Who Speaks for Indigenous Peoples? Tribal Journalists, Rhetorical Sovereignty, and Freedom of Expression
- Kevin R. Kemper, Ph.D., J.D., Assistant Professor in the School of Journalism1
Source
doi: 10.1177/152263791001200101 Journalism & Communication Monographs March 2010 vol. 12 no. 1 3-58
Abstract
This study asks whether tribal journalists
appeal to peoplehood or nationhood for authority for their exercise of
rhetorical
sovereignty and freedom of expression. Freedoms of
expression and information, in the context of indigenous tribes in the
United States, belong to anyone who practices
rhetorical sovereignty of those peoples by communicating what is in the
best
interests of those peoples. Then, to support that
thesis, the study uses rhetorical critiques of writings and historical
examples
about free expression by tribal journalists and
communicators to discuss this issue in a way that helps us understand
that
freedoms of press and information in their varying
forms essential for the survival and prosperity of indigenous peoples,
that rhetorical sovereignty is a theoretical
framework that helps us to understand how freedom of press or expression
comes
from the hearts of the tribes, and that tribal
journalists are examples of some of the best practices of rhetorical
sovereignty
and freedoms of press and information for the good
of their people. Some of the examples include Elias Boudinot (Cherokee)
and William Apess (Pequot) from the early
nineteenth century, and Mark Trahant (Shoshone-Bannock) and Tom Arviso
Jr. (Navajo)
from the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.
0 意見:
張貼留言