Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/15358593.2021.1961851
Charnell Peters
ABSTRACT Critical interpersonal and family communication (CIFC) contributes a context and lens for analyzing the intersections of race, communication, and genetic ancestry tests (GATs). This essay presents a discourse analysis of GAT reveal videos by Black content creators. Interpersonal communication—between the people in the videos and between them and online audiences—is a vehicle through which people narrate into meaning complex ideas of genetics and race. Results of this analysis show that Black content creators situate genetic ancestry within ongoing communication about identity. The videos work to “prove” Blackness and mark the significance of naming the self, often by conflating ideas of Blackness and genetic ancestry. CIFC as an analytic uncovers the paradox in which GAT discourse is both liberating and oppressive within relational spheres.
{"title":"“Add up all my Black”: understanding race and genetic ancestry through critical interpersonal and family communication","authors":"Charnell Peters","doi":"10.1080/15358593.2021.1961851","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2021.1961851","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Critical interpersonal and family communication (CIFC) contributes a context and lens for analyzing the intersections of race, communication, and genetic ancestry tests (GATs). This essay presents a discourse analysis of GAT reveal videos by Black content creators. Interpersonal communication—between the people in the videos and between them and online audiences—is a vehicle through which people narrate into meaning complex ideas of genetics and race. Results of this analysis show that Black content creators situate genetic ancestry within ongoing communication about identity. The videos work to “prove” Blackness and mark the significance of naming the self, often by conflating ideas of Blackness and genetic ancestry. CIFC as an analytic uncovers the paradox in which GAT discourse is both liberating and oppressive within relational spheres.","PeriodicalId":53587,"journal":{"name":"Review of Communication","volume":"21 1","pages":"223 - 230"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48018152","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/15358593.2021.1969424
J. Manning, Katherine J. Denker
ABSTRACT This essay reflects on the recent critical turns within interpersonal and family communication studies (IFC) and the advances of diversity, equity, inclusion, and access in the larger field of communication studies. The authors use a tool metaphor to argue the importance of studying IFC from a range of methodological approaches—including interpretive, cultural, and/or critical perspectives. Specifically, the authors (1) question the impulse to isolate interpersonal communication from the larger field of communication studies and (2) argue the necessity of recognizing critical approaches and/or traditions as one way of examining identities, relationships, and families. This commentary also previews the contributions of the articles featured in the themed issue “A Critical Turn for Interpersonal and Family Communication Studies.”
{"title":"Beyond the hammer: a critical turn for interpersonal and family communication studies","authors":"J. Manning, Katherine J. Denker","doi":"10.1080/15358593.2021.1969424","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2021.1969424","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This essay reflects on the recent critical turns within interpersonal and family communication studies (IFC) and the advances of diversity, equity, inclusion, and access in the larger field of communication studies. The authors use a tool metaphor to argue the importance of studying IFC from a range of methodological approaches—including interpretive, cultural, and/or critical perspectives. Specifically, the authors (1) question the impulse to isolate interpersonal communication from the larger field of communication studies and (2) argue the necessity of recognizing critical approaches and/or traditions as one way of examining identities, relationships, and families. This commentary also previews the contributions of the articles featured in the themed issue “A Critical Turn for Interpersonal and Family Communication Studies.”","PeriodicalId":53587,"journal":{"name":"Review of Communication","volume":"21 1","pages":"177 - 186"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47394801","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/15358593.2021.1965194
E. Hintz, Steven R. Wilson
ABSTRACT This essay lays initial groundwork for a theory of communicative disenfranchisement (TCD), which explores what occurs when individuals’ experiences, identities, and relationships are discredited (i.e., not treated as “real”) by others and how such talk disempowers them and alters their perceptions of future interactions. Five key assumptions of TCD advocate: (1) attending to power; (2) considering discursive and material conditions and their histories; (3) viewing communication as constitutive of reality; (4) adopting a process view; and (5) acknowledging interactions as having multiple meanings. This framework offers two central benefits: (a) aligning critical interpersonal and family communication scholarship with critical research occurring within other communication subfields; and (b) further spurring the critical reconsideration of traditional programs of interpersonal and family communication research. TCD is particularly useful for understanding the roles of power and discourse in communicative contestations as well as the outcomes of such talk.
{"title":"Theorizing disenfranchisement as a communicative process","authors":"E. Hintz, Steven R. Wilson","doi":"10.1080/15358593.2021.1965194","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2021.1965194","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This essay lays initial groundwork for a theory of communicative disenfranchisement (TCD), which explores what occurs when individuals’ experiences, identities, and relationships are discredited (i.e., not treated as “real”) by others and how such talk disempowers them and alters their perceptions of future interactions. Five key assumptions of TCD advocate: (1) attending to power; (2) considering discursive and material conditions and their histories; (3) viewing communication as constitutive of reality; (4) adopting a process view; and (5) acknowledging interactions as having multiple meanings. This framework offers two central benefits: (a) aligning critical interpersonal and family communication scholarship with critical research occurring within other communication subfields; and (b) further spurring the critical reconsideration of traditional programs of interpersonal and family communication research. TCD is particularly useful for understanding the roles of power and discourse in communicative contestations as well as the outcomes of such talk.","PeriodicalId":53587,"journal":{"name":"Review of Communication","volume":"21 1","pages":"241 - 251"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48863862","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/15358593.2021.1966082
Jordan Allen, Nicole T. Allen
ABSTRACT Interpersonal and family communication scholarship retains a dualistic approach to relationships and communication. This prevailing logic constrains the ability of critical interpersonal and family communication (CIFC) scholarship to identify communication practices that stabilize unjust operations of power. We argue that CIFC scholarship should make a nonhuman theoretical turn. Specifically, we propose that Bruno Latour’s actor–network theory (ANT) provides a way forward for CIFC scholars to identify and critique unjust operations of power that are rendered more and less durable by human and nonhuman communication. To appreciate how ANT could benefit CIFC scholarship, we first identify the ontological and epistemological shifts ANT requires of CIFC scholars. Second, we explore the core uncertainties/controversies of ANT. Third, we embody ANT as a framework to interrogate and critique the communicative constitution of functionally estranged family relationships. Finally, we discuss the value of inviting new materialist approaches to CIFC scholarship.
{"title":"Distant yet existent: actor–network theory and the communicative constitution of functionally estranged family relationships","authors":"Jordan Allen, Nicole T. Allen","doi":"10.1080/15358593.2021.1966082","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2021.1966082","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Interpersonal and family communication scholarship retains a dualistic approach to relationships and communication. This prevailing logic constrains the ability of critical interpersonal and family communication (CIFC) scholarship to identify communication practices that stabilize unjust operations of power. We argue that CIFC scholarship should make a nonhuman theoretical turn. Specifically, we propose that Bruno Latour’s actor–network theory (ANT) provides a way forward for CIFC scholars to identify and critique unjust operations of power that are rendered more and less durable by human and nonhuman communication. To appreciate how ANT could benefit CIFC scholarship, we first identify the ontological and epistemological shifts ANT requires of CIFC scholars. Second, we explore the core uncertainties/controversies of ANT. Third, we embody ANT as a framework to interrogate and critique the communicative constitution of functionally estranged family relationships. Finally, we discuss the value of inviting new materialist approaches to CIFC scholarship.","PeriodicalId":53587,"journal":{"name":"Review of Communication","volume":"21 1","pages":"252 - 269"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48393421","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/15358593.2021.1934521
Nikki Stevens, A. Hoffmann, Sarah Florini
ABSTRACT The 1970s saw major transformations in how computerized databases were conceived, developed, and designed. Part of a broader shift in how software applications were developed, these transformations—sometimes referred to as “the database revolution”—introduced new and then-novel approaches to structuring and arranging digital data, optimizing them for usability and convenience. At the same time, however, the rhetoric of innovation and revolution surrounding this moment in database development obscures the ways it helped concentrate and extend particular kinds of racialized power and, in particular, whiteness (i.e., those norms and values congenial to the reproduction of white racial dominance and the subjugation of blackness). In this article, we revisit key works of the database revolution to show how they encoded whiteness as a kind of unremarked optimum, in both implicit and explicit ways. Finally, we argue that these developments helped to codify and extend a kind of “willful ignorance” that, as scholars of epistemology and justice have shown, is central to the preservation and reproduction of whiteness.
{"title":"The unremarked optimum: whiteness, optimization, and control in the database revolution","authors":"Nikki Stevens, A. Hoffmann, Sarah Florini","doi":"10.1080/15358593.2021.1934521","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2021.1934521","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The 1970s saw major transformations in how computerized databases were conceived, developed, and designed. Part of a broader shift in how software applications were developed, these transformations—sometimes referred to as “the database revolution”—introduced new and then-novel approaches to structuring and arranging digital data, optimizing them for usability and convenience. At the same time, however, the rhetoric of innovation and revolution surrounding this moment in database development obscures the ways it helped concentrate and extend particular kinds of racialized power and, in particular, whiteness (i.e., those norms and values congenial to the reproduction of white racial dominance and the subjugation of blackness). In this article, we revisit key works of the database revolution to show how they encoded whiteness as a kind of unremarked optimum, in both implicit and explicit ways. Finally, we argue that these developments helped to codify and extend a kind of “willful ignorance” that, as scholars of epistemology and justice have shown, is central to the preservation and reproduction of whiteness.","PeriodicalId":53587,"journal":{"name":"Review of Communication","volume":"21 1","pages":"113 - 128"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15358593.2021.1934521","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46495377","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/15358593.2021.1934522
J. Morris, R. Prey, D. Nieborg
ABSTRACT This article investigates the ways content producers, marketers, and other promotional stakeholders work to optimize cultural goods and services for platform-dependent production, distribution, and monetization. We are particularly interested in how content creators find novel ways to work within, around, and even against platform politics and policies by manipulating algorithms, business models, and guidelines, or otherwise readying their content for optimal circulation on multiple platforms. Through comparative cases of music, games, and apps that draw on trade press and industry discourse, institutional and financial analysis, and select interviews with musicians, we consider various forms of, and strategies for, what we call cultural optimization. We draw on these instances to better understand the similarities and differences in the optimization of cultural content and metadata for economic or cultural gains. We hope our comparative approach reveals different conceptions of the term optimization, and that this term—in all its digital, financial, and cybernetic connotations—might prompt new ways of thinking about the interactions between content, (meta)data, platforms, and culture that have long shaped the circulation of cultural goods.
{"title":"Engineering culture: logics of optimization in music, games, and apps","authors":"J. Morris, R. Prey, D. Nieborg","doi":"10.1080/15358593.2021.1934522","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2021.1934522","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article investigates the ways content producers, marketers, and other promotional stakeholders work to optimize cultural goods and services for platform-dependent production, distribution, and monetization. We are particularly interested in how content creators find novel ways to work within, around, and even against platform politics and policies by manipulating algorithms, business models, and guidelines, or otherwise readying their content for optimal circulation on multiple platforms. Through comparative cases of music, games, and apps that draw on trade press and industry discourse, institutional and financial analysis, and select interviews with musicians, we consider various forms of, and strategies for, what we call cultural optimization. We draw on these instances to better understand the similarities and differences in the optimization of cultural content and metadata for economic or cultural gains. We hope our comparative approach reveals different conceptions of the term optimization, and that this term—in all its digital, financial, and cybernetic connotations—might prompt new ways of thinking about the interactions between content, (meta)data, platforms, and culture that have long shaped the circulation of cultural goods.","PeriodicalId":53587,"journal":{"name":"Review of Communication","volume":"21 1","pages":"161 - 175"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15358593.2021.1934522","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45020542","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/15358593.2021.1934523
R. Uliasz
ABSTRACT This article takes up the issue of optimization to consider the relationship between predictive algorithms and platform user experience. Corporate data analytic practices increasingly rely on machine learning algorithms that apply models to user behaviors, producing “knowledge” about users that can be bought and sold. This article considers the opacity of algorithms today in relation to optimization. Using a conceptual apparatus that draws from the study of cultural techniques, the following argues that optimization—the task of finding a sufficient solution to a well-defined problem—makes use of models to simulate possible answers to problems around the incomputablity of behavior. Tracing a set of examples that deal with the problem of predicting behavior—the “minimum point” problem, John von Neumann's automata theory, and the Facebook pixel—optimization is characterized by a shift from statistical model making towards predictive and algorithmic techniques. This shift is seen within the context of the decline of Cold War rationality towards the embeddedness of “intelligent” algorithms across technoculture.
{"title":"“Optimize user experience”: optimization techniques and the simulation of life, from the model to the algorithm","authors":"R. Uliasz","doi":"10.1080/15358593.2021.1934523","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2021.1934523","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article takes up the issue of optimization to consider the relationship between predictive algorithms and platform user experience. Corporate data analytic practices increasingly rely on machine learning algorithms that apply models to user behaviors, producing “knowledge” about users that can be bought and sold. This article considers the opacity of algorithms today in relation to optimization. Using a conceptual apparatus that draws from the study of cultural techniques, the following argues that optimization—the task of finding a sufficient solution to a well-defined problem—makes use of models to simulate possible answers to problems around the incomputablity of behavior. Tracing a set of examples that deal with the problem of predicting behavior—the “minimum point” problem, John von Neumann's automata theory, and the Facebook pixel—optimization is characterized by a shift from statistical model making towards predictive and algorithmic techniques. This shift is seen within the context of the decline of Cold War rationality towards the embeddedness of “intelligent” algorithms across technoculture.","PeriodicalId":53587,"journal":{"name":"Review of Communication","volume":"21 1","pages":"129 - 143"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15358593.2021.1934523","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45379743","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/15358593.2021.1934520
B. Lyall
ABSTRACT In the last decade, self-tracking technologies have encouraged users to optimize various biosocial practices. Through a wide array of smart digital devices and apps, users are put on notice: are they aware of the screen time they accrue each day, the steps they have (not) walked, or the last time they stood up? In the resulting sphere of mediated self-awareness, sleep is ripe for calculation, analysis, and optimization. Essential yet unconscious, sleep is a practice that manifests as an ambivalent example of wider self-tracking logics; an alluring “data frontier” for users and corporations alike. In this article, I draw on qualitative data (N = 38), collected in Australia, to explore the experiences and practices of self-trackers who monitor their sleep. Using interview data and participant screenshots, I discuss how apps construct sleep standards, social dimensions of sleep metrics, gamified incentives, and the process of assembling codes/spaces around sleep monitoring. In bringing sleep within a sphere of rational control, apps often exclude difference by focusing on consumer choice, wellness, and self-care. While imprecise and fungible, sleep metrics act as proxies for productivity, and reify normative understandings of time-use, energy, and sleep.
{"title":"The ambivalent assemblages of sleep optimization","authors":"B. Lyall","doi":"10.1080/15358593.2021.1934520","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2021.1934520","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In the last decade, self-tracking technologies have encouraged users to optimize various biosocial practices. Through a wide array of smart digital devices and apps, users are put on notice: are they aware of the screen time they accrue each day, the steps they have (not) walked, or the last time they stood up? In the resulting sphere of mediated self-awareness, sleep is ripe for calculation, analysis, and optimization. Essential yet unconscious, sleep is a practice that manifests as an ambivalent example of wider self-tracking logics; an alluring “data frontier” for users and corporations alike. In this article, I draw on qualitative data (N = 38), collected in Australia, to explore the experiences and practices of self-trackers who monitor their sleep. Using interview data and participant screenshots, I discuss how apps construct sleep standards, social dimensions of sleep metrics, gamified incentives, and the process of assembling codes/spaces around sleep monitoring. In bringing sleep within a sphere of rational control, apps often exclude difference by focusing on consumer choice, wellness, and self-care. While imprecise and fungible, sleep metrics act as proxies for productivity, and reify normative understandings of time-use, energy, and sleep.","PeriodicalId":53587,"journal":{"name":"Review of Communication","volume":"21 1","pages":"144 - 160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15358593.2021.1934520","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44442312","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/15358593.2021.1936143
F. McKelvey, Joshua Neves
ABSTRACT Optimization is seemingly everywhere and yet elusive. Our bodies, tools, and institutions are now understood as endlessly optimizable. But what does optimization mean? Or more crucially, what does it do? Who or what is optimized or dis-optimized? This themed issue introduces optimization as a critical concept to analyze the governance and governmentality of large technological infrastructures, platforms, and self-management apps. We define optimization as a form of calculative decision-making embedded in legitimating institutions and media that seek to actualize optimal social and technical practices in real time. Our Introduction outlines the techniques, legitimations, and social practices of optimization that have spread in many forms across the globe. By questioning optimization, our Introduction considers the social practices, geopolitical networks, and forms of organization (and violence) shored up by the desire for optimum performance.
{"title":"Introduction: optimization and its discontents","authors":"F. McKelvey, Joshua Neves","doi":"10.1080/15358593.2021.1936143","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2021.1936143","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Optimization is seemingly everywhere and yet elusive. Our bodies, tools, and institutions are now understood as endlessly optimizable. But what does optimization mean? Or more crucially, what does it do? Who or what is optimized or dis-optimized? This themed issue introduces optimization as a critical concept to analyze the governance and governmentality of large technological infrastructures, platforms, and self-management apps. We define optimization as a form of calculative decision-making embedded in legitimating institutions and media that seek to actualize optimal social and technical practices in real time. Our Introduction outlines the techniques, legitimations, and social practices of optimization that have spread in many forms across the globe. By questioning optimization, our Introduction considers the social practices, geopolitical networks, and forms of organization (and violence) shored up by the desire for optimum performance.","PeriodicalId":53587,"journal":{"name":"Review of Communication","volume":"21 1","pages":"95 - 112"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15358593.2021.1936143","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42750439","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-18DOI: 10.1080/15358593.2022.2147019
Michael Lechuga, J. Ackerman
ABSTRACT In this interlude, we would like to reflect briefly on the first two essays in the issue by commenting on the settler present. We make a brief comment on the fungibility of trauma and the relationship between it and memory. We build on these concepts to join the other authors in this issue who describe how they have begun a process of dissettling the institutions of public learning to prepare for the sets of possibilities available to us in the decades to come.
{"title":"Interlude II","authors":"Michael Lechuga, J. Ackerman","doi":"10.1080/15358593.2022.2147019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2022.2147019","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this interlude, we would like to reflect briefly on the first two essays in the issue by commenting on the settler present. We make a brief comment on the fungibility of trauma and the relationship between it and memory. We build on these concepts to join the other authors in this issue who describe how they have begun a process of dissettling the institutions of public learning to prepare for the sets of possibilities available to us in the decades to come.","PeriodicalId":53587,"journal":{"name":"Review of Communication","volume":"22 1","pages":"328 - 334"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42131080","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：