Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture (WPCC) wishes to engage international scholars in a critical debate about the relationship between communication, culture and society in the 21st century.
WPCC is a peer-reviewed journal, published online. The interdisciplinary nature of the field of Media and Cultural Studies is reflected in the diverse methods, contexts and themes of the papers published. Areas of interest include – but are not limited to – the history and political economy of the media, popular culture, media users and producers, political communication and developments arising from digital technologies in the context of an increasingly globalized and networked world.
Contributions from both established scholars and those at the beginning of their academic career are equally welcome.
In a time of political upheaval with the extreme right on the rise globally, and the techniques of fascism (populism, propaganda and fake news, hate speech and rise of hate crimes) dominating discourse around societal and political issues, what is the potential for progressive activists to use the media to enable resistance and open up space for alternatives? This special issue emphasises the importance of collective action and media visibility (Meikle, 2018; Tilly & Wood, 2013; Melucci, 1996) in generating positive change.
We define ‘activism’ as ‘the widest range of attempts to effect social or cultural change’ (Meikle, 2018: iii), while ‘the media’ includes a broad range of communication platforms, from traditional journalism to digital networks.
We welcome papers on the subject of (but not limited to):
This special issue invites the most recent theoretical interventions and empirical research that explores how media activism across the globe opposes the current crises in Western democracies and beyond.
Posted on 12 Dec 2018
WPCC is thrilled to announce the publication of an extensive new special issue on the topic of China’s much debated ‘going-out’ strategy as it has developed. It extends the discussion about China¹s media expansion by focusing on the act of communicating the ‘going-out’ message and how it has been received by residents of Latin America, the USA and Africans studying in China.
Eleven contributions consider television news to radio, Twitter, the financial structures of Chinese internet firms alongside book reviews of publications on Chinese and global media politics offering new data and interview material as well as alerting readers to some of the most useful theoretical tools to develop understanding.
WPCC is an open access journal and all content in this issue and in its archive is available free to read.
For more details on this collection click here!
Posted on 26 Jul 2018
Geography, media, and communications have been closely linked since the 16th Century. Just as the advent of the printing press changed the media landscape, so too did it change that of geography and cartography.
The printing revolution, along with new instruments of measurement led to a prolific expansion of mapping activates in the 16th Century, producing increasingly detailed birds eye views of the world. These views from above worked to serve as tools of possession, the elevated position of the explorer and cartographers and the commanding view provided by the maps mirrored the divine gaze of God, positioning the commissioner of the map in a seemingly omniscient position, solidifying their position of control, changing perceptions and relationships with space itself. In this way, the Cartographic Gaze was the precursor to the surveillent gaze, epitomized by Bentham’s Panopticon and the work of Foucault.
A number of texts have already examined the linkages between geography, media and communications; Innis’s (1950) classic text on Empire and Communications; Falkheimer and Jansson’s (2006) Geographies of Communication explores communication theory’s spatial turn, and conversely Adams and Jansson’s (2012) examination of geography’s communicational turn. Yet, as we move further and deeper into a digitized world we are bombarded with ever more instruments of measurement (big data, algorithms, UGC, VGI etc.), ever more far reaching versions of the printing press (Web 2.0, Social Media etc.), and the waters are muddied further by the development of Participatory-GIS systems, and the (re-)birth of Neogeography which purportedly offers up a challenge to the status quo (Goodchild, 2009; Haklay, 2013).
Thus, it becomes essential that, just as we might question the 16th century map makers, we must now question data analytics, algorithms and their architects, the media, and those who claim to contest the cartographic gaze; to ask, ‘did you find the world or did you make it up?’ to quote Winnicott (cited in Corner, 1999). The media, data analysts and neogeographers all sit in-between the virtual and the real creating new forms of virtual time and space that are then superimposed onto territorial spaces (Potts: 2015). These new virtual spaces are still so too controlled and mediated from above by new omniscient digital Gods, propelled by their search for profits.
Posted on 05 Dec 2017