Monitoring mobilization: a discursive psychological analysis of online mobilizing practices

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of the paper is to describe the ways in which people use language to achieve mobilization. Recognizing and anticipating the discursive practices that are used online, for instance for mobilization, increasingly is a primary concern for professionals in crisis communication or issue management. Design/methodology/approach A discursive psychological perspective is drawn upon to conduct a qualitative analysis of the interactional and rhetorical features of mobilization on two Facebook event pages, and to discover patterns of talk. Findings Three dominant discursive patterns were identified: disputing the integrity of authorities, constructing a positive atmosphere and a feeling of “togetherness” and constructing decisive identities. These activities play an important role in mobilization and are accomplished by the use of language. Furthermore, it demonstrates that mobilization involves the concern of not overtly presenting oneself as a victim or activist. Research limitations/implications Insights into the discursive strategies people use to achieve mobilization are important for recognizing these discursive phenomena during media monitoring. The analysis presented in this paper does not allow the authors to draw general conclusions nor the success of the strategies in terms of the actual events. Practical implications The study offers important insights for communication professionals (for instance, in the domain of crisis communication), enabling them to recognize mobilizing practices in other contexts and designing an adequate response. Social implications The study exposes those issues that are important for mobilizing a community and creating public engagement. Originality/value In addition to other studies on the role of language in mobilization, the current study adds a perspective that takes into account both the rhetorical and the interactional features of mobilization. Furthermore, the findings are implemented in a training for professionals in the domain of crisis communication.

Beyond the sentence: Shared reading within a high secure hospital

“…The function of first-person personal pronouns transitioned from predominantly establishing consensus through speaking on behalf of the group to promoting collegiality. This is reflective of research finding that the flexible use of “we” creates a power dynamic in the representation of subgroups ( Kvarnström and Cedersund, 2006 ) and can function to construct collectivity ( Sneijder et al, 2018 ). There was evidence for discourse shifting from speaker to listener-focussed; initial discourse, characterised by appeals to the listener and polysyndeton, contrasted with later use of non-directive substantive questions.…”

“…Furthermore, discourse can drive behavioural change. Three dominant devices achieving mobilisation and public engagement were identified using a psychological discourse analysis of two Facebook event pages ( Sneijder et al, 2018 ). Positive atmosphere and “togetherness” were promoted through the use of positive language to undermine or attenuate negative event aspects while the use of the pronoun “we” constructed collectivity.…”

“You are in Trouble!”: A Discursive Psychological Analysis of Threatening Language in Chinese Cellphone Fraud Interactions

“…DP is drawn upon to conduct a data-based qualitative analysis of the interactional features [ 41 ] of natural fraudster-victim talks. On the one hand, some extracts are taken as examples for discourse analysis to demonstrate fraudsters’ false identity construction, conversational skills and discursive situations.…”

“…To say that cellphone fraudsters’ discourse is constructed, it is necessary to analyze the way fraudsters speak to the victims and to explore how particular aspects of frauds as event are constructed and whether the fraud effects in cellphone interactions are achieved. Discourse is simultaneously constructive of a particular version of reality through the choice of “particular words formulations over others” [ 41 ] or “of different versions of the world, through the way in which we talk about people, events, actions and organizations ([ 46 ]: 10)”. Thus, DP can be employed to examine how fraudsters create false realities or build their certain false identities by their language use as a policeman, a bank clerk, or a gang member, and so on to threaten and entrap victims.…”

“…In addition, since online spoken interaction as a form of talk in its own right needs much more attention [ 29 ], DP has also been employed to study online discourse as a social practice [ 41 ]. Accordingly, DP offers a new methodological path in this study, for the exploration of cellphone fraud interactions, one form of online interactions.…”