Advertisement

Political Attention: A Genealogy of Reinscriptions

  • Jayson HarsinEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter argues that democratic political attention (PA) has always been embedded in socio-economic relations and observable through historically shifting communication practices and moralized habits. It considers democratic PA on as collective attention to a common object whose status as political is rhetorically contingent; and as individual cognition. Both forms of PA are the object of second-party and third-party strategies to transform it into distraction for political and commercial ends. It focuses on Greco-Roman origins, its displacement into anti-democratic spectacles of power as well as technologies of self; its rebirth in eighteenth century and then twentieth century American refigurings, which eventually are subsumed by consumer cultural monopolies on collective attention. Finally, it considers contemporary bio-political co-optation as digital post-PA; and as resistant insurgent PA.

Keywords

Attention economy Democracy Insurgent political attention Strategic political communication Political Attention Consumer culture 

References

  1. Amnå, E., and J. Ekman. 2014. Standby Citizens: Diverse Faces of Political Passivity. European Political Science Review 6 (2): 261–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrejevic, Mark. 2007. Surveillance in the Digital Enclosure. The Communication Review 10 (4): 295–317.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10714420701715365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andrejevic, M. 2013. InfoGlut: How Too Much Information Is Changing the Way We Think and Know. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aristotle. 2007. On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. Trans. G.A. Kennedy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Atchley, P., and S. Lane. 2014. Cognition in the Attention Economy. In Psychology of Learning and Motivation, ed. B.H. Ross. Waltham: Elsevier/Academic Press.Google Scholar
  6. Ball, T., R. Dagger, and D.I. O’Neill. 2016. Political Ideologies and the Democratic Ideal. New York/London: Taylor & Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Benjamin, W. 2007. The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. In Illuminations, 217–251. New York: Schocken Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bennett-Carpenter, B. 2017. Death in Documentaries: The Memento Mori Experience. Leiden: Brill Rodopi.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berger, Ben. 2011. Attention Deficit Democracy the Paradox of Civic Engagement. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bernays, E.L. 1928. Propaganda. New York: Horace Liveright.Google Scholar
  11. Bevir, M. 2010. Democratic Governance. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bovard, J. 2005. Attention Deficit Democracy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  13. Boynton, Rachel. 2006. Our Brand Is Crisis. Port Washington: Koch Lorber Films.Google Scholar
  14. Brunon, D. 2014. Théorie du genre: un rapport de l’OMS à l’origine de la rumeur. January 28. http://www.europe1.fr/societe/theorie-du-genre-un-rapport-de-l-oms-a-l-origine-de-la-rumeur-1784819. Accessed 21 May 2015.
  15. Calhoun, C.J., ed. 1992. Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  16. Citton, Y. 2014. Pour une écologie de l’attention. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
  17. ———. 2017. The Ecology of Attention. Trans. B. Norman. London: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  18. Cohen, Lizabeth. 2008. A Consumers’ Republic: The Politics of Mass Consumption in Postwar America. New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  19. Couldry, N., S. Livingstone, and T. Markham. 2016. Media Consumption and Public Engagement: Beyond the Presumption of Attention. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  20. Crary, Jonathan. 2001. Suspensions of Perception: Attention, Spectacle, and Modern Culture. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Crogan, P., and S. Kinsley. 2012. Paying Attention: Towards a Critique of the Attention Economy. Culture Machine 13: 1–29.Google Scholar
  22. Crouch, C. 2008. Post-democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  23. Curran, J. 1991. Rethinking the Media as a Public Sphere. In Communication and Citizenship, ed. P. Dahlgren and C. Sparks. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Dabbish, L., G. Mark, and V.M. González. 2011. Why Do I Keep Interrupting Myself?: Environment, Habit and Self-Interruption. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 3127–3130. ACM.Google Scholar
  25. Dean, Jodi. 2005. Communicative Capitalism: Circulation and the Foreclosure of Politics. Cultural Politics 1 (1): 51–74.  https://doi.org/10.2752/174321905778054845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dewey, John. 1927. The Public and Its Problems. Denver: Swallow.Google Scholar
  27. “Distract | Definition of Distract in English by Oxford Dictionaries.” n.d. Oxford Dictionaries | English. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/distract. Accessed 24 Aug 2018.
  28. Duarte, Antonio Manuel, and Manolis I. Stefanakis. 2015. The Use of Cues for Attention in Ancient Greek Art: Aspects That Influence Concentration in the Work of Art and Its Elements. Arte, Individuo y Sociedad 27 (3): 517–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ethington, Philip. 1999. The Metropolis and Multicultural Ethics: Direct Democracy Versus Deliberative Democracy in the Progressive Era. In Progressivism and the New Democracy, ed. Sidney M. Milkis and Jerome M. Mileu, 192–225. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
  30. Ewen, Stuart. 1996. PR!: A Social History of Spin. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  31. Fink, L. 1997. Progressive Intellectuals and the Dilemmas of Democratic Commitment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Foucault, M., and P. Rabinow. 1997. Ethics: Subjectivity and Truth. New York: New Press/Distributed by W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  33. Fox, R.W., and T.J.J. Lears. 1983. The Culture of Consumption in America. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  34. Friedenberg, R.V. 2008. Consultants, Political, In Encyclopaedia of Political Communication, ed. L. Kaid and C. Holz-Bacha. Sage Publications. http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/sagepolcom/consultants_political/0. Accessed 10 July 2015.
  35. Galloway, Chris. 2017. Blink and They’re Gone: PR and the Battle for Attention. Public Relations Review 43 (5): 969–977.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.06.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Garland, D. 2014. What Is a “History of the Present”? On Foucault’s Genealogies and Their Critical Preconditions. Punishment & Society 16 (4): 365–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Gates, Kelly. 2014. Designing Affective Consumers: Emotion Analysis in Market Research. In The Routledge Companion to Global Popular Culture, December 5.  https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203081846-16.
  38. “Global Citizenship Guides | Oxfam Education.” n.d. Oxfam GB. https://www.oxfam.org.uk/education/who-we-are/global-citizenship-guides. Accessed 11 Jan 2019.
  39. Habermas, J. 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  40. Haile, T. 2014, March 9. What You Think You Know About the Web Is Wrong. Time. Retrieved from http://time.com/12933/what-you-think-you-know-about-the-web-is-wrong/
  41. Haraway, D. 1985. A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology, and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s. Socialist Review 15 (2): 65–107.Google Scholar
  42. Harding, J. 2008. Alpha Dogs: The Americans Who Turned Political Spin into a Global Business. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
  43. Hariman, R. 1995. Political Style: The Artistry of Power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Harsin, J. 2014. Public Argument in the New Media Ecology. JAIC: Journal of Argumentation in Context 3 (1): 7–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. ———. 2015. Regimes of Posttruth, Postpolitics, and Attention Economies. Communication, Culture & Critique 8 (2): 327–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hooker, R. 1996. Thucydides: Pericles’ Funeral Oration. Retrieved August 31, 2019, from University of Minnesota, Human Rights Library Website: http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/education/thucydides.html
  47. Horgan, John. 2010. So Many Links, So Little Time. Wall Street Journal, June 4, sec. Life and Style. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703559004575256790495393722
  48. Jensen, K.B. 1995. The Social Semiotics of Mass Communication. London/Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  49. Jewett, A. 2014. Science, Democracy, and the American University: From the Civil War to the Cold War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Kahneman, Daniel. 2011. Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  51. Kitley, P. 2003. Television, Regulation and Civil Society in Asia. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kloppenberg, James T. 1987. Uncertain Victory: Social Democracy and Progressivism in European and American Thought, 1870–1920. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Kuna, David P. 1976. The Concept of Suggestion in the Early History of Advertising Psychology. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 12 (4): 347–353.  https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6696(197610)12:4<347::AID-JHBS2300120406>3.0.CO;2-M.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Leach, W. 1993. Land of Desire. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  55. Lees-Marshment, J. 2011. The Political Marketing Game. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lippmann, Walter. 1998. Public Opinion. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. (Original work published in 1922).Google Scholar
  57. Lockwood, T. 2013. Habituation, Habit, and Character in Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics. In A History of Habit from Aristotle to Bourdieu, ed. T. Sparrow and A. Hutchinson. Lanham: Lexington.Google Scholar
  58. Lovett, Frank. 2014. Civic Virtue. In The Encyclopedia of Political Thought, 509–518. Malden/Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.  https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118474396.wbept0147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. ———. 2018. Republicanism. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta, Summer 2018. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/republicanism/
  60. Marchand, R. 1998. Creating the Corporate Soul: The Rise of Public Relations and Corporate Imagery in American Big Business. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  61. Mayhew, L.H. 1997. The New Public. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. McCombs, M.E., and D.L. Shaw. 1972. The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media. Public Opinion Quarterly 36 (2): 176–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. McMahon, A. Michal. 1972. An American Courtship: Psychologists and Advertising Theory in the Progressive Era. American Studies 13 (Fall): 5–18.Google Scholar
  64. Miller, F. 2017, Winter. Aristotle’s Political Theory. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. E. N. Zalta. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/aristotle-politics/
  65. Nash, Kate. 1996. Post-Democracy, Politics and Philosophy: An Interview with Jacques Rancière. Angelaki 1 (3): 171–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Newman, Jared. 2016. Do We Read What We Share? Chartbeat Blog, March 3. http://blog.chartbeat.com/2016/03/03/do-we-read-what-we-share/
  67. North, Paul. 2012. The Problem of Distraction. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Oosterwijk, S. 2017. Sensing Death: The Danse Macabre in Early Modern Europe. In Sense and the Senses in Early Modern Art and Cultural Practice, ed. S. Walker, 95–110. New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  69. Ostrow, J. 2015, August 6. Jon Stewart, in His Final Episode, Reminds Viewers to Stay Vigilant. Retrieved December 20, 2018, from The Denver Post Website http://blogs.denverpost.com/ostrow/?p=23004
  70. Pascal, Blaise. 1999. Pensées and Other Writings. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Peters, John Durham. 1993. Genealogical Notes on “The Field”. Journal of Communication 43 (4): 132–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Petersen, S. 2007. Mundane Cyborg Practice. Convergence: The Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 13 (1): 79–91.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856507072859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Pettman, Dominic. 2016. Infinite Distraction: Paying Attention to Social Media. London: Polity.Google Scholar
  74. Pocock, J.G.A. 1974. The Machiavellian Moment. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  75. ———. 1981. The Machiavellian Moment Revisited: A Study in History and Ideology. The Journal of Modern History 53 (1): 49–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Potts, D. C. 1962. Pascal’s Contemporaries and ‘Le Divertissement’. The Modern Language Review 57 (1): 31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Przeworski, A. 2010. Democracy and the Limits of Self-Government. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Ratcliffe, Julian. 2016. Fighting the Politics of Confusion. OpenDemocracy, August 5. https://www.opendemocracy.net/julian-ratcliffe/post-factualism-and-politics-of-confusion
  79. Rosa, H. 2013. Social Acceleration a New Theory of Modernity. Trans. J. Trejo-Mathys. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Rosenwald, M. 2017, Fall. Making Media Literacy Great Again. Retrieved July 8, 2019, from Columbia Journalism Review website https://www.cjr.org/special_report/media-literacy-trump-fake-news.php/
  81. Saxonhouse, A.W. 2005. Free Speech and Democracy in Ancient Athens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Second Screening During TV Time—It’s Not What You Think. eMarketer. (2014, 6 October). http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Second-Screening-During-TV-TimeIts-Not-What-You-Think/1011256. Accessed 5 July 2015.
  83. Segijn, Claire M., Hilde A.M. Voorveld, and Edith G. Smit. 2016. The Underlying Mechanisms of Multiscreening Effects. Journal of Advertising 45 (4): 391–402.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2016.1172386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Segijn, Claire M., Hilde A.M. Voorveld, Lisa Vandeberg, and Edith G. Smit. 2017. The Battle of the Screens: Unraveling Attention Allocation and Memory Effects When Multiscreening. Human Communication Research 43 (2): 295–314.  https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Shainin, Jonathan. 2018. How We Make the Long Read: From the Rise of the Sandwich to the Meaning of Neoliberalism. The Guardian, April 7, sec. Membership. https://www.theguardian.com/membership/2018/apr/07/long-read-how-we-make-it-guardian-shainin
  86. Sheingate, A.D. 2016. Building a Business of Politics: The Rise of Political Consulting and the Transformation of American Democracy. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  87. Smart, P. 2017. Extended Cognition and the Internet. Philosophy & Technology 30 (3): 357–390.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-016-0250-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Sobel, A. 2015, March 15. Can Tony Haile Save Journalism by Changing the Metric? Retrieved August 23, 2018, from Columbia Journalism Review Website: https://www.cjr.org/innovations/tony_haile_chartbeat.php
  89. Streeck, W. 2011. The Crises of Democratic Capitalism. New Left Review 71: 5–29.Google Scholar
  90. Styles, E.A. 2006. The Psychology of Attention. New York: Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. de Tocqueville, A. 1840. De la démocratie en Amérique. Paris: Librairie de C. Gosselin.Google Scholar
  92. ———. 2010. Democracy in America: Historical-Critical Edition of De la démocratie en Amérique. Trans. E. Nolla. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
  93. “Topic: Binge Watching in the U.S.” n.d. www.Statista.Com. https://www.statista.com/topics/2508/binge-watching-in-the-us/. Accessed 9 Jan 2019.
  94. Trends, G. 2017. Fragmentation Cohesion & Uncertainty. Retrieved from https://www.ipsos.com/en-th/ipsos-global-trends-2017
  95. Vanderbilt, Tom. 2014. The Pleasure and Pain of Speed. Nautilus, January 23. http://nautil.us/issue/9/time/the-pleasure-and-pain-of-speed
  96. Virilio, Paul. 1983. Pure War. New York: Semiotexte.Google Scholar
  97. Wakefield, J. 2018, August 2. Number of Mobile Calls Drops for First Time. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-45033302
  98. Ward, Adrian F., Kristen Duke, Ayelet Gneezy, and Maarten W. Bos. 2017. Brain Drain: The Mere Presence of One’s Own Smartphone Reduces Available Cognitive Capacity. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, April.  https://doi.org/10.1086/691462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Weintraub, J.A., and K. Kumar. 1997. Public and Private in Thought and Practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  100. Williams, R. 1975. Television: Technology and Cultural Form. New York: Schocken Books.Google Scholar
  101. Wolfe, C. 2003. Liberalism at the Crossroads. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  102. Wolff, R.D. 2012. Democracy at Work: A Cure for Capitalism. Chicago: Haymarket books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The American University of ParisParisFrance

Personalised recommendations