Hate speech and environmental activist discourse
Critical analysis of user comments to one controversial tweet by Just Stop Oil
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/jld.27262Keywords:
critical discourse analysis, activist discourse, environment-related hate speech, Just Stop Oil, social media discourseAbstract
On 14 October 2022, two activists from the environmental group Just Stop Oil threw a can of tomato soup at Van Gogh’s famous Sunflowers at the National Gallery in London, gluing themselves to the wall beneath the painting. The action, covered in a tweet by the organisation, received a backlash of negative comments by social media users. The present paper focuses on hate speech in response to the controversial tweet by Just Stop Oil in a dataset of about 2700 user comments. Moving from critical discourse studies of hate speech in digital contexts, the manual and software-assisted qualitative analysis employs the appraisal framework and discourse-historical strategies to observe the discursive construction of hate themes against environmental activism. In line with ecolinguistics, findings suggest that, when something valued as extremely positive and important such as art is under attack, people may fail to recognise the motivations behind activist action, appraising it negatively through hate speech, and even distancing themselves from environmental values.
References
Assimakopoulos, S. (2020) Incitement to discriminatory hatred, illocution and perlocution. Pragmatics Society 11(2): 177–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/ps.18071.ass
Badullovich, N. (2023) From influencing to engagement: A framing model for climate communication in polarised settings. Environmental Politics 32(2): 207–26.
Balirano, G. and Hughes, B. (2020) Homing in on Hate: Critical Discourse Studies of Hate Speech, Discrimination and Inequality in the Digital Age. Naples: Paolo Loffredo editore.
Bednarek, M., Ross, A. S., Boichak, O., Doran, Y. J., Carr, G., Altmann, E. G. and Alexander, T. J. (2022) Winning the discursive struggle? The impact of a significant environmental crisis event on dominant climate discourses on Twitter. Discourse, Context & Media 45: 100564. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2021.100564
Biri, Y. (2022) Epistemic stance in the climate change debate: A comparison of proponents and sceptics on Twitter and Reddit. Register Studies 4(2): 232–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/rs.22005.bir
Brown, P. and Levinson, S. C. (1987) Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Burnap, P. and Williams, M. L. (2015) Cyber hate speech on Twitter: An application of machine classification and statistical modeling for policy and decision making. Policy & Internet 7(2): 223–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/poi3.85
Castaño-Pulgarín, S. A., Suárez-Betancur, N., Tilano Vega, L. M. and Herrera López, H. M. (2021) Internet, social media and online hate speech. Systematic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior 58: 101608. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2021.101608
Castrechini, A., Pol, E. and Guàrdia-Olmos, J. (2014) Media representations of environmental issues: From scientific to political discourse. European Review of Applied Psychology 64(5): 213–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2014.08.003
Cavasso, L. and Taboada, M. (2021) A corpus analysis of online news comments using the appraisal framework. Journal of Corpora and Discourse Studies 4: 1–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.18573/jcads.61
Chan, K. M. A., Balvanera, P., Benessaiah, K., Chapman, M., Díaz, S., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Gould, R., Hannahs, N., Jax, K., Klain, S., Luck, G. W., Martín-López, B., Muraca, B., Norton, B., Ott, K., Pascual, U., Satterfield, T., Tadaki, M., Taggart, J. and Turner, N. (2016) Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113(6): 1462–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1525002113
Chen, R. (2001) Self-politeness: A proposal. Journal of Pragmatics 33(1): 87–106.
Collins, L. and Nerlich, B. (2015) Examining user comments for deliberative democracy: A corpus-driven analysis of the climate change debate online. Environmental Communication 9(2): 189–207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2014.981560
Culpeper, J. (2021) Impoliteness and hate speech: Compare and contrast. Journal of Pragmatics 179: 4–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.04.019
De Koning, J., Winkel, G., Sotirov, M., Blondet, M., Borras, L., Ferranti, F. and Geitzenauer, M. (2014) Natura 2000 and climate change: Polarisation, uncertainty, and pragmatism in discourses on forest conservation and management. Europe. Environmental Science & Policy 39: 129–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2013.08.010
Extinction Rebellion (2022) We Quit. extinctionrebellion.uk. Retrieved 25 January 2024 from https://extinctionrebellion.uk/2022/12/31/we-quit/
Franzke, A. S., Bechmann, A., Zimmer, M., Ess, C. and the Association of Internet Researchers (2020) Internet Research: Ethical Guidelines 3.0. Retrieved 25 January 2024 from https://aoir.org/reports/ethics3.pdf
Fuoli, M. (2018) A stepwise method for annotating APPRAISAL, Functions of Language 25(2): 229–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/fol.15016.fuo
Gayle, D. (2022) Just Stop Oil activists throw soup at Van Gogh’s Sunflowers. The Guardian. Retrieved 25 January 2024 from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/14/just-stop-oil-activists-throw-soup-at-van-goghs-sunflowers
Guo, C. and Saxton, G. D. (2014) Tweeting social change: How social media are changing nonprofit advocacy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 43(1): 57–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0899764012471585
Hansson, S., Page, R. and Fuoli, M. (2022) Discursive strategies of blaming: The language of judgment and political protest online. Social Media+Society 8(4): 1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20563051221138753
Hardaker, C. (2010) Trolling in asynchronous computer-mediated communication: From user discussions to academic definitions. Journal of Politeness Research: Language, Behavior, Culture 6(2): 215–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.011
Hardaker, C. and McGlashan, M. (2016) ‘Real men don’t hate women’: Twitter rape threats and group identity. Journal of Pragmatics 91: 80–93.
Hardaker, C. and McGlashan, M. (2016) ‘Real men don’t hate women’: Twitter rape threats and group identity. Journal of Pragmatics 91: 80–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.11.005
Hulme, M. (2007) Climate change: From issue to magnifier. Open Democracy. Retrieved 25 January 2024 from https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/climate_change_from_issue_to_magnifier/
Jane, E. A. (2015) Flaming? What flaming? The pitfalls and potentials of researching online hostility. Ethics and Information Technology 17(1): 65–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10676-015-9362-0
Jones, O. (2023) 2023 was the year governments looked at the climate crisis – and decided to persecute the activists. The Guardian. Retrieved 25 January 2024 from https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/22/2023-governments-climate-crisis-persecute-activists-silenced
Kaushal, S., Dhammi, S. and Guha, A. (2022) Climate crisis and language: A constructivist ecolinguistic approach. Materials Today: Proceedings 49: 3581–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.08.093
KhosraviNik, M. (2017) Right wing populism in the west: Social media discourse and echo chambers. Insight Turkey 19(3): 53–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.25253/99.2017193.04
KhosraviNik, M. and Esposito, E. (2018) Online hate, digital discourse and critique: Exploring digitally-mediated discursive practices of gender-based hostility. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 14(1): 45–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/lpp-2018-0003
Kollmuss, A. and Agyeman, J. (2002) Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research 8(3): 239–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401
Koteyko, N., Jaspal, R. and Nerlich, B. (2013) Climate change and ‘climategate’ in online reader comments: A mixed methods study. The Geographical Journal 179(1): 74–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4959.2012.00479.x
Lakoff, G. (2010) Why it matters how we frame the environment. Environmental Communication 4(1): 70–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17524030903529749
Lawson, A. and Read, R. (2022) Activism, the very idea… Is the concept of activism itself a key block to mass action on climate? Systems Souls Society. https://systems-souls-society.com/activism-the-very-idea-is-the-concept-of-activism-itself-a-key-block-to-mass-action-on-climate/
Lovejoy, K., Waters, R. D. and Saxton, G. D. 2012. Engaging stakeholders through Twitter: How nonprofit organizations are getting more out of 140 characters or less. Public Relations Review 38: 313–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.01.005
Lucas, C. (2018) Concerning values: What underlies public polarisation about climate change? Geographical Research 56(3): 298–310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1745-5871.12284
Lucas, C. and Warman, R. (2018) Disrupting polarized discourses: Can we get out of the ruts of environmental conflicts? Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space 36(6): 987–1005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2399654418772843
Martin, J. R. and White, P. R. (2005) The Language of Evaluation. Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Milman, O. (2022) ‘Buckle up’: US backers of Just Stop Oil vow more Van Gogh-style protests. The Guardian. Retrieved 25 January 2024 from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/18/just-stop-oil-van-gogh-national-portrait-gallery-climate-emergency-fund
Moe, H., Lindtner, S. and Ytre-Arne, B. (2023) Polarisation and echo chambers? Making sense of the climate issue with social media in everyday life. Nordicom Review 44(1): 23–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/nor-2023-0002
Nerlich, B., Koteyko, N. and Brown, B. (2010) Theory and language of climate change communication. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 1(1): 97–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wcc.0
Norton, C. and Hulme, M. (2019) Telling one story, or many? An ecolinguistic analysis of climate change stories in UK national newspaper editorials. Geoforum 104: 114–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.01.017
Novikau, A. (2016) The evolution of the concept of environmental discourses: Is environmental ideologies a useful concept? Western Political Science Association 2016 Annual Meeting Paper.
Özden, J. (2022) What’s everyone got against throwing soup? Understanding Social Change. Retrieved 25 January 2024 from https://jamesozden.substack.com/p/whats-everyone-got-against-throwing
Özden, J. and Glover, S. (2022a) Disruptive climate protests in the UK didn’t lead to a loss of public support for climate policies. Effective Altruism Forum. Retrieved 25 January 2024 https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/YDtsGHmDJMsAWB7Wt/disruptive-climate-protests-in-the-uk-didn-t-lead-to-a-loss
Özden, J. and Glover, S. (2022b) Literature Review: Protest Movement Success factors. Social Change Lab. Retrieved 25 January 2024 from https://www.socialchangelab.org/_files/ugd/503ba4_e21c47302af942878411eab654fe7780.pdf
Page, R., Barton, D., Lee, C., Unger, J. W. and Zappavigna, M. (2022) Researching Language and Social Media. London: Routledge.
Penz, H. (2022) Communicating climate change: How (not) to touch a cord with people and promote action. Text & Talk 42(4): 571–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/text-2020-0081
Postmes, T. and Brunsting, S. (2002) Collective action in the age of the Internet: Mass communication and online mobilization. Social Science Computer Review 20(3): 290–301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/089443930202000306
Potts, A., Simm, W., Whittle, J. and Unger, J. W. (2014) Exploring ‘success’ in digitally augmented activism: A triangulated approach to analyzing UK activist Twitter use. Discourse, Context & Media 6: 65–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2014.08.008
Reisigl, M. and Wodak, R. (2016). The discourse-historical approach (DHA). In R. Wodak, and M. Meyer (eds.) Methods of Discourse Studies 24–61. London: Sage.
Russo, K. E. (2018) The Evaluation of Risk in Institutional and Newspaper Discourse: The Case of Climate Change and Migration. Naples: Editoriale scientifica.
Sharp, L. and Richardson, T. (2001) Reflections on Foucauldian discourse analysis in planning and environmental policy research. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning 3(3): 193–209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jepp.88
Stibbe, A. (2017) Positive discourse analysis: Rethinking human ecological relationships. In A. F. Fill and H. Penz (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Ecolinguistics 165–78. London: Routledge.
Stibbe, A. (2020) Ecolinguistics: Language, Ecology and the Stories We Live by. London: Routledge.
Wodak, R. and Meyer, M. (eds) (2016) Methods of Discourse Studies. London: Sage.
Zappavigna, M. (2012) Discourse of Twitter and Social Media: How We Use Language to Create Affiliation on the Web. London: Continuum.
