No abstract

The salmonella in eggs controversy in Britain in the late 1980s contributed to a partial dislocation of the hegemonic food discourse. This discourse had relied on a number of myths that are taken for granted, in particular the myth of managerial control. According to this myth, food risks had been successfully managed by a system of food production and a regulatory regime to ensure the safety and quality of the food. In the wake of the salmonella scandal the media debate formed part of a general politicisation of food safety where the managerial myth broke down. This resulted in a dislocation of the food discourse and a new social space opened for the existing myths to be contested and renegotiated. As a result, the media discourse played a role in either encouraging the preservation of the dominant values of the existing power structures or constituting a radical break with previous hegemonic conceptions of food production and consumption. Rethinking the concept of risk in terms of discourse analysis allows for an examination of the political origins of the arguments presented in the British media debate on salmonella. Risk is conceptualised as a signifier in the debate and a struggle takes place in the public domain in order to define and articulate the level of risk from salmonella contamination. On the one hand, the government and the farming industry maintained the manageability of the risk. Meanwhile, a critical discourse emerged questioning the scientific and regulatory hegemony within the area of food safety, the 'naturalness' of modern farming practices and the authorities' ability to manage safe food for the benefit of consumers.

This article argues that the definition of the political and its role in on- and offline public spheres calls for a conceptualization that takes into account the networked connections established between lay and professional political actors, mass media and mobile media. While acknowledging the importance of popular and mass media’s impact on participatory and democratic processes, this article focuses on the cultural citizen and proposes that a rethinking of publics affords a new understanding of the idea of networks as a series of connection points fostering a dynamic and relational view on the political. We illustrate this conceptualization through a case study mapping the agonistic and antagonistic frontiers in communication in a variety of publics and counter-publics in the context of Danish minority culture and politics.

No abstract

No abstract