@article{Rieger2024, author = {Rieger, Eva}, title = {A Manchurian Candidate? The GOP's Discourse on the Russian War in Ukraine}, series = {Politische Vierteljahresschrift (ISSN: 1862-2860)}, volume = {66}, journal = {Politische Vierteljahresschrift (ISSN: 1862-2860)}, number = {1}, publisher = {Springer Fachmedien}, address = {Wiesbaden}, issn = {0032-3470}, doi = {10.1007/s11615-024-00558-7}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:101:1-2411132119230.713822872360}, pages = {77 -- 99}, year = {2024}, abstract = {The United States has a longstanding tradition regarding its overall foreign policy, in the form of a bipartisan consensus. This includes—among other things—maintaining alliances and curbing the influence of rivals (e.g., Russia). Since this consensus has been in place, traditionally the Republican Party (GOP) has been especially intent on a less cooperative and more containing or deterring stance towards Russia. With former U.S. President Donald Trump, we can see a turning point in this behaviour by the GOP. Trump's obvious admiration for Russian president Putin and his statements about Putin being overly favourable, while simultaneously questioning NATO and the United States' commitment to defend Eastern European partners, show a distinctive shift in the GOP's discourse. This renunciation has subsequently been picked up by parts of the Republican Party, rendering the bipartisan consensus a contested issue. The full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 now constitutes an important external shock influencing said discursive shift. By drawing on discourse-bound identity theory and discourse analysis, the GOP's discourse regarding Russia and NATO is expected to have (substantially) changed in a kind of Zeitenwende —back towards the bipartisan consensus. This article will, therefore, analyse the statements of prominent Republicans after the Russian invasion, compare them to Trump's positions on these issues, and identify whether the invasion serves as a formative event that creates an overall shift in rhetoric and positions.}, subject = {-}, language = {en} } @article{Heinrich2024, author = {Heinrich, Horst-Alfred}, title = {Partizipationsvorstellungen von B{\"u}rger:innen: Eine explorative Anwendung der Draw\&Write-Technik als Survey-Instrument}, series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Politikwissenschaft (ISSN: 2366-2638)}, volume = {34}, journal = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Politikwissenschaft (ISSN: 2366-2638)}, number = {3}, publisher = {Springer Fachmedien}, address = {Wiesbaden}, issn = {1430-6387}, doi = {10.1007/s41358-024-00378-6}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:101:1-2412202107197.782688552245}, pages = {425 -- 445}, year = {2024}, abstract = {In einer bayernweiten postalischen Umfrage wurden unter Anwendung der Draw\&Write -Technik die Zielpersonen gebeten, ihre Vorstellung von Demokratie zu zeichnen. Eine Bildtypenanalyse ergab zwar, dass die Bilder im erhobenen Datensatz die große Bedeutung best{\"a}tigen, die der Wahl in der Demokratie zukommt. Doch f{\"u}hrt die in diesem Bereich neue Methode zu beachtlichen Differenzen verglichen mit den Ergebnissen standardisierter Umfragen. Der Mehrwert der Draw\&Write -Technik zeigt sich darin, dass das Datenmaterial nicht nur die bekannten Kategorien der repr{\"a}sentativen, direktdemokratischen, deliberativen oder demonstrativen Beteiligung spiegelt. Ein Teil der Zeichnungen wurde zwei weiteren Kategorien zugeordnet: 1) Klagen {\"u}ber empfundene Ohnmacht und Einflusslosigkeit angesichts eines repr{\"a}sentativen Herrschaftssystems sowie 2) Appelle an Konsensf{\"a}higkeit und die Bereitschaft zur Verantwortungs{\"u}bernahme als Bedingungen, die die B{\"u}rger:innen erf{\"u}llen m{\"u}ssen, wenn Beteiligung am politischen Prozess gelingen soll. Weiterhin ist das Ergebnis von großem Wert, weil das Zeichnen im Rahmen eines postalischen Surveys genutzt wurde. Ein Bias besteht lediglich hinsichtlich der Bildungsvariable, was aber auch bei der Anwendung offener Fragen zu erwarten w{\"a}re.}, subject = {-}, language = {de} } @article{BeselerToepfl2024, author = {Beseler, Arista and Toepfl, Florian}, title = {Conduits of the Kremlin's Informational Influence Abroad? How German-Language Alternative Media Outlets Are Connected to Russia's Ruling Elites}, series = {The International Journal of Press/Politics (ISSN: 1940-1620)}, volume = {30}, journal = {The International Journal of Press/Politics (ISSN: 1940-1620)}, number = {3}, publisher = {SAGE Publications}, address = {Los Angeles, CA}, issn = {1940-1612}, doi = {10.1177/19401612241230284}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:739-opus4-16755}, pages = {659 -- 678}, year = {2024}, abstract = {Extant research on alternative media in Western democracies has focused on scrutinizing their content, organization, production, and audiences. However, the extent to which alternative outlets are linked to powerful foreign actors has not yet been analyzed, despite the fact that a plethora of outlets have openly sided with Russia after its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, spreading the Kremlin's propagandistic narratives. To fill this gap, this study adopts a case study approach. It selects Germany as a revelatory case of a key target country of Russia's foreign influence efforts, raising the question of how and to what extent German-language alternative media outlets are connected to Russia's ruling elites. Grounded in qualitative analysis of a wide range of documents, this study proposes a categorization that divides the connections into three different types: organizational, media, and personal connections. Subsequently, it is demonstrated that half of the analyzed German-language alternative media outlets maintain at least one of these three types of connections to the Kremlin. These findings contribute to our knowledge of alternative media, as well as Russia's overt and covert foreign influence operations, the so-called "active measures." They also highlight the need for more transparency in alternative media landscapes in democratic contexts across the globe.}, subject = {-}, language = {en} } @article{Bach2024, author = {Bach, Maurizio}, title = {Effektiveres Pandemiemanagement durch sozialwissenschaftliche Politikberatung? Ein kritischer Kommentar zu J{\"o}rn Knoblochs Beitrag in Heft 4/2023}, series = {Berliner Journal f{\"u}r Soziologie (ISSN: 1862-2593)}, volume = {34}, journal = {Berliner Journal f{\"u}r Soziologie (ISSN: 1862-2593)}, number = {3}, publisher = {Springer Fachmedien}, address = {Wiesbaden}, issn = {0863-1808}, doi = {10.1007/s11609-024-00535-2}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:101:1-2412102126103.260519352471}, pages = {443 -- 460}, year = {2024}, abstract = {Der Kommentar setzt sich kritisch mit J{\"o}rn Knoblochs Analyse des Corona-Pandemiemanagements in Deutschland auseinander. Er hinterfragt die Behauptung Knoblochs, durch eine st{\"a}rkere Ber{\"u}cksichtigung von Sozialwissenschaftlern in den einschl{\"a}gigen Beratungsgremien h{\"a}tte eine effektivere Krisenbew{\"a}ltigung erreicht werden k{\"o}nnen. Der Beitrag fokussiert zum einen die strukturellen epistemischen Grenzen sowohl der biomedizinischen Wissenschaften als auch der empirischen Sozialforschung. Zum anderen beleuchtet er die Eigenlogik politischer Entscheidungsprozesse, die durch die Notwendigkeit der Unsicherheitsabsorption und Systemstabilisierung gepr{\"a}gt sind und gegen{\"u}ber externen Einfl{\"u}ssen als relativ immun erscheinen. Der Beitrag pl{\"a}diert f{\"u}r eine differenzierte Betrachtung der Schnittstelle zwischen wissenschaftlicher Beratung und politischer Praxis und mahnt eine kritische Reflexion der Rolle und der Grenzen der wissenschaftsgest{\"u}tzten Politikberatung an.}, subject = {-}, language = {de} } @article{RyzhovaToepfl2024, author = {Ryzhova, Anna and Toepfl, Florian}, title = {The Consequences of Evidence- Versus Non-Evidence-Based Understandings of the "Truth": How Russian Speakers in Germany Negotiate Trust in Their Transnational News Environments}, series = {The International Journal of Press/Politics (ISSN: 1940-1620)}, volume = {30}, journal = {The International Journal of Press/Politics (ISSN: 1940-1620)}, number = {1}, publisher = {SAGE Publications}, address = {Los Angeles, CA}, issn = {1940-1612}, doi = {10.1177/19401612241257872}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:739-opus4-16795}, pages = {326 -- 345}, year = {2024}, abstract = {Extant research on migrants' media use and trust has delivered mixed evidence on whether, and in which ways, migrants stay loyal to their homeland news media and/or develop trust in host-society media, particularly when the narratives of the two types of media clash. To advance this strand of research, this study scrutinizes how an audience group with migration background, who lived the first part of their lives under authoritarian rule but then relocated to a democracy, negotiates trust in their multilingual, transnational news environments. Specifically, we conducted semi-structured interviews with forty-two Russian-speaking first-generation migrants living in Germany in 2021. As we find, distinct understandings of the concept of "truth" played a pivotal role in how our participants negotiated trust in their transnational news environments. We distinguish broadly two understandings of "truth": (1) "truth" as a category grounded in factual evidence and (2) "truth" as a non-evidence based category grounded in values, emotions, or identities. Illustrative for the second understanding, some participants felt a strong moral obligation to believe Kremlin-sponsored media as they perceived these organizations as representing their homeland, independently of whether their news coverage was factually accurate or not. The two understandings of "truth" also affected how and where participants sought for what they considered the "truth." In the "Discussion" section, we argue that particularly the non-evidence-based truth-understandings formulated by our participants, and the ensuing truth-seeking strategies are conducive to the reach and persuasive impact of Kremlin-sponsored content among Russian speakers living abroad.}, subject = {-}, language = {en} }