This article makes the case for what we call accountability contexts as a valuable heuristic to think about how facts matter in public life, drawing attention to how different discursive and institutional contexts shape the ways in which facts can count. We examine two environmental case studies: The Territory, a documentary about the struggle of the Uru-eu-wau-wau community in Brazil to protect their land from illegal invaders, and the fact-checking organization Climate Feedback’s partnership with Facebook to flag misinformation on the platform. Popular stories about accountability hinge on using facts to change the public’s mind. In contrast, we find that publicity is only part of a much more complex picture. By analyzing factors such as appeals to relevant publics, institutional rigidity, the uses of knowledge and narrative, and the role of the state, we investigate the real, messy processes that people take part in as they seek change. Accountability contexts provide a valuable heuristic for scholars of political journalism and communication as well as a practical tool for analyzing which pathways have led to success or failure in the pursuit of accountability.

中文翻译：

---

让他们付出代价：比较环境事实在两种问责背景下的重要性


本文论证了我们所说的问责环境，作为思考事实在公共生活中如何重要的宝贵启发，提请人们注意不同的话语和制度环境如何塑造事实的计数方式。我们研究了两个环境案例研究：《领土》，一部关于巴西 Uru-eu-wau-wau 社区为保护他们的土地免受非法入侵者而奋斗的纪录片，以及事实核查组织气候反馈与 Facebook 的合作，以标记关于巴西的错误信息。平台。关于问责制的流行故事取决于利用事实来改变公众的想法。相比之下，我们发现宣传只是更为复杂的情况的一部分。通过分析相关公众的诉求、制度僵化、知识和叙事的使用以及国家的角色等因素，我们调查了人们在寻求变革时所参与的真实而混乱的过程。问责背景为政治新闻和传播学者提供了宝贵的启发，也是分析哪些途径导致追究问责成功或失败的实用工具。