2009/01/01 by Chris Atton · 1 citation
Social Sciences · Arts and Humanities · #Media Studies and Communication #Radio, Podcasts, and Digital Media #Rhetoric and Communication Studies #Framing (construction) #Frith #Journalism #Criticism #Active listening #Ideology #Aesthetics #Media studies #Sociology #Field (mathematics) #Epistemology #Literature #History #Art #Political science #Politics #Linguistics #Law #Communication
paper · doi:10.1017/s026114300800158x
openalex publication_date 2009/01/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/02
Abstract ‘Alternative’ publications challenge the conventional discourses of rock journalism. In particular, the dominant discourses of authenticity, masculinity and mythology might be countered by publications that emphasise historical and (sub)cultural framing, and that present radicalised ‘spaces of listening’. Using Bourdieu’s field theory to identify autonomous and semi-autonomous sites for rock criticism, the paper compares how a fanzine (the Sound Projector ) and what Frith has termed an ideological magazine (the Wire ) construct their reviews. The findings suggest that, whilst there is no evidence for an absolute break with the dominant conventions of reviewing, there is a remarkable polyglottism in alternative music reviewing. The paper emphasises differing cultural and social practices in the multiple ways the publications write about music, and argues for the value of such polyglottism.