Polling as Ritual

Lipari, Lisbeth

doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02783.x

Cited by 19 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As Lipari (1999) suggested, a ritual is a "structured social and symbolic activity that invokes, demarcates, or celebrates a community's deepest and most closely held values, of what it holds to be sacred" (p. 88). A biographical metahistory of communication research hones in on how mass communication research has become an institutionalized part of the academy, having gained the territory of established departments in top universities over the last 50 years.…”

Section: Biographical Historiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rebellion and Ritual in Disciplinary Histories of U.S. Mass Communication Study: Looking For "The Reflexive Turn"

Wahl‐Jorgensen¹

2000

Mass Communication and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, I take a fresh look at disciplinary histories of American communication study. Specifically, the discussion groups disciplinary histories into 2 different kinds of narratives, referred to as biographical and intellectual histories. The first group has as its method biography, and focuses on the achievement of central individuals and the methodology of their research. It is argued that these accounts constitute rituals of disciplinary affirmation. The second group has as its method intellectual history, and focuses on the theoretical foundations of ideas taken up by communication scholars, tracing the relations among ideology, culture, technology, and communication. These accounts, on the other hand, are read as polite rebellions against received understandings of communication history.In this article, I explore whether disciplinary histories represent a space for a reflexive turn in communication studies. The notion of reflexivity is borrowed from the work of sociologist Pierre Bourdieu (e.g., 1990Bourdieu (e.g., , 1991, who called for an examination of our stakes as producers of knowledge of the past, and the conditions that brought about this past.The discussion shows that the genre of disciplinary histories, as a self-interested discourse, does not allow for reflexivity because it falls short of considering our stakes as producers of knowledge-whether it be of a historical or scientific nature.It has become fashionable for communication scholars to turn to introspection. As our discipline has grown older and gained the dignity of an established past, we have become increasingly concerned with its history (cf. Robinson, 1996, p. 157; Wartella, 1996, p. 169). It seems that with age comes the realization of mortality, and with it, the need for reflection (for a comparison with similar claims, see Hardt, 1992, chap. 1). Since the 1983 special issue of Journal of Communication (Gerbner, 1983) on "Ferment in the Field" put intradisciplinary debate on the agenda, scholars have initiated more systematic efforts to identify the epistemological and institutional foundations of communication research. They have done so by publishing an array of books, articles, and chapters, and holding panels and symposia to ascertain and negotiate the state of communication research. In the accelerating introspection, communication study has been transformed into a polite intellectual battlefield. As the discipline undergoes construction, reconstruction, and deconstruction, its boundaries are hotly delineated and contested, and its territory fought over (e.g., see Dervin, Grossberg, O'Keefe, & Wartella, 1989;Gerbner, 1983). The debate circles around the problem of what communication study as a discipline is and what-if at all-it should be.In this article, I seek to both contribute to and interrogate the assumptions of this debate by honing in on the manifestations of disciplinary anxiety in histories of U.S. mass communication research. Although a variety of epistemological and methodological approaches have been ac...

show abstract

Section: Biographical Historiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rebellion and Ritual in Disciplinary Histories of U.S. Mass Communication Study: Looking For "The Reflexive Turn"

Wahl‐Jorgensen¹

2000

Mass Communication and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Polls, according to Hogan, substitute for substantive information about political issues and stifle debate (p. 177). Lipari (1999) claims that polls are a cultural ritual of participation in the symbolic American ''community.'' Lipari identified polling as a form of symbolic ritual that not only plays a role in social construction of public life but also reaffirms American values of opinion (1999, p. 90).…”

Section: Polls As Newsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Having and expressing an opinion is valued in the United States (Lipari, 1999). The problem comes when individuals start believing that their opinion matters on questions of fact.…”

Section: Critique Of the Media's Use Of Opinion Pollsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Critique of Internet Polls as Symbolic Representation and Pseudo-Events

Kent

Harrison

Taylor

2006

Communication Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In this paper I adopt a ritual analytic framework to study the perils of political flattery. The benefit of this framework stems from the strong explanatory power of rituals (Bennett, 1980;Carey, 1989;Lipari, 1999) due their essential role in society (Alexander, 2011;Goffman, 1967;Turner, 1982). Unsurprisingly, political rituals have drawn scholarly attention since there can be no politics without symbols and rituals to accompany them (Kertzer, 1988).…”

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

The democratic king: The role of ritualized flattery in political discourse

Danziger

2021

Discourse & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research has shown that personality cults are a strategy to further political legitimation. They function to secure a leader’s position in the absence of democratic legitimation methods by using excessive flattery towards the leader. Habitual public flattery towards democratic leaders has not received scholarly attention, even though it can provide insight into the danger authoritarian discursive rituals can have on democratic processes. By applying a ritual perspective to a comparative case study analysis, this paper illustrates how political flattery is not just an instrumental means for self-promotion in the political order, but also a manipulative and antidemocratic exploitation of epideictic rhetoric. Furthermore, the implicit requirement for ritualized flattery hinders accountability and deliberative decision-making, and the process of integrating differences of opinion or interest towards a collective and impartial political practice. Leaders who surround themselves with sycophants encourage opinion- and action-conformity to whatever pleases that specific leader.

show abstract

Polling as Ritual

Cited by 19 publications

References 18 publications

Rebellion and Ritual in Disciplinary Histories of U.S. Mass Communication Study: Looking For "The Reflexive Turn"

Rebellion and Ritual in Disciplinary Histories of U.S. Mass Communication Study: Looking For "The Reflexive Turn"

A Critique of Internet Polls as Symbolic Representation and Pseudo-Events

The democratic king: The role of ritualized flattery in political discourse

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About