Jairo Ferreira 256 If we consider that the actors relate to different media and institutions, the suggested flow is at imponderable levels of complexity, and this is especially important in the current con- juncture of mediatization (collectives built on socio-digital networks), in which the transit of audience, readers, audiences, etc. collectives to new collectives is observed, transformed by the in- sertion of actors (receivers and users) in the processes of media production, and, at the same time, liberation of the individual from certain previous social constraints, without this necessar- ily implying more freedom (if we consider authoritarian experiences on the rise in the context of artificial intelligence, algo- rithms, platforms, and digital networks). This flow of collective construction is articulated with the problem of circulation exposed in the previous section, in which Verón emphasizes the “lag” of meanings, between pro- duction and recognition (Cingolani, 2019) or the non-linearity of the process of meaning between production and reception, based on the following scheme: Figure 3 – Circulation with a focus on the discursive. Source: Boutaud and Verón, 2007, p. 3. In this scheme, producers (left) and receivers (right) are in different positions in discursive terms. The point of me- diation is discourse as materiality. It is about investigating the relations between what Verón conceptualizes as “grammars of production” and “grammars of recognition” – as he had ad- dressed in his initial studies, but now with greater complexity. In these relationships, his studies accentuate processes that we characterize as lags between these two instances. The scheme is formulated as follows by Boutaud and Verón (2007):
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjEzNzYz