Difference between revisions of "Lindgren (2012)"
(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Source={{Source | |Source={{Source | ||
|Name of Study=Lindgren (2012) | |Name of Study=Lindgren (2012) | ||
− | |Author= | + | |Author=Lindgren, S.; |
− | |Title=Pirate Panics: Comparing news and blog discourse on | + | |Title=Pirate Panics: Comparing news and blog discourse on illegal file sharing in Sweden |
− | illegal file sharing in Sweden | ||
|Year=2012 | |Year=2012 | ||
|Full Citation=Lindgren, Simon. Pirate panics: comparing news and blog discourse on illegal file sharing in Sweden. Information, communication & society 16.8 (2013): 1242-1265. | |Full Citation=Lindgren, Simon. Pirate panics: comparing news and blog discourse on illegal file sharing in Sweden. Information, communication & society 16.8 (2013): 1242-1265. | ||
Line 10: | Line 9: | ||
|Authentic Link=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1369118X.2012.757632 | |Authentic Link=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1369118X.2012.757632 | ||
|Link=http://umu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:612689/FULLTEXT02.pdf | |Link=http://umu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:612689/FULLTEXT02.pdf | ||
− | |Reference=Lessig (2004); Gantz and Rochester (2005); Oberholzer-Gee and Strumpf (2007); | + | |Reference=Lessig (2004);Gantz and Rochester (2005);Oberholzer-Gee and Strumpf (2007);Hinduja (2006); |
− | |Plain Text Proposition=* | + | |Plain Text Proposition=* While news and blog discourse on online piracy overlap, and often deal with similar themes, these representational spaces are still discernible as two distinct contexts of meaning production, each adhering to its own logic and can be conceived of as “linguistic fields”.* Both discourses revolve around issues of morality and ethics.* Both use the characteristics of moral panic discourse, casting the other side as 'folk devils'.* This means that the original moral panic model should be revised to allow for the notion that moral entrepreneurship can be exercised in hegemonic as well as counter-hegemonic directions. |
− | * Both | + | |FundamentalIssue=1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare,5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media),4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) |
− | * | + | |EvidenceBasedPolicy=F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness) |
− | + | |Discipline=K42: Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law, L82: Entertainment • Media | |
− | |FundamentalIssue=1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare, 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media), 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) | + | |Intervention-Response=* As the boundaries between producer and consumer in participatory culture are increasingly blurred, public discourse utilizing the 'moral panic' model are likely to become less homogenized and more contextualized, necessitating an update to the model. * Panic reactions can run not only from the top down but also from the bottom up as niche and micro media instigate their own moral panics. * Policy makers need to be aware of the multi layered manifestations of opposition to the dominant discourse and that there may be many positions all competing and at points achieving dominance, using the same strategies. |
− | |EvidenceBasedPolicy=F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness) | + | |Description of Data=This study is a discourse analysis of 279 news articles and 294 blogs, comparing the 'moral panic' discourse in the mainstream media to the 'information should be free' discourse in the internet blogs. |
− | |Discipline= | + | |Data Year=2009 |
− | |Intervention-Response=* | ||
− | * | ||
− | * | ||
− | |||
− | |Description of Data= | ||
− | |Data Year= | ||
|Data Type=Secondary data | |Data Type=Secondary data | ||
− | |Data Source=Newspaper articles; Blog posts; | + | |Data Source=Newspaper articles;Blog posts; |
− | |Method of Collection= | + | |Method of Collection=Quantitative data/text mining, Qualitative Collection Methods, Case Study, Qualitative content/text mining |
− | |Method of Analysis=Quantitative Analysis Methods, Social Network Analysis, Qualitative Analysis Methods | + | |Method of Analysis=Quantitative Analysis Methods, Social Network Analysis, Qualitative Analysis Methods, Discourse Analysis |
− | |||
|Country=Sweden; | |Country=Sweden; | ||
|Cross-country=No | |Cross-country=No | ||
|Comparative=Yes | |Comparative=Yes | ||
|Government or policy=No | |Government or policy=No | ||
− | |Literature review= | + | |Literature review=Yes |
}} | }} | ||
|Dataset={{Dataset | |Dataset={{Dataset | ||
+ | |Sample Size=294 | ||
+ | |Level of Aggregation=Blog posts | ||
+ | |Data Material Year=2009 | ||
+ | }}{{Dataset | ||
|Sample Size=279 | |Sample Size=279 | ||
− | |Level of Aggregation= | + | |Level of Aggregation=News articles |
− | |Data Material Year= | + | |Data Material Year=2009 |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
}} | }} | ||
}} | }} |
Latest revision as of 09:05, 26 May 2020
Contents
Source Details
Lindgren (2012) | |
Title: | Pirate Panics: Comparing news and blog discourse on illegal file sharing in Sweden |
Author(s): | Lindgren, S. |
Year: | 2012 |
Citation: | Lindgren, Simon. Pirate panics: comparing news and blog discourse on illegal file sharing in Sweden. Information, communication & society 16.8 (2013): 1242-1265. |
Link(s): | Definitive , Open Access |
Key Related Studies: | |
Discipline: | |
Linked by: |
About the Data | |
Data Description: | This study is a discourse analysis of 279 news articles and 294 blogs, comparing the 'moral panic' discourse in the mainstream media to the 'information should be free' discourse in the internet blogs. |
Data Type: | Secondary data |
Secondary Data Sources: | |
Data Collection Methods: | |
Data Analysis Methods: | |
Industry(ies): | |
Country(ies): | |
Cross Country Study?: | No |
Comparative Study?: | Yes |
Literature review?: | Yes |
Government or policy study?: | No |
Time Period(s) of Collection: |
|
Funder(s): |
Abstract
This article aims to map discourses and counter-discourses through which online piracy has been framed and constructed in Swedish blogs and online news. It has been common in previous analyses of moral public debates about new forms of media consumption to focus on conservative top-down hegemonic processes of reinstating order. The classic moral panic literature overemphasizes control, power and hegemony while overlooking counter-discourses. This study, on the other hand, takes such forms of symbolic resistance into account. It relies on a comparative discursive network analysis of texts produced by corporate news organizations and of blogs representing pro-piracy perspectives. It is concluded that with the blurring of the boundaries between producers and consumers of content, more and more localized moral panics that are not necessarily hegemonic are likely to be seen. Panic reactions can run not only from the top down but also from the bottom up as niche and micro media instigate their own moral panics.
Main Results of the Study
- While news and blog discourse on online piracy overlap, and often deal with similar themes, these representational spaces are still discernible as two distinct contexts of meaning production, each adhering to its own logic and can be conceived of as “linguistic fields”.* Both discourses revolve around issues of morality and ethics.* Both use the characteristics of moral panic discourse, casting the other side as 'folk devils'.* This means that the original moral panic model should be revised to allow for the notion that moral entrepreneurship can be exercised in hegemonic as well as counter-hegemonic directions.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
- As the boundaries between producer and consumer in participatory culture are increasingly blurred, public discourse utilizing the 'moral panic' model are likely to become less homogenized and more contextualized, necessitating an update to the model. * Panic reactions can run not only from the top down but also from the bottom up as niche and micro media instigate their own moral panics. * Policy makers need to be aware of the multi layered manifestations of opposition to the dominant discourse and that there may be many positions all competing and at points achieving dominance, using the same strategies.
Coverage of Study
Datasets
Sample size: | 294 |
Level of aggregation: | Blog posts |
Period of material under study: | 2009 |
Sample size: | 279 |
Level of aggregation: | News articles |
Period of material under study: | 2009 |