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

The Editors 12 masters’ degree students (idem, 30%), and graduate and under- graduate students (20%). More than 50% of the participants are from states outside Rio Grande do Sul and the overwhelming majority (about 80%) from outside UNISINOS. Among its results, in addition to the training processes during its realization, we emphasize the consolidation of a library of reflections, in the formof complete articles of the presentations in WGs and books published in e-book format (with chapters produced by the participants of the Conference Tables). This III Seminar extended abstracts are available at https://midiaticom. org/anais/index.php/seminario-midiatizacao-resumos/issue/ view/12. Full articles are available at https://midiaticom.org/ anais/index.php/seminario-midiatizacao-artigos/issue/view/5. This book of the Debating Tables of the III Seminar, in this e-book edition, is available not only in the project collection (https://www.midiaticom.org/e-books/) but also from FACOS UFSM (https://www.ufsm.br/editoras/facos/publicacoes/). We reiterateour thanks toCAPESandCNPqfor the financial assistance, essential for making this conversation proposal via research, both theoretical and empirical, carried out by its participants. ** In this III Seminar, the theme of the Discussion Pan- els was “Polarization, Intolerance, Homophilia, and Incivility.” These themes have been referencing part of the research on the processes of interaction on digital networks that accentuate the processes of political, economic, and cultural polarization. In this perspective, the debate took place based on the inferences produced by researchers from Southern and Northern lineages, and, also, other epistemological perspectives (according to na- tional guests: mediation, semiotics, cyberculture, communica- tion and politics, and epistemology of communication). It was intended, in these triangulations, to add more productive per- ceptions and reflections for the understanding of the empirical phenomena related to the theme, straining the research carried out from the epistemologies of mediatization. The book presents this in three parts (not correspond- ing to the panels but privileging the presented angles): a) epis-