Wiebke Loosen is a senior journalism researcher at the Leibniz Institute for Media Research│Hans-Bredow-Institut (HBI) (Germany) as well as a professor at the University of Hamburg. Her major area of expertise is the transformation of journalism within a changing media environment. Her current research focuses on the changing journalism-audience relationship, the datafication of journalism, and forms of “pioneer journalism.” https://leibniz-hbi.de/en/staff/wiebke-loosen
Hepp A., Loosen W., Hasebrink U. & Reichertz J. (2017) Konstruktivismus in der Kommunikationswissenschaft: Über die Notwendigkeit einer (erneuten) Debatte. M&K Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft 65(2): 181–206. https://cepa.info/5993
The present discussion surrounding constructivism in communication studies is characterized especially by three questions: Precisely how does constructivist thinking manifest itself in media and communication research? Which foundation does it offer for empirical research? And in which way does this necessitate a shift in existing perspectives and approaches? These questions are addressed in the introduction to this special issue on ‘Constructivism in Communication Studies’. First, and with reference to the recent media change, it outlines why it is necessary to (re-)open the discussion on constructivism. On this basis, the trajectories of constructivism in German communication studies over the last 50 years are reconstructed and the different articles of this special issue are located in the discussion. Finally, ideas for a constructivist critique are introduced – a critique which becomes necessary in the light of the fundamental and deep character of recent changes in media and communications.
Today algorithms are deemed to have a power similar to that of journalism to produce public spheres and constructions of reality. The debate relating to this proposition allow us to observe how questions, which have formed the core of journalism research, are now being reformulated. Such questions concern the definition of what underpins information in society and in the news, the definition of relevance, the appropriateness of selection processes, the idea of objectivity and how items offered as information relate to ‘reality’. The epistemological challenge of the reality of the mass media (to Communication Studies) has, therefore, waxed virulent again, given the new indexes of the changed conditions for communication in society. We use the possibilities of constructivism when observing the debate about the significance of algorithms for producing a public sphere/reality and propose a view of professional journalism and algorithmically generated information not as two separate sites for constructing reality but as interwoven with and relating to each other.
Open peer commentary on the article “Systems Theory and Algorithmic Futures: Interview with Elena Esposito” by Elena Esposito, Katrin Sold & Bénédicte Zimmermann. Abstract: Algorithms play an increasing role within the process of digitalization of society. They are used for descriptions and predictions of consumers’ or citizens’ behavior. Sociologist Elena Esposito has been doing research on these phenomena from the perspective of Niklas Luhmann’s theory of social systems. In our commentary we want to emphasize the epistemological dimension of algorithms, which we consider to match her focus very well.
Loosen W., Scholl A. & Woelke J. (2002) Systemtheoretische und konstruktivistische Methodologie [System-theoretical and constructivist methodology]. In: Scholl A. (ed.) Systemtheorie und Konstruktivismus in der Kommunikationswissenschaft [System theory and constructivism in communication science]. UVK, Konstanz: 37–65. https://cepa.info/1863
Pörksen B., Loosen W. & Scholl A. (2008) Paradoxien des Journalismus: Theorie – Empirie – Praxis. Festschrift für Siegfried Weischenberg. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften,, Wiesbaden.
Operating with paradoxes seems to infringe scientific rules, which try to avoid paradoxes as false argumentation. Both constructivism and system theory do not ignore logic paradoxes and practical dilemma situations. Rather, observing paradoxes theoretically and solving di-lemma situations practically is typical for constructivist research programmes (cf. Watzlawick, systemic therapy etc). The constructivist way of thinking in terms of paradoxes can be applied to journalism re-search (theory) and journalism (practice). Journalists have to cope with conflicting expecta-tions and demands in practice, and journalism researchers cannot ignore these dilemmas and the ways of overcoming them in theory-building. This volume collects almost fifty authors contributing relevant issues in journalism research which are more or less paradox in struc-ture. Although many of the authors are not committed to a constructivist or system-theoretical perspective, they manage to describe typical paradoxes and how these paradoxes can be “solved.” As this volume is also a festschrift for Siegfried Weischenberg, a prominent journal-ism researcher in Germany, it closes with an extensive interview the editors conducted with Weischenberg on major issues in journalism research and practice.