Abstract This article introduces a theoretical extension to Paul Lichterman and Nina Eliasoph's theory of “scene style”—which is conceptually related to Erving Goffman's notion of frames—by introducing the concept of “focus-steering.” Although scene style theory has proven effective in describing interactions within face-to-face settings, it lacks the tools to address semi-synchronous online interactions, in which participants often propose multiple simultaneous directions for the discussion. As an extension of scene style theory, this study offers a new approach to understanding how participants do not merely switch or reframe scenes but actively expand them while simultaneously negotiating them. The abductive analysis is based on long-term online ethnography conducted on Ylilauta, an anonymous Finnish-language discussion forum, and is illustrated through a single discussion thread on gendered loneliness. This theoretical extension enables a more nuanced analysis of digitally mediated interaction and the negotiation of meaning in semi-synchronous online publics.
This article analyzes the dynamics of online incel communities in the context of disengagement, highlighting the symbolic fracture created by the withdrawal of a key figure who went by the username ‘Komesarj’. Drawing on Davis's (2021) concept of the anti-public sphere and extending it through the framework of emotional echo chambers, we analyze qualitative data from X.com and the incel.is forum. Our findings show that Komesarj's disengagement destabilized the community's emotional and ideological cohesion, generating a moral panic expressed through misogynistic discourse, betrayal narratives, and intensified boundary work. Rather than interpreting disengagement merely as a crisis of belief, we argue that it functions as a collective violation that unsettles the emotional infrastructure of the incelosphere. The responses reveal how objectification of women and reaffirmation of black-pill ideology operate as mechanisms of group cohesion, reinforcing incel identity through shared grievance and resistance to feminist and democratic ideals. By situating disengagement within the politics of affect, political masculinity, and anti-public discourse, this study contributes to debates on digital extremism, gendered radicalization, and the cultural sociology of online communities.
This study provides sociological insight into contemporary fandom activism by examining how subaltern groups seek visibility through displaying innovative banners during ritualised performances in football stadium stands. Employing a netnographic approach, the study analyses the political reflections and visualities of campaigns by sports supporters following the deadliest train crash in Greek history: the Tempi train crash of 2023. The study argues that in the age of anti-politics, a visual infrapolitics triggered by fleeting instances of social injustice is emerging outside the institutional political sphere. It highlights the diversity of protest voices and the rebellious politics of mourning, articulated through social critique and visual mobilisation, thus providing a clearer understanding of subaltern forms of political expression. These range from aggressive counter-visualities by supporters acting as a vocal vanguard in the fight against state ills through a subcultural fandom style to political proclamations against capitalism and neoliberalism, as well as the visualities of poetic lament in ritualised mourning performances.
This study explores attitudes toward civic involvement in public life in the post-pandemic context, informed by recurring political emotions among young individuals between 16 and 26 years of age living in the metropolitan area of Milan and its hinterland. Drawing on 66 in-depth interviews conducted between 2022 and 2024 with young participants, the article traces the political emotions of this generation of under-30s in response to multiple crises and unpacks how the latter shape youth preferences with regard to civic action. Focusing on the gray area of occasional activists, the article highlights how the multiple crises of recent years have exacerbated feelings of exceptionalism, impotence, and intergenerational injustice, which are translated into a preference for individualistic approaches to social change. At the same time, the study unpacks how this socio-historical conjuncture encourages new forms of voluntarism driven by compassion and motivated by widespread sensitivity to social justice, gender issues, and climate change.
Building on pragmatic, pragmatist, and cultural sociological literature, this article presents a case for refocusing and broadening the research on participation by shifting the focus from specific ways of participating to how actors are doing society. We argue for focusing on action in participation and on how this action draws, connects, and feeds into broader cultural tools and repertoires (derived from cultural sociology). Paying attention to how these tools operate interactionally in situations and solidify as habits (derived from pragmatist and interactionist sociology) and how they connect to broader moral evaluations, conflicts, and the construction of commonality (pragmatic sociology) promises an interconnected, theoretically grounded research agenda: new social pragmatism.
This article focuses on a key concept in the sociologies of justification and engagement: “the situation.” We argue that despite the centrality of “the disposition of the situation” in such theorizations, the situation remains under-defined and that sociologists working along these lines would benefit from grappling more with interactional-pragmatist theoretical traditions that focused on the structuring of the situation. Using empirical examples, we outline the intellectual payoff of working through two such interactionist theories—Goffman's interaction ritual theory and the Chicago School tradition of studying forms in motion—and show how such analysis can productively push forward both the empirical study of participation and situational theory more generally.
This article examines the institutionalization in the French education system of a policy that celebrated the cultural distinctiveness of migrant pupils and their cultural ties to their home countries. This policy approach was a puzzling choice given the French universalist context, which is generally assumed to be more about cultural homogenization than accommodating difference. Using archival sources, the article considers the extent to which the policy fostered both a differentialist approach and a radical critique of the school system's ethnocentric bias. Finally, the article offers a methodologically based discussion of the relevance of using national models of integration paradigms to understand the long-term treatment of migrants within nation states.
This article analyzes participatory measures within professional, publicly funded children's theatre. Although increasing citizen participation has been an objective of cultural policy in Sweden since the 1970s—with children a specifically targeted group—problems achieving participatory goals persist. Drawing on ethnographic data, we theorize participatory measures by applying Laurent Thévenot's sociology of engagements. Our findings suggest that participation in children's theatre falls into one of three ‘plans’: 1. A plan of expert consultants, 2. A plan for the future, and 3. A plan for artistic collaboration. We conclude that although there is potential for creating commonality, there are also obstructing challenges on the level of engagement. The article argues for an interdependent relationship between participation and commonality concerning children's participation. In conclusion, mismatched frames of engagement make us question participation as a political and social pursuit, especially in intergenerational settings, and we thus call for a turn to commonality.
This article discusses how struggles over the meanings of (anti)racism transpired in Finnish mainstream media coverage of the 2020 Black Lives Matter (BLM) demonstrations in Finland and the subsequent public contention related to (anti)racism. Utilizing frame analysis, I examine 243 articles published in three Finnish mainstream media news outlets between May 2020 and September 2021. I analyze what kinds of frames were mobilized and how specific frames were (de)prioritized in mainstream media contention related to (anti)racism during and following the demonstrations. Of the five most prevalent frames, three represent antiracist frames—the frames of experiential racism, structural racism, and colonial complicity—and two represent frames challenging antiracism: the frame from moderation to anti-wokeness and the frame of denial of colonial/racial history. I argue that while mainstream media coverage amplified and validated the antiracist frames, it simultaneously worked to contain contention within normatively defined “acceptable” parameters.
In recent years, both public and academic discourse have taken a pessimistic view of the relationship between social media and politics. It has been argued that platformed politics fosters ideological and affective polarization, resulting in deeper divisions within Western democracies. By analysing the experiences of 34 Finnish politicians through media diaries and interviews gathered and conducted in 2020, this article highlights the conflictual and affective nature of politicians’ digital work. Using emotional and affective labour as an analytical lens, it argues that platforms are, however, spaces for agonistic pluralism. Contrary to the prevailing scepticism, the analysis shines light on affectivity and underscores its revitalizing potential, as evidenced by politicians’ constant assessment of democratic ethics and their attempts to manage relationships with platforms and different audiences. Consequently, the article addresses the limitations of normative aspects of agonistic theory.
This article analyses the reactions of antiracist activists to public debates about memorials following the Black Lives Matter demonstrations in 2020. Based on 47 in-depth interviews with Norwegian antiracist activists, we examine three debates about memorials in two Norwegian cities. Theoretically, the concepts of connected histories and reflexive transnationalization inform our analysis, supplemented by a discussion of the relationship between European colonialism and the Nordic context. Our analysis suggests that Norwegian antiracists are ambivalent regarding these highly mediatized debates over memorials. While they believe that such debates are important in challenging portrayals of Norwegian history, they also fear that a focus on symbolic politics may damage antiracist efforts. We conclude by suggesting how an existing national self-understanding of innocence is challenged and better understood through an examination of the intersection between connected histories and existing national narratives.
This article advances a cultural sociological approach to political cleavages by bringing cleavage theory into dialogue with research on symbolic boundaries. While structural and institutional aspects of cleavages are well studied, the ways in which political divides take root in everyday life and collective identities have only recently become a central focus of research. In this piece, I conceptualize the group dimension of cleavage formation and show that a deeper exchange between political and cultural sociology is needed to study this dimension. From a critique of prevailing accounts of group identities and political conflict (which I call tribalist, dispositional, and attitudinal accounts), I develop a relational framework that highlights the importance of symbolic boundary processes. Linking micro-level practices of classification, cultural repertoires, and morality with macro-level political transformations, this perspective sheds light on how political divides are culturally sustained. The article concludes with a call for an interdisciplinary research agenda of cultural cleavage research that integrates political science and cultural sociology perspectives.
