ABSTRACT
The definition of knowledge is often equated to fact or truth. The implication of this definition is that knowledge possesses a static nature, in that anything you “know” is also true, wherein the determining characteristics of truth are universality and eternality. The nature of knowledge, however, is essentially dynamic. What we knew 200 years ago differs greatly from what we know today, both qualitatively and quantitatively. Knowledge has been historically transmitted through schools, which have gone through, and continue to go through, secular transitions, which take the form of (broadly defined) Western academic institutions. These transitions, which invariably differ across histories and geographies, play a determinant role in the qualities and capacities of these schools as producers of knowledge. In addition, the impact of geography and language, as well as the impact of the political economy on the institutionalization and internationalization of knowledge production and research practice, is beginning to emerge. This chapter is focused on the way the scientific literature has perceived the Arab uprisings and the ways in which they are portrayed in scientific discourse, taking into account the social forces that come into play in the production of knowledge. In line with Latour and Fabbri (1977), this study analyzes both the content of academic journal articles on the Arab revolutions, as well as who produces and who frames the debate about such scholarship through an analysis of the network of authors who are considered influential. In addition to analyzing citations, we also analyze the content and style of the articles by applying semiotic analysis, and using quantitative measures of “sociological markers,” such as discipline, language and institutional affiliation. We do not assume that academic journal articles solely shape public debate or policy debates on the Arab uprisings, but they definitely are very important.
