Transparency is increasingly touted as a strategic tool for elevating journalistic authority. Despite this push, literature has overlooked how transparency can be utilized for authority purposes in audiovisual artefacts. In this paper, we conduct a qualitative thematic analysis of The New York Times’ podcast Caliphate to examine how transparency is strategically weaponized to stake a claim to journalistic authority. Based on the premise that transparency is a metajournalistic performance – a type of journalism about journalism that is performative in acting on people’s perception of journalistic authority – we identify three of those metajournalistic performances in the podcast: Revealing the journalistic process, Constructing the reporter’s persona and Reaffirming the journalistic culture. Together, they exhibit a form of self-celebratory transparency that strategically performs boundary-setting, definitional control and legitimization functions, in a bid to impress audiences and have them recognize the journalistic authority of the Caliphate reporters and The Times. We conclude with the implications of these strategic performances of transparency. First, how it can be used by reporters to reinstate verticality over audiences. Second, how the journalistic culture (norms, values, practices, etc.) can be transparently projected outward (to the public) or inward (to the journalist themself) to elevate authority – a new concept for journalism studies. Third, how metajournalistic performances of transparency may reveal power dynamics within the journalistic field.

Negative outcomes of ageism in the context of the Canadian labor market are well documented. Older workers remain the target of age-based stereotypes and attitudes on the part of employers. This study aims at assessing (1) the extent to which quality and quantity intergroup contacts between younger and older workers as well as knowledge-sharing practices reduce ageist attitudes, in turn (2) how a decrease in ageist attitudes increase the level of workers’ engagement and intentions to remain in the organization. Data were collected from 603 Canadian workers (aged 18 to 68 years old) from private and public organizations using an online survey measuring concepts under study. Results of a path analysis suggest that intergroup contacts and knowledge-sharing practices are associated with positive attitudes about older workers. More so, positive attitudes about older workers generate higher levels of work engagement, which in turn are associated with stronger intentions to remain with the organization. However, positive attitudes about older workers had no effect on intentions to remain in the workplace. Results are discussed in light of the intergroup contact theory.

Ageism toward older workers is prevalent in the labor market. The present study aimed to understand psychosocial mechanisms that may counteract this form of discrimination and help retain workers in the labor force. Using a sample of 500 Canadian younger and older workers, this study tested a model hypothesizing that intergenerational contacts and knowledge sharing practices can reduce ageist views about older adults and age-based discrimination against one’s own group, and in turn, enhance work engagement and intentions to remain in the workplace. The final model shows that knowledge sharing practices mediate the relationship between intergroup contacts and positive views about older workers as well as age-based discrimination. It also suggests that low levels of age-based discrimination increase work engagement and intentions to remain in the organization for workers of all ages. Practice and policy implications are discussed.

No abstract

Lu, the telos of reconciliation is nonalienation: "agents' mutual and nonalienated affirmation of the social/political order" alongside those agents nonalienated flourishing (37, 182-83). Because alienation has both objective and subjective components (38), reconciliation, too, operates at different levels: interactional reconciliation (37), existential reconciliation (38), and the "more normatively fundamental" (183) structural reconciliation (37). This attention to the objective conditions necessary for reconciliation echoes Indigenous critiques of reconciliation that offer alternative conceptions while also offering a refreshing challenge to agonistic conceptions in which critical criteria are limited to the problem of closure. Still, one question that arises here relates to critiques of reconciliation that do not seek to recuperate it as a normative or regulative ideal. This raises a question of the relationship between reconciliation as an ideal and political action. Unlike other approaches that ignore this distinction, Lu's text rightly holds on to it, emphasizing reconciliation as an ideal rather than a vehicle for political transformation-suggesting decolonization (269), decentering (274-75), and disalienation (277) as strategies for transformative redress. The extent to which this distinction of reconciliation as a regulative ideal remains convincing may map onto evaluations of the utility of ideal theory for contemporary political situations. For this reader, the analytical distinctions are clarifying and politically relevant. Nevertheless, I still find myself wondering whether reconstructions participate in the closure of alternative horizons. Les fausses nouvelles, nouveaux visages, nouveaux défis. Comment déterminer la valeur de l'information dans les sociétés démocratiques?