Discourse analysis: Power/Knowledge on an academic listserv
| Published date | 01 August 2003 |
| Date | 01 August 2003 |
| Pages | 133-148 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/14779960380000232 |
| Author | Patricia McGee,Felecia Briscoe |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management |
Discourse Analysis:
Power/Knowledge on an Academic Listserv
INTRODUCTION
Digital technologies have transformed
interaction among co-workers. Paper trails
have become cyber-trails of crime, com-
merce, and communication. In the work-
place, e-mail is often the preferred mode of
communication, replacing previously off-
line printed communications (memoranda,
forms, etc.) and supplanting the telephone
for tasks such as arranging meetings or
soliciting information (Dimmock, Gade &
Rankin, 2001). Like telephone communica-
tion, e-mail communication is often social
in nature unlike other written forms of
work-related communiqués such as letters
or faxes. Electronic communication
encompasses and reflects the intersection
between culture and the unique nature of
interactive media (Kling, Crawford,
Rosenbaum, Sawyer, Weisband, 2000). E-
mail messages organized through listservs
sustain group interaction over time (if they
are successful) and can form a social net-
work in which resources are exchanged and
group norms emerge (see, Wellman, 1999;
Wa sserman & Faust, 1994). As such, a list-
serv is also a medium for both the reflec-
tion and enactment of power relations. The
prevalence of Information Communication
Technology (ICT) in higher education led
the authors to examine the nature of com-
munication and interaction situated in an
academic e-mail listserv. In this paper the
authors focus on the degree to which the
emerging discourse appeared to enact
Info, Comm & Ethics in Society (2003) 1: 133–147
©2003 Troubador Publishing Ltd.
KKEEYYWWOORRDDSS
Listserv
Higher Education
Discourse
Power
Patricia McGee
Department of Interdisciplinary Studies and Curriculum & Instruction
College of Education and Human Development. The University of Texas at San Antonio. USA
Email: pmcgee@utsa.edu
Felecia Briscoe
Department of Educational Leadership. College of Education and Human Development.
The University of Texas at San Antonio. USA
Email: fbrisco@utsa.edu
CCOOVVEERRAAGGEE
This case study examines whether an academic listserv functions primarily as a medium for progressive
discourse in which enacted power relations are collaborative or primarily as a medium for discourse in
which norms are unilaterally established and off-line hierarchical power relations are re-enacted. A few
instances of progressive norm setting and other indicators of collaborative power relations were found.
However, findings overall suggest that the hierarchical power relations of the college context were re-enact-
ed in the listserv as revealed by the manner in which the discourse was patterned by gender, rank, and role.
ABSTRACT
collaborative power relationships versus
hierarchical power relationships.
Power relations can be observed in vari-
ous aspects of ICT discourse communities.
Baym (1997) delineates the four defining
aspects of an ICT discourse community as:
Forms of expression (e.g. salutations,
vocabulary); Identity (e.g., anonymous or
stated); Relationships both off- and online
(e.g., status), and Behavioral Norms (e.g.
conventions and protocols). These four
aspects are necessarily interrelated. How
relationships and interactions unfold in
ICTs is likely to reflect the norms and
power relations in off-line relationships,
particularly when members are identified
by name (Spears & Lea, 1994). A review of
nonacademic ICT studies, found little evi-
dence that status differentials were dimin-
ished in ICT interactions (Adrianson &
Hjelmquist, 1991). Given the hierarchical
power relations of a university setting and
the fact that the identity of a message
writer is immediately obvious, it seems
likely that hierarchical power relations
would be reflected and enacted in academ-
ic listserv discourse.
However, Drew and Sorjonen (1997) note
that we should recast our understanding of
“speaker’s identities [including status], not
as background ‘givens’ but as interactionally
produced in those contexts which are cru-
cial strategic sites in modern bureaucratic
industrial societies” (p.95). Within ICTs,
“although relationships may influence com-
munication, it is communication between
people that constructs and alters both social
and psychological realities” (Gratz & Salem,
1984, p. 98). Thus, the context in which list-
serv discourse takes place may not com-
pletely determine the nature of the power
relations enacted in the listserv discourse.
How power relations are constructed and
enacted within ICTs may be in part a func-
tion of the medium itself.
As some phenomenologists (see
Zurawski, 2000; Backhaus, 1997) have
noted, the medium of discourse can affect
the tone and content of the discourse.
Many experts believe that discourse medi-
ated through technology can be associated
with change and reform (see, Cuban, 2001;
Rogers, 1995; Hodas, 1993; McClintock,
1992). However, in order for emancipatory1
reform to take place, discourse facilitated
by technology must be critical and progres-
sive in nature. Habermas (1984) claims that
such emancipatory discourse can only take
place in a situation that is not systematical-
ly distorted by power relations; he notes
that fear of punishment is one of the pri-
mary ways in which speech situations
become distorted by power. McCarthy
(1988) summarizes Habermas’ description
of such an Ideal Speech Situation (ISS) as
one where everyone has the “freedom to
not only to enter into a critical discussion,
to seek discursive justification of problem-
atic claims, and to offer and evaluate vari-
ous arguments and explanations, but to call
into question and (if necessary) to modify
an originally accepted conceptual frame-
work…” (p.305). As described, an ISS fos-
ters critical and progressive discourse
through the enactment of collaborative
power relations, because restriction, cen-
sorship and punishment (all prohibited in
an ISS) can only be systematically adminis-
tered when power relations are structured
hierarchically.
While an ISS is an ideal and therefore
unobtainable, speech situations can vary in
the degree to which they approximate an
ISS. As a medium of communication, the
listserv by its very nature has one of the
characteristics of an ISS – that is all the
participants may enter into a discussion or
introduce a new topic whenever they wish.
Even when not anonymous, ICT members
(perhaps as a result of asynchronous inter-
action) tend to be more open in their
expressions whether or not they are identi-
fied by name (Collins-Jarvis, 1997; Herring,
1992). In listserv discourse any member of
the community can participate at their own
rate and not be cut off by another partici-
pant interrupting or refusing them the
right to speak. Unlike a faculty meeting or
other sorts of face-to-face interactions,
there is time enough for all subscribers to
follow up on a thought or to introduce a
new topic and communicate their thoughts
McGee and Briscoe: Discourse analysis: power/knowledge on an academic listserv
IInn lliissttsseerrvv ddiissccoouurrssee aannyy mmeemm--
bbeerr ooff tthhee ccoommmmuunniittyy ccaann ppaarr--
ttiicciippaattee aatt tthheeiirr oowwnn rraattee aanndd
nnoott bbee ccuutt ooffff bbyy aannootthheerr ppaarrttiicc--
iippaanntt iinntteerrrruuppttiinngg oorr rreeffuussiinngg
tthheemm tthhee rriigghhtt ttoo ssppeeaakk..
134
To continue reading
Request your trial