Dr. Kamile Grusauskaite

Stuart Hall's encoding/decoding model of cultural analysis was born as a critique of linear sender/message/receiver-models of communication, which Hall argued concentrate on message exchanges without questioning who sends and who receives a message, and the political-economic asymmetry between the two. By contrast, in encoding/decoding analyses, the message itself-a television show or other entertainment media object is only a pivotal object between two ‘moments' of encoding and decoding. Encoding conceptualizes the process of how, why, and by whom a message is produced; and decoding conceptualizes how, why, and by whom the message is consumed. This chapter provides, first, an introduction to Hall and encoding/decoding as an approach to studying media entertainment; second, an overview of the theoretical challenges under-gone by researchers over the last decades to operationalize and empirically apply Hall's model; and third, an insight into the relevance to and challenges presented by 21stcentury (online, interactive, and platformized) entertainment media.

The ‘paranoid personality’ is generally understood as an individual, psychological and pathological disorder characterized by suspicion and pervasive distrust of others. Since the early works of Sigmund Freud and Carl Gustav Jung to its professional classification in DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) since the 1950s, paranoia has been mainly considered as a pathological and psychological anxiety. In this chapter, the perspective on paranoia is broadened from the psychological micro level to the sociological macro level. It is demonstrated how paranoia as a subjective experience and a clinical category is socially constructed in the 20th century and, more precisely, that this paranoid anxiety is intimately related to societal developments of (post)modernization. Building on classical sociological theory, the analysis shows how the emergence of a ‘distant’ nation-state (Émile Durkheim), accelerating rationalization of institutions (Max Weber), the invasion of late modern capitalism (Fredric Jameson), the proliferation of media images and ‘simulations’ (Jean Baudrillard) and technologically enhanced ‘surveillance’ and ‘biopolitics’ in everyday life (Michel Foucault) have induced a collective sense of paranoia and the popularization of conspiracy theories in Western countries.

The ubiquity of social media platforms fuels heated discussions about algorithms and selection biases leading people into online “echo chambers.” Scholars argue that social media deepen societal polarization and fuel political extremism. However, studies often focus on media effects, disregarding individual agency and (sub)cultural values that shape communication. As a strategic case study, this article, based on a mixed-methods analysis, including a social network and qualitative analysis of 1199 comments under four conspiracy theory comment sections on YouTube, questions how insular these spaces are? And how people in these networks communicate? We find that the discussions in our strategically sampled comments sections lie between homogeneous closed debates and open debates. In other words, the networks in our sample vary in their “echo chamberness.” Based on our findings, we contend that variations in the echo chamberness of the various comment sections can be explained via the lens of conspiratorial (sub)cultures.

Conspiracy theories are central to “post-truth” discussions. Official knowledge, backed by science, politics, and media, is distrusted by various people resorting to alternative (conspiratorial) explanations. While elite commentators lament the rise of such “untruths,” we know little of people’s everyday opinions on this topic, despite their societal ramifications. We therefore performed a qualitative content analysis of 522 comments under a Dutch newspaper article on conspiracy theories to study how ordinary people discuss post-truth matters. We found four main points of controversy: “habitus of distrust”; “who to involve in public debates”; “which ways of knowing to allow”; and “what is at stake?” The diverging opinions outline the limits of pluralism in a post-truth era, revealing tensions between technocratic and democratic ideals in society. We show that popular opinions on conspiracy theories embody more complexity and nuance than elite conceptions of post-truth allow for: they lay bare the multiple sociological dimensions of poly-truth.

Conspiracy theories were once perceived as delusions of individuals on the fringes of society, but have become commonplace in mainstream culture. Today, they are produced, consumed, and circulated on various online media environments. From memes on 4chan, QAnon influencers on Instagram, to flat earth or antivaxx videos on YouTube, modern-day conspiracy culture embodies compelling mediated images and narratives that are composed of various audiovisual materials. Building on Stuart Hall’s encoding/decoding model, and Henry Jenkins’ notion of “participatory culture,” we analyze these audiovisual conspiracy theories as “oppositional readings” of hegemonic truths. More concretely, we analyze how conspiracy theorists reconstruct various audiovisual (mass-media) materials into streamlined narratives on YouTube videos to picture opaque power. Based on an in-depth qualitative analysis of 24 conspiracy theory videos, strategically selected from a larger sample of 200, we present three major categories of audiovisual narrative construction in conspiracy videos on YouTube: (1) Simulating: using fiction, religious and cultural images and narratives to render images of events otherwise invisible; (2) Deciphering: decoding hidden messages by “closely reading” images and looking for hidden symbolism; (3) Exhibiting: exposing information, research, and images that are “hidden in plain sight” but point to conspiracy. This article contributes to the growing body of literature on conspiracy theories by showing how they are not just texts, but should better be seen as media practices involving the recontextualizing of (mass)media material into new audiovisual conspiracy theory narratives. This shapes not just their content and form, but also their place in public discourse.

Psychedelic microdosing, or taking small doses of psychedelic substances that do not induce intoxication or altered states but rather subtle outcomes such as increased focus, has quickly become a mass media phenomenon. Many claim microdosing has become the new secret to enhancement in work contexts. Drawing from literature on psychedelic microdosing, technologies of the self, self-identity and the sociology of work and leisure, this study understands microdosing as a technology individuals introduce into their lives to modify themselves for various purposes. We explore the ways in which the 1960s iconic psychedelic drugs, that once offered turning on, tuning in and dropping out, are now finding new uses across different contexts. Taking a cultural-sociological perspective, we examine how individuals use microdoses of classic psychedelic drugs and how they make sense of microdosing in their daily lives. Based on our findings, we identify three different uses of psychedelic microdosing: (1) as technology of self-esteem and control at work, (2) as a self-help technology, and (3) as a technology of ‘slow living’.