value of such deliberations is unclear and might depend on the political allegiance and ownership of the media. Though some discourses can be considered democratic, their impact on decision-making remains minimal, which is a key constraint of deliberation.Cogitatio2019-08-09info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i3.1925oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/1925Media and Communication; Vol 7, No 3 (2019): Public Discussion in Russian Social Media; 133-1442183-2439reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/1925https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i3.1925https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/1925/1925Copyright (c) 2019 Olga Filatova, Yury Kabanov, Yuri Misnikovhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessFilatova, OlgaKabanov, YuryMisnikov, Yuri2022-12-20T10:57:38Zoai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/1925Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:20:19.236101Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Public Deliberation in Russia: Deliberative Quality, Rationality and Interactivity of the Online Media Discussions
title Public Deliberation in Russia: Deliberative Quality, Rationality and Interactivity of the Online Media Discussions
spellingShingle Public Deliberation in Russia: Deliberative Quality, Rationality and Interactivity of the Online Media Discussions
Filatova, Olga
argumentation; authoritarian deliberation; civility; deliberation; interactivity; internet discussions; media; online discourse; validity claims
title_short Public Deliberation in Russia: Deliberative Quality, Rationality and Interactivity of the Online Media Discussions
title_full Public Deliberation in Russia: Deliberative Quality, Rationality and Interactivity of the Online Media Discussions
title_fullStr Public Deliberation in Russia: Deliberative Quality, Rationality and Interactivity of the Online Media Discussions
title_full_unstemmed Public Deliberation in Russia: Deliberative Quality, Rationality and Interactivity of the Online Media Discussions
title_sort Public Deliberation in Russia: Deliberative Quality, Rationality and Interactivity of the Online Media Discussions
author Filatova, Olga
author_facet Filatova, Olga
Kabanov, Yury
Misnikov, Yuri
author_role author
author2 Kabanov, Yury
Misnikov, Yuri
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Filatova, Olga
Kabanov, Yury
Misnikov, Yuri
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv argumentation; authoritarian deliberation; civility; deliberation; interactivity; internet discussions; media; online discourse; validity claims
topic argumentation; authoritarian deliberation; civility; deliberation; interactivity; internet discussions; media; online discourse; validity claims
description Deliberation research is now undergoing two emerging trends: deliberation is shifting from offline to online, as well as from an inherently democratic concept to the one applicable to less competitive regimes (He & Warren, 2011). The goal of this article is to study the peculiarities of deliberative practices in hybrid regimes, taking online discourse on the Russian anti-sanctions policy as a case. We use the Habermasian concept of basic validity claims to assess deliberation quality through the lens of argumentation and interactivity. Our findings suggest that deliberative practices can exist in non-competitive contexts and non-institutionalized digital spaces, in the form of intersubjective solidarities resulting from the everyday political talk among ordinary citizens. Such deliberations can be counted as argumentative discourses, although in a special, casual way—unlike the procedural rule-based debates. Generally, as in established liberal democracies, deliberation in Russia tends to attract like-minded participants. While the argumentative quality does not seem to vary across the discussion threads sample, the level of deliberative interactivity is higher on pro-government media, accompanied with the higher level of incivility. On the other hand, discourses on independent media are distinctively against the government policy of food destruction. The democratic value of such deliberations is unclear and might depend on the political allegiance and ownership of the media. Though some discourses can be considered democratic, their impact on decision-making remains minimal, which is a key constraint of deliberation.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-08-09
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i3.1925
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/1925
url https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i3.1925
identifier_str_mv oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/1925
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/1925
https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i3.1925
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/1925/1925
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2019 Olga Filatova, Yury Kabanov, Yuri Misnikov
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2019 Olga Filatova, Yury Kabanov, Yuri Misnikov
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Media and Communication; Vol 7, No 3 (2019): Public Discussion in Russian Social Media; 133-144
2183-2439
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799130651807449088