The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Why conversation is not the soul of democracy
Abstract
Inspired by the writings of John Dewey, among others, thinking in communication studies has often taken face‐to‐face conversation to be the heart of democratic life. But face‐to‐face conversation has been as much honored in aristocracies as in democracies and there are, in fact, two distinctive and contrasting ideals of conversation—the sociable conversation and the problem‐solving conversation. Conversation that serves democracy is distinguished not by egalitarianism but by norm‐governedness and public‐ness, not by spontaneity but by civility, and not by its priority or superiority to print and broadcast media but by its necessary dependence on them. An argument is offered that institutions and norms of democracy give rise to democratic conversations rather than that the inherent democracy of conversation gives rise to politically democratic norms and institutions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The virtual sphere: The internet as a public sphere
Papacharissi, Z. (2002) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/14614440222226244 · Cited by 1,314
Cross-cutting Social Networks: Testing Democratic Theory in Practice
MUTZ, D. C. (2002) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055402004264 · Cited by 1,069
Facilitating Communication across Lines of Political Difference: The Role of Mass Media
Mutz, D. C. (2001) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055401000223 · Cited by 700
Civility 2.0: a comparative analysis of incivility in online political discussion
Rowe, I. (2015) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2014.940365 · Cited by 326
Theocharis, Y., Barberá, P., Fazekas, Z., Popa, S. A., & Parnet, O. (2016) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/jcom.12259 · Cited by 237
Metadata
- Authors
- Schudson, M.
- Venue
- Critical Studies in Mass Communication
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1997-12
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 297-309
- ISSN
- 0739-3180 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2071336553
- Cited by
- 467
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 46.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Why conversation is not the soul of democracy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/15295039709367020
- The paper
- Schudson, M. (1997). Why conversation is not the soul of democracy. Critical Studies in Mass Communication. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295039709367020
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.