Why We Should Keep Studying Good (and Everyday) Participation: An Analogy to Political Participation | Zendy

Neta Kligler-Vilenchik | Zendy

AI Assistant Blog Pricing

Home ZAIA Blog

Open Access

Why We Should Keep Studying Good (and Everyday) Participation: An Analogy to Political Participation

Author(s) -

Neta Kligler-Vilenchik

Publication year - 2018

Publication title -

media and communication

Language(s) - English

Resource type - Journals

SCImago Journal Rank - 0.804

H-Index - 19

ISSN - 2183-2439

DOI - 10.17645/mac.v6i4.1744

Subject(s) - analogy , politics , argument (complex analysis) , sociology , field (mathematics) , epistemology , everyday life , aesthetics , positive economics , political science , law , economics , art , philosophy , mathematics , biochemistry , chemistry , pure mathematics

Research on participation is currently characterized by a trend towards studying its “darker” sides. In this commentary, I make an argument for why we should keep studying good participation. In addition, I claim that the flipside of studying exceptional case studies of participation shouldn’t be only focusing on dark participation, but on everyday, mundane forms of participation, that may happen in surprising contexts (such as non-proprietary platforms) and may take different shapes. To make these claims, I introduce a case study of “good participation” in news production processes, and explain why it may merit this distinction. I then use a three-pronged analogy to the cognate field of political participation to show what it can tell us about good—and everyday—participation in the news.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.

Having issues? You can contact us here

Accelerating Research