Search

In this interdisciplinary roundtable discussion, five scholars interested in political communication work through the democratic dilemmas created when privately owned social media platforms are used as digital public squares by elected officials in the United States. This conversation unfolds in the context of ongoing legal cases that challenge politicians' efforts to block select interlocutors and bar them from participation. We grapple with the tension between politicians' use of social media to broadcast their own messages as a form of publicity with the desire by some members of the public that politicians be transparent online by allowing the electorate to question or even criticize them. Through this discussion, we weigh the importance of the right to criticize the government and its leaders alongside the realities of contentious content on social media platforms that are rife with abusive content, in a cultural context marked by social inequalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article develops a theory about the narrative foundations of public policy. Politicians draw on specific types of narratives in order to connect the policies they are proposing, the needs of the public, and their own needs for legitimacy. In particular, politicians are drawn to policy narratives in which they themselves occupy the central and heroic character position, and where they are able to protect the scope of their jurisdictional authority. We demonstrate how this works through a historical analysis of congressional debate about the nonprofit sector in the United States. Two competing narratives framed these debates: (1) a selfless charity narrative, in which politicians try to empower heroic charity workers and philanthropists, and then stay out of the way; and (2) a masquerade narrative, in which fake charities are taking advantage of the nonprofit tax exemption, in order to pursue a variety of noncivic and dangerous activities. Members of Congress quickly adopted the masquerade narrative as the dominant framework for discussing the nonprofit sector because it provided a more powerful and flexible rhetoric for reproducing their political legitimacy. By developing innovative elaborations of the masquerade narrative (i.e., identifying new categories of “false heroes”), while remaining faithful to its underlying narrative format, politicians were able to increase the persuasive impact of their legislative agendas. We argue that the narrative aspects of political debate are a central component of the policy-making process because they link cultural and political interests in a way that involves the mastery of cultural structure as well as the creativity of cultural performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the impact of media events on the social context in a sociology classroom. Student response to course content is contingent upon many factors, including the social context in which they interact with class materials. Researchers have acknowledged the role of students' and instructors' social locations in the classroom and have considered the role that campus characteristics play, but have failed to look more broadly at the ways that the historically specific social context interacts with student interpretation of course content, or the prominent role that the mass media plays in mediating this environment. Instructors need to consider the ways that high-profile current events, which speak to sociological issues, interact with student response to course content. Instructors can enhance student learning by considering how current events and their mediation impact the way that students respond to related topics raised in class. If the relevant current events take on the prominent and ubiquitous character of media events, then failure to address the widely circulating descriptions and explanations would be a serious oversight. Instructors should address current events on their own terms in addition to addressing the way information about these events is gathered, produced, and disseminated.

Two letters to the editor are presented in response to the article about the American Political Science Review in the previous issue.