Impact of information technologies on the development of ecological communication
https://doi.org/10.21453/2311-3065-2023-11-2-91-114
Abstract
The article is devoted to the analysis of the influence of information technologies on the transformation of ecological communication, as well as to the assessment of the ongoing social changes related to the development to ecological / environmental discourse. The paper considers the main stages of technological, social and media changes, and the development of public discourse around the topic of the environment. The author carried out a theoretical analysis of the works of modern researchers (McLuhan, Mansell, Wilson, McChesney, Neuman, Gil-Garcia, Karlsson, Agin, Hase, Hofman, Grimmer, etc.). In the research based on the analysis of the Telegram messenger the author examines the features of ecological communication in the digital age and the role of “big data” in shaping today’s environmental agenda (46 public TG channels related to ecology and environment). Attention is paid to both the content and the degree of demand for certain messages. The author notes that politics gives additional publicity to information, polarization of opinions or a conflict of interests contribute to the popularity of messages, than after attracting the necessary attention of the target audience, communication moves to another level, which is non-public, or secondary. At the end, the author comes to the conclusion that in the modern period “big data” is becoming a navigator that provides a sense of direction in a huge flow of information and events in whatever field of communication.
About the Author
E. V. Panova
State Duma of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Panova Elena Vasilievna – CandSc (Polit.), Head of the Office of the Russian State Duma Committee on Ecology, Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, candidate for the degree of Doctor of Science
103265, Moscow, Okhotny Ryad st., 1
References
1. Agin S., Karlsson M. (2021). Mapping the field of climate change communication 1993–2018: Geographically biased, theoretically narrow, and methodologically limited. Environmental Communication. No. 15(4). P. 431-446. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2021.1902363
2. Bagdikian B. (2004). The new media monopoly. Boston, Massachusetts. https://library.uniteddiversity.coop/Media_and_Free_Culture/The_New_Media_Monopoly-Ben_H_Bagdikian.pdf
3. Bennet W.L., Breunig C., Givens T. (2008). Communication and political mobilization: Digital media and the organization of anti-Iraq war demonstrations in the U.S. Political Communication. No. 25(3). P. 269-289.
4. Bennett W.L., Segerberg A. (2012). The logic of connective action. Information, Communication & Society. No. 15(5). P. 739-768.
5. Bukki M., Trench B. (2018). Textbook on public relations in science and technology. Moscow: Alpina non-fiction (in Rus.).
6. Bykov I.A. (2013). Network political communication: Theory, practice and research methods: monograph. St. Petersburg: SPGUTD (in Rus.). http://jf.spbu.ru/upload/files/file_1460022652_1434.pdf
7. Dispensa J.M., Brulle R. (2003). Media’s social construction of environmental issues: Focus on global warming… The International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy. No. 23 (10).
8. Dugin E.Ya. (2012). The communicative strategy of television in the conditions of the formation of “communicative communities”. In: G.A. Shevelev (ed.), History of domestic television: the view of researchers and practitioners. Moscow: Aspect Press. P. 57-66 (in Rus.).
9. Earl J., Kimport K. (2011). Where have we been and where are we headed? Digitally enabled social change: Activism in the internet age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10. Fownes J.R., Yu C., Margolin D.B. (2018). Twitter and climate change. Sociology Compass. No. 12(6). https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12587
11. Fuhrmann H., Kuhn S. (2020). Parallels between the corona pandemic and climate change. The Current Column German Development Institute 2020 / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE), The Current Column of 1 April 2020 [el. source]: https://www.idos-research.de/en/thecurrent-column/article/parallels-between-the-corona-pandemic-and-climate-change/ (дата об- ращения: 26.03.2023).
12. Gil-Garcia J.R., Dawes S.S., Pardo T.A. (2018) Digital government and public management research: finding the crossroads. Public Management Review. V. 20 (5). P. 633-646.
13. Gorbacheva K.I. (2020). Manipulations of public consciousness in the ecological conflict on Kushtau, Power and elites. V. 7. No. 1. P. 204-231 (in Rus.).
14. Griffin E. (2015). Communication: theory and practice (transl. by A.A. Naumenko). H.: Humanitarian Center (in Rus.).
15. Grimmer J., Roberts M. E., Stewart B. M. (2021). Machine learning for social science: an agnostic approach. Annual Review of PoliticalScience. No. 24(1). P. 395–419. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-053119-015921
16. Hansen A. (2019). Environment, media and communication. London and New York.
17. Hase V. (2023). Automated Content Analysis. In: F. Oehmer-Pedrazzi, S.H. Kessler, E. Humprecht, K. Sommer, L. Castro (eds.), Standardisierte Inhaltsanalyse in Der Kommunikationswissenschaft– Standardized Content Analysis in Communication Research (p. 23-36). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-36179-2_3
18. Hase V., Mahl D., Schäfer M.S., Keller, T. R. (2022). Climate change in news media across the globe: An automated analysis of issue attention and themes in climate change coverage in 10 countries (2006–2018). Global Environmental Change. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102353
19. Hase V., Schäfer M.S. (2023). Big data & computational methods: Methodological advances for analyzing mediated environmental communication. In: A. Hansen & R. Cox (eds.),The Routledge handbook of environment and communication, 2nd ed. Routledge.
20. Hestres L.E., Hopke J. (2017). Internet-enabled activism and climate change. Digital Climate Change Activism. August. P. 28 Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320881154_Internet-enabled_activism_and_climate_change (last accessed: 26.03.2023).
21. Hofman J. M., Watts D. J., Athey S., at al. (2021). Integrating explanation and prediction in computational social science. Nature. No. 595 (7866). P. 181-188. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03659-0
22. Karpf D. (2012). The MoveOn effect: The unexpected transformation of American political. New York: Oxford University Press.
23. Katz J.E., Aakhus M.A. (2002). Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Private Talk, Public Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Labush N.S., Puyu A.S. (2019). Mediatization of extreme forms of the political process: war, revolution, terrorism. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg State University (in Rus.).
25. Lazer D.M.J., Pentland A., Watts D.J. at al. (2020). Computational social science: Obstacles and opportunities. Science. No. 369 (6507). P. 1060-1062. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaz8170Macluhan M. (1964). Understanding Media. N.Y.
26. Mansell R. Inside the communication revolution: evolving patterns of social and technical interaction, February 2002, Oxford University Press.
27. McChesney R.W. (2007). Communication Revolution: Critical Junctures and the Future of Media. N.Y.: New Press.
28. McQuale D. (2013). Journalism and society. Textbook for journalists. M.: Mediamir (in Rus.).
29. Morris D. (2011). How Big-Money Lobbyists and the Media Are Losing Their Influence, and the Internet Is Giving Power Back to the People. L.A.: Macmillan.
30. Neuman R. (2001). Social Implications of the Internet. Annual Review of Sociology. No. 27. P. 34–40
31. Olson M. (1995). The logic of collective action. Public goods and group theory (transl.). M.: FEI (in Rus.).
32. Panfilova E.E. (2008). Global Information and Economic Community as an Objective Environment for the Functioning of an Industrial Organization of the 21st Century. Management in Russia and abroad. No. 2. P. 50-55 (in Rus.).
33. Papacharissi Z. (2012). Affective news and networked publics: The rhythms of news storytelling on #Egypt. Journal of Communication. No. 62 (2). P. 266-282.
34. Pearman O., Boykoff M., Katzung J., Nacu-Schmidt A. (2022). Media and climate change observatory special issue 2021: A review of media coverage of climate change and global warming in 2021. University of Colorado Boulder. https://doi.org/10.25810/3VAZ-2Z04
35. Pyrma R.V. (2020). Concepts of civic activism in the digital space of communications. Power. No. 2. P. 74-81 (in Rus.).
36. Radford J., Joseph K. (2020). Theory in, theory out: The uses of social theory in machine learning for social science. Frontiers in Big Data. V. 3. No. 18. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2020.00018
37. Reber U. (2019). Overcoming language barriers: Assessing the potential of machine translation and topic modeling for the comparative analysis of multilingual text corpora. Communication Methods and Measures. No. 13(2). P. 102–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2018.1555798SCHÄFERANDHASE9of10
38. Rice R.E., ed. (2008). Media Ownership: Research and Regulation. Cresskill (NJ): Hampton Press. Schäfer M.S., Hase V. (2022). Computational methods for the analysis of climate change communication: Towards an integrative and reflexive approach, 05 November 2022. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.806
39. Sovacool B. (2020). Sociotechnical agendas: Reviewing future directions for energy and climate research. Energy Research & Social Science. V. 70, 101617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101617
40. Su Y., Borah P. (2019). Who is the agenda setter? Examining the intermedia agenda-setting effect between twitter and newspapers. Journal of Information Technology & Politics. No. 16(3). P. 236-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2019.1641451
41. Volodenkov S.V. (2016). Mediatization and virtualization of the modern space of public policy. Communicology. No. 4. P. 125-136 (in Rus.).
42. Yakovlev I.P. (2004). Modern theories of mass communications. SPb (in Rus.). Yu M., Yang C., Li Y. (2018). Big data in natural disaster management: A review. Geosciences. No. 8(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8050165
43. Zinkin E.A. (2019). Applications, social networks and instant messengers as platforms for the distribution of media news content [el. source]: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/prilozheniyasotsialnye-seti-i-messendzhery-kak-platformy-rasprostraneniya-novostnogo-kontenta-smi/viewer (date of access: 03/26/2023).
Review
For citations:
Panova E.V. Impact of information technologies on the development of ecological communication. Communicology. 2023;11(2):91-114. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21453/2311-3065-2023-11-2-91-114
Views:
243
Email this article 
