CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 125Foucault, Power, and EthicsCultural Studies and PostmodernismCultural and political discourse analysis

Radical Transparency?

Birchall, Clare·2014·Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies
DOI 10.1177/1532708613517442
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article considers the cultural positioning of transparency as a superior form of disclosure through a comparative analysis with other forms. One, as yet under-examined appeal of transparency lies in its promise to circumvent the need for, and usurp the role of, narrative-interpretive forms of disclosure such as scandal, gossip, and conspiracy theories. This growing preference for transparency as a more enlightening, honorable mode of disclosure is not just a result of the positive qualities that are seen to be intrinsic to transparency (particularly e-transparency) itself, but a response to the perceived negative characteristics of other forms of disclosure. After questioning the opposition between transparency and narrative-interpretive disclosures, we can see the preference for the former to be, at least partly, ideological: Transparency reinforces neoliberal tenets as much as democratic ideals. WikiLeaks is invoked in this article as a case which draws on both e-transparency and narrative-interpretive forms of disclosure in a move that wrests transparency from the clutches of neoliberalism and refuses the traditional hierarchy between forms of disclosure. This hybrid form helps us explore the possibility and implications of non-ascendant, radical forms of transparency or, in other words, disclosure without political foreclosure.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1532708613517442

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 46 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Birchall, C.
Affiliations
King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Birchall, Clare
ORCID
Birchall, Clare
Venue
Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2014-01-13
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
77-88
ISSN
  • 1532-7086 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-356X
DOI
10.1177/1532708613517442
OpenAlex
W4239656662
Cited by
123
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 2
FWCI
21.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Culture Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Foucault, Power, and Ethics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Cultural Studies and Postmodernism
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Cultural and political discourse analysis
Keywords
transparency, disclosure, scandal, gossip, conspiracy theories, WikiLeaks, neoliberalism, democracy, radical transparency, ideology

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