Cliquepolitik:关于 CRISPR-Cas 基因组编辑技术的多模式在线话语联盟

IF 2.3 3区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Review of Policy Research Pub Date : 2024-01-08 DOI:10.1111/ropr.12590
Eduardo Rojas‐Padilla, Tamara Metze, A. Dewulf
{"title":"Cliquepolitik:关于 CRISPR-Cas 基因组编辑技术的多模式在线话语联盟","authors":"Eduardo Rojas‐Padilla, Tamara Metze, A. Dewulf","doi":"10.1111/ropr.12590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The influence of visualizations on decision‐making about controversial policy issues is increasingly recognized in the political and policy sciences. In this paper, we explore how combinations of visuals and text on Twitter (now X) lead to the formation of networks of actors sharing similar textual and visual framings about a policy issue in an online setting, which we conceptualize as Multimodal Online Discourse Coalitions (MODCs). MODCs struggle over the meaning of contested policy issues. We examine multiple MODCs in 2018 in the context of the regulatory decisions in that year about CRISPR‐Cas gene editing technology in the USA, Mercosur, and the EU. Based on an SNA and a qualitative visual and discursive analysis in three languages on Twitter in 2018 (covering in total ~ 427 k Tweets), we show that MODCs in English and Spanish focused on technocratic aspects of CRISPR‐Cas, resembling the regulatory decisions in the USA and Mercosur. In Europe, next to technocratic MODCs, an MODC in French formed around ethical/normative framings of the consequences of CRISPR‐Cas applications, using visuals of embryos to represent “GMO babies.” These visuals were emotional triggers in their framing of CRISPR technology. The ethical/normative framing reflected the argument brought to the CJEU by a group of French actors involved in the court case which categorized CRISPR‐Cas as a GMO technology in the EU. These results suggest that the French MODC and their visualization was of influence on the EU decision‐making process; however, more research is needed to verify the role of this online debate in the decision‐making process.","PeriodicalId":47408,"journal":{"name":"Review of Policy Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cliquepolitik: Multimodal online discourse coalitions on CRISPR‐Cas genome editing technology\",\"authors\":\"Eduardo Rojas‐Padilla, Tamara Metze, A. Dewulf\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ropr.12590\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The influence of visualizations on decision‐making about controversial policy issues is increasingly recognized in the political and policy sciences. In this paper, we explore how combinations of visuals and text on Twitter (now X) lead to the formation of networks of actors sharing similar textual and visual framings about a policy issue in an online setting, which we conceptualize as Multimodal Online Discourse Coalitions (MODCs). MODCs struggle over the meaning of contested policy issues. We examine multiple MODCs in 2018 in the context of the regulatory decisions in that year about CRISPR‐Cas gene editing technology in the USA, Mercosur, and the EU. Based on an SNA and a qualitative visual and discursive analysis in three languages on Twitter in 2018 (covering in total ~ 427 k Tweets), we show that MODCs in English and Spanish focused on technocratic aspects of CRISPR‐Cas, resembling the regulatory decisions in the USA and Mercosur. In Europe, next to technocratic MODCs, an MODC in French formed around ethical/normative framings of the consequences of CRISPR‐Cas applications, using visuals of embryos to represent “GMO babies.” These visuals were emotional triggers in their framing of CRISPR technology. The ethical/normative framing reflected the argument brought to the CJEU by a group of French actors involved in the court case which categorized CRISPR‐Cas as a GMO technology in the EU. These results suggest that the French MODC and their visualization was of influence on the EU decision‐making process; however, more research is needed to verify the role of this online debate in the decision‐making process.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47408,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Policy Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Policy Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12590\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Policy Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12590","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

可视化对有争议的政策问题决策的影响在政治和政策科学领域日益得到认可。在本文中,我们将探讨推特(现在的 X)上的视觉和文字组合如何在网络环境中形成对政策问题具有相似文字和视觉框架的行动者网络,我们将其概念化为多模态在线话语联盟(MODCs)。MODCs 围绕有争议的政策问题的意义展开斗争。我们以 2018 年美国、南方共同市场和欧盟关于 CRISPR-Cas 基因编辑技术的监管决定为背景,考察了多个 MODC。基于 SNA 以及对 2018 年 Twitter 上三种语言的视觉和话语定性分析(共涵盖约 427 k 条推文),我们发现英语和西班牙语中的 MODCs 主要关注 CRISPR-Cas 的技术官僚主义方面,这与美国和南方共同市场的监管决定相似。在欧洲,除了技术官僚主义 MODC 之外,法文 MODC 还围绕 CRISPR-Cas 应用后果的伦理/规范框架,使用胚胎的视觉效果来代表 "转基因婴儿"。这些视觉效果是他们对 CRISPR 技术进行构思的情感触发器。伦理/规范框架反映了参与法院案件的一群法国人向欧盟法院提出的论点,该案件在欧盟将CRISPR-Cas归类为转基因生物技术。这些结果表明,法国 MODC 及其可视化对欧盟的决策过程产生了影响;然而,还需要更多的研究来验证这一在线辩论在决策过程中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cliquepolitik: Multimodal online discourse coalitions on CRISPR‐Cas genome editing technology
The influence of visualizations on decision‐making about controversial policy issues is increasingly recognized in the political and policy sciences. In this paper, we explore how combinations of visuals and text on Twitter (now X) lead to the formation of networks of actors sharing similar textual and visual framings about a policy issue in an online setting, which we conceptualize as Multimodal Online Discourse Coalitions (MODCs). MODCs struggle over the meaning of contested policy issues. We examine multiple MODCs in 2018 in the context of the regulatory decisions in that year about CRISPR‐Cas gene editing technology in the USA, Mercosur, and the EU. Based on an SNA and a qualitative visual and discursive analysis in three languages on Twitter in 2018 (covering in total ~ 427 k Tweets), we show that MODCs in English and Spanish focused on technocratic aspects of CRISPR‐Cas, resembling the regulatory decisions in the USA and Mercosur. In Europe, next to technocratic MODCs, an MODC in French formed around ethical/normative framings of the consequences of CRISPR‐Cas applications, using visuals of embryos to represent “GMO babies.” These visuals were emotional triggers in their framing of CRISPR technology. The ethical/normative framing reflected the argument brought to the CJEU by a group of French actors involved in the court case which categorized CRISPR‐Cas as a GMO technology in the EU. These results suggest that the French MODC and their visualization was of influence on the EU decision‐making process; however, more research is needed to verify the role of this online debate in the decision‐making process.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
23.80%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: The Review of Policy Research (RPR) is an international peer-reviewed journal devoted to the publication of research and analysis examining the politics and policy of science and technology. These may include issues of science policy, environment, resource management, information networks, cultural industries, biotechnology, security and surveillance, privacy, globalization, education, research and innovation, development, intellectual property, health and demographics. The journal encompasses research and analysis on politics and the outcomes and consequences of policy change in domestic and comparative contexts.
期刊最新文献
Unraveling the dynamics of information exchange in governance networks: Opportunity structures in anti‐corruption multi‐stakeholder partnerships Information and expertise in public policy Embracing the politics of transformation: Policy action as “battle‐settlement events” State infrastructural power in a neopatrimonialist democratization context: Why Tunisian sustainable land management fails Stories, emotions, and governmental strategies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1