© 2025 SURF
Instagram has become an unsuspecting pulpit – seemingly caught off guard – for those determined to spread a militant message of Islamic State terror. Graphic, fanatical and oftentimes heavily photoshopped images weave through Instagram’s labyrinth of sunset snaps and gym selfies to advance a curious manifestation of cause-related self-promotion.
A poem about the role screenshots can play in our lives, our minds, our poetry. When does the personal become universal, and when does the digital become lyrical?
MULTIFILE
In media audience research we tend to assume that media are engaged with when they are used, however ‘light’ such engagement might be. Once ‘passive media use’ was banned as a reference to media use, being a media audience member became synonymous with being a meaning producer. In audience research however I find that media are not always the object of meaning making in daily life and that media texts can be hardly meaningful. Thinking about media and engagement, there is a threefold challenge in relation to audience research. The coming into being of platform media and hence of new forms of media production on a micro level that come out of and are woven into practices of media use, suggests that we need to redraft the repertoire of terms used in audience research (and maybe start calling it something else). Material and immaterial media production, the unpaid labour on the part of otherwise audience members should for instance be taken into account. Then, secondly, there is the continuing challenge to further develop heuristically strong ways of linking media use and meaning making, and most of all to do justice, thirdly, to those moments and ways in which audiences truly engage with media texts without identifying them with those texts.
In 2017, Denmark sent the first digital ambassador, Casper Klynge, to Silicon Valley. The aim of this move of ‘techplomacy’ was, as Klynge explained, not simply to distribute greetings notes by the Danish queen. Rather, the intention was to ‘update diplomacy’ based on the recognition that a few tech companies have obviously become much ‘more influential than some nation states’. Klynge framed the new political course in the manner of a well-known old but still utterly contemporary mantra: ‘There is no alternative’. In a similar vein, Denmark’s Foreign Minister Anders Samuelson highlighted the importance of the step as follows: ‘Just as we engage in a diplomatic dialogue with countries, we also need to establish and prioritize comprehensive relations with tech actors, such as Google, Facebook, Apple, and so on. (…) The idea is, we see a lot of companies and new technologies that will in many ways involve and be part of everyday life of citizens in Denmark.'
MULTIFILE
Wat is de beroepsidentiteit van sociaal werk, wat behoort zij te zijn? Sociaal werk wordt wel omschreven als een professie maar ook als een ambacht, vaak zonder duidelijk onderscheid tussen en wellicht zelfs door impliciete gelijkstelling van deze kwalificaties. Met behulp van de ideaaltypische benadering kan echter worden aangetoond dat deze twee typen beroepen niet alleen veel overeenkomsten delen maar ook op enkele punten fundamenteel van elkaar verschillen. Op basis van het werk van Freidson (2001) en Sennett (2008) kan worden aangetoond dat het ideaaltypische doel van professies het realiseren van een abstracte waarde (zoals rechtvaardigheid) is, terwijl ambachten gericht zijn op het manipuleren van concrete materialen (bijvoorbeeld steen). Bijgevolg zijn (enkel) professies beroepen met een morele identiteit. In alle zelfdefinities van sociaal werk is deze morele identiteit, deze humanitaire kern aanwezig (zie bv. IFSW, NVMW). Daarom moet sociaal werk worden beschouwd als een professie en niet als een ambacht. Dit is niet louter een academische discussie maar beïnvloedt bijvoorbeeld de positie van dit beroep in de samenleving, zoals aan de hand van de ministeriële richtlijnen betreffende Welzijn Nieuwe Stijl kan worden geïllustreerd.
This paper tries to contribute to the clarification of the problems concerning professional justifications from an ideal-typical point of view, which inevitably implies that it doesn’t deal with real problems and their solutions. The starting point is Freidsons (2001) idealtypical distinction between professionalism, market and bureaucracy. Abbotts (1988) analysis of professionalism will be used to convert Freidsons distinction of power into a distinction of expertise. By making use of Savornin Lohman & Raaff (2001) the distinction is extended by two more logics, the public and the private one. It will be shown that all five logics rest on different action values and that these differing values can cause serious misunderstandings concerning professional justifications.
This article starts from the observation that popular culture resides in a contradictory space. On the one hand it seems to be thriving, in that the range of media objects that were previously studied under the rubric of popular culture has certainly expanded. Yet, cultural studies scholars rarely study these media objects as popular culture. Instead, concerns about immaterial labor, about the manipulation of voting behavior and public opinion, about filter bubbles and societal polarization, and about populist authoritarianism, determine the dominant frames with which the contemporary media environment is approached. This article aims to trace how this change has come to pass over the last 50 years. It argues that changes in the media environment are important, but also that cultural studies as an institutionalizing interdisciplinary project has changed. It identifies “the moment of popular culture” as a relatively short-lived but epoch-defining moment in cultural studies. This moment was subsequently displaced by a set of related yet different theoretical problematics that gradually moved the study of popular culture away from the popular. These displacements are: the hollowing out of the notion of the popular, as signaled early on by Meaghan Morris’ article “The Banality of Cultural Studies” in 1988; the institutionalization of cultural studies; the rise of the governmentality approach and a growing engagement with affect theory.
LINK
