This cross-platform digital ethnography examines the nuances of how
emotions are expressed and who they are directed towards within social media in order to
better understand the phenomenon of affective polarization and the increased emotionality
online. As part of a larger three-year SSHRC-funded comparative study between the US and
Canadian elections, the focused dataset for this project draws on grounded theory (Charmaz,
2006) and our exploration of 1800 social media posts from the political left and right
across social media platforms: Twitter, Facebook, and Gab. By examining how social media
users discursively construct representations of self and other through expressions of
us/them dichotomies, this project seeks to better understand polarized political identities
and how social media users emphasize that their morals and values are similar or distinct
from others. How do people on the left and the right feel victimized by the other? What are
the moral and emotional injuries as well as the identity politics upon which they base their
claims to victimhood and simultaneously place blame on the other? How do social media users
rhetorically express their indignation through us/them dichotomizing, to justify their
negative affect as well as enactments of revenge as moral duty? In addition to presenting
key findings, this talk highlights our innovative approach to affective discourse analysis
developed over the past two years of iterative, grounded theoretical qualitative
study.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.