In:Doing Politics: Discursivity, performativity and mediation in political discourse
Edited by Michael Kranert and Geraldine Horan
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 80] 2018
► pp. 235–258
Chapter 10United we diverge
Politician Facebook responses to terror attacks
Editor
Published online: 12 December 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.80.10hor
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.80.10hor
Abstract
This chapter investigates what may be termed the responsive aspect of politics in critical situations where ordinary routines are challenged and unexpected events require a political response. Taking the deadly attack on a public meeting and the synagogue in Copenhagen, Denmark on 14 February 2015 as an empirical case, the chapter analyses responses from leading politicians on Facebook in the first days after the attacks. The analysis centres on the way in which the attacks are categorised and evaluated as well as on prevalent topoi and forms of dialogicality. The chapter concludes that the Facebook responses constitute a double articulation of overt unity and potential disagreement.
Article outline
- Introduction
- Conceptualising responsive politics in critical situations
- Method, research questions and data
- Analysis
- Categorisation
- Evaluations
- Topoi for political action
- Dialogicality
- Conclusion and discussion
Notes References
References (44)
Billig, Michael. 1996. Arguing and Thinking: A Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology. 2nd edn. Cambridge: University Press.
Benoit, William L. 1997. “Image Repair Discourse and Crisis Communication.” Public Relations Review 23 (2): 177–186.
Bor, Stephanie E. 2014. “Using Social Network Sites to Improve Communication Between Political Campaigns and Citizens in the 2012 Election.” American Behavioral Scientist 58(9): 1195–1213.
Bornscheuer, Lothar. 1976. Topik. Zur Struktur der gesellschaftlichen Einbildungskraft [On the Structure of Societal Imagination]. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
Carvalho, Anabela. 2005. “Representing the Politics of the Greenhouse effect: Discursive Strategies in the British Media.” Critical Discourse Studies 2 (1): 1–29.
Chadwick, Andrew. 2013. The Hybrid Media System: Politics and Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chouliaraki, Lilie. 2004. “Watching 11 September: The politics of Pity.” Discourse & Society 15(2–3): 185–198.
Chouliaraki, Lilie, and Norman Fairclough.1999. Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh University Press.
Coombs, W. Timothy. 1999. Ongoing Crisis Communication. Planning, Managing and Responding. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Condit, Celeste M. 1985. “The Functions of Epideictic: The Boston Massacre Orations as Examplar.” Communication Quarterly 33 (4): 284–299.
Cottle, Simon. 2009a. Global Crisis Reporting. Journalism in the Global Age. Maidenhead, Berkshire: Open University Press.
. 2009b. “Global Crises in the News: Staging New Wars, Disasters, and Climate Change.” International Journal of Communication (3): 494–516.
Chilton, Paul. 1987. “Metaphor, Euphemism and the Militarization of Language.” Current Research on Peace and Violence 10: 7–19.
De Rycker, Antoon, and Zuraidah Modh Don. (eds). 2013. Discourse and Crisis: Critical Perspectives. (DAPSAC Series No. 52). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Enli, Gunn Sara, and Eli Skogerbø. 2013. “Personalized Campaigns in Party-Centered Politics: Twitter and Facebook as Arenas for Political Communication.” Information, Communication & Society 6(5): 757–774.
Fairclough, Norman. 2003. Analysing Discourse. Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge.
Frandsen, Finn, and Winnie Johansen. 2011. “The Study of Internal Crisis Communication: Towards an Integrative Framework.” Corporate Communications: An International Journal 16 (4): 347–361.
Hajer, Maarten A. 2009. Authoritative Governance. Policy Making in the Age of Mediatization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hayes, Rebecca A., Andrew Smock, and Caleb T. Carr. 2015. “Face[book] Management: Self-Presentation of Political Views on Social Media.” Communication Studies. 66 (5): 549–568.
Heath, Robert L., and Dan O’Hair. 2008. “Terrorism: From the Eyes of the Beholder.” In Terrorism: Communication and Rhetorical Perspectives, ed. by Dan O’Hair, Robert L. Heath, Kevin J. Ayotte, and Gerald R. Ledlow, 17–41. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Hermann, Charles F. 1963. “Some Consequences of Crisis Which Limit the Viability of Organizations.” Administrative Science Quarterly (8): 61–82.
Horsbøl, Anders. 2016. “Public Conceptions of Publicness in the Wake of the Copenhagen Killlings.” Discourse & Communication 10 (6): 458–478.
Klinger, Ulrike and Jakob Svensson. 2015. “The Emergence of Network Media Logic in Political Communication: A Theoretical Approach.” New Media and Society 17(8): 1241–1257.
Lean, Li Mei, Zuraidah Mohd Don, and Prasana Rosaline Fernandez. 2013. “Polarization in the Media Representation of Terrorism Crises. Transitivity and Lexical Choices in Malaysia’s Leading English Dailies.” In Discourse and Crisis. Critical Perspectives, ed. by Antoon De Rycker, and Zuraidah Mohd Don, 435–461. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Linell, Per, and Srikant Sarangi (eds). 1998. “Discourse Across Professional Boundaries.” Special Issue of Text 18 (2) 143–318
Linell, Per. 2009. Rethinking Language, Mind, and World Dialogically: Interactional and Contextual Theories of Human Sense-making. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Machin, David, and Theo van Leeuwen. 2007. Global Media Discourse: A Critical Introduction. London: Routledge.
Marin, Ion 2011. “The Coverage of Terrorism in the News”. Geopolitics, History, and International Relations 3(2): 254–259.
Murphy, John M. 2003. “Our Mission and Our Moment: George W. Bush and September 11th.” Rhetoric & Public Affairs 6(4): 607–632.
. 2009. “The Discourse Historical Approach.” In Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, ed. by Ruth Wodak, and Michael Meyer, 87–121. London: Sage.
Rojecki, Andrew. 2005. “Media Discourse on Globalization and Terror.” Political Communication 22(1): 63–81.
Van Dijk, Teun. 2009. Society and Discourse: How Social Contexts Influence Text and Talk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wengeler, Martin. 2013. “Historische Diskurssemantik als Analyse von
Argumentationstopoi” [Historical Discourse Semantic as Analysis of Argumentative
Topoi]. In Linguistische Diskursanalyse: neue Perspektiven [Linguistic Discourse Analysis: New
Perspectives], ed. by Dietrich Busse, and Wolfgang Teubert. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Weizman, Elda & Zohar Livnat
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
