Skip to main content

Definitions by Dumu The Void

Linguistic Orthodoxy

The established, institutionalized set of beliefs about language that dominate education, media, and public discourse—the often-unexamined assumptions that some languages (or dialects) are correct while others are corrupt, that grammar rules are fixed rather than evolving, that standard language is superior, that change is decay, that some ways of speaking are "professional" while others are "slang." Linguistic orthodoxy includes commitments: that there is one correct way to speak and write, that prescriptive grammar reflects natural order, that non-standard dialects are mistakes, that accent indicates intelligence or education, that language should be protected from change. Like all orthodoxies, it provides standards for communication, but it functions as social control—enforcing class and regional hierarchies through language, delegitimizing the speech of marginalized groups, making people ashamed of their native dialects. Linguistic orthodoxy determines what speech is considered "educated," what writing is "correct," and who counts as "articulate" versus "inarticulate."
Example: "She was told she couldn't be a journalist because she spoke with a regional accent—linguistic orthodoxy, where way of speaking is treated as measure of intelligence. The orthodoxy's power is making class prejudice feel like linguistic judgment."

Internet Orthodoxy

The established, institutionalized set of beliefs about the internet that dominate digital discourse—the often-unexamined assumptions that the internet is liberating, that it democratizes knowledge, that it connects people, that it's inevitable, that more connectivity is always better, that the current internet (corporate, surveilled, centralized) is simply how the internet is. Internet orthodoxy includes commitments: that access solves problems, that digital natives understand technology, that platforms are neutral, that algorithms are technical rather than political, that the internet's problems are growing pains rather than design features, that alternatives (decentralized, non-commercial, community-owned) are impractical. Like all orthodoxies, it shapes how we understand digital space, but it functions as ideology—making particular internet arrangements seem natural and inevitable, obscuring how the internet could be otherwise, and delegitimizing visions of alternative digital futures. Internet orthodoxy determines what online spaces are "realistic," what digital policies are "forward-thinking," and who counts as "tech-savvy" versus "nostalgic."
Example: "He dismissed concerns about platform surveillance as inevitable—'that's just how the internet works.' Internet orthodoxy had made corporate control feel like the nature of technology rather than a choice."

Social Media Orthodoxy

The established, institutionalized set of beliefs and practices that define mainstream social media use—the often-unexamined assumptions about how platforms should be used, what counts as successful engagement, how identity should be performed, and what role social media plays in life. Social media orthodoxy includes commitments: that visibility is good, that sharing is connection, that metrics (likes, followers, shares) measure value, that personal branding is essential, that algorithms know what we want, that social media is simply how people communicate now, that criticism of platforms is Luddite. Like all orthodoxies, it shapes behavior and expectation, but it functions as ideology—making platform-mediated life seem natural and inevitable, obscuring how platforms shape us (attention, emotion, relationship), and delegitimizing alternatives (offline connection, platform cooperatives, non-commercial spaces). Social media orthodoxy determines what online behavior is "normal," what engagement is "successful," and who counts as "digitally literate" versus "out of touch."
Example: "She felt anxious about her low engagement numbers—not because she needed validation, but because social media orthodoxy had made metrics feel like measures of worth. The orthodoxy's power is making platform metrics feel like personal value."

Democratic Orthodoxy

The established, institutionalized set of beliefs about democracy that dominate political discourse—the often-unexamined assumptions that elections confer legitimacy, that representation works, that majority rule is just, that democratic procedures produce good outcomes, and that liberal democracy is the end of political history. Democratic orthodoxy includes commitments: that voting is the primary political act, that citizens are informed and rational, that elected officials represent their constituents, that checks and balances prevent tyranny, that democracy and capitalism are compatible, that alternatives to democracy are authoritarian. Like all orthodoxies, it provides a framework for political understanding, but it functions as ideology—making particular democratic arrangements seem natural and inevitable, obscuring democracy's limitations (exclusion, inequality, corporate power, voter manipulation), and delegitimizing critiques that question whether current institutions are truly democratic. Democratic orthodoxy determines what political arrangements are considered "legitimate," what reforms are "realistic," and who counts as a "good democrat" versus a threat to democracy.
Example: "He couldn't see how campaign finance makes a mockery of representation—not because he'd examined the evidence, but because democratic orthodoxy had made him believe that elections automatically produce democracy. The orthodoxy's power is making the form feel like the substance."

Mass Media Orthodoxy

The established, institutionalized set of beliefs and practices that define mainstream mass media—the often-unexamined assumptions about how media should be organized, what counts as professional journalism, how audiences should be addressed, and what role media plays in society. Mass media orthodoxy includes commitments: that media should be commercial, that advertising is the natural funding model, that professionalism means neutrality, that audiences are consumers, that "balance" means centering mainstream views, that media's role is to inform within existing frameworks rather than challenge them. Like all orthodoxies, it shapes what media becomes, but it functions as ideology—making commercial, corporate media seem like simply "how media works" rather than one model among many. Mass media orthodoxy determines what information reaches publics, what perspectives are legitimized, and what counts as "responsible" journalism versus "activism" or "bias."
Example: "The reporter followed mass media orthodoxy perfectly—got quotes from both parties, didn't question the framing, presented the issue as a matter of individual choice rather than systemic forces. It was professional, and it was useless."

Mass Culture Orthodoxy

The established, institutionalized set of beliefs about mass culture itself—the often-unexamined assumptions that mass culture is inevitable, that it serves the people, that it reflects popular taste, that it's democratizing, that criticism of mass culture is elitist, and that engagement with mass culture is simply normal. Mass culture orthodoxy includes commitments: that cultural production should be market-driven, that popularity indicates quality, that mass audiences get what they want, that cultural critique is snobbery, that alternatives to mass culture are nostalgic or impractical. Like all orthodoxies, it naturalizes particular arrangements—making mass culture seem like simply "how culture works" rather than a specific historical formation shaped by capitalism, technology, and power. Mass culture orthodoxy determines what cultural forms are visible, what alternatives are unthinkable, and who counts as "in touch" versus "out of touch."
Example: "He dismissed independent media as irrelevant because 'nobody watches that'—as if popularity were the measure of value. Mass culture orthodoxy had made market success feel like cultural significance."

Pop Media Orthodoxy

The established, institutionalized set of beliefs and practices that define mainstream popular media—the often-unexamined assumptions about what counts as news, how stories should be told, who gets to speak, and what audiences want. Pop media orthodoxy includes commitments: that "both sides" should be represented, that conflict drives engagement, that personalities matter more than policies, that sensationalism sells, that certain sources are reliable while others are "tabloid," that media should be "objective" (which usually means centering dominant views). Like all orthodoxies, it provides frameworks for media production, but it functions as gatekeeping—determining which stories get told, which voices are amplified, which perspectives are marginalized. Pop media orthodoxy shapes not just what we know but what we think it's possible to know, making certain narratives seem natural and alternatives invisible.
Example: "The story was covered exactly as pop media orthodoxy prescribes—two talking heads with opposing views, no structural analysis, and a focus on personality conflict. The form itself prevented understanding, but it felt like journalism because it followed the rules."