ECREA16-Abstract_book

117 / 658

115
Friday, November 111 6 : 0 0 – 1 7 : 3 0
COH06 Variations of Transnational Communication
PP 382 Cultural Citizenship and Media Memory in Post-Migrant Societies
E. Grittmann1
1 Leuphana University Lüneburg, ICAM, Lueneburg, Germany
This paper explores how news media deal with collective memory and commemoration on migrant victims of racist attacks. Theoretically the paper draws
upon the concept of Cultural Citizenship. Cultural Citizenship has become an important concept in media and communication studies to understand pro‑
cesses of mediated in- and exclusion and the recognition of„others“ in post-migrant societies (cf. Couldry 2006; Hermes 2006; Rosaldo, 1998; Stevenson
2003). Furthermore, as„a set of strategies and practices“ it enables„participation in society and includes rights to be represented and to speak actively“
(Klaus & Lünenborg, 2012). In this paper, the concept will be adopted to the emerging field of media and memory studies to explore how regional and
national media remember victims of racist attacks, who had an migration background. Within the last decade research in the emerging field of media
and memory has focussed more and more intensively on the crucial role of journalism as active ‘memory agent’(Zelizer, 2008) in the (re)construction and
commemoration of a “usable past”. Studies have shown very clearly how news coverage contributes discursively to the constitution of so called national
“imagined communities”(Anderson, 1984) by creating master narratives and thus evoking values and norms of a shared and unified nation. Furthermore,
they offer a feeling of belonging and national identity. All in all, narratives about the national past “play an important role in constructing contemporary
notions of citizenship” (Schwarz, 2013: 261). Within these processes of remembrance, migrants have been mainly excluded. (ibid). Furthermore, research
has been limited by an obvious “methodological nationalism” (Beck 2012). However, under the conditions of increased movements and cosmopolitaniza‑
tion (ibid.), the question of belonging and identity gains new importance. In this paper, it will be argued, that commemorative media coverage on racist
attacks against migrants provide important cases for news media to negotiate questions of social collectivity and of difference. The study analysed how
German regional and national media covered the commemoration on the victims of a racist murder series after the perpetrators have been revealed in
2011. Since the study is interested how commemoration coverage enables or limits cultural citizenship, a discourse analysis has been conducted (Sociology
of Knowledge Analysis of Discourse by Keller) which explored two main dimensions of cultural citizenship, recognition/representation and participation
of migrants. Visual representation was also part of the analysis.We analysed national newspapers and news magazines as well as regional newspapers that
are produced and available in the cities where the crimes were committed. The results suggest that the coverage of remembrance serves as a cultural form
of reconciliation, allowing practices of participation. However, in regard to the dimension of recognition, the study also shows that visibility still goes along
with the construction of difference.
PP 383 Periodicalization and Transnational References in National Press Histories. A Comparison Between Three Nations
J. Dr. Wilke1
1 Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Institut für Publizistik, Mainz, Germany
The paper’s goal and theoretical background The paper’s goal is to compare press histories in three countries according to two aspects. 1. The aspect how
the press histories in different countries have been periodicalized, i.e. in which phases or epochs the press histories have been structured and by which
principles 2. The aspect if and how transnational references have been included in the respective press histories. Additional a comparison can be made how
these aspects have changed over time. Necessarily this comparison must be restricted to only three countries: Germany, France and Great Britain. In these
countries the first press histories have been written in the midst of the 19th century. At first the theoretical problem of periodicalization will be discussed.
There are two concepts available. One (the older one) saying that to delimit periods in history has to follow objective reasons. The other concept says that
such decisions are subjective, dependent from the historian’s view. The paper is based on a concept inbetween both, saying that periodicalization is a sub‑
jective formation of a material given subjectively. The material analyzed To compare press histories in different countries raises a couple of problems. 1. Year
of publication. The press histories under investigation overarch a time line of 150 vears. 2. Length and complexity. Some press histories are published in
several volumes, others are rather short. 3. Authors. The group of authors is heterogeneous. Included are general historians, journalists, specialist in press
history. 4. Type of book. Different types of books are represented. On one side there are discursive accounts, on the other hand collections of articles that
are only loosely related to each other. 5. Target groups. The press histories are written for elaborated historians, for journalists, for students or the general
public. Included in the study are six German press histories (from 1845 to 2000), three French press histories (1859/61–2007) and 12 British Press Histories
(1850–2011). Besides six press histories will be studied which we call“transnational”(1907–2011) Preliminary results A first rather trivial result of the com‑
parison is that the press history in all three countries is displayed primarily with a national focus. In all three countries this goes so far that the early press
histories reclaim the birth of the press for the own country. But there are differences in how the press histories are periodicalized: Mainly politically in France
where the French Revolution is seen as the main event in press history. The British press seems to be the least in political and the prmary in press-specific
periodicalization, perhaps because of the most early introduction of press freedom. All three countries differ also in transnational references. The German
press histories include more such references than the French and the British. In all three countries the early modern period of news printing (15th716th) is
characterized as transnational. Only later press histories nationalized in Europe.