Search results

This chapter examines the concepts of race and racism, critically reviewing their historical and contemporary applications in everyday life as well as in academic and policy debates. Racism has been extensively researched, with various theories and conceptualisations developed across social science. However, there is a great deal of disagreement regarding its nature, contemporary significance and empirical validation. This chapter examines these and attempts to synthesise some of the common definitions of racism provided in the literature. It explores related concepts and underlying themes pertaining to expressions of race and racism. Furthermore, it unpacks current knowledge about racial issues and discusses recent advances in the conceptual understanding of various forms of racism. It also elucidates the social, political and analytical applications of racism as a concept and the significance of racism in contemporary societies. The chapter concludes by highlighting how racism is a dynamic phenomenon, continuously evolving with the social, political and technological transformations in contemporary societies.

Purpose – This chapter demonstrates the power that Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft (or the “GAFAM”) exercise over platforms within society, highlights the alt-right’s use of GAFAM sites and services as a platform for hate, and examines GAFAM’s establishment and use of hate content moderation apparatuses to de-platform alt-right users and delete hate content. Approach – Drawing upon a political economy of communications approach, this chapter demonstrates GAFAM’s power in society. It also undertakes a reading of GAFAM “terms of service agreements” and “community guidelines” documents to identify GAFAM hate content moderation apparatuses. Findings – GAFAM are among the most powerful platforms in the world, and their content moderation apparatuses are empowered by the US government’s cyber-libertarian approach to Internet law and regulation. GAFAM are defining hate speech, deciding what’s to be done about it, and censoring it. Value – This chapter probes GAFAM’s hate content moderation apparatuses for Internet platforms, and shows how GAFAM enable and constrain the alt-right’s hate speech on their platforms. It also reflexively assesses the politics of empowering GAFAM to de-platform the alt-right.

The purpose of this chapter is to introduce readers to the crisis facing Hungarian higher education institutions, students, and practitioners – namely, the loss of academic freedom and the rise of anti-intellectualism as a result of an autocratic government bent on silencing faculty voices. Like its regional neighbors, Hungary is the home to some of the first and finest universities in Europe. But tragically, a far-right political wave is swallowing its democratic institutions, including its institutions of higher learning. While there have been many reports about the concern or impact of Hungary’s state policies for education, there have been very few academic studies that have examined the repercussions of these State policies.

The opening pages of this chapter provide readers a short introduction to the problem facing students and faculty in Hungarian higher education institutions – specially, higher education reform and anti-reform in the years after Hungary adopted the Bologna processes, and the past decade marked by the rise of the illiberal Fidesz government. The second part of the chapter consists of short vignettes on higher education faculty perceptions of academic freedom. The vignettes are part of larger narratives that are the result of an in-depth qualitative research study of higher education professors from one large, public Hungarian institution.

The current study has three main purposes: (1) replicate results from prior framing effects studies on social media. To do so, the study examines the influence of news frames (free speech vs. public order) on participants' attitudes toward an alt-right rally (2) expand prior research by examining the emotional reaction of participants to these frames and (3) probe the moderating effects of face-to-face heterogenous talk and heterogenous social media feeds.

Drawing from theoretical concepts such as competitive framing, emotions and heterogeneity, the study uses a randomized online experiment. The study examines a conversation in a Twitter thread that includes both free speech and public order frames in the comments to the thread. The total number of participants was 275.

The results show that free speech versus public order frame did not impact attitudes of the participants toward the alt-right rally. Findings also show the significant main effects of free speech and public order frames and the interaction of exposure to heterogeneity on emotional reactions of outrage and anger toward the alt-right rally. These findings suggest that framing research needs to take social media features into consideration for a complete picture of framing effects on social media.

Using a classic framing effects experiment, the study includes variables relevant to social media discussions on Twitter and examined the moderating effects of heterogeneity on emotional reactions. In addition, one of the important methodological contributions of the current study are the framing manipulations for an externally valid experimental design.

This paper aims to describe a letter written to undergraduate students before their enrollment in a required foundations course, Service-Learning in English Education, taken before admission to the English education program at [the university]. The course, offered in the spring of 2017, came on the heels of Donald Trump’s election to the US Presidency, an event that followed from a campaign that raged against “politically correct” social developments that respect the dignity of people historically marginalized in US society.

The letter lays out the perils of teaching a diversity-oriented course in an era of disdain for diverse people and cultures. The letter explains how the course design attempts to give all interpretive authority to the students through their selection of course books and the book club design of promoting discussion outside professorial surveillance.

The paper includes the comments of three students regarding their response to the letter and course, and concludes that teaching a politicized course in a tempestuous time is risky yet possible.

This paper looks at one teacher educator’s approach to introducing diversity-related ideas in a Red State during an anti-diversity presidency.