In:Persuasion in Specialized Discourse: A multidisciplinary perspective
Edited by Chiara Degano, Dora Renna and Francesca Santulli
[Argumentation in Context 22] 2024
► pp. 71–91
Chapter 3Arguments and framing strategies in Italian public discourse about measures to contrast the Covid-19 pandemic
Published online: 25 October 2024
https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.22.03big
https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.22.03big
Abstract
The Covid-19 pandemic has been described as a creeping crisis, which is a kind of crisis that
develops slowly, threatens common values, and is partially or insufficiently addressed by authorities. In order for an event
to appear as a “creeping crisis” citizens have to agree that it threatens common and core values. Only when this happens, a
response can be organized. This study reports on arguments and framing strategies used by policy makers in Italy to define the
virus and thus justify the restrictive measures meant to stop it. Attempts to persuade the population to adopt restrictive
measures during the pandemic relied on pragmatic argumentation, in which values such as ‘life’, ‘health’ and ‘essential’
played a significant role.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.The Italian context
- 3.Pragmatic argumentation and value-based arguments
- 4.
Analysis
- 4.1Description of the corpus
- 4.2
Results of the analysis
- 4.2.1Argument schemes
- 4.2.2Framing strategies used to describe the virus
- 4.2.3Framing strategies used to describe the restrictive measures
- 5.Values in the arguments supporting adherence to restrictive measures
- 6.Concluding remarks
Notes References
References (34)
Abel, T., & McQueen, D. (2020). Critical
health literacy and the COVID-19 crisis. Health promotion
international, 35(6), 1612–1613.
Arlotti, M., & Ranci, C. (2021). Navigare
al buio. Politica e conoscenza nella gestione dell’emergenza Covid-19 nelle residenze per
anziani. Rassegna Italiana di
Sociologia, 62(1), 67–102.
Boin, A., Ekengren, M., & Rhinard, M. (2020). Hiding
in plain sight: Conceptualizing the creeping crisis. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in
Public
Policy, 11(2), 116–138.
Capano, G. (2021). Rincorrere,
rincorrere, rincorrere. AntiCovid-19 Italian Style. Rivista di Digital
Politics, 1(1), 51–72.
Combei, C. R., Luporini, A., Alaman, A. P., & Turci, M. (2022). In
guerra contro il virus invasore: un’analisi critica delle metafore sul Covid-19 nel discorso politico-istituzionale
inglese, italiano e spagnolo. In Diversità e Inclusione.
Quando le parole sono
importanti (pp. 207–226). Meltemi, Milano.
De Vreese, C. H. (2005). News
framing: Theory and typology. Information design journal & document
design, 13(1), 51–62.
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing:
Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of
Communication, 43(4), 51–58.
Kim, Y. (2016). Understanding
publics’ perception and behaviors in crisis communication: Effects of crisis news framing and publics’ acquisition,
selection, and transmission of information in crisis situations. Journal of Public
Relations
Research, 28(1), 35–50.
Lewiński, M. (2018). Practical
argumentation in the making: Discursive construction of reasons for
action. In Argumentation and Language – Linguistic, Cognitive
and Discursive
Explorations (pp. 219–241). Springer, Cham.
Macagno, F. (2014). Manipulating
emotions: value-based reasoning and emotive language. Argumentation and
advocacy, 51(2), 103–122.
Macagno, F., & Walton, D. (2010). What
we hide in words: Emotive words and persuasive definitions. Journal of
Pragmatics, 42(7), 1997–2013.
Management and Healthcare Laboratory (MeS) of the Sant’Anna School of Advanced
Studies & National Agency for Regional Health Services (AGENAS). (2021). [URL] (last
accessed April 10, 2024)
Matlock, T., Coe, C., & Westerling, A. L. (2017). Monster
wildfires and metaphor in risk communication. Metaphor and
Symbol, 32(4), 250–261.
OECD (2018), OECD Skills Strategy
Diagnostic Report: Italy 2017, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris. .
Olza, I., Koller, V., Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I., Pérez-Sobrino, P., & Semino, E. (2021). The
#ReframeCovid initiative: From Twitter to society via metaphor. Metaphor and the Social
World, 11(1), 98–120.
Paakkari, L., & Okan, O. (2020). COVID-19:
health literacy is an underestimated problem. The Lancet. Public
Health, 5(5), e249.
Palumbo, R., Annarumma, C., Adinolfi, P., Musella, M., & Piscopo, G. (2016). The
Italian Health Literacy Project: Insights from the assessment of health literacy skills in
Italy. Health
Policy, 120(9), 1087–1094.
Passaro, E. (2020). La
Retorica Del Contagio Da Boccaccio Al Coronavirus: I Casi Della Peste Del ’300, Del ’500 E Del ’600 Tra Fonti Storiche
E Letteratura. DNA – Di Nulla
Academia, 1(1), 57–70. .
Pelikan, J. M., Rothlin, F., & Ganahl, K. (2012). Comparative
report on health literacy in eight EU member states. The European Health Literacy Project, Maastricht.
Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1958). Traité
de l’argumentation: la nouvelle rhétorique. Presses universitaires de France.
Sala, M. & Scaglioni, M. (2020). L’altro
virus. Comunicazione e disinformazione al tempo del Covid-19. Vita e Pensiero.
Scaccia, C. (2022). An
interdiscursive construction: legitimacy and authority in Conte’s first press conferences on
Covid-19. Argumentation et Analyse du Discours,
(28).
Sørensen, K., Pelikan, J. M., Röthlin, F., Ganahl, K., Slonska, Z., Doyle, G., … & Brand, H. (2015). Health
literacy in Europe: comparative results of the European health literacy survey
(HLS-EU). European Journal of Public
Health, 25(6), 1053–1058.
Velasco, V., Gragnano, A., Gruppo Regionale Hbsc Lombardia, & Vecchio, L. P. (2021). Health
Literacy Levels among Italian Students: Monitoring and Promotion at
School. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, 18(19), 9943. .
Ventura, S. (2021). La
gestione della crisi e il meaning-making. Narrazione e manipolazione nelle conferenze stampa di Giuseppe Conte durante
la pandemia del coronavirus. Comunicazione
politica, 22(1), 19–46.
Walton, D., Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T., Wyner, A., & Cartwright, D. (2010). Argumentation
in the framework of deliberation dialogue. In C. Bjola, & M. Kornprobst (Eds.), Arguing
Global Governance: Agency, Lifeworld and Shared
Reasoning (pp. 210–230). Routledge.
