The founders of the interdisciplinary field of communication geography argue that the field carries the potential to provide a processual view of communication as spatial production. This article sets out to delineate this underexplored aspect of communication geography. The aim is to expand the research agenda of communication geography by acknowledging the role of everyday social interaction on the one hand, and media environments on the other, in producing and maintaining peoples’ taken-for-granted senses of space. This focus is guided by combining central insights of social phenomenology and medium theory. In synthesizing these positions, a research agenda emerges that emphasizes the capacity of media to “mold” the scope and character of communication that in turn maintain the scope and character of taken-for-granted space in everyday reality.
AdamsP. (2009). Geographies of media and communication. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
2.
AdamsP. (2011). A taxonomy for communication geography. Progress in Human Geography, 35, 37-57.
3.
AdamsP.JanssonA. (2012). Communication geography: A bridge between disciplines. Communication Theory, 22, 299-318.
4.
AppiahK. A. (2007). Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a world of strangers. London, England: Penguin Books.
5.
BeckU. (2002). Cosmopolitan society and its enemies. Theory, Culture & Society, 19, 17-44.
6.
BergerP.LuckmannT. (1991). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. London, England: Penguin. (Original work published 1966)
7.
BudeH.DürrschmidtJ. (2010). What’s wrong with globalization? Contra ‘flow speak’—towards an existential turn in the theory of globalization. European Journal of Social Theory, 13, 481-500.
8.
CareyJ. (2007). Time, space and the telegraph. In CrowleyD.HeyerP. (Eds.), Communication in history (pp. 150-155). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
9.
CareyJ.QuirkJ. J. (2009). The mythos of the electronic revolution. In CareyJ. (Ed.), Communication as culture (pp. 87-108). New York, NY: Routledge. (Original work published 1989)
DeuzeM. (2011). Media life. Media, Culture & Society, 33, 137-148.
12.
FalkheimerJ.JanssonA. (Eds.). (2006). Geographies of communication: The spatial turn in media studies. Göteborg, Sweden: Nordicom.
13.
GarfinkelH. (1984). Studies in ethnomethdology. Cambridge, England: Polity Press. (Original work published 1967)
14.
GiddensA. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
15.
HeppA. (2012). Cultures of mediatization. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
16.
HjarvardS. (2008). The mediatization of society. Nordicom Review, 29, 105-134.
17.
InnisH. (2007). Empire and communications (Rev. ed.). Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield. (Original work published 1950)
18.
InnisH. (2008). The bias of communication (Rev. ed.). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press. (Original work published 1951)
19.
JanssonA. (2006). Textural analysis: Materializing media space. In FalkheimerJ.JanssonA. (Eds.), Geographies of communication: The spatial turn in media studies (pp. 87-103). Göteborg, Sweden: Nordicom.
20.
JensenK. B. (2013). Definitive and sensitizing conceptualizations of mediatization. Communication Theory, 23, 203-222.
21.
KrotzF. (2009). Mediatization: A concept with which to grasp media and societal change. In LundbyK. (Ed.), Mediatization: Concept, changes, consequences (pp. 21-40). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
22.
LefebvreH. (1991). The production of space. Oxford, England: Blackwell. (Original work published 1974)
23.
McLuhanM. (2003). Understanding the media: The extensions of man. Berkeley, CA: Gingko Press. (Original work published 1964)
MeyrowitzJ. (1985). No sense of place: The impact of electronic media on social behavior. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
26.
MeyrowitzJ. (2003). Canonic anti-text: Marshall McLuhan. In KatzE.Durham PetersJ.LiebesT.OrloffA. (Eds.), Canonic texts in media research: Are there any? Should there be? How about these? (pp. 191-212). Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
27.
MeyrowitzJ. (2008). Medium theory. In DonsbachW. (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of communication (Vol. 7, pp. 3055-3061). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
28.
NatansonM. (1990). Introduction. In SchützA. (Ed.), Collected papers I: The problem of social reality (pp. xxv-xlvii). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic. (Original work published 1962)
29.
RantanenT. (2005). The media and globalization. London, England: Sage.
30.
RelphE. (2008). Place and placelessness. London, England: Pion. (Original work published 1976)
31.
ScannellP. (2007). Media and communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32.
SchützA. (1967). The phenomenology of the social world. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. (Original work published 1932)
33.
SchützA. (Ed.), (1990). Collected papers I: The problem of social reality. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic. (Original work published 1962)
34.
SchützA. (Ed.), (1976). Collected papers II: Studies in social theory. Leiden, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff. (Original work published 1964)
35.
SchützA.LuckmannT. (1973). The structures of the life-world: Vol. 1. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
36.
SilverstoneR. (2007). Media and morality: On the rise of the mediapolis. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
37.
ThompsonJ. B. (1995). The media and modernity: A social theory of the media. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
38.
TomlinsonJ. (1999). Globalization and culture. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
39.
TuanY.-F. (2011). Space and place: The perspective of experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1977)
40.
van LoonJ. (2008). Media technology: Critical perspectives. Berkshire, England: Open University Press.
41.
WilliamsR. (2003). Television. New York, NY: Routledge. (Original work published 1974)
42.
ZhaoS. (2004). Consociated contemporaries as an emergent realm of the lifeworld: Extending Schutz’s phenomenological analysis to cyberspace. Human Studies, 27, 91-105.
43.
ZhaoS. (2006). The internet and the transformation of the reality of everyday life: Toward a new analytic stance in sociology. Sociological Inquiry, 76, 458-474.
