Ciarlatani. Post-verità, contropubblici online e nuove articolazioni della fiducia nel sistema della medicina

Journal title SALUTE E SOCIETÀ
Author/s Laura Gemini, Giovanni Boccia Artieri, Fabio Giglietto, Manolo Farci, Stefano Brilli, Elisabetta Zurovac
Publishing Year 2021 Issue 2021/2 Language Italian
Pages 22 P. 201-222 File size 292 KB
DOI 10.3280/SES2021-002014
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

In the context of the cultural debate around the post-truth emerged in the last decade, the field of medicine seems to be an interesting place to observe the dialectic between traditional media and social media from which the action of counter-publics and polarized argumentative strategies emerge to defence their opinions. The paper presents the results of a research that concerns the analysis of the comments made on the Presa Diretta Facebook page, a Rai3 television program conducted by Riccardo Iacona, related to an episode - titling Charlatans - dedicated to cancer treatments. The research, using a mixed-methods approach related to the field of In-ternet Studies, draws on the analysis of 4,672 comments published by 1,377 unique users and collected from 35 posts on the page, in order to observe and to understand the typologies of comments and the quantitative volume of interactions, showing how the discursive strategies of Presa Diretta’s counterpublics are clear examples of the cultural debate around the concept of post-truth and its contradictions.

Keywords: Post-truth; counterpublics; polarization; CAM; social media; social television.

  1. Abercrombie N., Longhurst, B. (1998). Audiences: A Sociological Theory of Performance and Imagination. London. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications Ltd.
  2. Betsch C., Brewer N.T., Brocard P., Davies P. Gaissmaier W., Haase N., Leask J., Renkewitz F., Renner B., Reyna V. F., Rossmann C., Sachse K., Schachinger A., Siegrist M., Stryk M. (2012). Opportunities and challenges of Web 2.0 for vaccination decision. Vaccine, (30)25: 3727-33.
  3. Boccia Artieri G. (2012). Stati di connessione. Pubblici, cittadini e consumatori nella (Social) Network Society. Milano: Franco Angeli.
  4. Boccia Artieri G. (2019). La realtà della post-verità e le fake news: polarizzazioni tecnologiche o forme espressive culturali? In: Bistagnino G., Fumagalli C., a cura di, Fake news, post-verità e politica. Milano: Fondazione Giangiacomo Feltrinelli.
  5. Boccia Artieri G., Gemini L. (2019). Mass media and the web in the light of Luhmann’s media system. Current Sociology, online first: 1-16. DOI: 10.1177/001139211983754
  6. Boccia Artieri G., Gemini L., Pasquali F., Carlo S., Farci M., Pedroni M. (2017). Fenomenologia dei social network. Presenza, relazioni e consumi mediali degli italiani online. Milano: Guerini.
  7. boyd d. (2010). Social Network Sites as Networked Publics: Affordances, Dynamics, and Implications. In: Papacharissi Z., a cura di, Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Network Sites. New York: Routledge.
  8. Chomutare T., Fernandez-Luque L., Arsand E., Hartvigsen G. (2011). Features of mobile diabetes applications: Review of the literature and analysis of current applications compared against evidence-based guidelines. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 13(3): e65.
  9. Corsi G., a cura di (2015). Salute e malattia nella teoria dei sistemi. A partire da Niklas Luhmann. Milano: Franco Angeli.
  10. Fernández-Luque L., Bau T. (2015). Health and Social Media: Perfect Storm of Information. Healthcare Informatics Research, 21(2): 67-73.
  11. Frankfurt H.G. (2005). Stronzate. Un saggio filosofico. Milano: Rizzoli.
  12. Gauchat G. (2010). The cultural authority of science: Public trust and acceptance of organized science. Public Understanding of Science, 20(6): 751-770. DOI: 10.1177/096366251036524
  13. Giglietto F., Boccia Artieri G., Gemini L., Orefice M. (2016). Understanding Engagement and Willingness to Speak Up in Social Television: A Full-Season, Cross-Genre Analysis of TV Audience Participation on Twitter. International Journal of Communication, 10(2016): 2460-2480.
  14. Henderson S., Petersen A. (2002). Consuming Health: The Commodification of Health Care. Health & Social Care in the Community, 10(6): 520-522.
  15. Luhmann N. (1990). Sistemi sociali: fondamenti di una teoria generale. Bologna: il Mulino [eds. orig.: 1984].
  16. Luhmann N. (2000). La realtà dei mass media. Milano: FrancoAngeli [eds. orig.: 1995].
  17. Maturo A. (2012). La società bionica. Saremo sempre più belli, felici e artificiali? Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  18. Maturo A., Moretti V. (2018). Digital Health and the Gamification of Life. How Apps Can Promote a Positive Medicalization. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Limited.
  19. Mitchell A., Gottfried J., Barthel M., Shearer E. (2016). The modern news con-sumer: News attitudes and practices in the digital era. 1. Pathways to News. Pew Research Center. -- Testo disponibile al sito: (22/03/2021).
  20. Mitra T., Counts S., Pennebaker J. (2016). Understanding anti-vaccination attitudes in social media. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Web and Social Media, ICWSM 2016, 269-278. -- Testo disponibile al sito: (22/03/2021).
  21. Noelle-Neumann E. (2002). La spirale del silenzio. Roma: Meltemi.
  22. Papacharissi Z. (2014). Affective Publics: Sentiment, Technology, and Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  23. Pellegrino E.D. (1999). The commodification of medical and health care: The moral consequences of a paradigm shift from a professional to a market ethic. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 24(3): 243-266.
  24. Phillips W., Milner R. M. (2017). The Ambivalent Internet: Mischief, Oddity, and Antagonism Online. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  25. Rieder B. (2013). Studying Facebook via data extraction: The Netvizz application. Paper presented at the WebSci’13 Conference, Paris, France.
  26. Rozenblum R., Bates D. (2013). Patient-centred healthcare, social media and the internet: The perfect storm? BMJ Quality & Safety, 22(3): 183-186.
  27. Schwartz J.L. (2012). New media, old messages: Themes in the history of vaccine hesitancy and refusal. The Virtual Mentor: VM, 14(1): 50-55.
  28. van der Linden S., Maibach, E., Cook J., Leiserowitz A., Lewandowsky S. (2017). Inoculating against misinformation. Science, 358(6367): 1141-1142.
  29. Varnelis K. (2008). Networked Publics. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  30. Zuckerman E. (2017). Mistrust, efficacy and the new civics: Understanding the deep roots of the crisis of faith in journalism. Knight Commission Workshop on Trust, Media and American Democracy, Aspen Institute. -- Testo disponibile al sito: (23/03/2021).

  • Pratiche comunicative di salute LGBT e social media: una ricerca esplorativa su TikTok Alessandro Lovari, Cosimo Marco Scarcelli, in SALUTE E SOCIETÀ 2/2022 pp.67
    DOI: 10.3280/SES2022-002006
  • Alternative science, alternative experts, alternative politics. The roots of pseudoscientific beliefs in Western Europe Fabio Bordignon, in Journal of Contemporary European Studies /2023 pp.1
    DOI: 10.1080/14782804.2023.2177838

Laura Gemini, Giovanni Boccia Artieri, Fabio Giglietto, Manolo Farci, Stefano Brilli, Elisabetta Zurovac, Ciarlatani. Post-verità, contropubblici online e nuove articolazioni della fiducia nel sistema della medicina in "SALUTE E SOCIETÀ" 2/2021, pp 201-222, DOI: 10.3280/SES2021-002014