Social Cohesion: Communication and Consensus – #mpaed2021
Topic
The concept of social cohesion is booming. The term, which until recently was virtually unknown beyond the world of think tanks, has become an integral part of media debates and political communication about the state of our society. One encounters it as a matter of course in party programmes, on election posters, in political commentaries, and in talk show discussions. At the same time, its meaning often remains diffuse in these contexts and can be reduced to the fact that social cohesion is basically something good and desirable, but is currently being threatened or is dwindling and therefore needs to be strengthened again. Against the background of this everyday observation, the conference aims at a heuristic and transparent deconstruction of the term from a media education perspective.
Undoubtedly, the starting point for this is undoubtedly the social and communicative construction of reality – and thus also of social cohesion and the processes and practices that constitute it. A decisive factor here is the way citizens act with different communication media or the integration into socio-medial structures and the associated possibility to relate to different individuals, groups and public spheres. Accordingly, the media are important in the course of their institutionalisation under public law as a catalyst of social integration processes alongside family, professional and educational contexts.
Particularly with regard to the area of public communication, a twofold challenge has emerged since the second half of the 20th century concerning this integration function: While on the one hand public communication is attributed the function of conveying shared thematic interests, knowledge and value orientations, on the other hand the media public is supposed to reflect the increasing diversity of the population’s social and cultural living conditions and concepts.
There is a broad consensus that the Internet and the emergence of communicative online networks have made public access much easier for most people. Closely related to this is the removal or reduction of the asymmetry between communicators and recipients that was characteristic of traditional mass communication. The almost exclusively medial function of orientation and reduction of complexity has given way to a much more dynamic relationship, which includes flexible role changes. Moreover, the profound mediatisation of all areas of life has not only accelerated the structural change of production, distribution and use of public communication. Citizens can also experience connectivity almost anywhere and at any time, but they also have to live with the fact that their media practices can be “datafied” and made accessible to public (as well as scientific) observation, and that they themselves can thus become the object of negotiation for forms of social cohesion.
However, these changes go hand in hand with an increase in the significance of participatory as well as algorithmic selection, aggregation and distribution services, so that the question of a changed understanding of mass communication and its role in the production of publicity must be asked (e.g. with regard to data journalism). Moreover, it must be questioned whether this development also leads to a fragmentation and polarisation of population groups.
Online platforms seem to provide a breeding ground for populist and extremist communication strategies and styles, which contribute to the polarisation of society and thus to a weakening of social cohesion. At the same time, search engines, network or video platforms have become indispensable tools for finding one’s bearings in the available diversity of the Internet and for initiating new forms of community. Their media logic – the structuring of communication as well as underlying business models – is based on comprehensive data validation and algorithmization and culminates in the guiding principle of personalization. The social media in particular, with their diverse commentary and recommendation functions, make dialogue-oriented follow-up communication visible to large circles. While this can help to gain an insight into the climate of opinion in the social environment and the variety of conceivable attitudes it can also, in extreme cases, lead to populist “echo chambers” in which people only confirm or even radicalise their preconceived opinions, which is expressed, for example, in the increase in “hate speech”. Aspects such as the commercial interests of platforms, the disappearance of journalistic gatekeepers, the scandalization of narratives by fake news, as well as technological aspects such as the instrumentalization of algorithm-based display mechanisms, the creation of opinion tendencies and alternative realities by social bots all point to the scope of possible problematic developments. In sum, these aspects of digital media can favour communication strategies that undermine democracy and overlay the community-building potentials.
In view of this description, it becomes clear that the framework conditions of interpersonal and (partially) public communication are essential cultural factors for the quality and development of social cohesion. One task of media education research is therefore to determine more precisely the circumstances under which structures of interpersonal and (partially) public communication promote or undermine cohesion. The political, economic, media-legal and media-technical conditions of online networks are of central interest here. These networks are currently contributing to the fragmentation and stratification of society, but their potential lies in deliberative participation and thus also in strengthening social cohesion.
Submissions
We invite submissions that take particular account of the intersections of educational, communication and media research on phenomena and practices of social cohesion. For example, the following complex of questions can be addressed (directly or indirectly):
- What consequences does the change in the technical possibilities of (partial) public opinion-forming and media participation have for the self-image and political opinion-forming of contemporary societies?
- Under what conditions does the ideal of social cohesion collide with other central values, such as freedom of opinion or the journalistic duty to inform?
- Which communication practices and styles that undermine or promote social cohesion can be traced back to the media-technical, economic and social specifics of online networks and how do these take shape?
- What skills do citizens need in order to use media in a self-determined and democratic way?
- To what extent can media education as a discipline promote social cohesion?
Submissions of interdisciplinary contributions or contributions from other disciplines are expressly welcome. The conference should offer space for intensive and interdisciplinary exchange. Conceptual and theoretical contributions as well as empirical work, also from ongoing project contexts, are requested. After the conference, full texts of contributions can be submitted to be published in the Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik 19.
Interested parties are invited to submit an abstract of about 500 words (not counting references) electronically by 28 February 2021 (via: https://www.conftool.com/mpaed2021/).