2024
Hansen, Ejvind
Journalists Gaining Trust Through Silencing of the Self Journal Article
In: SATS – Northern European Journal of Philosophy, vol. 25, iss. 1, pp. 49-68, 2024, ISBN: 1869-7577.
@article{Hansen2024c,
title = {Journalists Gaining Trust Through Silencing of the Self},
author = {Ejvind Hansen},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1515/sats-2023-0002
https://uploads.ejvindh.net/Philosophy/PreprintSilenceTrust.pdf},
doi = {10.1515/sats-2023-0002},
isbn = {1869-7577},
year = {2024},
date = {2024-05-21},
urldate = {2024-05-21},
journal = {SATS – Northern European Journal of Philosophy},
volume = {25},
issue = {1},
pages = {49-68},
abstract = {Journalists depend on two vectors of trust: the trust invested in them by their sources, and the trust invested in them by their end-users. For many years, trust has become a key issue in the articulation of the journalistic profession. This paper distinguishes between two traditional approaches to earn public trust: either through an emphasis on the ideal of objectivity, or by a sort of showing one’s cards: an explicit declaration of one’s subjectivity. Through a reading of Løgstrup, Derrida, and Deleuze, we argue that both positions are inadequate solutions to the problem of trust. In as much as subjectivity is continuously negotiated in interaction with the unknown and the uncontrollable, the poles of objectivity and subjectivity cannot define the narrative event without each supplementing the other. To escape from this impasse, we suggest a third approach: a hospitable journalism characterized by a hospitable attitude towards the uncontrollable and the strange, or unknown, which operates to make the individual more aware of herself and her place in the world. This invitation happens through a silencing of the self.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Journalists depend on two vectors of trust: the trust invested in them by their sources, and the trust invested in them by their end-users. For many years, trust has become a key issue in the articulation of the journalistic profession. This paper distinguishes between two traditional approaches to earn public trust: either through an emphasis on the ideal of objectivity, or by a sort of showing one’s cards: an explicit declaration of one’s subjectivity. Through a reading of Løgstrup, Derrida, and Deleuze, we argue that both positions are inadequate solutions to the problem of trust. In as much as subjectivity is continuously negotiated in interaction with the unknown and the uncontrollable, the poles of objectivity and subjectivity cannot define the narrative event without each supplementing the other. To escape from this impasse, we suggest a third approach: a hospitable journalism characterized by a hospitable attitude towards the uncontrollable and the strange, or unknown, which operates to make the individual more aware of herself and her place in the world. This invitation happens through a silencing of the self.
Hansen, Ejvind
The fourth estate operating by means of silencing Journal Article
In: Journalism, vol. 25, iss. 1, pp. 141-157, 2024, ISBN: 1741-3001.
@article{Hansen2024a,
title = {The fourth estate operating by means of silencing},
author = {Ejvind Hansen},
url = {http://uploads.ejvindh.net/Philosophy/PreprintJournalistsImposingSilence.pdf
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14648849221132601
http://offentligheder.dk/den-fjerde-statsmagt-som-udoever-af-tavshed/
},
doi = {10.1177/14648849221132601},
isbn = {1741-3001},
year = {2024},
date = {2024-01-10},
urldate = {2024-01-10},
journal = {Journalism},
volume = {25},
issue = {1},
pages = {141-157},
abstract = {The traditional foundation of the placed reserved for the Fourth Estate in democratic practice is under pressure. To revitalize this idea, a focus upon how journalists handle silence professionally is suggested. It is argued that it is important to bring out how the handling of silence is carried out, and to understand that silence is not only something to be avoided. Silence is of foundational importance for communicative significance to emerge. In a reading of Deleuze, Heidegger and Derrida, we argue for a model in which silence is necessary for significant communicative exchanges. We avoid thoughtlessness by allotting a function to silence; for communication requires not just information but a channel of silence, so to speak. It is, finally, argued that it is important not to expect the revealed forms of silence to be problematic. It is demonstrated that certain forms of silence can be analysed as democracy enhancing because they permit less heated exchanges that make room for thoughtful contemplation.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The traditional foundation of the placed reserved for the Fourth Estate in democratic practice is under pressure. To revitalize this idea, a focus upon how journalists handle silence professionally is suggested. It is argued that it is important to bring out how the handling of silence is carried out, and to understand that silence is not only something to be avoided. Silence is of foundational importance for communicative significance to emerge. In a reading of Deleuze, Heidegger and Derrida, we argue for a model in which silence is necessary for significant communicative exchanges. We avoid thoughtlessness by allotting a function to silence; for communication requires not just information but a channel of silence, so to speak. It is, finally, argued that it is important not to expect the revealed forms of silence to be problematic. It is demonstrated that certain forms of silence can be analysed as democracy enhancing because they permit less heated exchanges that make room for thoughtful contemplation.
2021
Hansen, Ejvind
The Freedom to Remain Silent. The Right to make Qualified Contributions to the Public Sphere Unpublished
2021.
@unpublished{Hansen2021c,
title = {The Freedom to Remain Silent. The Right to make Qualified Contributions to the Public Sphere},
author = {Ejvind Hansen},
url = {https://offentligheder.dk/forsvar-doktorafhandling-om-tavshedens-produktive-rolle-i-offentligheden/},
year = {2021},
date = {2021-10-12},
urldate = {2021-10-12},
abstract = {Manuscript handed in with the view to obtain the higher doctoral degree in philosophy (dr. phil -- comparable to the German "Habilitation"). Defended at Aarhus University on December 2023.
This book sets out to turn a centuries-old discussion about a particular aspect of democracy on its head. It has been commonplace since the Enlightenment and the emergence of rationalism to believe that some form of freedom of expression is the path to an enlightened public sphere. While accepting that this is the case, I wish to supplement this line of thought by adding its opposite into the mix. Just as dialogue and information are indispensable ingredients in a functioning democracy, I want to show that silence is also a fundamental prerequisite. With this in mind, I suggest that we supplement thinking about freedom of expression with similar deliberations about freedom of silence. In order to prepare the ground for this, the book sets out to bring forth the significance and importance of silence in the generation of communicative significance. This is done in a reading of Habermas, Heidegger, Derrida, Deleuze, Kierkegaard, (a.o.). In the second half of the book I show how silence can be used critically to create space for thoughtfulness in the democratic spheres that tend to be crowded with an overwhelming amount of discussion.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {unpublished}
}
Manuscript handed in with the view to obtain the higher doctoral degree in philosophy (dr. phil -- comparable to the German "Habilitation"). Defended at Aarhus University on December 2023.
This book sets out to turn a centuries-old discussion about a particular aspect of democracy on its head. It has been commonplace since the Enlightenment and the emergence of rationalism to believe that some form of freedom of expression is the path to an enlightened public sphere. While accepting that this is the case, I wish to supplement this line of thought by adding its opposite into the mix. Just as dialogue and information are indispensable ingredients in a functioning democracy, I want to show that silence is also a fundamental prerequisite. With this in mind, I suggest that we supplement thinking about freedom of expression with similar deliberations about freedom of silence. In order to prepare the ground for this, the book sets out to bring forth the significance and importance of silence in the generation of communicative significance. This is done in a reading of Habermas, Heidegger, Derrida, Deleuze, Kierkegaard, (a.o.). In the second half of the book I show how silence can be used critically to create space for thoughtfulness in the democratic spheres that tend to be crowded with an overwhelming amount of discussion.
This book sets out to turn a centuries-old discussion about a particular aspect of democracy on its head. It has been commonplace since the Enlightenment and the emergence of rationalism to believe that some form of freedom of expression is the path to an enlightened public sphere. While accepting that this is the case, I wish to supplement this line of thought by adding its opposite into the mix. Just as dialogue and information are indispensable ingredients in a functioning democracy, I want to show that silence is also a fundamental prerequisite. With this in mind, I suggest that we supplement thinking about freedom of expression with similar deliberations about freedom of silence. In order to prepare the ground for this, the book sets out to bring forth the significance and importance of silence in the generation of communicative significance. This is done in a reading of Habermas, Heidegger, Derrida, Deleuze, Kierkegaard, (a.o.). In the second half of the book I show how silence can be used critically to create space for thoughtfulness in the democratic spheres that tend to be crowded with an overwhelming amount of discussion.
2019
Hansen, Ejvind; Jørndrup, Hanne
Redaktionelt forord Journal Article
In: Journalistica - Tidsskrift for forskning i journalistik, vol. 1, pp. 4-5, 2019, ISBN: 1904-7967.
@article{Hansen2019,
title = {Redaktionelt forord},
author = {Ejvind Hansen and Hanne Jørndrup},
editor = {Ejvind Hansen and Hanne Jørndrup},
url = {https://tidsskrift.dk/journalistica/issue/view/8209},
isbn = {1904-7967},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-05-02},
journal = {Journalistica - Tidsskrift for forskning i journalistik},
volume = {1},
pages = {4-5},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
2018
Hansen, Ejvind
The Fourth Estate: the Construction and Place of Silence in the Public Sphere Journal Article
In: Philosophy & Social Criticism, vol. 44, no. 10, pp. 1071–1089, 2018, ISSN: 0191-4537.
@article{Hansen2018c,
title = {The Fourth Estate: the Construction and Place of Silence in the Public Sphere},
author = {Ejvind Hansen},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0191453718797991
http://offentligheder.dk/for-lidt-tavshed-i-offentligheden/
http://uploads.ejvindh.net/Philosophy/Preprint_SilenceAndDeliberation.pdf},
doi = {10.1177/0191453718797991},
issn = {0191-4537},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-11-21},
journal = {Philosophy & Social Criticism},
volume = {44},
number = {10},
pages = {1071–1089},
abstract = {The main narratives of prevailing ideas of the Fourth Estate were articulated in the era of traditional mass media, and these traditional narratives are challenged by the changing media landscapes. This raises the question whether traditional narratives of the Fourth Estate should be maintained. We will argue – through a close reading of Derrida’s reflections on the relationship between communicative significance and silence, combined with a deliberative ideal for democracy – that the new structures of communication call for a Fourth Estate that focuses on creating spaces for flexible structures of silence in the public sphere. The Fourth Estate has an obvious assignment of counteracting problematic structures of silence (if certain important voices are not being heard). In this paper we will, however, bring out assignments of creating spaces of silence in the public sphere: By (a) silencing certain dominant voices, (b) making room for an increased lack of answers, and (c) creating an awareness of the insufficiencies of the public spheres.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The main narratives of prevailing ideas of the Fourth Estate were articulated in the era of traditional mass media, and these traditional narratives are challenged by the changing media landscapes. This raises the question whether traditional narratives of the Fourth Estate should be maintained. We will argue – through a close reading of Derrida’s reflections on the relationship between communicative significance and silence, combined with a deliberative ideal for democracy – that the new structures of communication call for a Fourth Estate that focuses on creating spaces for flexible structures of silence in the public sphere. The Fourth Estate has an obvious assignment of counteracting problematic structures of silence (if certain important voices are not being heard). In this paper we will, however, bring out assignments of creating spaces of silence in the public sphere: By (a) silencing certain dominant voices, (b) making room for an increased lack of answers, and (c) creating an awareness of the insufficiencies of the public spheres.
2016
Hansen, Ejvind
Forlaget Philosophia, Aarhus, 2016, ISBN: 978-87-93041-31-8.
@book{Hansen2016a,
title = {Kugleregn møder kuglepen},
author = {Ejvind Hansen},
url = {http://offentligheder.dk/kugleregn-moeder-kuglepen/},
isbn = {978-87-93041-31-8},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-01-14},
urldate = {2016-01-14},
publisher = {Forlaget Philosophia},
address = {Aarhus},
abstract = {Ytringsfriheden handler bl.a. om at kunne gøre grin med magthaverne. Ytringsfriheden handler også om at bygge bro mellem medborgere. Det kan vi gøre, når vi griner sammen, i stedet for at grine af hinanden.
Den første forside på satiremagasinet Charlie Hebdo efter terroranslaget mod bladets medarbejdere kan lære os dette. På forsiden græder Muhammed og tilgiver terroristerne, men vil hellere grine med dem, som de var, da de var børn, der selv kunne lave sjove tegninger.
Kan vi, og skal vi, lære at grine med terroristernes familie, venner og trosfæller? Det argumenterer Ejvind Hansen, Forskningsleder i Journalistisk filosofi, for i denne bog!},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {book}
}
Ytringsfriheden handler bl.a. om at kunne gøre grin med magthaverne. Ytringsfriheden handler også om at bygge bro mellem medborgere. Det kan vi gøre, når vi griner sammen, i stedet for at grine af hinanden.
Den første forside på satiremagasinet Charlie Hebdo efter terroranslaget mod bladets medarbejdere kan lære os dette. På forsiden græder Muhammed og tilgiver terroristerne, men vil hellere grine med dem, som de var, da de var børn, der selv kunne lave sjove tegninger.
Kan vi, og skal vi, lære at grine med terroristernes familie, venner og trosfæller? Det argumenterer Ejvind Hansen, Forskningsleder i Journalistisk filosofi, for i denne bog!
Den første forside på satiremagasinet Charlie Hebdo efter terroranslaget mod bladets medarbejdere kan lære os dette. På forsiden græder Muhammed og tilgiver terroristerne, men vil hellere grine med dem, som de var, da de var børn, der selv kunne lave sjove tegninger.
Kan vi, og skal vi, lære at grine med terroristernes familie, venner og trosfæller? Det argumenterer Ejvind Hansen, Forskningsleder i Journalistisk filosofi, for i denne bog!
2013
Hansen, Ejvind
Aporias of Digital Journalism Journal Article
In: Journalism: Theory, Practice & Criticism, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 678–694, 2013.
@article{Hansen2013,
title = {Aporias of Digital Journalism},
author = { Ejvind Hansen},
url = {http://jou.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/07/10/1464884912453283.abstract?rss=1
http://uploads.ejvindh.net/Philosophy/Preprint_AporiasOfDigitalJournalism.pdf},
doi = {10.1177/1464884912453283},
year = {2013},
date = {2013-01-01},
journal = {Journalism: Theory, Practice & Criticism},
volume = {14},
number = {5},
pages = {678--694},
abstract = {The internet poses, in certain ways, a problem for journalists: on the one hand, it is evidently a marvellous tool for investigative work, for the rapid dissemination of information, and for creating new news platforms with new constituencies; on the other hand, these constituencies, habituated to the real time coordinates of internet communication, are impatient with the old rhythms of the news cycle, and impatient with forms of journalistic authority that were formed in the era of one-way mass medias. The very status of the journalist as reporter or opinion maker has been put into question as the bar to entry for creating a mass media audience has lowered dramatically – which was first noticed when bloggers of all types rose to prominence. This article presents an account of journalism that relates thematically to the idea that the future of journalism lies primarily in the journalist as editor, moderator and curator. We suggest, however, that these accounts need a twist in order to incorporate the critical ethos of journalism. Journalists should not be thought of merely as those who edit, moderate and curate already ongoing dialogues. Journalists should also help to show the blank spots of ongoing dialogues, in order to make the silent voices heard. Journalists should facilitate an awareness of which voices are not heard in the ongoing dialogues. To show this, we articulate a Derridean deconstruction of the situation of journalists, hereby showing that the founding aporias of journalism (the aporia of giving and denying voices) have been replaced by an aporia of giving and denying room for dialogue.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The internet poses, in certain ways, a problem for journalists: on the one hand, it is evidently a marvellous tool for investigative work, for the rapid dissemination of information, and for creating new news platforms with new constituencies; on the other hand, these constituencies, habituated to the real time coordinates of internet communication, are impatient with the old rhythms of the news cycle, and impatient with forms of journalistic authority that were formed in the era of one-way mass medias. The very status of the journalist as reporter or opinion maker has been put into question as the bar to entry for creating a mass media audience has lowered dramatically – which was first noticed when bloggers of all types rose to prominence. This article presents an account of journalism that relates thematically to the idea that the future of journalism lies primarily in the journalist as editor, moderator and curator. We suggest, however, that these accounts need a twist in order to incorporate the critical ethos of journalism. Journalists should not be thought of merely as those who edit, moderate and curate already ongoing dialogues. Journalists should also help to show the blank spots of ongoing dialogues, in order to make the silent voices heard. Journalists should facilitate an awareness of which voices are not heard in the ongoing dialogues. To show this, we articulate a Derridean deconstruction of the situation of journalists, hereby showing that the founding aporias of journalism (the aporia of giving and denying voices) have been replaced by an aporia of giving and denying room for dialogue.
2011
Hansen, Ejvind
Den dialog-udfordrende journalist Book Section
In: Buch, Roger (Ed.): Forandringens journalistik. 40 års tilbageblik, pp. 97–117, Forlaget Ajour, Aarhus, 2011, ISBN: 978-87-92816-03-0.
@incollection{Hansen2011a,
title = {Den dialog-udfordrende journalist},
author = { Ejvind Hansen},
editor = {Roger Buch},
url = {http://uploads.ejvindh.net/Philosophy/018DenDialogUdfordrendeJournalist.PDF},
isbn = {978-87-92816-03-0},
year = {2011},
date = {2011-01-01},
booktitle = {Forandringens journalistik. 40 års tilbageblik},
pages = {97--117},
publisher = {Forlaget Ajour},
address = {Aarhus},
abstract = {Da lovforslaget om “Danmarks Journalisthøjskole og Institut for Presseforskning” blev vedtaget i 1970 og realiseret i 1971, blev journalistikkens rolle i samfundet kodificeret. I de samme år fandt imidlertid også en kommunikationsteknologisk revolution sted, som på sigt kom til at etablere en udfordring i den journalistiske selvforståelse. Betydningen af disse hændelser og opfindelser kunne man ikke forudse i 1971, men fra 40-års perspektivet etablerer dannelsen af Journalisthøjskolen og Internettets fremvækst to hændelser en tydelig dialektik, som i dag udgør en uomgængelig udfordring for journalistikken. Internet teknologierne har på den ene side lettet mange journalistiske processer. På den anden side bliver journalistens “monopol” som vidensformidler og formidler af kontakt mellem magthavere og befolkning også udfordret.Internettet har ofte været anset for at være et muligt værktøj til at effektivisere den journalistiske opgave. Jeg argumenterer imidlertid for, at Internettet radikalt forandrer hele relationen i den offentlige sfære, så den kommunikative udfordring forflytter sig. Snarere end at skulle bøvle med at bringe den rette information frem til modtagerne, bliver udfordringen nu, hvordan man faciliterer en åben og kritisk udfordrende dialog. Til dette formål må vi have nyere argumentative analyseværktøjer som diskursanalyse og dekonstruktion til hjælp. Kun herved kan journalister håbe på at løse den journalistiske udfordring: At udvikle og afgrænse rum for dialog – i forhold til passende grader af uenighed mellem deltagerne.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {incollection}
}
Da lovforslaget om “Danmarks Journalisthøjskole og Institut for Presseforskning” blev vedtaget i 1970 og realiseret i 1971, blev journalistikkens rolle i samfundet kodificeret. I de samme år fandt imidlertid også en kommunikationsteknologisk revolution sted, som på sigt kom til at etablere en udfordring i den journalistiske selvforståelse. Betydningen af disse hændelser og opfindelser kunne man ikke forudse i 1971, men fra 40-års perspektivet etablerer dannelsen af Journalisthøjskolen og Internettets fremvækst to hændelser en tydelig dialektik, som i dag udgør en uomgængelig udfordring for journalistikken. Internet teknologierne har på den ene side lettet mange journalistiske processer. På den anden side bliver journalistens “monopol” som vidensformidler og formidler af kontakt mellem magthavere og befolkning også udfordret.Internettet har ofte været anset for at være et muligt værktøj til at effektivisere den journalistiske opgave. Jeg argumenterer imidlertid for, at Internettet radikalt forandrer hele relationen i den offentlige sfære, så den kommunikative udfordring forflytter sig. Snarere end at skulle bøvle med at bringe den rette information frem til modtagerne, bliver udfordringen nu, hvordan man faciliterer en åben og kritisk udfordrende dialog. Til dette formål må vi have nyere argumentative analyseværktøjer som diskursanalyse og dekonstruktion til hjælp. Kun herved kan journalister håbe på at løse den journalistiske udfordring: At udvikle og afgrænse rum for dialog – i forhold til passende grader af uenighed mellem deltagerne.