SCIENCE IN FRAGMENTS

DOCUMENTS, AUTHORITY, AND CONTROVERSIES IN DIGITAL PUBLIC ARENAS

Abstract

This article examines how science is mobilized in digital public controversies through two episodes of the YouTube program Zona de Fogo focused on debates about trans children. Rather than assessing the biomedical, legal, or moral validity of the arguments presented, the study investigates how scientific documents, experts, institutions, statistics, and research findings are invoked as sources of authority in contentious settings. The theoretical framework combines Pierre Bourdieu’s contributions on scientific authority and scientific capital with Niels Windfeld Lund’s complementary theory of documentation, particularly the concepts of documentation, communication, information, document, and doceme. Methodologically, the study conducts a qualitative analysis of debate segments in which trans children occupy a central position. Preliminary findings indicate that science is frequently mobilized through documentary fragments removed from their original contexts of production and validation, where they operate as resources of legitimacy in argumentative disputes. From a Health Information perspective, these findings show how medical and scientific knowledge concerning the body, diagnosis, and care circulates through public arenas of controversy and is mobilized by actors occupying different political positions. In this context, attention to docemes offers a way to understand fragmented forms of health information circulation across documents, institutions, and communication environments. The article argues that document theory provides useful analytical tools for understanding the social circulation of science in contemporary digital environments.