Logics of Exclusion: How Ukrainian Audiences Renegotiate Propagandistic Narratives in Times of Conflict

References

• Althaus, S. L., & Coe, K. (2011). Priming patriots: Social identity processes and the dynamics of public support for war. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(1), 65–88. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antaki, C., & Widdicombe, S. (Eds.). (1998). Identities in talk. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Asmolov, G. (2019). The effects of participatory propaganda: From socialization to internalization of conflicts. Journal of Design and Science, (6) , 1–25 https://doi.org/10.21428/7808da6b.833c9940
   Google Scholar
• Baden, C. (2010). Communication, contextualization & cognition: Patterns & processes of frames’ influence on people’s interpretations of the European Constitution. Eburon.
   Google Scholar
• Binder, A. R., Dalrymple, K. E., Brossard, D., & Scheufele, D. A. (2009). The soul of a polarized democracy: Testing theoretical linkages between talk and attitude extremity during the 2004 presidential election. Communication Research, 36(3), 315–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650209333023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bobkowski, P. S. (2015). Sharing the news: Effects of informational utility and opinion leadership on online news sharing. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 92(2), 320–345. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699015573194
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohman, J. (2000). Public deliberation: Pluralism, complexity, and democracy. MIT press.
   Google Scholar
• Brundidge, J., Reid, S. A., Choi, S., & Muddiman, A. (2014). The “deliberative digital divide”: Opinion leadership and integrative complexity in the U.S. political blogosphere. Political Psychology, 35(6), 741–755. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12201
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busselle, R., & Bilandzic, H. (2008). Fictionality and perceived realism in experiencing stories: A model of narrative comprehension and engagement. Communication Theory, 18(2), 255–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.00322.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busselle, R., & Bilandzic, H. (2009). Measuring narrative engagement. Media Psychology, 12(4), 321–347. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213260903287259
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cappella, J. N., Price, V., & Nir, L. (2002). Argument repertoire as a reliable and valid measure of opinion quality: Electronic dialogue during campaign 2000. Political Communication, 19(1), 73–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/105846002317246498
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conover, P. J., & Miller, P. R. (2018). Taking everyday political talk seriously. In A. Bächtiger, J. S. Dryzek, J. Mansbridge, and M. Warren (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of deliberative democracy (pp. 378–391). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Conover, P. J., Searing, D. D., & Crewe, I. M. (2002). The deliberative potential of political discussion. British Journal of Political Science, 32(1), 21–62. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123402000029
   Google Scholar
• Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988593
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cramer, K. J. (2004). Talking about politics: Informal groups and social identity in American life. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cramer, K. J. (2016). The politics of resentment: Rural consciousness in Wisconsin and the rise of Scott Walker. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Culpeper, J. (1996). Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics, 25(3), 349–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00014-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahlgren, P. (1988). What’s the meaning of this? Viewers’ plural sense-making of TV news. Media, Culture & Society, 10(3), 285–301. https://doi.org/10.1177/016344388010003003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational influences upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 629–636. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046408
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Diehl, T., Weeks, B. E., & Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2016). Political persuasion on social media: Tracing direct and indirect effects of news use and social interaction. New Media & Society, 18(9), 1875–1895. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815616224
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Druckman, J. N., Levendusky, M. S., & McLain, A. (2018). No need to watch: How the effects of partisan media can spread via interpersonal discussions. American Journal of Political Science, 62(1), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Druckman, J. N., & Nelson, K. R. (2003). Framing and deliberation: How citizens’ conversations limit elite influence. American Journal of Political Science, 47(4), 729–745. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5907.00051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eliasoph, N. (1998). Avoiding politics: How Americans produce apathy in everyday life. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eveland, W. P Jr. (2004). The effect of political discussion in producing informed citizens: The roles of information, motivation, and elaboration. Political Communication, 21(2), 177–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600490443877
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eveland, W. P., Jr, Morey, A. C., & Hutchens, M. J. (2011). Beyond deliberation: New directions for the study of informal political conversation from a communication perspective. Journal of Communication, 61(6), 1082–1103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01598.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power. Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Gamson, W. A. (1992). Talking politics. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gastil, J., Black, L., & Moscovitz, K. (2008). Ideology, attitude change, and deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Political Communication, 25(1), 23–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600701807836
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gieryn, T. F. (1999). Cultural boundaries of science: Credibility on the line. University Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goh, D., Ling, R., Huang, L., & Liew, D. (2019). News sharing as reciprocal exchanges in social cohesion maintenance. Information, Communication & Society, 22(8), 1128–1144. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1406973
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(10), 1489–1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00096-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graber, D. A. (2001). Processing the news: How people tame the information tide. University Press of America.
   Google Scholar
• Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics (pp. 411–458). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action. Volume one, reason and the rationalization. Beacon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harris-Lacewell, M. (2010). Barbershops, bibles, and BET: Everyday talk and black political thought. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (2000). Constructing the life course. Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Huckfeldt, R., Johnson, P. E., Johnson, P. E., & Sprague, J. (2004). Political disagreement: The survival of diverse opinions within communication networks. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jennstål, J. (2019). Deliberation and complexity of thinking. Using the integrative complexity scale to assess the deliberative quality of minipublics. Swiss Political Science Review, 25(1), 64–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12343
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamberelis, G., & Dimitriadis, G. (2014). Focus group research: Retrospect and prospect. In P. Leavy (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of qualitative research (pp. 315–340). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan, M. F., & Miller, C. E. (1987). Group decision making and normative versus informational influence: Effects of type of issue and assigned decision rule. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(2), 306–313. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.2.306
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khaldarova, I., & Pantti, M. (2016). Fake news: The narrative battle over the Ukrainian conflict. Journalism Practice, 10(7), 891–901. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2016.1163237
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, J., & Kim, E. J. (2008). Theorizing dialogic deliberation: Everyday political talk as communicative action and dialogue. Communication Theory, 18(1), 51–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00313.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, J., Wyatt, R. O., & Katz, E. (1999). News, talk, opinion, participation: The part played by conversation in deliberative democracy. Political Communication, 16(4), 361–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/105846099198541
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kligler-Vilenchik, N. (2021). Collective social correction: Addressing misinformation through group practices of information verification on whatsapp. Digital Journalism, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2021.1972020
   Google Scholar
• Koltsova, O., & Pashakhin, S. (2020). Agenda divergence in a developing conflict: Quantitative evidence from Ukrainian and Russian TV newsfeeds. Media, War & Conflict, 13(3), 237–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750635219829876
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liebes, T. (1992). Decoding television news: The political discourse of Israeli hawks and doves. Theory and Society, 21(3), 357–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00993453
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liebes, T., & Katz, E. (1990). The export of meaning: Cross-cultural readings of Dallas. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Liebes, T., & Ribak, R. (1994). In defense of negotiated readings: How moderates on each side of the conflict interpret Intifada news. Journal of Communication, 44(2), 108–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1994.tb00679.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipman, M., Kachkaeva, A., & Poyker, M. (2018). Media in Russia: Between modernization and monopoly. In D. Treisman (Ed.), The new autocracy: Information, politics, and policy in Putin’s Russia (pp. 159–190). Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Livingstone, S. (1998). Making sense of television: The psychology of audience interpretation. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Maia, R. C., Cal, D., Oliveira, V. V., Vimieiro, A. C., Hauber, G., & Rossini, P. G. (2018). Deliberation across a space of reasons: Assessing epistemic changes in group discussions. Human Communication Research, 44(4), 399–426. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqy007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maoz, I. (2000). Power relations in intergroup encounters: A case study of Jewish–Arab encounters in Israel. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24(2), 259–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(99)00035-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGlynn, J. (2020). Historical framing of the Ukraine crisis through the great patriotic War: Performativity, cultural consciousness and shared remembering. Memory Studies, 13(6), 1058–1080. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750698018800740
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mejias, U., & Vokuev, N. (2017). Disinformation and the media: The case of Russia and Ukraine. Media, Culture & Society, 39(7), 1027–1042. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443716686672
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michelle, C. (2007). Modes of reception: A consolidated analytical framework. The Communication Review, 10(3), 181–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714420701528057
   Google Scholar
• Morley, D. (2006). Unanswered questions in audience research. The Communication Review, 9(2), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714420600663286
   Google Scholar
• Mouffe, C. (2011). On the political. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mutz, D. C. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ochs, E., Smith, R., & Taylor, C. (1989). Detective stories at dinnertime: Problem-solving through co-narration. Cultural Dynamics, 2(2), 238–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/092137408900200206
   Google Scholar
• Palmer, R., Toff, B., & Nielsen, R. K. (2020). “The media covers up a lot of things”: Watchdog ideals meet folk theories of journalism. Journalism Studies, 21(14), 1973–1989. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1808516
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pantti, M. K. (2016). Media and the Ukraine crisis: Hybrid media practices and narratives of conflict. Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Pasitselska, O. (2017). Ukrainian crisis through the lens of Russian media: Construction of ideological discourse. Discourse & Communication, 11(6), 591–609. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481317714127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pasitselska, O., & Baden, C. (2020). Who are ‘the people’?: Uses of empty signifiers in propagandistic news discourse. Journal of Language and Politics, 19(4), 666–690. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.19057.pas
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In: Petty , R. E., and Cacioppo, J. T. eds. Communication and persuasion (pp. 1–24). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Price, V., Nir, L., & Cappella, J. N. (2006). Normative and informational influences in online political discussions. Communication Theory, 16(1), 47–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00005.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roselle, L., Miskimmon, A., & O’Loughlin, B. (2014). Strategic narrative: A new means to understand soft power. Media, War & Conflict, 7(1), 70–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750635213516696
   Google Scholar
• Ryfe, D. M. (2006). Narrative and deliberation in small group forums. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 34(1), 72–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909880500420226
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation: Volume I. Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt-Beck, R., & Lup, O. (2013). Seeking the soul of democracy: A review of recent research into citizens’ political talk culture. Swiss Political Science Review, 19(4), 513–538. https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strömbäck, J., Tsfati, Y., Boomgaarden, H., Damstra, A., Lindgren, E., Vliegenthart, R., & Lindholm, T. (2020). News media trust and its impact on media use: Toward a framework for future research. Annals of the International Communication Association, 44(2), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2020.1755338
   Google Scholar
• Swart, J., Peters, C., & Broersma, M. (2019). Sharing and discussing news in private social media groups: The social function of news and current affairs in location-based, work-oriented and leisure-focused communities. Digital Journalism, 7(2), 187–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2018.1465351
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szostek, J. (2018). Nothing is true? The credibility of news and conflicting narratives during “Information War” in Ukraine. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 23(1), 116–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161217743258
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tal-Or, N., & Tsfati, Y. (2016). When Arabs and Jews watch TV together: The joint effect of the content and context of communication on reducing prejudice. Journal of Communication, 66(4), 646–668. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tandoc, E. C., Jr, Ling, R., Westlund, O., Duffy, A., Goh, D., & Zheng Wei, L. (2018). Audiences’ acts of authentication in the age of fake news: A conceptual framework. New Media & Society, 20(8), 2745–2763. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817731756
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toepfl, F. (2013). Making sense of the news in a hybrid regime: How young Russians decode state TV and an oppositional blog. Journal of Communication, 63(2), 244–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Aelst, P., Strömbäck, J., Aalberg, T., Esser, F., De Vreese, C., Matthes, J., Hopmann, D., Salgado, S., Hubé, N., Stępińska, A., Papathanassopoulos, S., Berganza, R., Legnante, G., Reinemann, C., Sheafer, T., & Stanyer, J. (2017). Political communication in a high-choice media environment: A challenge for democracy? Annals of the International Communication Association, 41(1), 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2017.1288551
   Google Scholar
• Van Dijk, T. A. (1996). Discourse, power and access. In C. R. Caldas-Coulthard & M. Coulthard (Eds.), Texts and practices. Readings in critical discourse analysis (pp. 84–104). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Discourse and manipulation. Discourse & Society, 17(3), 359–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926506060250
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vartanova, E. (2012). The Russian media model in the context of post-Soviet dynamics. In D. C. Hallin & P. Mancini (Eds.), Comparing media systems beyond the Western world (pp. 119–142). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, M. C., & Boczkowski, P. J. (2019). The reception of fake news: The interpretations and practices that shape the consumption of perceived misinformation. Digital Journalism, 7(7), 870–885. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2019.1653208
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wetherell, M., & Potter, J. (1988). Discourse analysis and the identification of interpretative repertoires. In C. Antaki (Ed.), Analyzing everyday explanation: A casebook of methods (pp. 168–183). Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2009). Critical discourse analysis: History, agenda, theory and methodology. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 1–33). Sage.
   Google Scholar