Right-wing populism as a worldview and online practice: Social media communication by ordinary citizens between ideology and lifestyles

Storm the Capitol: Linking Offline Political Speech and Online Twitter Extra-Representational Participation on QAnon and the January 6 Insurrection

“…These results confirm the importance of effective communicative efforts to mobilize individuals toward a political goal. Furthermore, the fact the same themes appear across various datasets and at different periods suggests political milieus were successfully developed and maintained throughout the 2020 campaign, which some studies have highlighted before (Krämer et al, 2021 ). Moreover, the themes unearthed by this study give credence to studies that highlight the effects of social media and online platforms consumption on political participation (Yamamoto et al, 2015 ) and the potential of increasing populist movements (KhosraviNik, 2018 ).…”

“…Vinogradova et al ( 2020 ) argue that some aspects of these communicative elements facilitate rapid and tactical deployment of messaging to generate political mobilization when done correctly. These manifestations of effective communicative efforts can enable the development of political milleus (Krämer et al, 2021 ).…”

Empowering the People’s Truth Through Social Media? (De)Legitimizing Truth Claims of Populist Politicians and Citizens

“…This ideational core of populism may be expressed to various extents by different (political) actors (Busby et al, 2019). In this article, we aim to understand how this antagonism central to populism relates to the construction of knowledge, truth-claims, and de-legitimizing discourses targeted at the media, experts, and scientists-discourses found to be central in RWPs' construction of (counter-)knowledge (e.g., Krämer et al, 2021;Ylä-Anttila, 2018). Mede and Schäfer (2020) coined the term "sciencerelated populism" to describe populism's understanding of science.…”

“…Science-related populism includes popular demands for science-related decision-making sovereignty, which means that the people (and not the academic elite) are seen as a legitimate source of scientific decision-making: Their ideas about true knowledge are allegedly not biased by ideological interests or corruption (Mede & Schäfer, 2020)-which means that they should have the power to formulate truth claims related to science. Krämer et al (2021) found empirical support for such populist constructions of reality on social media: Users with an affinity for right-wing populism cultivated distrust in established knowledge and, at the same time, emphasized the merits of alternative authorities and evidence. Using a mixed-methods analysis of far-right Twitter networks in Brazil, Oliveira et al (2021) reveal how users selectively use ideologically aligned sources to substantiate truth claims and conspiracies on Covid-19.…”

“…Responding to developments toward increasing distrust in the mainstream media, cultivated and amplified by RWP actors (Waisbord, 2018), the mainstream media and scientific actors are increasingly regarded as part of the "corrupt" elite who is not listening to the voice of the people when creating knowledge or when analysing issues (e.g., Mede & Schäfer, 2020). In this setting, this article seeks to answer the question of how social media may empower both political actors and citizens with an affinity for populist worldviews to express their perspective on truth and knowledge in an antagonistic manner (also see e.g., Krämer et al, 2021).…”