Mediatization, polarization, and intolerance (between environments, media, and circulation)

Natalia Raimondo Anselmino 118 1. Introduction The possibility and meaning of collective action, more/less organized, represents one of the most desired is- sues for social sciences, in general, and, also, for studies on the future of the historical process of mediatization (VERÓN, 2013) in particular. The constant intersection between individual and collective identities, the dynamics of the constitution of social ties in times of discrediting of the most traditional in- stitutions, and the commitment to the circulation of social dis- courses in conflict or protest situations are part of the fabric through which phenomena, such as the one presented here, are interwoven. It is precisely in this line of interest that the reflections shared in this article are located. They are part of a group and interdisciplinary research 3 , whose general objec- tive consisted in analyzing how social discourses on the pub- lic-political sphere (understood in the sense proposed by Rai- mondo Anselmino; Reviglio; Diviani, 2015), made visible when published on connective platforms (VAN DIJCK, 2016), such as those of Facebook or Twitter, outside of them, acquire located visibility of co-presence of the more traditional public space (square, street, etcetera) or media visibility 4 . With this aim, the research was devoted to the study of a case that functioned almost as an excuse or a starting point from which to know how the articulation between the different visibility regimes 5 3 PI+D Nuevas visibilidades en la cultura digital: esfera pública contemporánea y redes sociales en Internet (1POL253), based at Centro de Investigaciones en Me- diatizaciones (CIM) of Universidad Nacional de Rosario, Argentina. The referred project was executed under Sebastián Castro Rojas’ direction, and Natalia Rai- mondo Anselmino and María Cecilia Reviglio’s co-direction, and had the partici- pation of professors, students and graduates of the degrees in Social Communi- cation —Ricardo Diviani, Irene Gindin, Mariana Busso, María Cecilia Echecopar, Natalia Coiutti, Daniela Sánchez, Alejandro Sambrana—, in Anthropology—Em- manuel Pérez Zamora—, in International Relations —Virginia Brussa—, as well as in Information Systems Engineering —Guillermo Leale, Ana Laura Cardoso, José Rostagno. 4 Here, the arguments about visibility elaborated by Thompson (1998) are recovered. 5 Visibility regimes are linked to “certain ways in which that visibility has been - and is - socially and historically circumscribed and classified. Thus, among its different meanings in Spanish, the term regime is defined as a ‘set of rules by which an institution, entity, or activity is governed’ and, likewise, as a ‘set of reg-