Abstract
This commentary notes the existence of a “policy reflex” in Canadian communication studies. The author suggests that many scholars engage in issues having to do with policy even if “policy analysis” is not the goal of scholarship. This tendency is in part due to a limited understanding of policy or a tendency among some scholars to see their work as “critical” over other possible characterizations. In many cases a turn to policy has a symbolic function, marking absence rather than presence. In a research field characterized by major gaps in research and in the face of convoluted or missing data, what we call “policy analysis” often emerges largely by default. The article discusses consequences of this reflex on policy scholarship and public discourses of culture.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
