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

Polarization as a structure of intolerance (a communicational issue) 297 tal construction of relations between the public and private spheres, we see the perverse effectiveness of characters who fall into the realms of power exercising such tactics, which only work by grafting polarizing structures into anomic spaces and dispersion. *** The issue of mediatization complements the commu- nicational perspective (along with political, ethical, and psycho- logical perspectives) to face polarizing situations. Interactional processes, in the contemporary world, imply a mandatory pas- sage through the media reference - for this reason, it is neces- sary to seek ways of working with differences through media- tized interactions, promoting the encounter of diversity through multiple shares; inventing social operations of technology, at the service of interactional flexibility; and curbing those who trigger media for intolerance actions. V. Conclusion Brazil There is a usual sense of the word “polarity,” not nec- essarily related to intolerance, in the realm of politics. It refers to dualities as “situation vs. opposition”; “Left vs. right”; or still, preponderant bipartisan structures (such as the alternation of both main American parties in power). In Brazil, this type of political polarity has been ob- served, between both main political forces, since 1996. Until 2014, this dual organization of politics did not appear to bring larger risks to democracy. My interpretation of this coexistence in polarity , but not polarizing, involves two complementary angles. On the one hand, the possible intolerances on the part of the parties, be- tween the parties, and among the voters, are generally diluted in the diversity of interactional processes in contemporary society which, despite social zones of strain and discrimination, had de- veloped some strategies in the work of differences. On the other hand, the expectation of alternation between both poles did not seem to prevent the diversity of options and social paths, de- spite the differentiation of political projects.