Global days of action, global public transcripts and democracy: a reply
This is a reply to:Gregoratti, Catia. 2014. “Global days of action, global public transcripts and democracy.” Global Discourse. 4 (2–3): 353–366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23269995.2014.914367.
Occupy Pittsburgh and the Challenges of Participatory Democracy
Local manifestations of Occupy Wall Street (OWS) have emerged around the world with enthusiasm for the participatory style used in Zuccotti Park (New York). However, less attention has been paid to earlier lessons about the limits of these techniques for building diverse and sustainable movements. Much of the discussion in the USA ignores how OWS is connected to the long-term and global struggle against corporate-led globalization. Also, models of consensus practiced in many OWS sites have become reified to the verge of fetishization. Activists in the USA have yet to effectively incorporate many lessons from global justice activism including the need for a global analysis and strategy as well as greater sensitivity to how consensus practices can exclude people most harmed by the structures the movement opposes. This study draws from our involvement in Occupy Pittsburgh (Pennsylvania) and in the US Social Forum and World Social Forum (WSF) to compare the participatory democratic practices in each setting and identify lessons about organizing broad coalitions against capitalist globalization.
Same Same But Different - also in Europe! A New Methodological Approach in Cross-Country Analysis of Communication Structuresapplied to five EU member states
The EU still lacks a truly European public sphere. On this level, there is still a clear lack of integration between individual member states. This means that national public spheres and cultures are still of great importance for European communication and media professionals. Comparative research into the similarities and differences between different nations is therefore valuable for cross-border PR communication activities. This paper lays out the methodological foundation for such research, discussing possible approaches and difficulties associated with comparative research. The author then introduces a potential heuristic framework for comparative analysis: the International Corporate Communication Compass. This framework is applied to five case-study EU countries (Denmark, Germany, France, Poland and the UK), showing the differences and similarities in a range of different contexts that affect public communication in all its forms. The conclusion examines how the results of such studies could be used in order to compare communication identities of different countries. This can potentially help in the development of a European public identity on the long run and in a first step can led towards a better, more adapted communication structure about European citizenship. Ultimately, communication structures within the EU might become more Europeanized than they