Media studies are a pivotal way of understanding society.
Media became pervasive in our individual and collective everyday life, and they are able to create collective representations and memory on a global level: all the information we have about society and the world come from the media.
Their pervasiveness makes them, and us, ubiquitous: through our smartphones we can live in several worlds at the same time. Media, and especially the new digital media, deeply modified our way of experiencing the space.
Often media and space are understood as dichotomous concepts, as if “real reality” and “virtual reality” could exist separately. Such an interpretation can acquire a shade of nostalgia if relations established in the “real” world are considered “pure”, “im-mediate” in the meaning of “not-mediated”, and possibly threatened by the diffusions of the new media and of more mediated relations.
Nevertheless, a deeper analysis reveals that urban space and new media are strongly linked and that their relation is not based on a simple contraposition. New media do not simply dematerialise social relations: they make the territory more complex and stratified. They do not replace the physical space: they re-mediate the borders and re-define traditional distinctions, such as public-private, external-internal.

The aim of the Summer school is to investigate the complex relations between space, city and media. Major attention will be given to the methodological questions that threaten the scholars in Human Sciences.

The courses will be held in English by renowned scholars from Europe and North America, experts from different disciplines, who will illustrate the complexity and potentialities of these perspectives.

Application deadline: April 15, 2017
Application fee: 350€, it includes course materials, coffee breaks and lunch meals.

Discover more on our website: www.media-sociology.com <http://www.media-sociology.com>
​
For any information do not hesitate to contact the coordinator
​ ​
(Anita Paolicchi: mediasociology.pisa@gmail.com <mailto:mediasociology.pisa@gmail.com>)

Critical Arts: South-North Cultural and Media Studies
Guest editor: Kris Rutten
Editorial consultant: Leora Farber

In this special issue of Critical Arts we aim to explore participatory art practices that specifically engage with technology and digital media. There has been a growing body of art that focuses on social practices, networks and processes as constituting the artwork itself. This implies that the events that facilitate social interaction and cultural encounter are variously seen as the actual art practice (Siegenthaler 2013). However, because contemporary media culture is characterized by participation, interaction, immersion and collaboration, art practices are challenged to move beyond a “mere” adoption of new technologies. There is a need to explore how technologies are also changing our experience of place, conceptions of intimacy, co-presence and interaction, and to generate new understandings of technological mediation as a feature of social relations (Beaulieu, 2010; Hjorth and Sharp 2014).

We invite papers from researchers, theorists and artists to engage critically with how technology, media and networks open up new avenues to develop practices that examine place and locality, community and communication, interaction and intimacy, proximity and distance, creation and co-creation. Papers can also focus more broadly on the impact of digital technologies on art today, for example by exploring the creative and participatory practices that are made possible by artists working with technology or by collaborations between artists, scientists and technological experts, focusing for example on robotics, virtual/ augmented reality, immersive media or game technology (Gardiner and Gere 2010, Gronlund 2016). Next to full research papers we also invite contributions that can serve as vignettes – short statements and reflections by artists about their practice.

Submission guidelines

– Deadline for abstracts: Please send your abstracts of 300 words by April 15th 2017 to Kris.Rutten@UGent.be. – Notification of selected abstracts by: May 15th 2017.
– Deadline for article submission: based on the selection of the abstracts full papers will need to be submitted by: August 15th 2017.
– Information and instructions for authors: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/RCRC
All completed manuscripts MUST be uploaded onto the online manuscript portal Scholar One. Go to Critical Arts on the Taylor and Francis site. There is an option on the top left pane of the screen that says ‘submit’, select this then click ‘submit online’ and follow the prompts.

Further inquiries about the special issue: Kris.Rutten@UGent.be Alternatively, contact the Critical Arts editorial office at criticalarts@ukzn.ac.za or the editor-in-chief, Keyan Tomaselli at keyant@uj.ac.za

Critical Arts prides itself in publishing original, readable, and theoretically cutting edge articles. For more information on the history and the orientation of the journal, as well as guidelines for authors, and legal and editorial procedures, please visit: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/authors/rcrcauth.asp Critical Arts is now published six times annually and is indexed in the International Bibliography of Social Sciences (IBSS) and the ISI Social Science Index and Arts & Humanities Citation Index and other indexes.

References
– Beaulieu, A. 2010. From co-location to co-presence: Shifts in the use of ethnography for the study of knowledge. Social Studies of Science 40(3): 453-470.
– Gardiner, H. and Gere, C. 2010. Art Practice in a Digital Culture. London: Routledge. – Gronlund, D. 2016. Contemporary Art and Digital Culture. London: Taylor and Francis.
– Hjorth, L. and Sharp, K. 2014. The art of ethnography: the aesthetics or ethics of participation? Visual Studies 29(2): 128-135.
– Siegenthaler, F. 2013. Towards an ethnographic turn in contemporary art scholarship. Critical Arts. South-North Cultural and Media Studies, 27(6): 737-752.

MSc Double Degree in Global Media and Communications (LSE and UCT) – for entry in September 2017

Applications are now open for a new and unique two year programme which enables students to study for one year at LSE in London, the UK’s media capital, and one year at the University of Cape Town (UCT) – the top-ranked university on the African continent with close links to Cape Town’s media and film industry and NGO sector.

The MSc Double Degree in Global Media and Communications (LSE and the University of Cape Town) aims to provide:

• critical exploration of mediation in the global context, examining processes of globalisation in relation to organisation, production, consumption and representation in media and communications;
• the opportunity to study a range of courses, flexibly tailoring the programme to develop specialist interests, culminating in an independent research project on a topic in global media and communications at LSE and a further dissertation or creative media production at UCT;
• preparation for high-level employment in media and communications related professions anywhere in the world;
• the opportunity to carry out an internship in Cape Town.

Students on this degree will be trained to examine the intersection of media and globalisation from an African vantage point. They will gain an understanding of global media and communications in an African context and African media and communications in a global context.

General information about the new programme:
http://www.lse.ac.uk/media@lse/study/mscProgrammes/globalMedia/Home.aspx

Watch video about the programme
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5etxv19nZE&t=17s

Detailed course information about Year One at LSE:
http://www.lse.ac.uk/resources/calendar/programmeRegulations/taughtMasters/collaborativeProgrammes/2017_MScGlobalMediaAndCommunications(withFudanOrUSCorUCT).htm

Detailed course information about Year Two at UCT:
http://www.cfms.uct.ac.za/msc-global-media-courses

How to apply:
http://www.lse.ac.uk/media@lse/study/mscProgrammes/globalMedia/HowToApply.aspx
http://www.lse.ac.uk/study/graduate/enquirer/howToApply/HowToApplyForGraduateStudyVideo.aspx

Entry requirements:
http://www.lse.ac.uk/study/graduate/enquirer/entryRequirements/home.aspx

Financial support for all students:
http://www.lse.ac.uk/intranet/students/moneyMatters/financialSupport/ScholarshipsLSE/MScApp/taughtMScprogrammes.aspx

Financial support for African students:

Two LSE Master’s Awards (LMA’s) are earmarked for African offer holders on the MSc double degree in Global Media and Communications (LSE and UCT). Offer holders should be African residents and preference is given to students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds. The awards cover the first year of study at LSE, are means tested and up to the value of full fees and living costs at £1,200 per month. Students interested in the scholarship opportunity are advised to apply by 31 March 2017. If they receive an offer, they must then complete the LSE Graduate Financial Support Application form by 5pm GMT on 26 April 2017:

http://www.lse.ac.uk/intranet/students/moneyMatters/financialSupport/ScholarshipsLSE/MScApp/taughtMScprogrammes.aspx

Other LSE financial support for African students:
http://www.lse.ac.uk/africa/study/scholarships/scholarshipsHome.aspx

Other external financial support for African students (see links to country-based awards in column on the left):
http://www.lse.ac.uk/intranet/students/moneyMatters/financialSupport/ScholarshipsLSE/MScApp/awards/Awards.aspx

For general enquiries about the admissions process, please email: media.msc@lse.ac.uk
For further details about LSE programme content, please contact Dr Wendy Willems, (w.willems@lse.ac.uk)
For further details about UCT programme content, please contact Dr Wallace Chuma (wallace.chuma@uct.ac.za)

Due to interest from many quarters internationally the organisers are extending the deadline for 250 word abstracts to 31st March. Please see below for full details.

Bournemouth University, U.K., June 14th 2017

/Introduction/

It is fifteen years since Tonks (2002) argued that “rhetoric needs to have a more central location in making sense of marketing management” (p. 806). How far has this clarion call been answered? Are we any closer to an understanding of what it might mean to recast marketing theory and practice as a rhetoric? Or are we all still in thrall to the latest logic? To what degree has the ‘rhetorical turn’ in the human sciences had an influence on scholarship and teaching in marketing? We hope to enlist your contribution in starting to answer these and related questions at the 1st International Conference on Marketing (as) Rhetoric, to be held at Bournemouth University, June 14th, 2017 under the auspices of the Promotional Cultures and Communication Centre’s Advertising Research group.

While rhetorical approaches have become part of the standard toolbox in management studies (Bonet & Saquet, 2010; Hartelius & Browning, 2008) and have made a notable impact in economic scholarship (McCloskey, 1983, 1985) their adoption in marketing has been comparatively slow. A small but dedicated group of advertising scholars have perhaps had the most visible success in applying rhetorical criticism to a marketing topic area (McQuarrie & Mick, 1992, 1996, 2003; Phillips & McQuarrie, 2002, 2004; Scott, 1994; Stern, 1998, 1990). At the same time, there has been some investigation of the substantial part that rhetorical strategies play in the success of our most valued marketing scholars and marketing concepts (Brown, 2004, 2005; Hackley, 2003; Miles, 2010, 2013, 2015; O’Reilly, 2000) as well as efforts to situate aspects of marketing practice within a rhetorical frame (Marsh, 2013; Nilsson, 2015; O’Shaughnessy & O’Shaughnessy, 2004; Palmer et al, 2014; Persuit, 2013; Press & Arnould, 2014).

Given the historically central place that strategies of persuasion and control have at the heart of marketing thought it is remarkable that rhetoric remains such a rare framework for marketing thinking and scholarship. Has academic marketing’s (unrequited) love for the trappings of ‘science’ made rhetoric an unworthy research partner? Is there something at the root of rhetoric that makes marketers uncomfortable? Why are some young marketing scholars happy to adopt discourse analysis but remain wary of the far more developed traditions of rhetorical criticism? The International Conference on Marketing (as) Rhetoric hopes to deals with these challenging questions. Additionally, we are keen to encourage engagements with rhetorical themes across all aspects of marketing theory and practice. Below is an indicative (but not exclusive) list of possible research areas for papers:

*Rhetoric and the ‘attention economy” (Lanham, 2007)
* Rhetorical strategies as marketing strategies
* Advertising/PR and rhetoric
* Rhetoric and social media marketing
* The rhetoric of marketing relationships
* The rhetoric of marketing pedagogy
* Rhetoric as a unifying theory for marketing
* Propaganda, political marketing, and rhetoric
* Sales and rhetoric
* Critical marketing / postmodern marketing and rhetorical theory and criticism
* Explications of particular rhetorical figures and schools and their relevance for marketing
* Contemporary rhetorical criticism and marketing theory
* Kairos and marketing techniques
* Logos/ethos/pathos as marketing frames
* Copia and marketing pedagogy
* Sophism and modern marketing

We particularly welcome contributions that examine the legacy of Sophism as it relates to the marketing function and to the overall understanding of marketing. Given that Laufer and Paredeise’s (1990) dictum that “marketing is the bureaucratic form of Sophism” was so clearly an inspiration for Tonks’ (2002) own stance and that the reappraisal of Sophism continues to go from strength to strength (Poulakos, 1983; Lanham 1993, 2007; Cassin, 2000; Corey, 2015; Tindale, 2010), we would encourage scholars to continue this line of investigation and submit abstracts which examine the relationships between Sophism and all aspects of marketing.

We also invite contributions from scholars with an interest in marketing and rhetoric but residing in fields other than marketing, including organization studies, human resource, management, leadership, etc., as well as scholars from other disciplines, including rhetoric, sociology, philosophy, linguistics, cultural studies, etc.

/Practical information/

Conference Date: 14 June 2017

Keynote Speakers:
* Dr. Nicholas O’Shaughnessy (Visiting Professor in the Department of War Studies King’s College London, Centre for Strategic Communications; Professor of Communications, Queen Mary University of London)
* Dr. Chris Hackley (Professor of Marketing, Royal Holloway University of London)

Conference Location: Bournemouth University, Talbot Campus, Dorset, United Kingdom.
Conference registration: £50
Conference website/registration page: https://marketingasrhetoric.eventbrite.co.uk/
Abstracts: Abstracts of 250 words to be submitted to cjmiles@bournemouth.ac.uk<mailto:cjmiles@bournemouth.ac.uk> by the extended deadline of *31st March*.

Review procedure: Notification of acceptance of abstracts will be communicated by 10th April.
/Organizers/
* Dr. Chris Miles (Department of Corporate and Marketing Communication, Bournemouth University, UK). Email: cjmiles@bournemouth.ac.uk<mailto:cjmiles@bournemouth.ac.uk>
* Dr. Tomas Nilsson (Department of Marketing, Linnaeus University, Sweden). Email: tomas.nilsson@lnu.se<mailto:tomas.nilsson@lnu.se>

/References/
Bonet, E., & Sauquet, A. (2010). Rhetoric in management and in management research. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 23(2), 120–133.
Brown, S. (2004). Writing Marketing: The Clause That Refreshes. Journal of Marketing Management, 20(3–4), 321–342.
Brown, S. (2005). Writing Marketing: Literary Lessons form Academic Authorities. London, Sage.
Cassin, B. (2000). Who’s Afraid of the Sophists? Against Ethical Correctness. Hypatia, 15(4), 102-120.
Corey, D. (2015). The Sophists in Plato’s Dialogues. Albany, State University of New York Press.
Hackley, C. (2003). “We Are All Customers Now . . .” Rhetorical Strategy and Ideological Control in Marketing Management Texts. Journal of Management Studies, 40(5), 1325–1352.
Hartelius, E. J., & Browning, L. D. (2008). The Application of Rhetorical Theory in Managerial Research: A Literature Review. Management Communication Quarterly, 22(1), 13–39.
Lanham, R. (1993). The Electronic Word: Democracy, Technology, and the Arts. Chicago. University of Chicago Press
Lanham, R. (2007). The Economics of Attention: Style And Substance In The Age Of Information. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
Laufer, R., & Paradeise, C. (1990). Marketing Democracy: Public Opinion and Media Formation in Democratic Societies. London, Transaction Publishers.
Marsh, C. (2013). Classical Rhetoric and Modern Public Relations. London, Routledge.
McCloskey, D. (1983). The rhetoric of economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 21(2), 481–517.
McCloskey, D. (1985). The Rhetoric of Economics. Madison, University of Wisconsin Press.
McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1992). On Resonance: A Critical Pluralistic Inquiry Into Advertising Rhetoric. The Journal of Consumer Research, 19(2), 180–197.
McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1996). Figures of Rhetoric in Advertising Language. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(4), 424–438.
McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (2003). Re-Inquiries: Visual and verbal rhetorical figures under directed processing versus incidental exposure to advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(4), 579–87.
Miles, C. (2010). Interactive Marketing: Revolution or Rhetoric? London, Routledge.
Miles, C. (2014). The rhetoric of managed contagion: Metaphor and agency in the discourse of viral marketing. Marketing Theory, 14(1), 3-18.
Miles, C. (2014). Rhetoric and the foundation of the Service-Dominant Logic. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 27(5), 744–755.
Nilsson, T. (2015). Rhetorical Business: A study of marketing work in the spirit of contradiction. Lund, Lund University.
O’Reilly, D. (2000). On the Precipice of a Revolution with Hamel and Prahalad. Journal of Marketing Management, 16(1–3), 95–109.
O’Shaughnessy, J. & O’Shaughnessy, N. (2004). Persuasion in Advertising. London, Routledge.
Palmer, M., Simmons, G., & Mason, K. (2014). Web-based social movements contesting marketing strategy: The mobilisation of multiple actors and rhetorical strategies. Journal of Marketing Management, 30(3–4), 383–408.
Persuit, J. (2013). Social Media and Integrated Marketing Communication: A Rhetorical Approach. New York, Lexington Books.
Press, M., & Arnould, E. J. (2014). Narrative transparency. Journal of Marketing Management, 30(13–14), 1353–1376.
Phillips, B. J., & McQuarrie, E. F. (2002). The development, change, and transformation of rhetorical style in magazine advertisements 1954-1999. Journal of Advertising, 31(4), 1–13.
Phillips, B. J., & McQuarrie, E. F. (2004). Beyond Visual Metaphor: A New Typology of Visual Rhetoric in Advertising. Marketing Theory, 4(1), 113–136.
Poulakos, J. (1983). Toward a Sophistic Definition of Rhetoric. Philosophy & Rhetoric
16(1), 35-48.
Scott, L. M. (1994). Images in advertising: The need for a theory of visual rhetoric. The Journal of Consumer Research, 21(2), 252–273.
Stern, B. B. (1988). Medieval allegory: Roots of advertising strategy for the mass market. The Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 84–94.
Stern, B. B. (1990). Other-speak: classical allegory and contemporary advertising. Journal of Advertising, 19(3), 14–26.
Tindale, C. (2010). Reason’s Dark Champions: Constructive Strategies of Sophistic Argument. Columbia, University of South Carolina Press.
Tonks, D. (2002). Marketing as Cooking: The Return of the Sophists. Journal of Marketing Management, 18(7–8), 803–822.?

DOCUMENTARY AND ENTERTAINMENT
https://inmedia.revues.or
The purpose of this special issue of InMedia is to further the understanding of the documentary by linking it to the notion of entertainment, which has so far been underexplored in the expanding field of documentary studies. Our aim is thus to study the strategies and forms used by documentary filmmakers when they willingly choose to inject entertainment into their film. InMedia, the French Journal of Media studies, a peer-reviewed online journal (https://inmedia.revues.org/?lang=en), is published by the research unit CREW at Sorbonne Nouvelle University and was launched by Professor Divina Frau-Meigs, Nolwen Mingant, and Cécilia Tirtaine in 2011. The content of the journal is in English featuring articles by international scholars. Its current managing editors are Clémentine Tholas and Sébastien Mort.
The documentary, as a distinct film form, has often been associated with what Bill Nichols termed the “discourses of sobriety” (1)  and scholarly works on the subject have emphasized the serious political or social nature of the documentary, with a special focus on the rhetoric and politics of documentaries. Starting in the second half of the 20th century, “hard news” found in the news media was distinctly separate from the “soft news” in the entertainment media. In that respect, the documentary film form, whether for cinema or for TV, was principally meant to inform its audiences about topics they were not aware of. The technological and esthetic evolution of the documentary did not really have an impact on the public perception of what documentaries could do, as argued by Brian Winston, who contends that Direct Cinema is the continuation of the Griersonian heritage rather than a radical break from it. However in the last thirty years the media environment has considerably changed, blurring the lines between hard and soft news, as Delli Carpini and Willams clearly affirm: “…the form and content of news and entertainment [have] come to resemble each other more closely.” (2) These changes, mainly in the domain of television, brought about a new hybrid form that combines traditional news with entertainment, a form known as “infotainment”. If the authors now state that the term “infotainment” has “outlived whatever usefulness [it] might have once had (3)” historically it was widely used to describe influential TV shows such as The Daily Show or The Colbert Report. In retrospect, it seems that the lack of a comprehensive definition that would deal with what these new forms of entertainment and information media could do is linked to the historical evolution of their distribution platforms.

For feature documentary films, the groundbreaking film Roger & Me in 1989 by Michael Moore ushered in a new era where what was referred to then as “infotainment” could now be found in documentary films, thus departing from the classic models of the documentary film pioneers John Grierson, Dziga Vertov, and Robert Flaherty among others. For Moore, even the term “documentary” was anathema and should be replaced by “movie” as he feels it is necessary to abide by “the tenets of entertainment” (4). Thus, a documentary should both educate (following the hard news principles) AND entertain, which is what soft news was meant to do. As a result of this new interest in the relationship between documentary and entertainment, we seek contributions that focus on this unique combination.

One possible line of inquiry would be to look at the mutual influence of “infotainment TV”, understood as a historically specific form, and the documentary film: How has the documentary tradition and some of its practices (compilation films, editing, voice-over, social commentary, etc.) shaped the structure and esthetics of ”infotainment TV”? In turn, how has the TV medium influenced the contemporary documentary (fast editing, humor, overt bias, generalizations, etc.)? Is the “infotainment” documentary a new genre, or mode, in and of itself? To what extent is this new documentary film genre affected by the influence of Television and its short information format? Are these current trends in documentary film just a longer version of the television infotainment format? Or, could we say that they are just the translation of a classic documentary film with added elements from entertainment TV to bring it up to date?

A second axis of investigation would be to consider documentary as entertainment. Based on Annette Hill’s study of documentary modes of engagement (5), how is it possible to rethink and reinvent the tension between information and entertainment most people associate with the documentary? What is deemed an entertaining documentary (fast-paced, humorous yet informative)? How and why is it perceived as such? How has the technological and cultural evolution of what constitutes entertainment in our current society been incorporated into documentary film? At the level of production, do documentary filmmakers include the necessity to entertain (cf. Moore’s distinction between documentaries and movies) within their feature documentaries?
Finally, a third thematic axis would be to examine the political consequences of this new hybrid form between information and entertainment? How have politics and entertainment been successfully combined creating politainment, a new genre that has been gaining in popularity? In what ways is entertainment a new way to get the spectator involved in the political process?  How effective is it in delivering votes afterwards at the ballot box? From the political documentaries that shaped the 2004 American presidential election, as studied by James McEnteer, to the recent focus on Steve Bannon (6), Donald Trump’s Chief Strategist, as a former documentary filmmaker, what are the links between documentary, entertainment, and electoral politics? Has the documentary caused the transformation of politics into reality TV – a criticism that was already leveled, in different terms, against Robert Drew’s political documentaries in the 1960s?
We welcome individual proposals pertaining – but by no means limited – to the following thematic areas and their intersections with entertainment and documentary film:
●        The role of television in the evolution of the documentary
●        The fictional dimension of the documentary
●        The use of humor in documentary films
●        The emergence of entertainment TV elements in documentary film
●        Recent developments of ”infotainment” strategies in documentary film
●        The role and effectiveness of politainment in documentary film
●        The use of music in documentary films
●        The documentary and the shortening attention span of the modern spectator
●        Characteristics of the documentary of the 21st century
●        Reception studies of the documentary as entertainment
●        The “boring” documentary devoid of entertainment
●        “Mockumentaries” and their esthetic strategies, in film or on television
●        The representation of documentary filmmakers in fiction films and TV series
●        Documentary parodies in the Documentary Now! series
●        The typology of information and entertainment in documentary films

Although the journal is written entirely in English, the documentary films under study can come from countries that are not English-speaking. We are open to all types of approaches  (formal analysis, political science, media studies, semiotics, gender studies, race studies, etc…). Proposals should not exceed 300 words, should include a short bibliography and should be sent both to David Lipson (lipson.fr@gmail.com) and to Zachary Baqué (baque.zachary@neuf.fr) before September 8th 2017.

Notes
(1)        Bill Nichols, Representing Reality p. 29
(2)        Delli Carpini and Williams After Broadcast News,p. 164
(3)        Delli Carpini and Williams, p. 10 and following
(4) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-moore/13-rules-for-making-docum_b_5834954.html
(5)        Annette Hill, p. 217, based on an expression by Bill Nichols
(6) http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/steve-bannon-films-movies-documentaries-trump-hollywood-214495

Bibliography
BARNOUW Erik. Documentary, A History of Non-Fiction Film, New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1974, 1983, 1993.
BAUDRILLARD Jean. Simulacres et simulations, Paris: Editions Galilée, 1981.
BENSON Thomas W. & Brian J. Snee (eds.). The Rhetoric of the New Political Documentary, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2008.
DELLI CARPINI, M. and WILLIAMS B. After Broadcast News: Media Regimes, Democracy, And the New Information Environment New York: Cambridge University Press. 2011.
DELLI CARPINI, M. and WILLIAMS B. “Let Us Infotain You: Politics in the New Media Environment.” In BENNETT L. and ENTMAN R. (Eds.), Mediated politics: Communication in the future of democracy (pp. 160-181). New York: Cambridge University Press. 2001. DEBORD Guy.  La Société du spectacle, Paris: Gallimard, collection « folio », 1967, 1992. GOODWIN Andrew, WHANNEL Garry. Understanding Television, London: Routledge, 1992.
GRIERSON John. On Documentary, London: Faber & Faber, 1966.
HILL Annette. “Documentary Modes of Engagement.” In AUSTIN T. and DE JONG W. (Eds.), Rethinking Documentary: New Perspectives, New Practices (pp. 217-231). Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2008. HOLBERT R. Lance. “A Typology for the Study of Entertainment Television and Politics,” American Behavioral Scientist 49, n°3 (2005)
KELSO Tony. “And now no word from our sponsor, How HBO puts the risk back into television” in LEVERETTE Marc, Brian L. OTT and Cara Louise BUCKLEY (eds.), It’s Not TV, Watching HBO in the Post-television Era, New York & London: Routledge, 2008.
McENTEER James. Shooting the Truth: The Rise of American Political Documentaries, Westport CO and London: Praeger, 2006. MENAND Louis. “Nanook and Me: Fahrenheit 9/11 and the Documentary Tradition”, The New Yorker, August 9-16  2004, 90-96. , accessed January 12, 2014.
NICHOLS Bill. Blurred Boundaries: Questions of Meaning in Contemporary Culture, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994, 2001.
NICHOLS Bill.  Representing Reality: Issues and Concepts in Documentary, Bloomington : Indiana University Press, 1991.
NICHOLS Bill. Speaking Truths with Film: Evidence, Ethics, Politics in Documentary, Oakland: University of California Press, 2016. NINEY François.  L’Épreuve du réel à l’écran, Essai sur le principe de réalité documentaire, Bruxelles: De Boeck & Larcier, 2002, 2004. NISBET Matt. “That’s infotainment”, The Skeptical Inquirer April 30, 2001 accessed November 11, 2016, http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/thats_infotainment
WINSTON Brian (Ed.) The Documentary Film Book, London/Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.