Сư³æ´«Ã½

Teacher(s)

Dufrasne Marie;

Language

French

Prerequisites

The prerequisite(s) for this Teaching Unit (Unité d’enseignement – UE) for the programmes/courses that offer this Teaching Unit are specified at the end of this sheet.

Learning outcomes

At the end of this learning unit, the student is able to :

This course aims to: - analyse the different relationships that constitute the public space, between the field of knowledge, the media and the political field. - decipher the growing interdependencies between science, media, economics and politics. - understand the specific dynamics that govern these relationships, using several key concepts from philosophy, general sociology, media sociology, sociology of science, history of science, and information and communication sciences. - illustrate these themes through media examples. The course will therefore cover a series of theoretical resources essential for such an analysis, and then propose examples of concrete applications to contemporary social, cultural and economic phenomena.

Content

1) The notion of public space
- Habermas and his critics
- The communicative approach to public space
2) The role of the media in the public space
- Visibility and interaction
- Freedom of expression and debate
- Internet as a public space?
- Fake news, the post-truth
- Big data, recommendation algorithms, filter bubbles, etc.
3) Public space and scientific knowledge
- The (m)knowledge society
- The communication of science in the public space
- The responsibility of intellectuals in the public space
- Experts in the public space

Teaching methods

The teacher's presentations will be made on the basis of slides. The presentations are accompanied by a highlighting of the concepts through the analysis of external resources (extracts from radio or TV programmes, documentaries, photos, videos, press articles). These external resources, being fully integrated into the course, will be an integral part of the subject matter (and are available on Moodle).
The teaching system is intended to be participatory, and the presence and involvement of students is therefore desirable. Part of the evaluation takes place on an ongoing basis during the course sessions: reading and presentation of scientific articles, creation of collaborative slides based on the course and textual resources, viewing of documentaries and analyses, creation of a thematic dossier (based on the subject matter) for a web newspaper, participation in a serious game, etc. All the detailed instructions will be explained during the session and will be available on Moodle. A detailed schedule of activities is also available on Moodle.

Evaluation methods

The evaluation consists of 6 parts:
During the course weeks
1) Reading and presentation of the exploitation of one of the 12 scientific articles (one common mark per small group representing 20% of the final mark)
2) The reading of two texts and the production of collaborative slides during the session (one common mark per small group representing 10% of the final mark).
3) The viewing of a conference and the elaboration of a web (newspaper) (one common mark per small group representing 10% of the final mark)

During the session
4) An individual written work of application of the subject to a case for the examination (30%)
5) Oral defence of the examination work and the answer to two questions on the work-related subject matter (20% of the final mark)
6) Discussion of the work of a peer (10% of the final grade)
All the instructions are explained during the session and in writing on Moodle. All productions must be submitted to the plagiarism detector (see instructions and link on Moodle). Any plagiarism will be severely punished as stipulated in the RGEE.

As provided for in the implementing provisions of the General Regulations for Studies and Examinations for the ESPO Faculty (Article 6 § 2), unjustified failure to submit any genuine work within the deadline may result in a final mark of 0/20 for the EU.

In the case of registration for the second session, the evaluation will be distributed as follows:

1) An analytical press review work on public space (20% of the final mark)
2) An individual written work on the application of the subject matter to a case for the examination (50% of the final mark)
3) Oral defence of examination work and answering questions on work-related subject matter (30% of the final mark)
The workload will of course be adapted to match the workload required of students during the quadrimester and for the first session.

Bibliography

Parmi les diverses références qui seront précisées au cours des séances, citons :

Berthelot, J.-M., Collinet, C., Martin, O. (2005). Savoirs et savants. Les études sur la science en France, PUF, Paris, coll. « science, histoire et société ».
Bourdieu, P. (1996). « Champ politique, champ des sciences sociales, champ journalistique », Cahiers de Recherche, n°15, GRS, Lyon.
Brunet, S., Bergmans, A., Bertrand, A., Biren, P. (2002). L'expertise en questions. Domestiquer l'incertitude dans la société du risque, Bruxelles, P.I.E.-Peter Lang, 2002.
du Roy, A. (2003). « Les liaisons dangereuses du journalisme et de la politique », Hermès, n°35, Paris, CNRS, 131-136.
Gingras, Y. (2013). Sociologie des sciences, PUF, Paris, coll. « Que sais-je?».
Habermas, J. (1978). L'espace public: archéologie de la publicité comme dimension constitutive de la société bourgeoise, Payot, Paris.
Habermas, J. (1992). « L'espace public », 30 ans après, Quaderni, n°18, Automne 1992, 161-191.
Lemieux, C. (2007). « À quoi sert l'analyse des controverses ? », Mil neuf cent, 2007/1, n°25, 191-212.
Lits, M. (2014). « L'espace public : concept fondateur de la communication ». Hermès, 3(70), 77-81.
Miège, B. (2010). L'espace public contemporain: Approche info-communicationnelle, PUG, Saint-Martin-d'Hères.
Negt, O. (2007) L'espace public oppositionnel, Payot, Paris, Collection Critique de la politique.
Pailliart, I. (1995). L'espace public et l'emprise de la communication, Grenoble, ELLUG.
Pailliart, I. (dir.) (2005). La publicisation de la science: Exposer, communiquer, débattre, publier, vulgariser, PUG (Presses Universitaires de Grenoble), Coll. « Communication, médias et sociétés ».
Rasse, P. (2001). « La médiation scientifique et technique entre vulgarisation et espace public », Quaderni, n°46, Hiver 2001-2002, p.73-93.
Thompson, J. B., Pasquier, D., Relieu, M. (2000). « Transformation de la visibilité », Réseaux, vol. 18, n°100, pp. 187-213.
Watine, T. (1999). « Bourdieu et les médias: des lois du champ et de l'habitus comme présomptions du conservatisme des journalistes », Les Cahiers du journalisme, n°6, octobre 1999.

Faculty or entity

> ESPB