This article introduces the method of podcast ethnography. The method encompasses three general stages: to explore a podcast from a particular social field, to engage with it through careful, ethnographic reflexivity and to examine the podcast by developing typologies and themes expedient for analysis. Podcast ethnography is beneficial due to its spatial and temporal flexibility; observing a podcast universe can be performed on the move and in parallel with other tasks. This advantage enables a muchneeded breathing space for researchers inquiring vehement milieus, such as white radical nationalism. The article uses an example from this precise milieu in Sweden-the podcast Motgift [Antidote]-to illustrate and flesh out the potentials and challenges of applying the method's three stages. In so doing, the article argues for inclusion of podcast ethnography into the extended family of ethnographic methods.

Market adaptation, fragmentation and precariousness have been widely documented as problematic features of knowledge production processes in the university. This article follows an undercurrent of critical scholarship to explore how paths of resistance can be opened up by researching otherwise. The article builds on autoethnographic notes from a collective and non-funded research project aimed at gathering in situ narratives from people who experienced the 2013 Stockholm Riots. The research strategy behind this project, its organization as well as its results and reception, is here used as a point of departure to scrutinize the conditions of the possibility of critical knowledge production. The article draws attention to a critical place for doing research – in the cracks of the university – which arguably complicates the academic–public divide and keeps open discursive spaces during troubling moments of closure.

This paper discusses variegated scholarly approaches to what is here typified as a political economy of meat. Identified as a multifaceted, transdisciplinary and most dynamic field of research, inquiries into the political economy of meat imbricate key issues of social and economic development, across the human-animal divide. While some scholars interpret livestock production as "a pathway from poverty", others observe deepened marginalization and exploitation. The argument raised in this paper is that concise engagement with multiple critical perspectives may facilitate further explorations into the social dynamics that characterize the political economy of meat.

The past decades' substantial growth in globalized meat consumption continues to shape the international political economy of food and agriculture. This political economy of meat composes a site of contention; in Brazil, where livestock production is particularly thriving, large agri-food corporations are being challenged by alternative food networks. This article analyzes experiential and experimental accounts of such an actor-a collectivized pork cooperative tied to Brazil's Landless Movement-which seeks to navigate the political economy of meat. The ethnographic case study documents these livestock farmers' ambiguity towards complying with the capitalist commodification process, required by the intensifying meat market. Moreover, undertaking an intersectional approach, the article theorizes how animal-into-food commodification in turn depends on the speciesist logic, a normative human/non-human divide that endorses the meat commodity. Hence the article demonstrates how alternative food networks at once navigate confines of capitalist commodification and the speciesist logic that impels the political economy of meat.

The increased meat consumption during the past 15 years has boosted a dramatic production increase called the Livestock Revolution. This case study from Rio Grande do Sul indicates that the Livestock Revolution causes prosperity for large-scale food processing companies, while small-scale farmers are being marginalized. Utilizing the food regime analysis, this polarizing pattern is interpreted as an expression of the 'corporate food regime,' which is challenged by an alternative agri-food paradigm. As farmer resistance constitutes alternatives that fuel the dynamics of the Livestock Revolution, it is argued that these tensions reflect an ongoing crisis of the contemporary food regime.