European Journal of Social Theory, 2017

The relationship between politics and the digital has largely been characterized as one of epochal change. The respective theories understand the digital as external to politics and society, as an autonomous driver for global, unilateral transformation. Rather than supporting such singular accounts of the relationship between politics and the digital, this article argues for its specificity: the digital is best examined in terms of folds within existing socio-technical configurations, and as an artefact with a set of affordances that are shaped and filled with meaning by social practice. In conceptualizing the digital as numeric, countable, computable, material, storable, searchable, transferable, network-able and traceable, fabricated and interpreted, it becomes clear that the digital cannot be divorced from the social. These affordances of the digital are discussed in relation to specific political, digital practices that are further developed in the different contributions in this special issue, such as predictive policing (Aradau and Blanke, this issue), data protection (Bellanova, this issue), extremist recruitment videos (Leander, this issue), political acclamation (Dean, this issue), and pandemic simulations (Opitz, this issue).

Synesis, 4, 2013

It goes without saying that the change we experience today, which is fuelled by a series of new technologies, differs from other profound changes that have defined our culture in the past. The current change affects our everyday lives, but the new tools it offers us can be seen as an extension of our senses, of our various modes of communication and, to a certain extent, of our brains (since the question about whether one regards machines as extensions of living organisms or living organisms as complex machines seems to be a topic of exploration as well). Nowadays, the proliferation of the fields of knowledge, the often vague distinction between art, technology and science, and the "immaterial" form of the new tech-nologies compel us to widen the field of our traditional research disciplines, and most crucially the field of ethics. The debate around the morality of technology has given rise to special moral categories -regarding for example the issues of responsibility, safety and risk -which had not been as important in premodern moral philosophy.

Thesis Eleven, 2019

Following media-theoretical studies that have characterized digitization as a process of all-encompassing cybernetization, this paper will examine the timely and critical potential of Günther Anders’s oeuvre vis-à-vis the ever-increasing power of cybernetic devices and networks. Anders has witnessed and negotiated the process of cybernetization from its very beginning, having criticized its tendency to automate and expand, as well as its circular logic and ‘integral power’, including disruptive consequences for the constitution of the political and the social. In this vein, Anders’s works, particularly his magnum opus Die Antiquiertheit des Menschen [The Obsolescence of Man], sheds new light on the technologically organized milieus of the contemporary digital regime and also highlights a new form of cybernetic ‘conformism’. The goal of the essay is therefore, not only to emphasize the contemporary nature of Anders’s thought but also to use it to frame a critique of current neo-technocratic and, ultimately, post-political concepts, such as ‘algorithmic regulation’, ‘smart states’, ‘direct technocracy’, and ‘government as platform’. This essay argues that cybernetic capitalism is causing what Anders terms ‘Unfestgelegtheit’ to disappear; that is, we are losing the originary possibility of technologically (re-)structuring our world in alternative ways, particularly given the determinist character of current technologies.

Technopolitics is a follow up conference that intends to depart and expand the concept of Cyberpolitics to all the dimensions and effects of technology in our lives but placing politics at the center of debate and thought. Most investigation in the fields of Humanities have highlighted the impact of digitization and social virtualization and mapped the transition from industrial revolution, and mass disciplinary society, to the digital revolution, telework and social atomism. The fusion of disruptive technologies such as the so-called NBIC Technologies (Nano-Bio-Info-Cogno) is changing the fundamentals of our world almost roaming on its own towards a near future with unprecedented and unpredictable outcomes. This new technological reason implies a rupture and a paradigm shift in the radical transition from an instrumental reason (auxiliary) to an autonomous reason (essential). This means the impossibility of further sustaining the illusion of technological neutrality. Beyond exploring what does the axiological non-neutrality of technology mean, the politics, or better, the Technopolitics shows now the perspective of the absolutism of technicality as a worldview. AI’s exponential progress hasn’t been duly addressed yet given its out-of-control development worldwide, soon it could have an agenda of its own leading to an eventual singleton of some kind, and the strategies explored until now to keep it in a box have been far from consensual, as has been the experts’ position on this: Should we let it develop in an open-source kind of environment where everybody has an influence on it (but from where also anyone can have danger access to, or on the other hand should we confine its regulated development to a specific number of chosen experts, a kind of committee elected by the UN as proposed by Nick Bostrom – and criticized by Ben Goertzel? One of these two directions might be the future of AI Governance. Science, culture and technology appear to be merging and in combat simultaneously. And all fields of knowledge are alert to a main idea: how deep is technology shaping our societies and politics? Probably a double edge sword: on one hand it’s expanding our conscience as a planetary unity and diversity, even in our relation to the beginning of a new experience for the human civilization in its first solar system expansion, and on the other its closing minds and behaviors around technological individual devices that enclose the human experience and life. In a larger scale, with the development of energy wars in a close horizon, the theory of political systems will soon face the expected clash with the paradoxes of democracy, i.e., what values will emerge for the future of the fusion of democracy with technology after the fusion of democracy with liberal economics? Will Science become the new global religion? Can Dataism be that religion? Will these issues lead our society to a dystopia soon? Regardless of the outcome, an age of instability is also an age of challenges where we must confront the illusions in the mist, and the shades of mirages, that with the promises of scientific salvation may makes us forget the realism and pragmatism of surviving, thriving and overcoming. In our era of uncertainty, and while our civilization moves forward towards a hyper-technological future, we should not forget to discuss and reflect on the values and ethics we would like to survive the ruin of time, and to pass on to the next generations. TECHNOPOLITICS 2023 provides an open academic setting which will certainly open a rich horizon for reflections from diverse fields of study. In order to promote a transdisciplinary dialogue, with contributions from the entire spectrum of academic knowledge, the submission of proposals, on the following topics are particularly encouraged: 1. Technology, sustainability and ecology 2. Technology and wars 3. Technology, democracy and media 4. Technology, strategy and geopolitics 5. Technoscience, politics and progress 6. Human body and technology 7. Artificial intelligence, ethics and politics 8. Technology and Law 9. Space exploration: new horizons, settlements and architecture, commercialization, etc. 10. Genetics, drugs, human enhancement and meta human 11. Biotechnology and care as a political category 12. Authors: Philosophy, Political Theory, Science, etc. 13. Transhumanism vs Bioconservatism 14. AI Governance: Friendly AI 15. NBIC merging 16. Political economy and sociology 17. Literature, arts and myths 18. Philosophy of Science and Technology Abstracts should be sent to constantinomar@gmail.com or nanosimbiotica@gmail.com with a small biographical note and may be submitted in English or Portuguese. Presentations will be 20 minutes in English or Portuguese. Conference proceedings will be published in e-book format in English and Portuguese. Participation and attendance is free.

The End of the Future: Governing Consequence in the Age of Digital Sovereignty, 2019

We are now entering an era where the human world assumes recognition of itself as data. Its basis for existence is becoming fully subordinated to the software processes that tabulate, index, and sort the relations entailed in making up what we perceive as reality. The acceleration of data threatens to relinquish ephemeral modes of representation to ceaseless processes of computation. This situation compels the human world to form relations with non-human agencies, to establish exchanges with the algorithms and other software processes that accelerate and intensify the possibility of its obsolescence in order to allow for a profound upgrade to our own ontological understanding to take precedent. Through a partial attunement to what is always already non-human in its form of mediation to a higher intelligence, we are able to rediscover the actual inner logic of the age of intelligent machines, as at once the reason of trauma and the instrument of catastrophe for a humanity still beholden to a linear process of rationality. Humanity now finds itself captive to pervasive institutionalised forms of violence whose force has everything to do with the aggressive pattern of economics in a neoliberal age, bound with an internet that has taken on a fourth dimension to generate consequence in the material world. This has allowed the internet to become thingly insofar as it will soon be understood not as an interface but as an environment. It thus takes on the ability to shape conditions beyond the imaginary and embed itself into materiality in a variety of ways that benefit from the demise of state parameters and the enlivenment of a fluidity of information able to migrate across time and space. All previous forms of media suffered from imprisonment within a screen, which limited their ability to function as the foundation for alternative networks, or as nodes of multilayered connectivity. The promise of a universal connectivity through a perpetual 2 The End of the Future: Governing Consequence in the Age of Digital Sovereignty summons of our inclinations brings forth nothing less than a new form of imperialism able to transform space into a sphere of liquidity, and complexity into a condition of movement. As labour precarity and labour migration becomes the normative situation of a disenfranchised humanity, so too does its acquiescence to a universal accessibility where individuals are continuously subject to digital interpolation, and as such their behaviours and movements are made available to generating exploitable forms of interest. The data created is thus credited to others and interpreted to advance the interests of others; all in order to finance the states and corporations who control the means for making worlds we alone discover. The prospect of a future that has the capacity to come to an end prompts us to apprehend an understanding of the digital through its dynamic intersection with the advent and development of the nation-state, race, colonisation, navigational warfare, mercantilism and capitalism, and the mathematical sciences over some five centuries. Its task is to animate an understanding of the twenty-first century as an era where the screen has split off from itself and proliferated onto multiple surfaces, and as a consequence has allowed an inverted image of totalitarianism to flash up at this point in history, and be altered to support our present condition of binary apperception. It progresses through a recognition of a now atomised political power whose authority lies in the control not of the means of production, but of information, and thus, digital media now serves to legitimise and promote a customised micropolitics of identity management. On this new apostolate plane, it is possible to conceive a world in which each human soul is captured and reproduced as an autonomous individual bearing affects and identities. The digital infrastructure of the twenty-first century makes it possible for power to operate through an esoteric mathematical means, and for factual material to be manipulated in the interest of advancing the means of control. This pathway towards understanding the significance of the digital travels a wide course between Elizabethan England, North American slavery, German fascism, Cold War cybernetic social engineering and counterinsurgency, and the (neo)libertarianism of Silicon Valley in order to arrive at a place where a cool organising intelligence that started from Introduction: Life on the Algorithmic Estate 3 an ambition to resourcefully manipulate bodies, ends with their profound neutralisation. The digital in this sense is made to denude its relationship to historical political economies, and to relate to ecologies of culture and media production spanning centuries as opposed to mere decades. In that time span, it has emerged variously as the quintessence of political representation, the essence of public perception and the immaterial layer through which the impacts on everyday life might be felt. The digital has managed to relate collective values to individual identities, and in so doing draw up an inventive terrain all its own in which these positionings are now given the power to become operational and indeed operative when it comes to our understanding of subjectivity itself. The digital has become essential to humanity's self-understanding through its ability to implicate itself within a pattern of changing societal and perceptual hierarchies that exists everywhere around it and from which it is now possible to conclude have assumed their own 'digital consciousness'. Over time, the digital comes to be tied to an understanding of emerging institutional protocols and new forms of non-representational visualities as they emerge in various guises within the algorithmic estate. It is possible to witness this through the evolution of various public spheres whose spatial coordinates now encompass the dynamic realities of both a material and digital world. A diversity of critical perspectives including those drawn from visual culture, media studies, cultural studies, science and technology studies, ethnography, cultural theory, critical race theory, postcolonial theory, environmental humanities, and sociology together provide a compendium through which to grasp the historical consequence of data. These critical perspectives when brought together present a compelling new narrative around data as a technology of public truth and private architectures, aesthetically produced through new practices of capitalism. Within this challenging terrain, modes of information can be placed in further context and situated in conjunction with new and emerging regions of power. Here contemporary perception and cultural history can be joined together in various guises to generate a cogent understanding of data as both a vehicle for political agency, as well as its repression and, therefore, as an elemental 4 The End of the Future: Governing Consequence in the Age of Digital Sovereignty force that figures crucially within any analysis of the turbulent realities of our time. Such times and indeed the notion of time itself has become radically altered by the rise of digitisation so that memory itself has become the stuff of cheap storage and facile retrieval. We believe in a mode of recall now that is at once universal and progressively omniscient. The softness of software as we have come to know it presents humanity with the tantalising prospect of our bodies being subject to interiorised programmability as a means of optimising their functionality. It is by no means a coincidence that this is happening at a time humanity is grappling with its own biological finitude in this world. The human bodies that exist amidst that anxiety are now further burdened in their effort to conserve their resources by a body of information that, by contrast, has no looming expiry date. As such the algorithm's solutions-based thinking may well be on a collision course with our best interests and its capacity for overtaking our authority positioned well beyond our current scope of projection. In a tangible sense, 'programmability' already fuels the current organization of the contemporary neoliberal state. Moreover, in many respects, computer code now functions as its own mechanism of causality and sovereignty. Similarly, the social, political, and economic coding embedded within our societies, now increasingly is materialised in the software and hardware that render us as conscious subjects, rather than the other way around. What we perceive has become the effect of technologies that are becoming increasingly adept not only in the prediction of our behaviour but in subtly influencing it. These technologies persuade us to accept a concept of the future that is very much furnished to us on the basis of past data. Our interface with the algorithm over time could easily become shorthand for everything we believe in, performing as a medium of interpretation of our lived reality. It is invisible yet generates visible, logical effects, and this holds vast implication for our perception of everything from genetics to the invisible hand of the market, from ideology to culture. A faith in the algorithm, more generally, is providing an esoteric bridge to an understanding between theoretical concepts and pragmatic reality. Data has generated a capacity of invocation that permits it to not merely describe the world, but to recast it in its own image. The Introduction: Life on the Algorithmic Estate 5

The End of the Future: Governing Consequence in the Age of Digital Sovereignty, 2019

This is the full manuscript of the following: The End of the Future: Governing Consequence in the Age of Digital Sovereignty We are now entering an era where the human world assumes recognition of itself as data. Its basis for existence is becoming fully subordinated to the software processes that tabulate, index, and sort the relations entailed in making up what we perceive as reality. The acceleration of data threatens to relinquish ephemeral modes of representation to ceaseless processes of computation. This situation compels the human world to form relations with non-human agencies, to establish exchanges with the algorithms and other software processes that accelerate and intensify the possibility of its obsolescence in order to allow for a profound upgrade our own ontological understanding to take precedent. Through a partial attunement to what is always already non-human in its form of mediation to a higher intelligence, we are able to rediscover the actual inner logic of the age of intelligent machines, as at once the reason of trauma and the instrument of catastrophe for a humanity still beholden to a linear process of rationality. Humanity now finds itself captive to pervasive institutionalised forms of violence whose force has everything to do with the aggressive pattern of economics in a neoliberal age, bound with an internet that has taken on a fourth dimension to generate consequence in the material world. This has allowed the internet to become thingly insofar as it will soon be understood not as an interface but as an environment. It thus takes on the ability to shape conditions beyond the imaginary and embed itself into materiality in a variety of ways that benefit from the demise of state parameters and the enlivenment of a fluidity of information able to migrate across time and space. All previous forms of media suffered from imprisonment within a screen, which limited their ability to function as the foundation for alternative networks, or as nodes of multilayered connectivity. The promise of a universal connectivity through a perpetual summons of our inclinations brings forth nothing less than a new form of imperialism able to transform space into a sphere of liquidity, and complexity into a condition of movement. As labour precarity and labour migration becomes the normative situation of a disenfranchised humanity, so too does its acquiescence to a universal accessibility where individuals are continuously subject to digital interpolation, and as such their behaviours and movements are made available to generating exploitable forms of interest. The data created is thus credited to others and interpreted to advance interests of others; all in order to finance the states and corporations who control the means for making worlds we alone discover. The End of the Future conceives an understanding of the digital through its dynamic intersection with the advent and development of the nation-state, race, colonisation, navigational warfare, mercantilism and capitalism, and the mathematical sciences over some five centuries. Its task is to animate an understanding of the twenty-first century as an era where the screen has split off from itself and proliferated onto multiple surfaces, and as a consequence has allowed an inverted image of totalitarianism to flash up at this point in history, and be altered to support our present condition of binary apperception. It progresses through a recognition of a now atomised political power whose authority lies in the control not of the means of production, but of information, and thus, digital media now serves to legitimise and promote a customised micropolitics of identity management. On this new apostolate plane, it is possible to conceive a world in which each human soul is captured and reproduced as an autonomous individual bearing affects and identities. The digital infrastructure of the twenty-first century makes it possible for power to operate through an esoteric mathematical means, and for factual material to be manipulated in the interest of advancing the means of control. This volume travels a course between Elizabethan England, North American slavery, Cybernetic Social Engineering, Cold War Counterinsurgency, and the (neo)libertarianism of Silicon Valley in order to arrive at a place where a cool organising intelligence that started from an ambition to resourcefully manipulate bodies, ends with their profound neutralization.

Building a European digital space, 499-519. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Internet, Law & Politics

In this article, we seek to revisit what the term 'technopolitical' means for democratic politics in our age. We begin with tracing down how the term was used, and then transformed through various and conflicting uses of ICTs in governmental, civil organizations and bottom-up movements. Two main streams can be distinguished: studies about internet-enhanced politics, labeled as e-government and Politics 2.0 that imply facilitating the existing practices such as e-voting, e-campaign , and e-petition. The internet-enabled perspective on the other hand builds up on the idea that ICTs are essential for the organization of (or organizing of) contentious politics, citizen participation and deliberative processes. Under a range of labels studies have often used concepts in an undefined or underspecified manner for describing their scope of investigation. After critically reviewing and categorizing the main literature towards concepts used for describing ICT-based political performances , in this article we construct a conceptual model of technopolitics: A schema consisting of the six dimensions context, scale, direction, purpose, synchronization, and actors systematizing informal and formal ways of political practices. In the following section we explain the dimensions by real-world examples to illustrate the unique characteristics of each technopolitical action field and the power dynamics that influence them. We conclude by arguing how this systematization will help facilitating academic research in the future.

2021

But also the admiration I feel for his work and study. He is the most brilliant mind I have ever met and its been almost 30 years witnessing his intelligence as a musical storm and his discourse as an embrace. His passion for thinking is still today an inspiration for many of us and an impossible challenge to fit in his shoes. Without him and his continuing support none of this would have been possible. Also a very special note of esteem to Bruno C. Duarte who is one of the most intense and progressive thinkers in Philosophy and Aesthetics but who, by some strange twist of fate, keeps being subsumed by the silent noise of the world that unfairly refuses to recognize and acknowledge his value. For what it's worth, I would like to pay him my homage. Last but not the least, Professor Mário Santiago de Carvalho, Director of IEF in Coimbra University, for the support and making possible that the book could exist in a open access form. This book would not have been possible without the financial support of the FCT Foundation regarding my study and time. X FOREWORD 0. Humbleness. The task we have set ourselves here is not a light one. We aim at connecting present and future, at drawing that invisible line between possibility and actuality. At trying to see among all the shadows and fog in a transition stage. That is no easy venture. And aside from all the odds, aside from all the unpredictable developments we are as yet unable to see right now, aside from testifying to the survival process of possibilities and witnessing which of our hypothesis will become real, aside from all that, there is an overallfeeling, almost a palpable sensation, that something is changing. Drastically, rapidly, and deeply. Last year, around this same date, I was at the Kyoto airport trying to kill time before returning to Lisbon in what was to be a very long flight. Whenever you spend a lot of time in the same exact place, a vast territory of experience awaits you before and after boredom befalls you. You are suddenly able to see how small the world is, all the different types of persons, you enter in a void regarding yourself, your body and mind are out of synch, you wander through multiple horizons of time and memory, you walk when you start feeling numb, you eat, you listen to music, you read, but the full weight of time eventually kicks in, and either you sleep or you stroll a bit observing your fellow travellers who find themselves there, imprisoned, like yourself. During one of these rambles, I decided to enter a bookshop. Browsing through all the covers and titles, whilst thinking how much writing and reading have become a hobby when it comes to killing time, designed for empty areas of life like traveling, I found a strange book with a great title by Yuval Noah Harari. As I read the index, I was shocked to recognize a lot of my ideas and thoughts. There it was, a world best seller, or so it was announced, that synthesized what had cost me so much work and time to study and develop. I left the bookshop in horror, disappointed at my own intellectual achievements. But then, suddenly a strange thing happened. Following that initial state of perplexity, I started to digress about coincidences, life, and how truly wonderful is the fact that ideas are common and free entities, that they belong to no one. Here I was at Kyoto, after having studied so much about Political Philosophy in Lisbon, face to face with a mirror in the words of a Professor sitting at a Jerusalem University. I was blown away. And even more blown away with a sudden, sharp and profound experience of humbleness. In fact, these two instances, humility and the possibility of thinking for oneself, allow both for the autonomy of Philosophy and for the dialogue between us and the ones that are no longer with us. We can reach the same conclusion as Kant or Kierkegaard, have meaningful visions with Nietzsche or Wittgenstein, feel alone or in context: such amplitude is very rare in the academic universe, especially in our present time. In the corridor of the Kyoto airport, I was humbly reminded by that book why I love philosophy: absolute freedom, something I never experienced in a scholarly atmosphere. It is that same freedom that brought us together in presenting this book to readers. And it's a very ambiguous book from the start: while it provides and intends to ground some key concepts and discussions, it is already fighting for its own theoretical survival in a world where the cyberpolitical XI shock, along with its inevitable shift of paradigm, is going through several waves and stages of development. We are starting with something that a few years ago was a mere hypothesis and suspicion, but may easily be found to be obvious and irrelevant a few years from now. In very brief terms, then, I would suggest a twofold preliminary analysis: a) Dematerialization of the political process. Taking metamorphosis as a central concept, alongside the notion of speed (addressing and improving the old politics always a step behind, that insists in the relationship with geopolitics as an essential analysis tool for preventing the establishment of Cyberpolitics as a new academic method that could also integrate and improve political analysis: the real world vs the virtual world); b) Immaterialization of the political universe. Probably the last phase of this stage, which will imply the coexistence of parallel worlds, the surpassing and death of mass media systems, an almost utopian political world built in accordance with specific group or individual positions and interests. These two landmarks, with all the controversy and discussion they might generate, even if it now seems tenuous and ambivalent, will reveal itself to be inevitable, and one could even say it is already in motion. When I started working in this research area, the mere word Cyberpolitics was fragile and uncertain. Since then, many changes have occured. From the immense doubts and insecurities observed in the past, numerous certainties have been reached in the establishment of the concept and field of studies. It is the importance of that conquest and those concepts, which are now in plain view, that this book wishes to address and to underline both for the present and, most especially, for the future. all, namely the one between technology and theology. I believe that event will be the most dramatic change in the history of mankind. 3. Prognosis: time, affect, economy. One of the most fascinating things in the world are the periods of crisis. With all the pain and suffering they entail, but also the overcoming surprise and discoveries they always reveal. We could probably simplify all human evolution by considering its crisis as a profound pattern. However, regardless of the form it takes, an acute crisis is a singular historical moment of great intensity and anxiety, precisely in view of the fact that such moments demand more critical thinking. Maybe crisis and critic should be the subtitle of this final preamble, since we are clearly dazzled by the absolute crisis and change that the transition from the 20th century to the new millennium has brought upon us. It appears that this massive transformation is immune to critical analysis, and that it has occurred with a strange naturalness and a technological neutrality or passiveness. Science installed itself as the great new god without opposition, and established its imperial dominion without any major wars, no hordes of barbaric invasions, and paradoxically without any alarm. The future and its risks seem oblivious to the elapsing of time that peacefully observes and watches its own destiny unfolding like a movie spectator. As we all know, science fiction movies seem to be just two steps ahead of reality, and one of the biggest dangers of Cyberpolitics, regarding the temptation of total control, even towards accident and randomness, consists of witnessing the artificial intelligence, genetic manipulation, and parallel questions, in a degree of predictability never before encountered. But not even all the folds of cyberspace can hide the dimension of the problems that lie ahead (we should probably have to follow Kant's categories and mention also cybertime and the distortions, expansions and retractions, of time on the net). And time was, is and will always be, the central question of life. The net, the web, and all the expressions that sew our lives, desires, hopes, dreams and nightmares, also enforce the return of the same old dilemmas: trust, truth, freedom, safety, loneliness, sex, love and all the major philosophical questions that endure through the ages. The future and its risks should also be about the risk of oblivion, the fact that the electrical metaphysics that has been carried out so far, should not make us forget the basis of life, water, air, and face ecology as a fundamental ethics. The current Coronavirus pandemic seems to confirm that we have entered a second stage of Cyberpolitics. The urgent need for a deeper development towards health issues merging robotics and A.I., the emergence of a faceless society like a Levinas nightmare, it's like we almost feel we cannot maintain the status quo by its own, meaning humanity on its own, by itself. The automation of the social and labor fabric will probably be our next step in the chain of this new era. But besides all this speculative ultimate attempt of peeking into the future, and beyond any functionalist, metaphysical or pragmatist point of view, it's now visible for everyone that we are in an moment of enormous civilizational leap, that, much like the Hegelian process of self-consciousness, Cyberpolitics is the affirmation of that transitional stage. The impact of a paradigm shift is always fertile ground for the XX savagery of our imagination, and YouTube, in the erosion between private and public sphere, will certainly be a tremendous archive for academic research: conspiracy theories, political-science...

European Journal of Communication, 2006