To start I want to define the terms I will be using in my post today. From Carey he argues that communication has two major logics: communication as transmission and communication as ritual. These models help explain how communication both organizes social action and builds shared cultural meaning. Next from Leanne Betasamosake Simpson she expands on the ritual model through her Indigenous concept of “sintering,” which emphasizes communication as a process of relational bonding and collective strengthening. These communication theories are clearly seen in the grassroots resistance networks described in the second article ‘Minnesota Proved MAGA Wrong’. This article, which explores how community members in Minneapolis organized to resist aggressive ‘ICE’ or Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations also highlights a very prominent politically charged struggle present in the US so I felt a deeper analysis would be very interesting.
Carey defines communication as transmission as the process of sending messages across space for the purpose of control and to send messages more efficiently. This view reflects the dominant understanding of communication in modern industrial societies, where communication is often tied to transportation technologies and information exchange. In the article, the ICE resistance networks demonstrate this model through their communication systems which were designed to coordinate rapid responses to federal enforcement actions. Volunteers working with organizations such as COPAL developed text message chains, code names, and dispatcher systems all to monitor ICE activity. The article then describes how volunteers tracked federal vehicles, relayed license plate information, and alerted immigrant families about potential raids. These actions illustrate communication as a tool for transmitting urgent information across physical space in order to achieve concrete goals, such as protecting vulnerable residents from detention or deportation and we see how these systems are used to resist the control ICE has and the efficiency is to ensure action is taken in a timely manner.
Another part of the article to highlight is about the aid networks which rely heavily on transmission communication to distribute resources. They are volunteers and they organized food deliveries, transportation services, and safety planning through coordinated communication channels. These networks function similarly to emergency response systems that we use in the event of a winter storm or a campus closure for us, where accurate and timely information is essential to operational success and their our ability to run. Carey argues that the transmission model prioritizes communication as a functional and instrumental process, and the Minnesota resistance networks clearly demonstrate how communication can operate as infrastructure that enables collective action and fights against power.
As I defined earlier, Carey also emphasizes that communication is not solely about sending messages efficiently, but you also need to consider his ritual model of communication. His ritual model presents communication as a symbolic process that creates/maintains shared cultural values. It essentially is about keeping community, “not the act of imparting information but the representation of shared beliefs.”(pg.18), and this quote captures a clear distinction of what h is talking about. Rather than focusing on information exchange, the ritual model emphasizes communication as participation in a shared reality. The Minnesota article strongly reflects this ritual logic through its portrayal of community solidarity and as a collective against ICE. The resistance movement described in the article is not simply about preventing ICE arrests; it is also about reinforcing a shared moral commitment to protecting neighbors and building inclusive communities which is why this article is so good at showing what Carey was talking about. The article highlights the emergence of what participants describe as “neighborism,” a cultural ideology rooted in mutual care and collective responsibility. Community members engaged in public protests, organized church gatherings, and developed shared language around resistance and solidarity in the fight against ICE. These communicative practices helped create emotional connections among participants and reinforced shared values about justice but also human dignity. In Carey’s ritual framework, communication acts as a ceremony through which communities reaffirm their identity and social purpose.
Although I am talking about the Minnesota article, if you watch a Trump Rally or event you can see how he uses spectacles and emotion to create identity and this is a perfect example of Ritual communication. Even before it starts music is used and this is either popular or kind of patriotic like songs which are building unity and engaging the audience members and this also creates almost a ceremony where you know like sports games or others that he will play music. Then is his Call and response chants are another example along with the signs and flags around functioning as symbols. I use this example because although it is a bit more subtle in the Minneapolis reading you still see very similar tactics demonstrated as I have highlighted.
Now moving to Simpson’s concept of sintering which further deepens this understanding of communication as relational and transformative. Simpson uses the metaphor of sintering, a process in which separate particles bond together under heat and pressure to form a stronger material, to describe how communication fosters relational strength within communities. In Simpson’s Indigenous framework, communication is not merely about exchanging information but about building relationships and sustaining collective survival which are very similar themes discussed in Carey. Communication strengthens social bonds and reinforces responsibilities between individuals, communities, and the land. The Minnesota resistance networks strongly reflect Simpson’s concept of sintering. The article describes how volunteers from diverse racial, religious, and socioeconomic backgrounds worked together to support immigrant communities no matter there background. Through repeated acts of mutual aid, such as providing transportation, food, and legal assistance, participants formed deeper relational ties and strengthened community cohesion. These networks were not temporary or purely strategic alliances; rather, they evolved into durable systems of care and collective responsibility and resistence. The stress and urgency created by ICE enforcement functioned similarly to the “heat and pressure” in Simpson’s sintering metaphor, strengthening bonds between participants and reinforcing shared commitments to justice and protection.
Furthermore, Simpson’s framework emphasizes that communication involves listening, witnessing, and participating in relational accountability. The article reflects this through the way community members actively monitored ICE activity to protect neighbors rather than simply reacting after enforcement actions occurred. The Minnesota resistance movement also demonstrates the interconnected nature of communication, power, and media. The grassroots networks relied on digital communication technologies such as text messaging and social media platforms to monitor ICE activities and mobilize community responses. These technologies enabled rapid transmission communication while simultaneously fostering ritual communication through shared storytelling and identity formation. The movement illustrates how media technologies can support both functional coordination and cultural solidarity, reinforcing Carey’s argument that communication systems shape social power and cultural meaning.
I think I covered everything, but if I missed anything please feel free to help make more connections from the reading to Carey and Simpson in your comments. Look forward to reading everyone else’s blog posts!
No comments:
Post a Comment