Public Deliberation in Russia: Deliberative Quality, Rationality and Interactivity of the Online Media Discussions
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2019 |
Outros Autores: | , |
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 |