Cover not available
Article published In:
When Dialogue Fails
Edited by Anja Müller-Wood
[Language and Dialogue 12:1] 2022
► pp. 130–149

Dialogue and speech centricity in the public sphere

 | Denison University
This article examines how speech centric legal and public policy interpretations of the U.S. First Amendment – which guarantees constitutional protection for the freedoms of speech, press, religion, and assembly, from government constraint – tend to significantly impede democratic political discourse in the public sphere. Among other problems, speech centricity diminishes the importance of listening, adding to the crises of polarization and demonization now fracturing public political discourse. By drawing upon dialogical theory, speech act theory, and theories of listening, the essay explores how a listening-based perspective on legal and policy conceptions of free expression could perhaps reinvigorate political discourse.
Keywords: democratic discourse, free expression, first amendment, politics of listening, supreme court, telecommunication policies, uptake
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.On speech, dialogue and listening power
  • 3.Dialogue and public discourse
  • 4.Free expression, the first amendment and the right to listen
  • 5.Mediated listening and the fairness doctrine
  • 6.Money as speech: The first amendment and campaign finance reform
  • 7.Conclusion: Five problems of speech centricity in public discourse
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 7 March 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00115.lip
References (48)
References
Austin, John Langshaw. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, 494 U.S. 652 (1990)Google Scholar
Barber, Benjamin R. 1984. Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Bakhtin, M. Mikhail. 1984. Problems of Dostoyevsky’s Poetics. Ed. by Michael Holquist, translated by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail Mikhailovich. 1986. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Translated by Vern W. McGee. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Benson, Rodney. 2013. Shaping Immigration News: A French-American Comparison. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 11 (1976). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 3101 (2010).Google Scholar
Clark, Eve V. and Josie Bernicot. 2008. “Repetition as Ratification. How Parents and Children Place Information in Common Ground.” Journal of Child Language 35(2): 349–371. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corradi Fiumara, Gemma. 1995. The Other Side of Language: A Philosophy of Listening. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Crick, Bernard. 1992. In Defense of Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 2002. Democracy: A Very Short Introduction. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Douglass, Frederick. 1860 (December 14). “Frederick Douglass at Music Hall.” The Liberator 301: 50.Google Scholar
Federal Communications Commission. 1949. “In the Matter of Editorializing by Broadcast Licensees. Report of the Commission .” No. 8516.Google Scholar
Gregorian, Vartan. 2002 (October 17). “Libraries as Acts of Civic Renewal.” Speech to the Kansas City Club, Kansas City, Missouri. [URL]
Guo, Lei and Maxwell E. McCombs (eds.). 2016. The Power of Information Networks: New Directions for Agenda Setting. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Humboldt, Wilhelm von. 1963. Humanist Without Portfolio: An Anthology of the Writings of Wilhelm von Humboldt. Trans. by Marianne Cowan. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar
Jakubinskij, Lev P. 1979. “On Verbal Dialogue.“ Trans. Jane E. Knox. Dispositio. Revista Hispanica de Semiotica Literaria IV (11–12): 321–336.Google Scholar
Jaworski, Adam and Crispin Thurlow. 2009. “Taking an Elitist Stance.” In Stance. Sociolinguistic Perspectives, ed. by Alexandra M. Jaffe, 195–226. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kleindienst v. Mandel, 408 U.S. 7531 (1972).Google Scholar
Kim, Son Ho. 2011. The Voice on Paper: A Dialogic Critique of Public Opinion Polling. Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania. [URL]
Lacey, Kate. 2013. Listening Publics: The Politics and Experience of Listening in the Media Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Lamont v. Postmaster General, 381 U.S. 3011 (1965).Google Scholar
Lim, Sun Sun. 2020. “Manufacturing Hate 4.0. Can Media Studies Rise to the Challenge?” Television and New Media 21(6): 602–607. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lipari, Lisbeth. 1999. “Polling as Ritual.” Journal of Communication 49(1): 83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. “Toward a Discourse Approach to Polling.” Discourse Studies 2(2): 187–215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014a. Listening, Thinking, Being. Toward an Ethics of Attunement. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
. 2014b. “On Interlistening and the Idea of Dialogue.” Theory and Psychology 24(4): 504–523. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. “The Speech We Do Not Speak. Dialogic Mind, Praxis, and Ethics.” Language and Dialogue 7(1): 45–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matzko, Paul. 2020. The Radio Right. How a Band of Broadcasters Took on the Federal Government and Built the Modern Conservative Movement. Kettering: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McGee, Michael Calvin. 1980. “The ‘Ideograph’. A Link Between Rhetoric and Ideology.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 66(1): 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 2001. On Liberty. Electronic resource. London: Electric Book Co.Google Scholar
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 2701 (1964). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 7131 (1971).Google Scholar
Norrick, Neal R. 2009. “Ratifying and Rejecting Listener Assessments in the Course of Multi-Unit Turns.” Saarland Working Papers in Linguistics (SWPL) (3): 1–20.Google Scholar
Nystrand, Martin, Wu, Lawrence L., Gamoran, Adam, Zeiser, Susie and David A. Long. 2003. “Questions in Time: Investigating the Structure and Dynamics of Unfolding Classroom Discourse.” Discourse Processes 35(2): 135–198. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peters, John Durham. 2005. Courting the Abyss: Free Speech and Liberal Tradition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Potter, Nancy. 2000. “Giving Uptake.” Social Theory and Practice 26(3): 479–508. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Radio Act, Pub. L. 1927. No. 47 U.S.C. 4.Google Scholar
Red Lion Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. FCC, 395 U.S. 3671 (1969).Google Scholar
Ryfe, David Michael. 2007. “The Future of Media Politics.” Rhetoric and Public Affairs 10(4): 723–738. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandel, Michael. 2020. The Tyranny of Merit: What’s Become of the Common Good? New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Sbisà, Marina. 2007. “How to Read Austin.” Pragmatics 17(3): 461–473. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schudson, Michael. 1997. “Why Conversation Is Not the Soul of Democracy.” Critical Studies in Mass Communication 14(4): 297–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomas v. Collins, 323 U.S. 5161 (1945).Google Scholar
Volosinov, Valentin Nikolaevich. 1986. Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. Trans. by Ladislav Matejka and Irwin R. Titunik. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, Lev Semenovich. 1986. Thought and Language. Trans. by Alex Kozulin. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Weigand, Edda and Istvan Kecskes (eds). 2018. From Pragmatics to Dialogue. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar