P. 1
Security K Planet Debate

Security K Planet Debate

Ratings: (0)|Views: 152|Likes:
Published by Rahul Gupta
A possible security kritik
A possible security kritik

More info:

Categories:Types, Research
Published by: Rahul Gupta on Feb 04, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Generic LinksThe affirmative engages in realist discourse that uses fear to control the masses—that’s atool of securization Altheide and Michalowski 99 (David L., Professor of Justice and Social Inquiry @ ASU, R.Sam, graduate student of Sociology @ City University of New York, “Fear in the News:Discourse of Control”)Fear pervades popular culture and the news media . Whether used as a noun, verb,adverb, or adjective, an ongoing study finds that the word "fear" pervades news reportsacross all sections of newspapers, and is shown to move or "travel" from one topic toanother. The use of fear and the thematic emphases spawned by entertainment formatsare consistent with a "discourse of fear," or the pervasive communication, symbolicawareness and expectation that danger and risk are a central feature of the effectiveenvironment. A qualitative content analysis of a decade of news coverage in The ArizonaRepublic and several other major American news media (e.g., the Los Angeles Times, and ABC News) reveals that the word "fear" appears more often than it did several years ago,particularly in headlines, where its use has more than doubled. Comparative materialsobtained through the Lexis/Nexis information base also reveals that certain themes areassociated with a shifting focus of fear over the years (e.g., violence, drugs, AIDS), withthe most recent increases associated with reports about children. Analysis suggests thatthis use of fear is consistent with popular culture oriented to pursuing a "problemframe" and entertainment formats, which also have social implications for social policy and reliance on formal agents of social control. No passion so effectually robs the mindof all its powers of acting and reasoning as fear. Edmund Burke Nearly everyone knowshow to read the news of the day. But using news as a resource for everyday life isdifferent from treating it as a topic to understand how social reality is ordered,maintained, and repaired. On the one hand, news reports as resources serve to setemotional tones for the rhythms of life and reminders of ideals of the order and disorderthat threaten peaceful neighborhoods and the cosmologies of "normal order." On theother hand, news reports as topics provide a window into organizational frameworks of reality maintenance and their relevance for broader societal definitions of situations,courses of action, and assessments of a life world. News reports, as a feature of popularculture, become intertwined in everyday life, political speeches, and other entertainmentforms such as movies. This article reports on the way fear is being used to provideentertaining news that also benefits formal agents of social control and promotesdistrust among the audience. The way the production of entertaining news shapes thecontent of news can be clarified by looking at the role and use of fear over time acrosssocial issues. When fear is the prevailing framework for looking at social issues, thenother competing frames and discourses lose out. When President Franklin Rooseveltsaid, in the context of the Great Depression, "Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself," he had not envisioned American news media!Roosevelt cautioned against fear; today fear is embraced and constitutes a major publicdiscourse through which numerous problems and issues are framed. A discourse of fearmay be defined as the pervasive communication, symbolic awareness, and expectationthat danger and risk are a central feature of the effective environment, or the physicaland symbolic environment as people define and experience it in everyday life (Pfuhl andHenry 1993, p. 53). We report on the expanded use of fear in news reports and reflect onits significance for social orderBig Willy Style1
Generic Link (Fear)The affirmative engages in fear mongering discourse to obtain state control Altheide and Michalowski 99 (David L., Professor of Justice and Social Inquiry @ ASU, R.Sam, graduate student of Sociology @ City University of New York, “Fear in the News:Discourse of Control”)The prevalence of fear in public discourse can contribute to stances and reactive socialpolicies that promote state control and surveillance. Fear is a key element of creating"the risk society," organized around communication oriented to policing, control, andprevention of risks (Ericson and Haggerty 1997; Staples 1997). A constitutive feature of this emerging order is a blanket reminder of fear. "Fear ends up proving itself, as new risk communication and management systems proliferate" (Ericson and Haggerty 1997,p. 6). While fear is commonly associated with crime, we suggest that fear provides adiscursive framework of expectation and meaning within which crime and related"problems" are expressed. Media practices and major news sources (e.g., law enforcement agencies) have cooperatively produced an organizational "machine," fueled by entertainment and selective use of news sources, that simultaneously connects peopleto their effective environments even as it generates entertainment-oriented profits(Altheide 1997). As one law enforcement official stated about Arizona's televised "crimestoppers" dramatizations, "If you can have a little entertainment and get your man, too,that's great."T his discourse resonates through public information and is becoming apart of what a mass society holds in common: We increasingly share understandingsabout what to fear and how to avoid it. The consequences are felt in numerous ways butparticularly in accelerated negative perceptions about public order (e.g., the streets arenot safe, strangers are dangerous, the state must provide more control and surveillance).In commenting on everyday life features of mass society, Stanford M. Lyman (1997, p.294) observes, "Such a fearful disunity undermines the general conditions of trust andorder, encouraging intrigues, deceptions and interactions that are strategic rather thanspontaneous."Big Willy Style2
The affirmative engages in fear mongering discourse to obtain state controlGiroux, Professor of English and Cultural Studies @ McMasters University, 06(Henry A., “The Emerging Authoritarianism in the United States: Political Culture underthe Bush/Cheney Administration”, University of Nebraska Press, AD: 7-16-10)He has no language for entertaining the possibility of a mixture of both systems, which would suggest a more updated if not different form of authoritarianism, or the malignantreplication of many ideas characteristic without first obtaining warrants; the disclosure by the
Washington Post 
of a network of covert prisons known as “black sites,”established by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in eight countries; the rampantcorruption involving the most powerful politicians in the Bush administration; theadministration’s political and moral laxity in the face of the Hurricane Katrina tragedy;and the ongoing stories about widespread abuse and torture in Iraq and Afghanistan are just some of the elements reported in the popular press that corroborate a growingauthoritarianism in American life. The Bush administration, as many notable andcourageous critics ranging from Seymour M. Hersh to Gore Vidal and Robert Kennedy Jr. have pointed out, has tarnished the highest offices of government with unsavory corporate alliances, used political power unabashedly to pursue legislative policies thatfavor the rich and punish the poor, and disabled those public spheres not governed by the logic of the market. Sidney Blumenthal, former senior adviser to President Clintonand no radical, has argued that the Bush administration has created a government that istantamount to “a national security state of torture, ghost detainees, secret prisons,renditions and domestic eavesdropping” (para. 2). And, most recently, Bob Herbertsuggested that all of the surreptitious activities of the Bush regime offer Americansnothing less than a “road map totalitarianism” (2006, A25). Whereas the Clintonadministration situated its key positions in the Treasury Department, the Bushadministration relies on its defense experts—Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rice—to develop itsinternational policy. As war becomes the foundation for the administration’s empiredriven foreign policy, real and symbolic violence combine with a number of anti-democratic tendencies to make the world more dangerous and the promise of globaldemocracy difficult to imagine in the current historical moment. Entire populations arenow seen as disposable, and state sovereignty is no longer organized around the strugglefor life but now entails an insatiable quest for the accumulation of capital, leading to what Achille Mbembe calls “necropolitics” or the destruction of human bodies.1 Thelanguage of patriotic correctness and religious fanaticism is beginning to replace thelanguage of social justice and equality, bespeaking the enduring attraction and“rehabilitation of fascist ideals and principles” (Gilroy 2000, 148). In what follows, I want to argue that fascism and authoritarianism are important categories that need to bemined in order to explore the changing nature of power, control, and rule in the UnitedStates and the challenge that such changes pose to a democracy clearly under siege. I want to make clear from the outset that I am not suggesting the United States is engagedin a process of genocidal terror against racialized populations—though the increase inpolice brutality in the last decade against people of color coupled with the rise of aprison-industrialmilitary complex that primarily punishes black men cannot beoverlooked.2 Nor can the increased attack by the American government on the rights of many innocent Arabs, Muslims, and immigrants be understood as anything other than akind of totalitarian time warp in which airport terminals now resemble state prisons asforeign nationals are fingerprinted, photographed, and interrogated (see Tristam 2004).Rather, I am arguing that the United States has many earmarks of a growingauthoritarianism, the characteristics of which I will spell out below Big Willy Style3

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->