Jessy's Post 9/22

In quintessential critical form, Mumby begins his chapter by critiquing the very form and structure of the forum his research is presented in. A call for “common ground” in organizational communication seems very benevolent and progressive on the surface, yet for Mumby, it is imperative to examine the “politics of common ground” (69). Not to be overdramatic but motions towards common ground have been used throughout history as a rhetorical strategy to reify hateful ideas and policies by forwarding the notion of peaceful coexistence and similarity. Of course, I do not mean to say that these organizational perspectives and paradigms are “evil” just that they are indeed heavily laced with ideology and structures of power. Nevertheless, Mumby does offer some therapy to the discipline by presenting a theory of commonality based on the central interest of communication. Do you agree with Mumby that each perspective is itself politically driven, or do you see each paradigm in a less adversely way? Namely, do these paradigm/perspectives/dialogues stand in opposition for you, or are they at some level complementary?