When Twitter blocked Trump: The paradox, ambivalence and dialectic of digitalized publics
In our text, we follow the traces of a (1) paradox, (2) an ambivalence and (3) a dialectic that constitute digitalized public spheres and discuss the resulting tensions in discourse-ethical and political-theoretical perspectives using the blocking of Donald J. Trump’s Twitter account as an example....
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Philosophy & social criticism 2024-01, Vol.50 (1), p.239-254 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 254 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 239 |
container_title | Philosophy & social criticism |
container_volume | 50 |
creator | Seeliger, Martin Baum, Markus |
description | In our text, we follow the traces of a (1) paradox, (2) an ambivalence and (3) a dialectic that constitute digitalized public spheres and discuss the resulting tensions in discourse-ethical and political-theoretical perspectives using the blocking of Donald J. Trump’s Twitter account as an example. Starting from this, we determine the conditions of constitution of the digital public sphere and locate the dynamics of its development in the dialectical tension between private and public: The fact that the two other relations of autonomy and heteronomy, intensification and polarization come to such a head is based on an insufficient socialization of all those means of production that produce the current digital public sphere. Using the example of Donald J. Trump’s recently suspended Twitter account and with a view to Habermas’s discourse ethics, we illustrate the extent to which Trump’s partly racist and conspiracy-theoretical post violates discourse ethics standards and is also highly problematic with regard to the political; however, banishment from a part of the digital public sphere is certainly not an act that should be incumbent on a private company. From this, we conclude that the normative potentials of digital public spheres can only be vol. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/01914537231203921 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2916636861</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_01914537231203921</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2916636861</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-12e532c00ee9eb58be735dcc05991a090f3f789d4ff6db49cf8c2b32d8a289203</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEtLxDAUhYMoOI7-AHcBt3bMo20adyK-YMBNRV2VNLmZydhpa9L6-vVmGMGFuLoc7vnu4yB0TMmMUiHOCJU0zbhgnDLCJaM7aELTnCaCp0-7aLLpJxvDPjoIYUUIyWQuJuj5cQktLt_dMIDHddPpFzC49OO6P8flEnCvvDLdxylW69q9qQZaDVi1BhsXhR6cxp2NYuEG1bivCPdj3TgdDtGeVU2Ao586RQ_XV-XlbTK_v7m7vJgnmhMxJJRBxpkmBEBCnRU1CJ4ZreN9kioiieVWFNKk1uamTqW2hWY1Z6ZQrJDx1yk62c7tffc6QhiqVTf6Nq6smKR5zvMip9FFty7tuxA82Kr3bq38Z0VJtUmw-pNgZGZbJqgF_E79H_gGNBBwOQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2916636861</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>When Twitter blocked Trump: The paradox, ambivalence and dialectic of digitalized publics</title><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>Seeliger, Martin ; Baum, Markus</creator><creatorcontrib>Seeliger, Martin ; Baum, Markus</creatorcontrib><description>In our text, we follow the traces of a (1) paradox, (2) an ambivalence and (3) a dialectic that constitute digitalized public spheres and discuss the resulting tensions in discourse-ethical and political-theoretical perspectives using the blocking of Donald J. Trump’s Twitter account as an example. Starting from this, we determine the conditions of constitution of the digital public sphere and locate the dynamics of its development in the dialectical tension between private and public: The fact that the two other relations of autonomy and heteronomy, intensification and polarization come to such a head is based on an insufficient socialization of all those means of production that produce the current digital public sphere. Using the example of Donald J. Trump’s recently suspended Twitter account and with a view to Habermas’s discourse ethics, we illustrate the extent to which Trump’s partly racist and conspiracy-theoretical post violates discourse ethics standards and is also highly problematic with regard to the political; however, banishment from a part of the digital public sphere is certainly not an act that should be incumbent on a private company. From this, we conclude that the normative potentials of digital public spheres can only be vol.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0191-4537</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1461-734X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/01914537231203921</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Ambivalence ; Autonomy ; Closely held corporations ; Conspiracy ; Dialectics ; Discourse ; Ethics ; Habermas, Jurgen ; Polarization ; Politics ; Public sphere ; Racism ; Socialization</subject><ispartof>Philosophy & social criticism, 2024-01, Vol.50 (1), p.239-254</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-12e532c00ee9eb58be735dcc05991a090f3f789d4ff6db49cf8c2b32d8a289203</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0558-0051</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/01914537231203921$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/01914537231203921$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21798,27901,27902,33751,43597,43598</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Seeliger, Martin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baum, Markus</creatorcontrib><title>When Twitter blocked Trump: The paradox, ambivalence and dialectic of digitalized publics</title><title>Philosophy & social criticism</title><description>In our text, we follow the traces of a (1) paradox, (2) an ambivalence and (3) a dialectic that constitute digitalized public spheres and discuss the resulting tensions in discourse-ethical and political-theoretical perspectives using the blocking of Donald J. Trump’s Twitter account as an example. Starting from this, we determine the conditions of constitution of the digital public sphere and locate the dynamics of its development in the dialectical tension between private and public: The fact that the two other relations of autonomy and heteronomy, intensification and polarization come to such a head is based on an insufficient socialization of all those means of production that produce the current digital public sphere. Using the example of Donald J. Trump’s recently suspended Twitter account and with a view to Habermas’s discourse ethics, we illustrate the extent to which Trump’s partly racist and conspiracy-theoretical post violates discourse ethics standards and is also highly problematic with regard to the political; however, banishment from a part of the digital public sphere is certainly not an act that should be incumbent on a private company. From this, we conclude that the normative potentials of digital public spheres can only be vol.</description><subject>Ambivalence</subject><subject>Autonomy</subject><subject>Closely held corporations</subject><subject>Conspiracy</subject><subject>Dialectics</subject><subject>Discourse</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Habermas, Jurgen</subject><subject>Polarization</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Public sphere</subject><subject>Racism</subject><subject>Socialization</subject><issn>0191-4537</issn><issn>1461-734X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFRWT</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kEtLxDAUhYMoOI7-AHcBt3bMo20adyK-YMBNRV2VNLmZydhpa9L6-vVmGMGFuLoc7vnu4yB0TMmMUiHOCJU0zbhgnDLCJaM7aELTnCaCp0-7aLLpJxvDPjoIYUUIyWQuJuj5cQktLt_dMIDHddPpFzC49OO6P8flEnCvvDLdxylW69q9qQZaDVi1BhsXhR6cxp2NYuEG1bivCPdj3TgdDtGeVU2Ao586RQ_XV-XlbTK_v7m7vJgnmhMxJJRBxpkmBEBCnRU1CJ4ZreN9kioiieVWFNKk1uamTqW2hWY1Z6ZQrJDx1yk62c7tffc6QhiqVTf6Nq6smKR5zvMip9FFty7tuxA82Kr3bq38Z0VJtUmw-pNgZGZbJqgF_E79H_gGNBBwOQ</recordid><startdate>202401</startdate><enddate>202401</enddate><creator>Seeliger, Martin</creator><creator>Baum, Markus</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>AFRWT</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>WZK</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0558-0051</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202401</creationdate><title>When Twitter blocked Trump: The paradox, ambivalence and dialectic of digitalized publics</title><author>Seeliger, Martin ; Baum, Markus</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-12e532c00ee9eb58be735dcc05991a090f3f789d4ff6db49cf8c2b32d8a289203</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Ambivalence</topic><topic>Autonomy</topic><topic>Closely held corporations</topic><topic>Conspiracy</topic><topic>Dialectics</topic><topic>Discourse</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Habermas, Jurgen</topic><topic>Polarization</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Public sphere</topic><topic>Racism</topic><topic>Socialization</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Seeliger, Martin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baum, Markus</creatorcontrib><collection>Sage Journals GOLD Open Access 2024</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Philosophy & social criticism</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Seeliger, Martin</au><au>Baum, Markus</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>When Twitter blocked Trump: The paradox, ambivalence and dialectic of digitalized publics</atitle><jtitle>Philosophy & social criticism</jtitle><date>2024-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>50</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>239</spage><epage>254</epage><pages>239-254</pages><issn>0191-4537</issn><eissn>1461-734X</eissn><abstract>In our text, we follow the traces of a (1) paradox, (2) an ambivalence and (3) a dialectic that constitute digitalized public spheres and discuss the resulting tensions in discourse-ethical and political-theoretical perspectives using the blocking of Donald J. Trump’s Twitter account as an example. Starting from this, we determine the conditions of constitution of the digital public sphere and locate the dynamics of its development in the dialectical tension between private and public: The fact that the two other relations of autonomy and heteronomy, intensification and polarization come to such a head is based on an insufficient socialization of all those means of production that produce the current digital public sphere. Using the example of Donald J. Trump’s recently suspended Twitter account and with a view to Habermas’s discourse ethics, we illustrate the extent to which Trump’s partly racist and conspiracy-theoretical post violates discourse ethics standards and is also highly problematic with regard to the political; however, banishment from a part of the digital public sphere is certainly not an act that should be incumbent on a private company. From this, we conclude that the normative potentials of digital public spheres can only be vol.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/01914537231203921</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0558-0051</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0191-4537 |
ispartof | Philosophy & social criticism, 2024-01, Vol.50 (1), p.239-254 |
issn | 0191-4537 1461-734X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2916636861 |
source | SAGE Complete A-Z List; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Alma/SFX Local Collection; Sociological Abstracts |
subjects | Ambivalence Autonomy Closely held corporations Conspiracy Dialectics Discourse Ethics Habermas, Jurgen Polarization Politics Public sphere Racism Socialization |
title | When Twitter blocked Trump: The paradox, ambivalence and dialectic of digitalized publics |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-12T15%3A29%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=When%20Twitter%20blocked%20Trump:%20The%20paradox,%20ambivalence%20and%20dialectic%20of%20digitalized%20publics&rft.jtitle=Philosophy%20&%20social%20criticism&rft.au=Seeliger,%20Martin&rft.date=2024-01&rft.volume=50&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=239&rft.epage=254&rft.pages=239-254&rft.issn=0191-4537&rft.eissn=1461-734X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/01914537231203921&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2916636861%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2916636861&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_01914537231203921&rfr_iscdi=true |