The meaning of community: the viability of Public Sphere theory and Social Cohesion on social media groups: a reception study of the ‘Grahamstown’ Facebook Group
- Authors: Ferreira, Ettioné
- Date: 2019
- Subjects: Digital media -- Social aspects , Facebook (Firm) , Social participation -- South Africa -- Makhanda , Public sphere -- South Africa -- Makhanda , Group identity -- South Africa -- Makhanda , Grahamstown Facebook Group
- Language: English
- Type: text , Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/114870 , vital:34043 , Digital media -- Social aspects , Facebook (Firm) , Social participation -- South Africa -- Makhanda , Public sphere -- South Africa -- Makhanda , Group identity -- South Africa -- Makhanda , Grahamstown Facebook Group
- Description: This study explores the meaning of community to Grahamstown’s online social media community, through a case study of the ‘Grahamstown’ Facebook group (GFG). The study explores the possibilities of social media as a public sphere and the way geographically-based social media sites might contribute to social cohesion in a community. The study explores what kinds of discussions take place on the GFG and why they are happening. It investigates whether these discussions can promote understanding and social solidarity, and whether useful deliberations are taking place, in some kind of approximation of a public sphere. Is this Group contributing to the wellbeing of the community, and how? Drawing on public sphere theory and various conceptions of the concept of social cohesion, the dissertation aims to find out how much of an impact the GFG has on Grahamstown/Makhanda inhabitants’ lives and sense of community. The study argues that with the advent of digital media, another ‘structural transformation’ in Habermasian terms, is underway, both empirically and theoretically. Through more than a dozen in-depth interviews combined with content analysis (via participant observation), the study finds that participation in and exposure to the GFG does lead, for many, to a sense of belonging and social cohesion as community members come together to act in relation to the state, local business and other institutions. The viability of ideas of highly localised (in time and space) ‘public sphericules’ as an alternative to broader more overarching concepts of a public sphere, is explored in this study. The study also suggests a typology of users, identifying the frequency, tone of voice and motives for participating on the GFG and attempts a periodisation of the GFG’s changing role in the community over the past decade.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2019
- Authors: Ferreira, Ettioné
- Date: 2019
- Subjects: Digital media -- Social aspects , Facebook (Firm) , Social participation -- South Africa -- Makhanda , Public sphere -- South Africa -- Makhanda , Group identity -- South Africa -- Makhanda , Grahamstown Facebook Group
- Language: English
- Type: text , Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/114870 , vital:34043 , Digital media -- Social aspects , Facebook (Firm) , Social participation -- South Africa -- Makhanda , Public sphere -- South Africa -- Makhanda , Group identity -- South Africa -- Makhanda , Grahamstown Facebook Group
- Description: This study explores the meaning of community to Grahamstown’s online social media community, through a case study of the ‘Grahamstown’ Facebook group (GFG). The study explores the possibilities of social media as a public sphere and the way geographically-based social media sites might contribute to social cohesion in a community. The study explores what kinds of discussions take place on the GFG and why they are happening. It investigates whether these discussions can promote understanding and social solidarity, and whether useful deliberations are taking place, in some kind of approximation of a public sphere. Is this Group contributing to the wellbeing of the community, and how? Drawing on public sphere theory and various conceptions of the concept of social cohesion, the dissertation aims to find out how much of an impact the GFG has on Grahamstown/Makhanda inhabitants’ lives and sense of community. The study argues that with the advent of digital media, another ‘structural transformation’ in Habermasian terms, is underway, both empirically and theoretically. Through more than a dozen in-depth interviews combined with content analysis (via participant observation), the study finds that participation in and exposure to the GFG does lead, for many, to a sense of belonging and social cohesion as community members come together to act in relation to the state, local business and other institutions. The viability of ideas of highly localised (in time and space) ‘public sphericules’ as an alternative to broader more overarching concepts of a public sphere, is explored in this study. The study also suggests a typology of users, identifying the frequency, tone of voice and motives for participating on the GFG and attempts a periodisation of the GFG’s changing role in the community over the past decade.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2019
What meanings a selection of South African legal practitioners make of their role in the emerging digital media ecosystem
- Authors: Robertson, Heather Lillian
- Date: 2019
- Subjects: Public sphere -- South Africa , Lawyers -- South Africa , Citizen journalism -- South Africa , User-generated content -- South Africa , Social media -- Authorship , Digital media -- South Africa , Online journalism -- South Africa , Liminality , Journalism, Legal -- South Africa , Gatewatching , New media ecosystem
- Language: English
- Type: text , Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/114854 , vital:34042
- Description: This dissertation explores what a sample of South African lawyers understand about the roles they play in digital public spaces, and whether they perceive their contributions as impacting on journalism in general and legal knowledge among the public more broadly. The communications revolution triggered by web 2.0 interactivity has created a new media ecosystem in which mainstream media journalists co-exist with a variety of non-journalist content producers - including professionals like lawyers, who contribute to media content. This study specifically explores current debates about how the media ecosystem is changing in the digital age, including journalistic practices and routines and the role of journalism within a democracy and daily life. Thomas Hanitzsch and Tim Vos’s recent taxonomy of journalistic functions and roles in society is adapted by combining the domains of politics and daily life, to better describe the roles of non-journalists like the eleven digitally active members of the South African legal community in this study. Using qualitative interviews and content analysis research methods, the study suggests lawyers’ practices and routines challenge current theorisation about the new media ecosystem and digital public sphere in particular ways, suggesting that the affective nature of social media interactions between the lawyers and members of the public is more usefully understood via drawing on Chantal Mouffe’s concept of agonistic public spaces and Axel Bruns and Tim Highfield’s theorisation of ‘public sphericules’ than Jurgen Habermas’s conceptualisation of a rational public sphere. The study found that all of the digitally active lawyers played one or more active roles in contributing news, opinion and debate about legal and social justice matters on different digital public spaces, even though most were reluctant to describe what they do as journalism. The study concludes that this select group of lawyers do complement and enhance the work of journalists covering the legal field in the new media ecosystem in South Africa. It suggests that much more can be done by both journalists and the legal community to deepen co-operation to further enhance public knowledge about the workings of the South African legal system, in relation to legal rights and the rule of law. This dissertation explores what a sample of South African lawyers understand about the roles they play in digital public spaces, and whether they perceive their contributions as impacting on journalism in general and legal knowledge among the public more broadly. The communications revolution triggered by web 2.0 interactivity has created a new media ecosystem in which mainstream media journalists co-exist with a variety of non-journalist content producers - including professionals like lawyers, who contribute to media content. This study specifically explores current debates about how the media ecosystem is changing in the digital age, including journalistic practices and routines and the role of journalism within a democracy and daily life. Thomas Hanitzsch and Tim Vos’s recent taxonomy of journalistic functions and roles in society is adapted by combining the domains of politics and daily life, to better describe the roles of non-journalists like the eleven digitally active members of the South African legal community in this study. Using qualitative interviews and content analysis research methods, the study suggests lawyers’ practices and routines challenge current theorisation about the new media ecosystem and digital public sphere in particular ways, suggesting that the affective nature of social media interactions between the lawyers and members of the public is more usefully understood via drawing on Chantal Mouffe’s concept of agonistic public spaces and Axel Bruns and Tim Highfield’s theorisation of ‘public sphericules’ than Jurgen Habermas’s conceptualisation of a rational public sphere. The study found that all of the digitally active lawyers played one or more active roles in contributing news, opinion and debate about legal and social justice matters on different digital public spaces, even though most were reluctant to describe what they do as journalism. The study concludes that this select group of lawyers do complement and enhance the work of journalists covering the legal field in the new media ecosystem in South Africa. It suggests that much more can be done by both journalists and the legal community to deepen co-operation to further enhance public knowledge about the workings of the South African legal system, in relation to legal rights and the rule of law.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2019
- Authors: Robertson, Heather Lillian
- Date: 2019
- Subjects: Public sphere -- South Africa , Lawyers -- South Africa , Citizen journalism -- South Africa , User-generated content -- South Africa , Social media -- Authorship , Digital media -- South Africa , Online journalism -- South Africa , Liminality , Journalism, Legal -- South Africa , Gatewatching , New media ecosystem
- Language: English
- Type: text , Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/114854 , vital:34042
- Description: This dissertation explores what a sample of South African lawyers understand about the roles they play in digital public spaces, and whether they perceive their contributions as impacting on journalism in general and legal knowledge among the public more broadly. The communications revolution triggered by web 2.0 interactivity has created a new media ecosystem in which mainstream media journalists co-exist with a variety of non-journalist content producers - including professionals like lawyers, who contribute to media content. This study specifically explores current debates about how the media ecosystem is changing in the digital age, including journalistic practices and routines and the role of journalism within a democracy and daily life. Thomas Hanitzsch and Tim Vos’s recent taxonomy of journalistic functions and roles in society is adapted by combining the domains of politics and daily life, to better describe the roles of non-journalists like the eleven digitally active members of the South African legal community in this study. Using qualitative interviews and content analysis research methods, the study suggests lawyers’ practices and routines challenge current theorisation about the new media ecosystem and digital public sphere in particular ways, suggesting that the affective nature of social media interactions between the lawyers and members of the public is more usefully understood via drawing on Chantal Mouffe’s concept of agonistic public spaces and Axel Bruns and Tim Highfield’s theorisation of ‘public sphericules’ than Jurgen Habermas’s conceptualisation of a rational public sphere. The study found that all of the digitally active lawyers played one or more active roles in contributing news, opinion and debate about legal and social justice matters on different digital public spaces, even though most were reluctant to describe what they do as journalism. The study concludes that this select group of lawyers do complement and enhance the work of journalists covering the legal field in the new media ecosystem in South Africa. It suggests that much more can be done by both journalists and the legal community to deepen co-operation to further enhance public knowledge about the workings of the South African legal system, in relation to legal rights and the rule of law. This dissertation explores what a sample of South African lawyers understand about the roles they play in digital public spaces, and whether they perceive their contributions as impacting on journalism in general and legal knowledge among the public more broadly. The communications revolution triggered by web 2.0 interactivity has created a new media ecosystem in which mainstream media journalists co-exist with a variety of non-journalist content producers - including professionals like lawyers, who contribute to media content. This study specifically explores current debates about how the media ecosystem is changing in the digital age, including journalistic practices and routines and the role of journalism within a democracy and daily life. Thomas Hanitzsch and Tim Vos’s recent taxonomy of journalistic functions and roles in society is adapted by combining the domains of politics and daily life, to better describe the roles of non-journalists like the eleven digitally active members of the South African legal community in this study. Using qualitative interviews and content analysis research methods, the study suggests lawyers’ practices and routines challenge current theorisation about the new media ecosystem and digital public sphere in particular ways, suggesting that the affective nature of social media interactions between the lawyers and members of the public is more usefully understood via drawing on Chantal Mouffe’s concept of agonistic public spaces and Axel Bruns and Tim Highfield’s theorisation of ‘public sphericules’ than Jurgen Habermas’s conceptualisation of a rational public sphere. The study found that all of the digitally active lawyers played one or more active roles in contributing news, opinion and debate about legal and social justice matters on different digital public spaces, even though most were reluctant to describe what they do as journalism. The study concludes that this select group of lawyers do complement and enhance the work of journalists covering the legal field in the new media ecosystem in South Africa. It suggests that much more can be done by both journalists and the legal community to deepen co-operation to further enhance public knowledge about the workings of the South African legal system, in relation to legal rights and the rule of law.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2019
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »