The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The New Visibility
Abstract
This article examines the characteristics of a new form of visibility which has become a pervasive feature of the modern world and which is linked to the development of communication media. With the development of the media, the visibility of individuals, actions and events is severed from the sharing of a common locale: one no longer has to be present in the same spatial-temporal setting in order to see the other or to witness an action or event. The rise of this new form of mediated visibility has transformed the relations between visibility and power. Thanks to mediated visibility, political rulers are able to appear before their subjects in ways and on a scale that never existed previously. Skilful politicians exploit this to their advantage; with the help of their PR consultants and communications advisers, they seek to create and sustain a basis of support by managing their visibility in the mediated arena of modern politics. But mediated visibility is a double-edged sword: it also creates new risks for political leaders, who find themselves exposed to new kinds of dangers. Hence the visibility created by the media becomes the source of a new and distinctive kind of fragility. However much political leaders try to manage their visibility, they cannot completely control it: mediated visibility can slip out of their grasp and can, on occasion, work against them.
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 Culture of Connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media
van Dijck, J. (2013) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199970773.001.0001 · Cited by 2,688
Christensen, L. T., Morsing, M., & Thyssen, O. (2013) · Organization · doi:10.1177/1350508413478310 · Cited by 591
Rethinking Research Ethics, Power, and the Risk of Visibility in the Era of the “Alt-Right” Gaze
Massanari, A. L. (2018) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/2056305118768302 · Cited by 156
The visibility of scientific misconduct: A review of the literature on retracted journal articles
Hesselmann, F., Graf, V., Schmidt, M., & Reinhart, M. (2017) · Current Sociology · doi:10.1177/0011392116663807 · Cited by 153
Jiménez-Martínez, C. (2021) · The International Journal of Press/Politics · doi:10.1177/1940161220923984 · Cited by 22
Sculpting digital voids: The politics of forgetting on Facebook
Jacobsen, B. N. (2021) · Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies · doi:10.1177/1354856520907390 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Thompson, J. B.
- Venue
- Theory, Culture & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-12
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 31-51
- ISSN
- 0263-2764 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-3616
- OpenAlex
- W2136904606
- Cited by
- 611
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 16.82
- 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
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.