No abstract

No abstract

This study examines how a specific digital space—the Reddit message board dedicated to a discussion of the murder case featured on the podcast Serial—affords its users the ability to transcend the spatiotemporal limitations of traditional journalistic and criminal justice practices in the collection, validation, and deliberation of evidence. The digital discourse on the Serial subReddit can be understood, using concepts derived from network society theory (Castells, 2005) as a form of deliberative digital democracy (Dahlberg, 2011) in which crowdsourced evidence bears the weight of establishing the “rational” nature of a constructive, public discourse about practices employed by democratic institutions. However, the same evidence serves to reveal the limits of this form of digital deliberation when it is used in the practice of “doxing”—the online, public posting of private information about private individuals (Davison, 2012). This tension reveals the complicated relationship between democracy, privacy, and emerging technologies.

The institutional discourses of US journalism display both an ever-present sense of crisis and a persistent nostalgia for a mythic golden age when the news was better made and better respected by the public. This article examines discussions hosted by the American Society of Newspaper Editors between 1986 and 2000, what we call ‘the pre-Internet era’, as a site of discursive constitution and relative stability in the news industry. As various actors inside the news industry utilize both nostalgia and crisis as common representational strategies, these discourses circulate and propagate a sense-making regime that is both precise and flexible in its deployment, and thus, helps journalism cohere as a field. Specific discussions around the First Amendment, journalistic identities, and business issues all provide fertile ground for challenging and reaffirming journalism’s binding values, and reveal larger structures of power around who has the authority to both describe threats to journalism and prescribe possible solutions.

This study explores how two subreddits—r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut (Donut) and r/ProtectAndServe (PnS)—function as online interpretive communities discussing the same topic: police conduct. Members of Donut construct a genre from videos depicting a history of police violence in order to advocate for policing reform, arguing that cop-watching practices that produce this genre are essential to driving changes in policing. Members of PnS construct a genre from similar videos in order to advocate for resisting systemic reform, reading these videos as professional development opportunities for police to reestablish legitimacy with the public. Donut insists on change, while PnS resists change. Donut produces a discourse which engages with historical instances of police misconduct; PnS produces a discourse which rarely engages with this history. Studying these processes of interpretation reveals how dissonant meanings can arise from the same material, how meaning is made in communities consuming and repurposing texts, and how historical narratives are essential to challenging structural inequity.