Strong and Weak Forms of Mediatization Theory. A Critical Review.

Forskningsoutput: TidskriftsbidragArtikelVetenskapligPeer review

Sammanfattning

During recent years, the concept of mediatization has made a strong impact on media and communication studies, and its advocates have attempted to turn it into a refined and central theoretical framework for media research. The present article distinguishes two forms of mediatization theory: a strong form based on the assumption that a ‘media logic’ increasingly determines the actions of different social institutions and groups, and a weak form that questions such a logic, though the latter form emphasizes the key role of the media in social change and singles out mediatization as a central ‘meta-process’ today. Exponents of the weak form have convincingly criticized the notion of media logic. However, the weaker version of mediatization is itself problematic, as its advocates have failed to produce a clear explanatory framework around the concept. We argue that, although the analytical status of mediatization is unclear, fascination with the concept will, in all probability, continue in the years to come, due to the promises of heightened disciplinary coherence and status that this notion has conveyed for media and communication studies.
Originalspråkengelska
TidskriftNORDICOM Review
Volym35
Utgåva2014 (Special Issue)
Sidor (från-till)111-123
Antal sidor13
ISSN1403-1108
StatusPublicerad - 2014
MoE-publikationstypA1 Tidskriftsartikel-refererad

Vetenskapsgrenar

  • 518 Medie- och kommunikationsvetenskap
  • 5141 Sociologi

Citera det här

@article{c203471fc33147409f485322a8cb52d4,
title = "Strong and Weak Forms of Mediatization Theory. A Critical Review.",
abstract = "During recent years, the concept of mediatization has made a strong impact on media and communication studies, and its advocates have attempted to turn it into a refined and central theoretical framework for media research. The present article distinguishes two forms of mediatization theory: a strong form based on the assumption that a ‘media logic’ increasingly determines the actions of different social institutions and groups, and a weak form that questions such a logic, though the latter form emphasizes the key role of the media in social change and singles out mediatization as a central ‘meta-process’ today. Exponents of the weak form have convincingly criticized the notion of media logic. However, the weaker version of mediatization is itself problematic, as its advocates have failed to produce a clear explanatory framework around the concept. We argue that, although the analytical status of mediatization is unclear, fascination with the concept will, in all probability, continue in the years to come, due to the promises of heightened disciplinary coherence and status that this notion has conveyed for media and communication studies.",
keywords = "518 Media and communications, 5141 Sociology",
author = "Marko Ampuja and Juha Koivisto and Esa V{\"a}liverronen",
year = "2014",
language = "English",
volume = "35",
pages = "111--123",
journal = "NORDICOM Review",
issn = "1403-1108",
publisher = "NORDICOM, G{\"o}teborg University",
number = "2014 (Special Issue)",

}

Strong and Weak Forms of Mediatization Theory. A Critical Review. / Ampuja, Marko; Koivisto, Juha; Väliverronen, Esa.

I: NORDICOM Review, Vol. 35, Nr. 2014 (Special Issue), 2014, s. 111-123.

Forskningsoutput: TidskriftsbidragArtikelVetenskapligPeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Strong and Weak Forms of Mediatization Theory. A Critical Review.

AU - Ampuja, Marko

AU - Koivisto, Juha

AU - Väliverronen, Esa

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - During recent years, the concept of mediatization has made a strong impact on media and communication studies, and its advocates have attempted to turn it into a refined and central theoretical framework for media research. The present article distinguishes two forms of mediatization theory: a strong form based on the assumption that a ‘media logic’ increasingly determines the actions of different social institutions and groups, and a weak form that questions such a logic, though the latter form emphasizes the key role of the media in social change and singles out mediatization as a central ‘meta-process’ today. Exponents of the weak form have convincingly criticized the notion of media logic. However, the weaker version of mediatization is itself problematic, as its advocates have failed to produce a clear explanatory framework around the concept. We argue that, although the analytical status of mediatization is unclear, fascination with the concept will, in all probability, continue in the years to come, due to the promises of heightened disciplinary coherence and status that this notion has conveyed for media and communication studies.

AB - During recent years, the concept of mediatization has made a strong impact on media and communication studies, and its advocates have attempted to turn it into a refined and central theoretical framework for media research. The present article distinguishes two forms of mediatization theory: a strong form based on the assumption that a ‘media logic’ increasingly determines the actions of different social institutions and groups, and a weak form that questions such a logic, though the latter form emphasizes the key role of the media in social change and singles out mediatization as a central ‘meta-process’ today. Exponents of the weak form have convincingly criticized the notion of media logic. However, the weaker version of mediatization is itself problematic, as its advocates have failed to produce a clear explanatory framework around the concept. We argue that, although the analytical status of mediatization is unclear, fascination with the concept will, in all probability, continue in the years to come, due to the promises of heightened disciplinary coherence and status that this notion has conveyed for media and communication studies.

KW - 518 Media and communications

KW - 5141 Sociology

M3 - Article

VL - 35

SP - 111

EP - 123

JO - NORDICOM Review

JF - NORDICOM Review

SN - 1403-1108

IS - 2014 (Special Issue)

ER -