Advertisement

Sozialer Wandel

Chapter
  • 2.3k Downloads

Zusammenfassung

Medien sind in Gesellschaften eingebettet, die sich wandeln, und Veränderungsprozesse und Medien beeinflussen einander wechselseitig. Dieses Kapitel betrachtet (1) die Parallelität von Medien- und allgemeinmenschlicher Sozialgeschichte; (2) vier Theoretiker sozialen Wandels, deren Impulse in der Mediensoziologie aufgenommen und verwendet werden; (3) in handlungstheoretischer Analyse, was da passiert, bezüglich der grundsätzlichen Entwicklung der Modernisierung, und (4) wieso sie in Europa zu zwei Schüben gesellschaftlicher Modernisierung und der als Großgruppengesellschaft verfassten Industriegesellschaft mit ihren Massenmedien führte; (5) wie die Großtheoretiker das darstellen und wie Mediensoziologie mit ihnen arbeitet.

Literatur

Zentrale Referenzen

  1. Bauman, Zygmunt. 1998. Modernity and the Holocaust. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  2. Bauman, Zygmunt. 2000. Liquid modernity. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  3. Bauman, Zygmunt. 2003. Liquid love: On the frailty of human bonds. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  4. Beck, Ulrich. 2000. The cosmopolitan perspective: Sociology of the second age of modernity. British Journal of Sociology 51:79–105.Google Scholar
  5. Beck, Ulrich. 2004. Cosmopolitical realism: On the distinction between cosmopolitanism in philosophy and the social sciences. Global Networks-a Journal of Transnational Affairs 4:131–156.Google Scholar
  6. Beck, Ulrich. 1986. Risikogesellschaft. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  7. Beck, Ulrich. 1992. How modern is modern society? Theory Culture & Society 9:163–169.Google Scholar
  8. Bell, Daniel. 1973. The coming of the post-industrial society: A venture in social forecasting. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  9. Castells, Manuel. 1996–1998. The information age: Economy, society and culture. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  10. Giddens, Anthony. 1990. The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  11. Giddens, Anthony. 1992. The transformation of intimacy: Sexuality, love and eroticism in modern societies. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Habermas, Jürgen. 1992. Faktizität und Geltung: Beiträge zur Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaats. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  13. Harvey, David. 1989. The condition of postmodernity. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  14. Hunt, Alan. 1996. Governance of the consuming passions: A history of sumptuary law. New York: St. Martin’s.Google Scholar
  15. Hutchins, B., und L. Lester. 2006. Environmental protest and tap-dancing with the media in the information age. Media Culture & Society 28:433–451.Google Scholar
  16. Inglehart, Ronald, und Wayne E. Baker. 2000. Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values. American Sociological Review 65:19–51.Google Scholar
  17. Jameson, Fredric. 1991. Postmodernism, or, the cultural logic of late capitalism. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Jaspers, Karl. 1949. Vom Ursprung und Ziel der Geschichte. Zürich: Artemis-Verlag.Google Scholar
  19. Knöbl, Wolfgang. 2003. Theories that won’t pass away: The never ending story of modernization theory. In Handbook of historical sociology, Hrsg. Gerard Delanty und Engin F. Isin, 96–107. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Lyotard, Jean-François. 1984. The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  21. Papacharissi, Z. 2013. A networked self identity performance and sociability on social network sites. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  22. Spengler, Oswald. 1923. Der Untergang des Abendlandes. Umrisse einer Morphologie der Weltgeschichte. München: Beck. (Erstveröffentlichung 1918).Google Scholar
  23. Touraine, Alain. 1969. La société post-industrielle. Naissance d’une société. Paris: Denoël.Google Scholar
  24. Urry, John. 2003. Global complexity. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  25. Weber, Max. 1984. Wissenschaft als Beruf. Berlin: Duncker und Humblot. (Erstveröffentlichung 1919).Google Scholar

Beispiele mediensoziologischer Studien

  1. Ailon, G. 2012. The discursive management of financial risk scandals: The case of wall street journal commentaries on LTCM and Enron. Qualitative Sociology 35:251–270.Google Scholar
  2. Ampuja, M. 2012. Globalization theory, media-centrism and neoliberalism: A critique of recent intellectual trends. Critical Sociology 38:281–301.Google Scholar
  3. Bovone, L. 2006. Urban style cultures and urban cultural production in Milan: Postmodern identity and the transformation of fashion. Poetics 34:370–382.Google Scholar
  4. Bristow, E., und A.J. Fitzgerald. 2011. Global climate change and the industrial animal agriculture link: The construction of risk. Society & Animals 19:205–224.Google Scholar
  5. Chen, W.H., F.J. Tu, und P. Zheng. 2017. A transnational networked public sphere of air pollution: Analysis of a Twitter network of PM2.5 from the risk society perspective. Information Communication & Society 20:1005–1023.Google Scholar
  6. Cockerham, W.C., A. Rutten, und T. Abel. 1997. Conceptualizing contemporary health lifestyles: Moving beyond Weber. Sociological Quarterly 38:321–342.Google Scholar
  7. Curran, D. 2018. Risk, innovation, and democracy in the digital economy. European Journal of Social Theory 21:207–226.Google Scholar
  8. David, M., und P. Millward. 2012. Football’s coming home?: Digital reterritorialization, contradictions in the transnational coverage of sport and the sociology of alternative football broadcasts. British Journal of Sociology 63:349–369.Google Scholar
  9. Davidson, D.J., und E. Bogdan. 2010. Reflexive modernization at the source: Local media coverage of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy in rural Alberta. Canadian Review of Sociology-Revue Canadienne De Sociologie 47:359–380.Google Scholar
  10. De Venanzi, A. 2012. School shootings in the USA: Popular culture as risk, teen marginality, and violence against peers. Crime Media Culture 8:261–278.Google Scholar
  11. Ekberg, M. 2007. The parameters of the risk society – A review and exploration. Current Sociology 55:343–366.Google Scholar
  12. Fisher, E. 2010. Contemporary technology discourse and the legitimation of capitalism. European Journal of Social Theory 13:229–252.Google Scholar
  13. Fitzgerald, S.T., und B.A. Rubin. 2010. Risk society, media, and power: The case of nanotechnology. Sociological Spectrum 30:367–402.Google Scholar
  14. Gies, L. 2008. How material are cyberbodies? Broadband Internet and embodied subjectivity. Crime Media Culture 4:311–330.Google Scholar
  15. Giulianotti, R. 1997. Drugs and the media in the era of postmodernity: An archaeological analysis. Media, Culture and Society 19:413–439.Google Scholar
  16. Guo, Y., und Y.W. Li. 2018. Online amplification of air pollution risk perception: The moderating role of affect in information. Information Communication & Society 21:80–93.Google Scholar
  17. Hayton, J.W., P. Millward, und R. Petersen-Wagner. 2017. Chasing a Tiger in a network society? Hull City’s proposed name change in the pursuit of China and East Asia’s new middle class consumers. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 52:279–298.Google Scholar
  18. Hobbs, M., S. Owen, und L. Gerber. 2017. Liquid love? Dating apps, sex, relationships and the digital transformation of intimacy. Journal of Sociology 53:271–284.Google Scholar
  19. Hobson-West, P. 2007. ‚Trusting blindly can be the biggest risk of all‘: Organised resistance to childhood vaccination in the UK. Sociology of Health & Illness 29:198–215.Google Scholar
  20. Hoffman, P.T. 2012. Why was it Europeans who conquered the world? Journal of Economic History 72:601–633.Google Scholar
  21. Hutchins, B., D. Rowe, und A. Ruddock. 2009. „It’s fantasy football made real“: Networked media sport, the internet, and the hybrid reality of myfootballclub. Sociology of Sport Journal 26:89–106.Google Scholar
  22. Ivan, L., und M. Fernandez-Ardevol. 2017. Older people, mobile communication and risks. Societies 7:16.Google Scholar
  23. Jensen, M., und A. Blok. 2008. Pesticides in the risk society – The view from everyday life. Current Sociology 56:757–778.Google Scholar
  24. Keller, Reiner. 2003. Distanziertes Mitleiden. Katastrophische Ereignisse, Massenmedien und kulturelle Transformation. Berliner Journal für Soziologie 13:395–414.Google Scholar
  25. Kleese, D. 2002. Contested natures: Wolves in late modernity. Society & Natural Resources 15:313–326.Google Scholar
  26. Lidskog, R. 1996. In science we trust? On the relation between scientific knowledge, risk consciousness and public trust. Acta Sociologica 39:31–56.Google Scholar
  27. Macinnes, J. 2006. Castells’ Catalan routes: Nationalism and the sociology of identity. British Journal of Sociology 57:677–698.Google Scholar
  28. Mackendrick, N.A. 2010. Media framing of body burdens: Precautionary consumption and the individualization of risk. Sociological Inquiry 80:126–149.Google Scholar
  29. Martin, J.A. 2014. (Re)embodiment of the digital self and first life body in a new social media environment: Paid sex work in second life. In Symbolic interaction and new social media, Hrsg. M.D. Johns, S.L.S. Chen, und L.A. TerliS. 143–171. Bingley: Emerald Group.Google Scholar
  30. Meyer, S., P. Ward, et al. 2008. Trust in the health system: An analysis and extension of the social theories of Giddens and Luhmann. Health Sociology Review 17:177–186.Google Scholar
  31. Monaci, M., M. Magatti, und M. Caselli. 2003. Network, exposure and rhetoric: Italian occupational fields and heterogeneity in constructing the globalized self. Global Networks-a Journal of Transnational Affairs 3:457–480.Google Scholar
  32. Munar, A.M., S. Gyimothy, und L.P. Cai. 2013. Tourism social media: A new research agenda. In Tourism social media: Transformations in identity, community and culture, Hrsg. A.M. Munar, S. Gyimothy, und L. Cai, 1–15. Bingley: Emerald Group.Google Scholar
  33. Nerlich, B., und N. Koteyko. 2008. Balancing food risks and food benefits: The coverage of probiotics in the UK national press. Sociological Research Online 13:21.Google Scholar
  34. Ong, J.C. 2009. The cosmopolitan continuum: Locating cosmopolitanism in media and cultural studies. Media Culture & Society 31:449–466.Google Scholar
  35. Petersen-Wagner, R. 2017. The football supporter in a cosmopolitan epoch. Journal of Sport & Social Issues 41:133–150.Google Scholar
  36. Petzold, K. 2017. Cosmopolitanism through mobility: Physical-corporeal or virtual-imagined? British Journal of Sociology 68:167–193.Google Scholar
  37. Rasmussen, T. 1998. The morality of closeness in a world of distances. Sociologisk Forskning 35:61–84.Google Scholar
  38. Silbey, S.S. 2009. Taming Prometheus: Talk about safety and culture. Annual Review of Sociology 35:341–369.Google Scholar
  39. Stevenson, N. 2005. What is safe? Cultural citizenship, visual culture and risk. Sociological Research Online 10:15.Google Scholar
  40. Szerszynski, B., und J. Urry. 2006. Visuality, mobility and the cosmopolitan: Inhabiting the world from afar. British Journal of Sociology 57:113–131.Google Scholar
  41. Ungar, S. 2001. Moral panic versus the risk society: The implications of the changing sites of social anxiety. British Journal of Sociology 52:271–291.Google Scholar
  42. Ushchyna, V. 2018. Manipulative use of risk as a stance in political communication. Discourse & Society 29:198–221.Google Scholar
  43. Ward, P.R., J. Henderson, et al. 2012. How do South Australian consumers negotiate and respond to information in the media about food and nutrition? The importance of risk, trust and uncertainty. Journal of Sociology 48:23–41.Google Scholar
  44. Wrobel, S. 2018. The task of the translator in times of dismantling the social. Zygmunt Bauman and active utopia. Polish Sociological Review 2018:61–76.Google Scholar

Weitere Referenzen

  1. Blockmans, Wim, und ’T Hart Marjolein. 2013. Pre-modern cities: Power. In The Oxford handbook of cities in world history, Hrsg. Peter Clark. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Maddison, Angus. 2010. „Statistics on World Population, GDP and Per Capita GDP, 1-2008 AD.“ http://www.ggdc.net/MADDISON/Historical_Statistics/horizontal-file_02-2010.xls. Zugegriffen 08. Aug. 2017.

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.DCMUniversität FribourgZürichSchweiz
  2. 2.Soziologisches InstitutUniversität ZürichZürichSchweiz

Personalised recommendations