Paper short abstract:

The paper intends to make a "new reading" of "conspiracy theory", examining how conspiracy theories are "narrated" in mass media journalistic productions and scientific publications.

Paper long abstract:

"Conspiracy Theories" have been approached from the psychological, historical and sociological side mostly to interpret their meaning and functions for human psyche, historical processes and social dynamics. For a long time, conspiracy theories were defined as a form of "pathological thinking" or "irrational belief", categorized as a deviation from normality. Constructivism and relational approaches in the humanities, social sciences, and cultural studies promise a kind of "rehabilitation" of the conspiracy theories: the study of "conspiracies as type of knowledge" (Anton / Schetsche / Walter 2013) or as "Narratives" (Seidler 2016) is rather recent and still a relatively unexplored perspective on the subject. But how does science and journalism write, talk and report about "conspiracy theories"? Which literary, pictorial, performative and stylistic elements create "conspiracy theory" as "heterodox thinking", as a "type of knowledge", as "narrative" or as "entertainment"? I think that, despite the intention of "rehabilitation", an Othering operates in the journalistic and scientific descriptions and the analysis of conspiracy theories. This Othering makes use of the poetics and aesthetics of strangeness and exotic ("the naïve", "the attractive", "the unusual", "the threatening", "the crazy"), but with the goal of protection and legitimation (under the appearance of "neutrality"/"objectivity") of one's own position and scientific/journalistic authority.