THE INFLUENCE OF SOCIAL MEDIA ON POLITICAL DISCOURSE
Main Article Content
Abstract
The article presents the results of an investigation carried out between 2021 and 2022, which hasas a general objective to unravel the ideology and power contained in the messages disseminated by social networks in the 2018 presidential electoral contest in Colombia.Political propaganda is selected as the object of analysis. Methodologically, the socio-critical paradigm is adopted with a qualitative approach and as a type of research, discourse analysis. The corpus is made up ofmessages from the candidacies of Iván Duque and Gustavo Petro.Among the results, it is evident that social networks constitute a broad and important scenario in the dissemination and transmission of content, particularly in electoral campaigns; that in this type of message, discursive power is used to uncritically spread and reproduce ideologies that lead to prejudice and discrimination;that political discourse acquires particular importance through propaganda, as this is used by elites as a form of power and social control by making deliberate use of symbols whose purpose is to manipulate people's beliefs and ideas, or mental representations, regardless of the discursive strategies used to achieve it. As conclusion, it is highlighted thatin the 2018 Colombian presidential electoral contest, social networks play a decisive role in the dissemination of propaganda messages, whose purpose is to reproduce ideologies and impose power mechanisms to influence public opinion and, consequently, legitimize or delegitimize one's actions. or another party.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Becerra, L. (2019). In Colombia, misinformation is spread by WhatsApp and Facebook reveals a study by the University of Oxford. September 27.https://www.larepublica.co/economia/en-colombia-se-desinforma-por-whatsapp-y-facebook-revela-estudio-de-oxford-2914148
Beltran, D. (2017). Virtual social networks as contemporary media devices. Notebooks of Hispanic Linguistics, (30), 105-123.
Bernays, E. (2008 [1928]). Propaganda. Barcelona: Melusine.
Bernays, E. (2019 [1923]), Crystallizing Public Opinion. Calif.: New Hall Press.
Castells, M. (2009). Communication and power. Madrid: Alliance.
Charaudeau, P. (2002). What is the use of analyzing political discourse? Designis, (2), 109-124. Retrieved February 7, 2020. Available athttp://www.designisfels.net/publicaciones/revistas/2.pdf
Charaudeau, P. (2005). Le discours politic. Les masques du pouvoir. Paris: Vuibert. http://www.dissoc.org/ediciones/v03n02/DS3(2)Charaudeau.pdf
Charaudeau, P. (2009). Persuasive argumentation The example of political discourse. Central University of Venezuela, (pp. 277-295), (Trans. Pedro AlemánGuillén).
Charaudeau, P. (2010). “The propaganda discourse: a typology”. ANDn Machado, Ida Lucia & Mello, Renato, Analysis of today's discourse, vol. 3. Rio de Janeiro: Nova Fronteira (Lucerne) 2010, p.57-78.
Charaudeau, P. (2012). The speech of propaganda. An attempt at typology. In: Shiro, Marta; Charaudeau, Patrick; Granato, Luisa (eds.). Discursive genres from multiple perspectives: theories and analysis. Madrid: IberoamericanaVervuert.
Domenach, Jean-Marie. (1979). Political propaganda. French University Presses, Paris.
Constitutional Journal (2018). On "The 11 principles of Nazi propaganda developed by Joseph Goebbels, today in force in fake news". Opinion article, May 30, 2018. Santiago de Chile.https://www.diarioconstitucional.cl/2018/05/30/sobre-los-11-principios-de-la-propaganda-nazi-desarrollados-por-joseph-goebbels-hoy-vigentes-en-las-fake- news/
Fajardo, C. (2017). Global democracy and other writings. Bogota: Editions from Below.
Lasswell, HD (1927) Propaganda Technique in the World War. Knopf: New York.
Mancera, A. and Pano, A. (2013). Political discourse on Twitter: Analysis of messages that "chirp". Barcelona: Anthropos.
Martinez, MC (2001). Discourse analysis and pedagogical practice. Barcelona-Buenos Aires: Editorial Homo Sapiens.
Martinez, MC (2002). Strategies for reading and writing texts. UNESCO MECEAL Chair: Reading and Writing. Cali: University of the Valley.
Martinez, MC (2005). The argumentation in the enunciative dynamics of the discourse and the discursive construction of the identity of the subjects. In: Martínez, MC, Didactics of Discourse. Argument and narration. Workshops. Cali: Universidad del Valle-UNESCO Chair.
Martinez, MC (2013). Genres from a socio-enunciative perspective. The notion of integrated context. ALED Magazine, 13 (2), 21-40.
Martinez, MC (2015). The argumentation in the enunciation, the construction of the argumentative process in the discourse. Theoretical perspectives and practical work. Cali: University of the Valley.
MOE (2018). Impact of social networks in the Colombian electoral process. Congressional and Presidency Elections 2018. Retrieved from http://moe.org.co/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/2.-Monitoreo-de-Redes-Sociales-Intolerancia-y-Noticias-Falsas.pdf
Brown April, NG (2007). How to do critical discourse analysis. A Latin American perspective. Chile: Frasis.
Perez, E. (2018). WhatsApp reaches 1.5 billion users: this is how it has evolved to become the most popular messaging app.https://www.xatakandroid.com/aplicaciones-android/whatsapp-reaches-los-1500-millones-de-usuarios-this-has-evolved-until-it-be-the-most-popular-messaging-app, accessed September 30, 2021.
Pineda, A. (2006). Elements for a communicational theory of propaganda. Seville: Alfar.
Rodero A., E. (2000). Concept of propaganda techniques and their application to Nazism. III International Congress of Culture and Media, Pontifical University of Salamanca.http://bocc.ubi.pt/pag/rodero-emma-propaganda-nazismo.html
Terrasa, R. (2019). From Bolsonaro to Vox: how WhatsApp has become the most effective weapon of political propaganda. The World, Madrid. Sunday, January 6, 2019. Accessed August 26, 2021. https://www.elmundo.es/papel/historias/2019/01/05/5c2f91a8fc6c834e478b45dc.html
Van Dijk, T. (1995). Ideological discourse analysis. In E. Ventola& A. Solin (eds.), Special issue Interdisciplinary approaches to Discourse Analysis (pp. 135-161). New Courant: University of Helsinki.
Van Dijk, T. (2001). Discourse, ideology and context. Linguistic Folio, 35 (1-2), 11-40.
Van Dijk, T. (2003) Ideology and discourse. Editorial Ariel, Barcelona.
Van Dijk, T. (2004). Discourse and domination. Major conferences at the Faculty of Human Sciences No. 4. Bogotá: National University of Colombia.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2005). Ideology and discourse analysis. Study Utopia and Latin American Praxis, 29, 9-36. Zulia University.
Van Dijk, T. (2006). Discourse and inequality. The Netherlands: University of Amsterdam.http://www.discursos.org/Art/Discurso%20y%20desigualdad.pdf
Van Dijk, T. (2009). speech and power. Barcelona: Gedisa.
Young, K. (1991). The public opinion and the propaganda. Mexico: Paidos.