- Central European University, Center for Media, Data and Society (CMDS), Department Memberadd
- Public and Political Communication, Communication, Political Communication (Communication), Jan Blommaert, Discourse Analysis, Discourse Theory, and 10 moreIdeology and Discourse Analysis, Populism, Political Extremism/Radicalism/Populism, Radical Right, Political Theory, Journalism, Extreme and Far Right, Media Discourse, Media Studies, and Critical Discourse Analysisedit
- https://www.vub.be/en/people/benjamin-de-cleenedit
Trade unions have been the object of sustained critique coming from across the political spectrum for several decades now. Based on a discourse theoretical analysis of articles in three Dutch-speaking Belgian newspapers, published in two... more
Trade unions have been the object of sustained critique coming from across the political spectrum for several decades now. Based on a discourse theoretical analysis of articles in three Dutch-speaking Belgian newspapers, published in two periods of social protest in 2014 and 2016, this article identifies six strands of critique: (1) critiques that label unions as conservative anachronisms that are out of sync with the realities of our times; (2) critiques that psychologize unions as egoistic, irresponsible and child-like actors; (3) critiques that criminalize unions as vandals, hostage takers or terrorists; (4) critiques that oppose unions to a homogenized general interest; (5) metadiscursive critiques of unions’ discursive practices; and (6) metapolitical critiques that problematize unions as polarizing and ‘political’ actors. These six strands of critique get articulated through discursive logics that operate within and across texts, newspapers and voices. Together they constitute a heterogenous but relatively consonant polyphonic discourse that challenges trade unions and their right to strike. This discourse has metapolitical implications for the debate on the mode(s) of politics that can legitimately be practiced by civil society actors.
Research Interests:
This chapter inquires into the politics of the media’s use of the signifier populism. We shift attention from the much more commonly asked questions about the relation between media and populist politics – as a phenomenon – to questions... more
This chapter inquires into the politics of the media’s use of the signifier populism. We shift attention from the much more commonly asked questions about the relation between media and populist politics – as a phenomenon – to questions about the media’s use of the term ‘populism’. Based on a literature review and a small empirical analysis of references to ‘populism’ in Flemish mainstream media, we show that the term populism is predominantly used to express concerns about the negative impact of populist politics on democracy. Bearing witness to the term’s flexibility, the ‘populist’ threat ranges from racism and ultra-nationalism to antagonistic rhetoric and demagogy. We then relate this use of ‘populism’ to broader reflections on media’s position in democracy, showing how their criticism of ‘populism’ can be seen as an exercise in drawing boundaries around what they consider legitimate democratic politics, an endeavour largely based on a defence of liberal democracy and of rational and moderate public debate. We then connect our findings about media discourse to broader insights into the nature of anti-populist discourse that seems to dominate not only media but also politics and the academy. Moving beyond political-ideological concerns dominating most of the work on anti-populism, we finally turn our attention to other kinds of logics and mechanisms that might underlie media discourse about populism and its relations to politics and the academy.
Research Interests:
In a recent article in this journal, Rogers Brubaker formulates a critique of the distinction we make in our work between populism and nationalism, and further develops his own, thicker conceptualization of populism, which integrates the... more
In a recent article in this journal, Rogers Brubaker formulates a critique of the distinction we make in our work between populism and nationalism, and further develops his own, thicker conceptualization of populism, which integrates the nationalist dimension without however totally conflating populism and nationalism. In this article, we briefly respond to the critique of our work, further clarifying and refining our plea for clearly distinct conceptualizations of populism and nationalism in dialogue with the considerations formulated by Rogers Brubaker. More broadly, we see this response as a chance to contribute to the further development of a framework that allows for the rigorous study of populism's pivotal as well as complex and often troubling relation with nationalism.
Research Interests:
Criticizing mainstream media for their 'lies' or 'fake news' has become a common political practice on the radical right. Further empirical research is needed to better understand the intricacies of these attacks on media, in particular... more
Criticizing mainstream media for their 'lies' or 'fake news' has become a common political practice on the radical right. Further empirical research is needed to better understand the intricacies of these attacks on media, in particular for the way they relate to criticism of the political system as a whole and to matters of political representation. How do radical right actors construct a sense of political misrepresentation through their critique of media, and how does this allow them to make representative claims? This is what we explore in this article through a discourse analysis of the Flemish radical right youth movement Schild & Vrienden. Drawing inspiration from constructivist theories of representation, we explore the entanglement in empirical practice between two dimensions of representation: 1) between its literal meaning (as 'portrayal') and its political meaning (as standing or speaking for), and 2) between representation and misrepresentation. With our analysis, we shed light on the increasing politicization of the media as a non-electoral space of representation and misrepresentation, and on the role played by media criticism in the radical right's broader (meta)political strategies.
Research Interests:
Aiming to provide some theoretical context to this edited volume on Imagining the Peoples of Europe, this chapter argues that a discourse-theoretical definition of populism as a political logic is the best basis for discursive analyses... more
Aiming to provide some theoretical context to this edited volume on Imagining
the Peoples of Europe, this chapter argues that a discourse-theoretical definition
of populism as a political logic is the best basis for discursive analyses of populist
politics. In identifying what makes populist politics across the political spectrum
populist, the chapter strongly builds on Laclau’s work. But it more explicitly
limits populism to a particular political logic that revolves around the claim to
represent ‘the people’, discursively constructed through a down/up opposition
between the people-as-underdog and ‘the elite’ as a small and illegitimately
powerful group that is argued not to satisfy the needs and demands of the people.
This definition also emphasizes how populism constructs not only ‘the people’
but also ‘the elite’, and how it presents certain demands as the will of the people.
The chapter concludes with a discussion of the proposed definition’s implications
for the empirical analysis of populist politics across the political spectrum,
suggesting that we need to analyze the ways in which populists construct the
down/up opposition between ‘people’ and ‘elite’ as well as how this opposition is
articulated with other elements of populists’ particular programs and strategies.
the Peoples of Europe, this chapter argues that a discourse-theoretical definition
of populism as a political logic is the best basis for discursive analyses of populist
politics. In identifying what makes populist politics across the political spectrum
populist, the chapter strongly builds on Laclau’s work. But it more explicitly
limits populism to a particular political logic that revolves around the claim to
represent ‘the people’, discursively constructed through a down/up opposition
between the people-as-underdog and ‘the elite’ as a small and illegitimately
powerful group that is argued not to satisfy the needs and demands of the people.
This definition also emphasizes how populism constructs not only ‘the people’
but also ‘the elite’, and how it presents certain demands as the will of the people.
The chapter concludes with a discussion of the proposed definition’s implications
for the empirical analysis of populist politics across the political spectrum,
suggesting that we need to analyze the ways in which populists construct the
down/up opposition between ‘people’ and ‘elite’ as well as how this opposition is
articulated with other elements of populists’ particular programs and strategies.
Research Interests:
The Democracy in Europe Movement 2025 (DiEM25), launched by former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis, seeks to construct a transnational left political project to 'democratise Europe'. Its construction of a European 'people' against... more
The Democracy in Europe Movement 2025 (DiEM25), launched by former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis, seeks to construct a transnational left political project to 'democratise Europe'. Its construction of a European 'people' against an international elite raises questions about the potentials of populism beyond the nation-state. Building on a discourse-theoretical distinction between populism and nationalism, the article asks whether DiEM25 is a truly transnational populist movement. Through an analysis of the movement's manifestoes, speeches, press releases and published interviews with DiEM25 leaders, the article shows how DiEM25 constructs a 'European people' in opposition to an international 'elite', how DiEM25 oscillates between speaking for national 'peoples' and a transnational 'people', and how it negotiates its populism, nationalism and transnationalism. The article contributes to the theorisation of populism beyond the usually assumed nation-state level and shines a light on the potentials and limitations of transnational populism as an as-yet understudied political development.
Research Interests:
This introduction to the edited volume Communication and Discourse Theory aims to reflect on the interaction between discourse theory and the study of media and communication, and the Brussels Discourse Theory Group’s contribution to it.... more
This introduction to the edited volume Communication and Discourse Theory aims to reflect on the interaction between discourse theory and the study of media and communication, and the Brussels Discourse Theory Group’s contribution to it. The chapter starts with a summary of the main tenets of Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse theory, and touches upon its methodological/analytical translation in discourse-theoretical analysis (DTA). A next main part of the chapter discusses how discourse theory has been put to use for the analysis of communication and media, distinguishing four thematic areas: (1) communication, rhetoric, and media strategies, (2) discourses in media organizations, (3) media identities, practices, and institutions, and (4) media and agonistic democracy. In the next part, we single out two areas that are currently
being developed in the Group, and have thus far remained under-developed, theoretically as well as empirically, from a discourse-theoretical perspective: the relation between the discursive and the material, and the relation between media, communication, and audiences. Finally, the chapter provides a short overview of the other chapters in this book.
being developed in the Group, and have thus far remained under-developed, theoretically as well as empirically, from a discourse-theoretical perspective: the relation between the discursive and the material, and the relation between media, communication, and audiences. Finally, the chapter provides a short overview of the other chapters in this book.
Research Interests:
Las estrechas conexiones empíricas y las afinidades conceptuales entre el populismo y el nacionalismo han llevado a una superposición generalizada pero engañosa entre los conceptos de populismo y nacionalismo en los debates académicos, en... more
Las estrechas conexiones empíricas y las afinidades conceptuales entre el populismo y el nacionalismo han llevado a una superposición generalizada pero engañosa entre los conceptos de populismo y nacionalismo en los debates académicos, en el periodismo y en la retórica política. A pesar de la evidente importancia de las conexiones entre el nacionalismo y el populismo, sus relaciones conceptuales y empíricas han recibido una atención bastante limitada. Basándonos en la tradición teórico-discursivo post-estructuralista asociada a Laclau y Mouffe y la Escuela de Essex de análisis del discurso, este artículo trata el populismo y el nacionalismo como formas distintas de construir discursivamente y de reclamar representar al “pueblo” como “los de abajo” (underdog en inglés) y como nación, respectivamente. Las diferencias entre ambos conceptos también se pueden identificar y resaltar desde una perspectiva espacial u orientacional, al mirar la arquitectura del populismo y el nacionalismo como si se estructurase en torno a un eje abajo/arriba (poder vertical) y un dentro/fuera (horizontal - identidad y territorio) respectivamente. Sobre la base de este marco, sugerimos que la coincidencia del populismo y el nacionalismo pueden estudiarse fructíferamente a través del prisma de la articulación. Una vez más, un enfoque en la arquitectura discursiva permite comprender cómo distintos proyectos políticos construyen diferentes discursos al conectar los componentes básicos del populismo y el nacionalismo de maneras particulares. La última parte del artículo ilustra los beneficios del enfoque teórico-discursivo al estudiar la articulación del populismo y el nacionalismo en el rechazo excluyente y nacionalista de la
derecha populista radical de la diversidad étnico-cultural y en las críticas de la política supranacional y multinacional encontradas tanto en la izquierda como en la derecha.
derecha populista radical de la diversidad étnico-cultural y en las críticas de la política supranacional y multinacional encontradas tanto en la izquierda como en la derecha.
Research Interests: Discourse Analysis, Political Extremism/Radicalism/Populism, Nationalism, Populism, Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe, and 9 morePolitical Discourse Analysis, Ideology and Discourse Analysis, Radical Right, Political Discourse, Ernesto Laclau, Radical Right-wing Populist Parties, Populismo, Nacionalismo, and Discurso Populista
This article formulates precise questions and 'rules of engagement' designed to advance our understanding of the role populism can and should play in the present political conjuncture, with potentially significant implications for... more
This article formulates precise questions and 'rules of engagement' designed to advance our understanding of the role populism can and should play in the present political conjuncture, with potentially significant implications for critical management and organization studies and beyond. Drawing on the work of Ernesto Laclau and others working within the post-Marxist discourse theory tradition, we defend a concept of populism understood as a form of reason that centres around a claim to represent 'the people', discursively constructed as an underdog in opposition to an illegitimate 'elite'. A formal discursive approach to populism brings with it important advantages. For example, it establishes that a populist logic can be invoked to further very different political goals, from radical left to right, or from progressive to regressive. It sharpens too our grasp of important issues that are otherwise conflated and obfuscated. For instance, it helps us separate out the nativist and populist dimensions in the discourses of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), Trump or the Front National (FN). Our approach to populism, however, also points to the need to engage with the rhetoric about populism, a largely ignored area of critical research. In approaching populism as signifier, not only as a concept, we stress the added need to focus on the uses of the term 'populism' itself: how it is invoked, by whom, and to what purpose and effect. This, we argue, requires that we pay more systematic attention to anti-populism and 'populist hype', and reflect upon academia's own relation to populism and anti-populism.
Research Interests:
This article analyses how official citizen deliberation processes interpellate citizens, and argues that this act of invitation is a crucial element of the power dynamics of people's participation in such processes. The interpellation as... more
This article analyses how official citizen deliberation processes interpellate citizens, and argues that this act of invitation is a crucial element of the power dynamics of people's participation in such processes. The interpellation as citizen is both what offers people the opportunity to speak and a central aspect of how people's discourse is constrained and given direction. The study combines a discourse-theoretical perspective on interpellation and subject positions (Laclau and Mouffe) with frame-theoretical insights (Goffman), to analyse the way interpellation works in practice, how certain subject positions rather than others are indicated or prescribed to participants , and the ways these participants endorse them or attempt to (re)position themselves in interactions. Based on the analysis of a citizen deliberation process on health care reimbursement organised in Belgium, we show how the invited citizens are interpellated ‒ often simultaneously ‒ as 'nationals', as 'ordinary people', and as 'participants', and how they respond to this. On a theoretical level, this article contributes modestly to a more dynamic, multi-layered and subtle conceptualization of subject positions as constructed through suggestion, response and resistance in concrete interactive settings.
Research Interests: Discourse Analysis, Sociology, Political Participation, Community Engagement & Participation, Public Deliberation, and 10 moreLouis Althusser, Deliberative Democracy, Judith Butler, Post-Althusserian Theory, Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe, Public Health, Democracy, Erving Goffman, Interpellation, and Public Policy
This chapter disentangles the concepts of populism and nationalism to shed light on how populism and nationalism have been combined in populist politics. Drawing on Essex style discourse theory, it defines nationalism as a discourse... more
This chapter disentangles the concepts of populism and nationalism to shed light on how populism and nationalism have been combined in populist politics. Drawing on Essex style discourse theory, it defines nationalism as a discourse structured around ‘the nation’, envisaged as a limited and sovereign community that exists through time and is tied to a certain space, and that is constructed through an in/out (member/non-member) opposition. Populism, by contrast, is structured around a down/up antagonism between ‘the people’ as a large powerless group and ‘the elite’ as a small and illegitimately powerful group, with populists claiming to represent ‘the people’. The chapter uses this theoretical distinction to analyse the intricate empirical connections between populism and nationalism. It pays particular attention to the articulation of exclusionary nationalism and populism in populist radical right politics; populist ways of formulating demands for national sovereignty; and the possibilities and limitations of a transnational populism.
Research Interests:
The close empirical connections between populism and nationalism have naturalised a rather misleading overlap between the concepts of populism and nationalism in academic and public debates. As a result, the relation between the two has... more
The close empirical connections between populism and nationalism have naturalised a rather misleading overlap between the concepts of populism and nationalism in academic and public debates. As a result, the relation between the two has not received much systematic attention. Drawing on the poststructuralist discourse theory originally formulated by Laclau and Mouffe, this article differentially identifies populism and nationalism as distinct ways of discursively constructing and claiming to represent “the people”, as underdog and as nation respectively. These distinct constructions of “the people” can also be identified and highlighted from a spatial or orientational perspective, by looking at the architectonics of populism and nationalism as revolving around a down/up (vertical) and an in/out (horizontal) axis respectively. Building on this framework, the article then concludes that the co-occurrence of populism and nationalism should be studied through the prism of articulation. Again, a focus on discursive architectonics allows grasping how different political projects construct different discourses by connecting the building blocks of populism and nationalism in particular ways. The study of these articulations, based on a clear distinction between populism and nationalism, is a necessary step in further deepening our understanding of the complexity and variety of populist politics.
Research Interests:
In contrast to other core constituents of modern politics, conservatism has not been the object of much discursive-constructivist rethinking. Inspired by Laclau's work and by Glynos and Howarth's discourse-theoretical development of the... more
In contrast to other core constituents of modern politics, conservatism has not been the object of much discursive-constructivist rethinking. Inspired by Laclau's work and by Glynos and Howarth's discourse-theoretical development of the notion of logics, this article sets out to identify the conservative political logic. Conservative politics, it argues, articulate demands as conservation, envisaged as a process of ensuring the desirable continuity of the social order between past, present, and future, in opposition to a (demand for) change that is argued to constitute a dislocatory threat to the continuity of the social order. The conservative political logic interpellates citizens as members of that threatened social order, and presents conservative politics as the way to protect this threatened social order. Building on a critical discussion of dominant approaches to conservatism, the article proposes to identify the more formal logic that structures conservative rhetoric as an alternative for a substance-based ideological definition of conservatism. The distinctiveness of the discourse-theoretical perspective on conservative politics becomes more pronounced as the article moves on to argue that conservatism discursively constructs changes as threats to the social order, and, finally, shows how conservative politics discursively construct and reproduce the social order they (cl)aim to conserve.
Research Interests:
Like elsewhere in Europe, the increased number of asylum applications dominated Flemish media and political debate during the summer and autumn of 2015, and asylum has remained on the political agenda ever since. This chapter argues that... more
Like elsewhere in Europe, the increased number of asylum applications dominated Flemish media and political debate during the summer and autumn of 2015, and asylum has remained on the political agenda ever since. This chapter argues that the 'refugee crisis' was a moment marked by continuities and adaptations of existing discourses rather than by radical transformations. The dominant negative discourse on the 'refugee crisis' has drawn on long-established culturalist, securitarian and economic discursive logics to problematise the presence of migrants, ethnic minorities and asylum seekers. These have been adapted to the particularities of the contemporary moment, for example through the Europeanisation of the Flemish debate, and the further strengthening of an anti-Islamic clash of civilisations discourse. Humanitarian concerns have also been present in both discourse and policy, but have not been able to counter the dominant construction of the 'refugee crisis' as a cultural, security and economic threat and crisis for Flanders, Belgium and Europe, caused by the influx of refugees. Zusammenfassung: Note to the editors: Please insert a German abstract of max 150 words
Research Interests: Discourse Analysis, Critical Discourse Studies, Refugee Studies, Migration, Critical Discourse Analysis, and 11 moreEuropean Immigration and Asylum Law, Migration Studies, Asylum seekers, Ideology and Discourse Theory, Refugees, Belgium, Migrants, Flanders, Logics, Critique of Culturalism, and asylum crisis
Research Interests:
In their editorial, Speed and Mannion identify two main challenges " the rise of post-truth populism " poses for health policy: the populist threat to inclusive healthcare policies, and the populist threat to well-designed health policies... more
In their editorial, Speed and Mannion identify two main challenges " the rise of post-truth populism " poses for health policy: the populist threat to inclusive healthcare policies, and the populist threat to well-designed health policies that draw on professional expertise and research evidence. This short comment suggests some conceptual clarifications that might help in thinking through more profoundly these two important issues. It argues that we should approach right-wing populism as a combination of a populist down/up (people/elite) axis with an exclusionary nationalist in/out (member/non-member) axis. And it raises some questions regarding the equation between populism, demagogy and the rejection of expertise and scientific knowledge.
Research Interests:
This brief text is the editorial to the JOMEC Journal special issue on Expressive Culture and Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. It situates the special issue within the existing body of literature on the intersections between the... more
This brief text is the editorial to the JOMEC Journal special issue on Expressive Culture and Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. It situates the special issue within the existing body of literature on the intersections between the radical right and expressive culture. The editorial further outlines the main contribution of the special issue: the focus on hitherto largely ignored countries, and the more consistent focus on parties and
organised politics. This includes taking into account the populist dimensions of the radical right’s relation to artists and genres. The editorial also reflects on what the contributions, taken together, teach us about the differences and tensions between
nationalist vanguard strategies typical of radical right activist subcultures and the populist dimensions of radical right party politics.
organised politics. This includes taking into account the populist dimensions of the radical right’s relation to artists and genres. The editorial also reflects on what the contributions, taken together, teach us about the differences and tensions between
nationalist vanguard strategies typical of radical right activist subcultures and the populist dimensions of radical right party politics.
Research Interests:
This article discusses the interplay between nationalism and populism in the Flemish (North-Belgian), Vlaams Bloc/Vlaams Belang’s (VB), populist radical right rhetoric about expressive culture. Building on a discourse theoretical analysis... more
This article discusses the interplay between nationalism and populism in the Flemish (North-Belgian), Vlaams Bloc/Vlaams Belang’s (VB), populist radical right rhetoric about expressive culture. Building on a discourse theoretical analysis of three extensive case studies (concerts against the VB, the opposition between the VB and the Flemish theatres,
and the VB’s criticism of the Flemish National Songfest), and a number of other controversial moments the article shows that nationalist and populist discourse play different roles in VB rhetoric about expressive culture. Radical and exclusionary
nationalism is the ideological core of the VB’s views on culture and of its relationships with artists. Populism is a strategy the party uses to position itself as the political representative of the people, to present its nationalist demands as the will of the people, and to dismiss opposition to the party and its radical and exclusionary nationalist ideology as elitist.
The VB’s ‘positive’ populist strategy of associating with popular Flemish artists and genres, the article shows, has only had limited success. By contrast, the party’s ‘negative’ populist
strategy of criticising artists as an elite has been instrumental in delegitimising the strong, mainly anti-racist, resistance from the part of artists against the VB. It has reduced artistic resistance to the VB and its ideology to support of the political elite. And it has presented artists themselves as an elite that is completely out of touch with the ordinary people who suffer from multicultural society. The VB’s nationalist-populist rhetoric about expressive culture has thus contributed to the construction of the antagonism that is central to its populist radical right politics: the antagonism between on the one hand the anti-Flemish and multiculturalist political, cultural, media, and intellectual elite and on the other hand the people and the radical and exclusionary Flemish nationalist VB as the
party of the people.
and the VB’s criticism of the Flemish National Songfest), and a number of other controversial moments the article shows that nationalist and populist discourse play different roles in VB rhetoric about expressive culture. Radical and exclusionary
nationalism is the ideological core of the VB’s views on culture and of its relationships with artists. Populism is a strategy the party uses to position itself as the political representative of the people, to present its nationalist demands as the will of the people, and to dismiss opposition to the party and its radical and exclusionary nationalist ideology as elitist.
The VB’s ‘positive’ populist strategy of associating with popular Flemish artists and genres, the article shows, has only had limited success. By contrast, the party’s ‘negative’ populist
strategy of criticising artists as an elite has been instrumental in delegitimising the strong, mainly anti-racist, resistance from the part of artists against the VB. It has reduced artistic resistance to the VB and its ideology to support of the political elite. And it has presented artists themselves as an elite that is completely out of touch with the ordinary people who suffer from multicultural society. The VB’s nationalist-populist rhetoric about expressive culture has thus contributed to the construction of the antagonism that is central to its populist radical right politics: the antagonism between on the one hand the anti-Flemish and multiculturalist political, cultural, media, and intellectual elite and on the other hand the people and the radical and exclusionary Flemish nationalist VB as the
party of the people.
Research Interests:
This article presents a discourse-theoretical analysis of the discursive struggle against the Flemish radical right from within Flemish nationalist civil society as it was fought out in debates about the Flemish National Songfest in the... more
This article presents a discourse-theoretical analysis of the discursive struggle against the Flemish radical right from within Flemish nationalist civil society as it was fought out in debates about the Flemish National Songfest in the period 1991-1995. Using a discourse-theoretical redefinition of nationalism, the article develops the argument that the discursive struggle against the radical right from within Flemish nationalist civil society has been structured around attenuations of nationalism. Whilst the radical right takes the nationalist premise of the existence of a sovereign and limited nation to its radical conclusions, opposition to the radical right contests the authoritarian and racist consequences of radical nationalism. The radical right’s critics attenuate Flemish nationalism’s radical potential by articulating it with signifiers originating in other discourses: democracy, tolerance, peace, and openness. But they do not question the nationalist premises in which the radical right’s authoritarianism and racism are grounded. By analyzing these mechanisms, the article contributes to understanding the discursive struggle among Flemish nationalists, and especially to the tension inherent to the resistance against radical right politics from the part of more moderate nationalists.
Research Interests:
This chapter discusses the rhetoric of the Flemish radical right party Vlaams Belang (formerly Vlaams Blok, VB) by looking at the discursive struggle between the VB and the so-called Flemish city theatres in Antwerp, Ghent and Brussels.... more
This chapter discusses the rhetoric of the Flemish radical right party Vlaams Belang (formerly Vlaams Blok, VB) by looking at the discursive struggle between the VB and the so-called Flemish city theatres in Antwerp, Ghent and Brussels. The city theatres have been among the most active opponents of the VB from within the cultural sector and have been the cultural institutions most consistently criticised by the VB. The chapter looks at the discursive struggle between the VB and the city theatres in the period 2005-2006, a period of intensified struggle between the VB and the theatres. It presents the results of a discourse-theoretical analysis – that combines discourse-theoretical concepts (Laclau & Mouffe 2001) with the procedures of qualitative content analysis – of the rhetoric of the VB in its relation to the rhetoric of the VB’s opponents from within the theatres. The analysis is based on a corpus of external communication of the VB and the city theatres, parliamentary and city council debates about the city theatres, as well as mainstream and specialised media coverage. The analysis shows how the VB’s rhetoric about the city theatres is structured around the articulation of three discourses – nationalism, conservatism, and populism. Nationalism, conservatism, and populism mutually reinforce each other and create a strong antagonism between the VB and the city theatres. The chapter shows that the VB claims the signifier democracy but that at the same time its nationalism, conservatism, and populism close down the space for democratic politics to a significant extent and thus give the VB’s rhetoric an authoritarian character.
Research Interests:
Although they belong to different spheres, popular culture and populism can in some cases become intertwined and interlocked because they are both built around the antagonism between people and elite. Populist parties are often happy to... more
Although they belong to different spheres, popular culture and populism can in some cases become intertwined and interlocked because they are both built around the antagonism between people and elite. Populist parties are often happy to associate themselves with popular culture as this allows them to strengthen their bond with the (signifier) people. This article looks at an inverse movement: the contestation of a populist party's claim on the people through popular culture. It analyzes the discursive struggle between the Flemish extreme-right populist party Vlaams Belang and 0110. On 1 October 2006, a series of concerts “for tolerance, against racism, against extremism, and against gratuitous violence” featuring many of Belgium's most popular artists from all kinds of genres, were held in four Belgian cities. The article shows how the organization behind the 0110 concerts managed to turn popular culture against the Vlaams Belang, thus questioning this party's claim on the signifier “people”.
Research Interests:
On 1 October 2006 — one week before the municipal elections — the 0110 concerts ‘for tolerance, against racism, against extremism, against gratuitous violence’ were held in the Belgian cities of Antwerp, Brussels, Ghent and Charleroi.... more
On 1 October 2006 — one week before the municipal elections — the 0110 concerts ‘for tolerance, against racism, against extremism, against gratuitous violence’ were held in the Belgian cities of Antwerp, Brussels, Ghent and Charleroi. With these concerts the organizers wanted to make a statement against the extreme right Flemish-nationalist party Vlaams Belang (VB). This article looks at the discourse of the artists organizing and participating in the concerts, and at how this was communicated through the concerts, and asks how the VB reacted to 0110. The key to understanding this discursive struggle is populism. After discussing the VB and earlier anti-racist initiatives in Belgium from the perspective of populism, the article presents the results of a discourse analysis of the external communication of the VB and of the 0110 organization, of press coverage of 0110, and of the live coverage of the concerts. It discusses three issues that were central to the struggle between 0110 and the VB: the relationship between 0110 and (institutionalized) politics, the discourse of tolerance, and the participation of popular artists.
Research Interests:
When Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe published an elaborate version of their discourse theory in Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (1985), they were met with fierce resistance by a unified front of traditional Marxists and... more
When Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe published an elaborate version of their discourse theory in Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (1985), they were met with fierce resistance by a unified front of traditional Marxists and anti-poststructuralists. The debates on post-Marxism dominated much of the book's reception. This focus, combined with discourse theory's rather abstract nature, its lack of clear methodological guidelines, and its more natural habitat of Political Studies, caused discourse theory to remain confined to this realm of Political Studies, despite the broad ideological definition of the political preferred by the authors. This article aims to revisit discourse theory and bring it into the realm of Media Studies. A necessary condition to enhance discourse theory's applicability in Media Studies is the re-articulation of discourse theory into discourse theoretical analysis (DTA). DTA's claim for legitimacy is supported in this article by two lines of argument. Firstly, a comparison with Critical Discourse Analyses (CDA) at the textual and contextual level allow us to flesh out the similarities — and more importantly — the differences between CDA and DTA. Secondly, DTA's applicability is demonstrated by putting it to work in a case study, which focuses on the articulation of audience participation through televisional practices. Both lines of argument aim to illustrate the potential, the adaptability and the legitimacy of DTA's move into media studies.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Early career scholars face a number of common challenges, uncertainties, and experiences, and thus they can learn from each other, from other young scholars who are in similar situations, as well as from senior scholars. Furthermore, the... more
Early career scholars face a number of common challenges, uncertainties, and experiences, and thus they can learn from each other, from other young scholars who are in similar situations, as well as from senior scholars. Furthermore, the ever more competitive academic environment demands broad solidarity among scholars to secure academia's capacity to be critical about developments in society at large but also about academia and the conditions of those working in it. The summer school and the YECREA network aim to provide a space for this.
Research Interests:
Under the overarching theme of Transcultural Communication - Intercultural Comparisons, the 2010 European Communication Conference (ECC 2010) organised by the European Communication Research and Education Association (ECREA) in Hamburg... more
Under the overarching theme of Transcultural Communication - Intercultural Comparisons, the 2010 European Communication Conference (ECC 2010) organised by the European Communication Research and Education Association (ECREA) in Hamburg brought together more than 1,000 participants from a wide range of media and communication disciplines. Within 17 thematic sections, scholars from Europe and beyond presented their current research. Among them were many interesting presentations by young scholars. A selection of these papers is presented in this special issue of PLATFORM edited by the management team of the Young Scholars' Network of the European Communication Research and Education Association (YECREA).
Research Interests:
"Abstract: The Zapatista rebellion which broke out on January 1, 1994, on the very day that the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was implemented, can be considered a local response to the global policy shift of the Mexican... more
"Abstract: The Zapatista rebellion which broke out on January 1, 1994, on the very day that the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was implemented, can be considered a local response to the global policy shift of the Mexican government under President Salinas de Gortari (1988-1994). This thesis includes a detailed discursive analysis of the annual speeches of the president, and the annual declarations of the EZLN (Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional). One of the basic assumptions of the thesis is that these political narratives played a strategic role in a struggle to gain hegemonic acceptance amongst the Mexican populace for the respective national projects which each side envisioned. The initial chapters present a description of the socio-historical context in Mexico and of the EZLN as a social movement. Chapters III and IV describe the theoretical-methodological framework of the thesis, which integrates a Gramscian approach to hegemony with discourse theory and two main directions in critical discourse analysis (CDA): discourse and social change and the discourse-historical approach. Categories of discourse theory have been connected to categories in CDA, thus creating a framework which allows for the analysis of data in the light of a hegemonic struggle. The analysis helps to clarify concepts in discourse theory, especially ‘empty signifiers’, ‘nodal points’, ‘myth’ and ‘imaginary’. The integration of discourse theory and CDA makes possible an analysis of the discourse of the Mexican government and the EZLN in terms of processes of rearticulation. Thus, Salinas de Gortari rearticulates the national future of Mexico in terms of civic nationalism and liberal democracy; and the EZLN in terms of ethnic nationalism and a radical democracy. The final chapters discuss the stakes in this conflict and consider it in terms of the struggle, on the part of the EZLN, for the right to be different. In abstract terms, this involves an increased tension between the universal and particular – both relevant issues in a contemporary world which is characterized by multiple groups struggling to affirm their identity. "
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The negotiations between the Greek government and its creditors have dominated European politics in these last months to such an extent that politicians and press alike seem to have largely forgotten about the populist radical right, and... more
The negotiations between the Greek government and its creditors have dominated European politics in these last months to such an extent that politicians and press alike seem to have largely forgotten about the populist radical right, and certainly the Greek Golden Dawn. All eyes were focused on the unequal struggle between Greece’s creditors and the left-wing populists of Syriza (Syriza’s right-wing, conservative and nationalist coalition partner ANEL, i.e. Independent Greeks, received very little attention). Resistance to neoliberal economic policy has been beaten for now, or so it seems, even with Syriza still in power as I write this. This crisis can go in many directions. But what is clear is that the defeat of the democratic, inclusive and pro-European left-wing populist Syriza and the imposition of even harsher austerity measures on a country suffering a profound economic crisis might strengthen the radical right and perhaps also other forces that constitute a danger to democracy and stability in Greece.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
An interview with Benjamin de Cleen, Assistant Professor at Vrije Universiteit Brussel, on the distinction between nationalism and populism, the Flemish far-right and the possibility of a trans-national populism. The interview was... more
An interview with Benjamin de Cleen, Assistant Professor at Vrije Universiteit Brussel, on the distinction between nationalism and populism, the Flemish far-right and the possibility of a trans-national populism. The interview was published in Open Democracy in October 2016 https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/antonis-galanopoulos-benjamin-de-cleen/you-can-use-populism-to-send-migrants-back
Research Interests:
Trade unions have been the object of sustained critique coming from across the political spectrum for several decades now. Based on a discourse theoretical analysis of articles in three Dutch-speaking Belgian newspapers, published in two... more
Trade unions have been the object of sustained critique coming from across the political spectrum for several decades now. Based on a discourse theoretical analysis of articles in three Dutch-speaking Belgian newspapers, published in two periods of social protest in 2014 and 2016, this article identifies six strands of critique: (1) critiques that label unions as conservative anachronisms that are out of sync with the realities of our times; (2) critiques that psychologize unions as egoistic, irresponsible and child-like actors; (3) critiques that criminalize unions as vandals, hostage takers or terrorists; (4) critiques that oppose unions to a homogenized general interest; (5) metadiscursive critiques of unions’ discursive practices; and (6) metapolitical critiques that problematize unions as polarizing and ‘political’ actors. These six strands of critique get articulated through discursive logics that operate within and across texts, newspapers and voices. Together they constitute a heterogenous but relatively consonant polyphonic discourse that challenges trade unions and their right to strike. This discourse has metapolitical implications for the debate on the mode(s) of politics that can legitimately be practiced by civil society actors.
Research Interests: Discourse Analysis, Critical Discourse Studies, Civil Society and the Public Sphere, Critical Discourse Analysis, Neoliberalism, and 15 moreWork and Labour, Critique, Polyphony, Ideology and Discourse Theory, Labor unions, Discourse Theory, Belgium, Civil Society, Trade unions, Labour Unions, Syndicalism, Depoliticization, Flanders, Essex School of Discourse Analysis, and Metapolitics
This paper focuses on the de-legitimation strategies used by union critical voices in debates about union actions against Belgian austerity politics in 2014 and 2016. Based on a discourse theoretical analysis of union critical discourse... more
This paper focuses on the de-legitimation strategies used by union critical voices in debates about union actions against Belgian austerity politics in 2014 and 2016. Based on a discourse theoretical analysis of union critical discourse in three mainstream Flemish newspapers, six sets of de-legitimation strategies that share a series of family resemblances are distinguished. These are: (1) strategies that depict unions as conservative anachronisms that are out of sync with the realities of our times; (2) strategies that psychologize and individualize unions as self-centred, irresponsible and child-like actors; (3) criminalization strategies that depict unions and unionists as vandals, as hostage takers and/or as terrorists; (4) a collection of strategies that oppose unions to a homogenized general interest; (5) metadiscursive de-legitimation strategies that criticize unions’ discursive practices; and (6) more direct metapolitical claims that question the democratic character of the unions and/or their practices. Indeed, these de-legitimation strategies link up with a broader metapolitical struggle, where the meaning of politics itself as well as the institutionalized relationships between business, government, civil society and citizens are reconfigured.
Research Interests: Social Movements, Critical Discourse Studies, Civil Society and the Public Sphere, Critical Discourse Analysis, Work and Labour, and 13 morePolitical Discourse Analysis, Ideology and Discourse Theory, Labor unions, Discourse Theory, Belgium, Trade unions, Labour Unions, Political Discourse, Metadiscourse, Flanders, Criminalization, Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), and Metapolitics
Zienkowski (jan) and De Cleen (Benjamin) - De-legitimizing labour unions - on the metapolitical fantasies taht inform discourse on striking terrorists, blackmailing the government and taking hard-working citizens hostage - Tilburg Paper... more
Zienkowski (jan) and De Cleen (Benjamin) - De-legitimizing labour unions - on the metapolitical fantasies taht inform discourse on striking terrorists, blackmailing the government and taking hard-working citizens hostage - Tilburg Paper 176.pdf
Research Interests:
Like elsewhere in Europe, the increased number of asylum applications dominated Flemish media and political debate during the summer and autumn of 2015, and asylum has remained on the political agenda ever since. This chapter argues that... more
Like elsewhere in Europe, the increased number of asylum applications dominated Flemish media and political debate during the summer and autumn of 2015, and asylum has remained on the political agenda ever since. This chapter argues that the 'refugee crisis' was a moment marked by continuities and adaptations of existing discourses rather than by radical transformations. The dominant negative discourse on the 'refugee crisis' has drawn on long-established culturalist, securitarian and economic discursive logics to problematise the presence of migrants, ethnic minorities and asylum seekers. These have been adapted to the particularities of the contemporary moment, for example through the Europeanisation of the Flemish debate, and the further strengthening of an anti-Islamic clash of civilisations discourse. Humanitarian concerns have also been present in both discourse and policy, but have not been able to counter the dominant construction of the 'refugee crisis' as a cultural, security and economic threat and crisis for Flanders, Belgium and Europe, caused by the influx of refugees.
Research Interests:
Almost all countries in Europe are facing the rise of extreme right parties and movements, and if some of them face these phenomena for decades, each national context is specific. Some countries only know radical, Neo-Nazi, and violent... more
Almost all countries in Europe are facing the rise of extreme
right parties and movements, and if some of them face these
phenomena for decades, each national context is specific. Some
countries only know radical, Neo-Nazi, and violent movements
at the margins, some face well organized political parties at the
gateway of the power, and others have known them at local or
national government for years.
In some countries, political parties are clearly labeled at the
extreme right with discourses blending nationalism, racism and
social Darwinism. In others, political parties mobilize a populist
rhetoric opposing a glorious people against corrupted elite
with, sometimes, a rejection of others. Often, the fear of Islam,
Afrophobia, and the rejection of the consolidated Europe are
central topics.
Within this galaxy, concepts are multiple and any of them fit
with all the national contexts in a comparative perspective. At
the same time, these groups and political parties change their
rhetoric, their programme or their behavior to access power or
to influence public opinion.
The International Experts Workshop seeks to offer a country-by-country
tour of Europe of extreme right parties and movements,
and negative effects on human rights and fundamental
freedoms, and explore responses to these phenomenons. It is
organised by the O ffice of the United Nations High Commissioner
for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the « Centre d’Etudes
Démocratie » (Faculté de Droit de Science politique et de Criminologie
de l’Université de Liège). The working languages are
French and English.
right parties and movements, and if some of them face these
phenomena for decades, each national context is specific. Some
countries only know radical, Neo-Nazi, and violent movements
at the margins, some face well organized political parties at the
gateway of the power, and others have known them at local or
national government for years.
In some countries, political parties are clearly labeled at the
extreme right with discourses blending nationalism, racism and
social Darwinism. In others, political parties mobilize a populist
rhetoric opposing a glorious people against corrupted elite
with, sometimes, a rejection of others. Often, the fear of Islam,
Afrophobia, and the rejection of the consolidated Europe are
central topics.
Within this galaxy, concepts are multiple and any of them fit
with all the national contexts in a comparative perspective. At
the same time, these groups and political parties change their
rhetoric, their programme or their behavior to access power or
to influence public opinion.
The International Experts Workshop seeks to offer a country-by-country
tour of Europe of extreme right parties and movements,
and negative effects on human rights and fundamental
freedoms, and explore responses to these phenomenons. It is
organised by the O ffice of the United Nations High Commissioner
for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the « Centre d’Etudes
Démocratie » (Faculté de Droit de Science politique et de Criminologie
de l’Université de Liège). The working languages are
French and English.
Research Interests:
In their editorial, Speed and Mannion identify two main challenges " the rise of post-truth populism " poses for health policy: the populist threat to inclusive healthcare policies, and the populist threat to well-designed health policies... more
In their editorial, Speed and Mannion identify two main challenges " the rise of post-truth populism " poses for health policy: the populist threat to inclusive healthcare policies, and the populist threat to well-designed health policies that draw on professional expertise and research evidence. This short comment suggests some conceptual clarifications that might help in thinking through more profoundly these two important issues. It argues that we should approach right-wing populism as a combination of a populist down/up (people/elite) axis with an exclusionary nationalist in/out (member/non-member) axis. And it raises some questions regarding the equation between populism, demagogy and the rejection of expertise and scientific knowledge.
Research Interests:
The Democracy in Europe Movement 2025 (DiEM25), launched by former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis, seeks to construct a transnational left political project to 'democratise Europe'. Its construction of a European 'people' against... more
The Democracy in Europe Movement 2025 (DiEM25), launched by former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis, seeks to construct a transnational left political project to 'democratise Europe'. Its construction of a European 'people' against an international elite raises questions about the potentials of populism beyond the nation-state. Building on a discourse-theoretical distinction between populism and nationalism, the article asks whether DiEM25 is a truly transnational populist movement. Through an analysis of the movement's manifestoes, speeches, press releases and published interviews with DiEM25 leaders, the article shows how DiEM25 constructs a 'European people' in opposition to an international 'elite', how DiEM25 oscillates between speaking for national 'peoples' and a transnational 'people', and how it negotiates its populism, nationalism and transnationalism. The article contributes to the theorisation of populism beyond the usually assumed nation-state level and shines a light on the potentials and limitations of transnational populism as an as-yet understudied political development.
Research Interests:
This conference provides a forum for researchers who seek to analyze, challenge, and (re)think the concept and the practice of propaganda in the light of contemporary forms of discourse and communication across the ideological... more
This conference provides a forum for researchers who seek to analyze, challenge, and (re)think the concept and the practice of propaganda in the light of contemporary forms of discourse and communication across the ideological spectrum.
We invite authors to examine the relationship between concepts such as propaganda, ideology, hegemony and discourse in today’s digital environment. Both empirical and theoretical contributions are welcome.
The notion of propaganda was seminal to the field of communication studies in the beginning of the 20th century. It derives its negative connotations from the way mass media have been intentionally used by state and corporate actors for partisan interests. Even though the term ‘propaganda’ may have grown out of fashion – both inside and outside of academia – its practices have not.
Notions such as ‘public relations’, ‘advertising’, ‘political marketing’, ‘public diplomacy’, ‘political marketing’ and ‘advocacy’ have now transplanted propaganda even though they often refer to similar discursive strategies of persuasion or (dis)information. As the term ‘propaganda’ grew less popular new terms emerged in order to label similar communication strategies that shape contemporary discourse and communication until this day.
Many critical approaches in discourse studies have treated propagandistic modes of communication through the lenses of ‘ideology’, ‘hegemony’, ‘discourse’ and ‘power’. However, whereas all propaganda is ideological, not all ideology manifests itself as propaganda. Likewise, whereas all propaganda operates through discourse and communication, not all discourse or communication performs the function of propaganda.
Different forms of critical discourse studies have paid attention to ideological phenomena, but the term propaganda is remarkably absent from this field of inquiry. This may be explained with reference to underlying theoretical premises of specific discourse theoretical and discourse analytical approaches, a hypothesis that may also be explored at this conference.
In a global context marked by ‘a return of the political’, by an intensification of political debates across the political spectrum, and by a (re-)articulation of old and new political fault lines crossing local, regional, national and/or transnational contexts, the seemingly outdated notion of propaganda may provide a useful entry point for examining the (partially) strategic modes of communication practiced by activists on all sides of the ideological spectrum.
If propaganda is no longer associated exclusively with traditional institutional actors such as the state or corporations, the political and communicative strategies of social and political actors such as eco-activists, AltRight trolls, neoliberal think tanks or the peace movement may be (re)thought in terms of propaganda. This brings us back to the old question whether (specific forms of) propaganda hinder or facilitate democracy. It also leads us to explore uses of digital and algorithmic propaganda in contemporary populist projects.
Regardless of the question whether and how the term propaganda is used, ‘strategies’ of white, black and grey propaganda are practiced on an everyday basis while new ways of doing propaganda continue to be developed. In fact, propaganda practices are constantly being adapted to specific social, political and technological developments. As new technologies become available, the range of actors able to practice propaganda expands.
We welcome contributions that focus on the multimodal propaganda strategies and material (text, images, video, digital content, digital education, algorithms, Virtual Reality) of states, political parties, and corporate actors. We equally welcome contributions focusing on the communicative activities of social movements, think tanks, algorithms, advertising agencies, social media and public relations counselors. All abstracts fitting one or more of the following themes will be considered but we also leave space for interesting contributions that may not be that easy to classify:
• Theme 1: Conceptual and methodological issues for studying activism and propaganda
• Theme 2: Historical and contemporary transformations in activism and/or propaganda
• Theme 3: Democratic and anti-democratic modes of discourse, communication and ideology
• Theme 4: Digital and multimodal forms of activism, persuasion and disinformation
• Theme 5: Transdisciplinary dialogues on discourse and communication as propaganda and/or activism
• …
We especially welcome papers that rethink the notions of propaganda and activism in relation to key concepts in discourse studies. Such notions include power, subjectivity, reflexivity, critique, identity, context, language use and multimodal communication. Papers may also focus on the ethical problems that come with propagandistic activities. For instance, what does propaganda mean for notions such as knowledge, political correctness, freedom of speech or critical awareness?
As the field of discourse studies is inherently transdisciplinary, we welcome authors from disciplines as varied as communication science, psychology, sociology, philosophy, literature, media studies and linguistics. Likewise, we seek to provide a forum for all methodological and theoretical orientations provided that the authors connect with the themes outlined in this call for papers.
We invite authors to examine the relationship between concepts such as propaganda, ideology, hegemony and discourse in today’s digital environment. Both empirical and theoretical contributions are welcome.
The notion of propaganda was seminal to the field of communication studies in the beginning of the 20th century. It derives its negative connotations from the way mass media have been intentionally used by state and corporate actors for partisan interests. Even though the term ‘propaganda’ may have grown out of fashion – both inside and outside of academia – its practices have not.
Notions such as ‘public relations’, ‘advertising’, ‘political marketing’, ‘public diplomacy’, ‘political marketing’ and ‘advocacy’ have now transplanted propaganda even though they often refer to similar discursive strategies of persuasion or (dis)information. As the term ‘propaganda’ grew less popular new terms emerged in order to label similar communication strategies that shape contemporary discourse and communication until this day.
Many critical approaches in discourse studies have treated propagandistic modes of communication through the lenses of ‘ideology’, ‘hegemony’, ‘discourse’ and ‘power’. However, whereas all propaganda is ideological, not all ideology manifests itself as propaganda. Likewise, whereas all propaganda operates through discourse and communication, not all discourse or communication performs the function of propaganda.
Different forms of critical discourse studies have paid attention to ideological phenomena, but the term propaganda is remarkably absent from this field of inquiry. This may be explained with reference to underlying theoretical premises of specific discourse theoretical and discourse analytical approaches, a hypothesis that may also be explored at this conference.
In a global context marked by ‘a return of the political’, by an intensification of political debates across the political spectrum, and by a (re-)articulation of old and new political fault lines crossing local, regional, national and/or transnational contexts, the seemingly outdated notion of propaganda may provide a useful entry point for examining the (partially) strategic modes of communication practiced by activists on all sides of the ideological spectrum.
If propaganda is no longer associated exclusively with traditional institutional actors such as the state or corporations, the political and communicative strategies of social and political actors such as eco-activists, AltRight trolls, neoliberal think tanks or the peace movement may be (re)thought in terms of propaganda. This brings us back to the old question whether (specific forms of) propaganda hinder or facilitate democracy. It also leads us to explore uses of digital and algorithmic propaganda in contemporary populist projects.
Regardless of the question whether and how the term propaganda is used, ‘strategies’ of white, black and grey propaganda are practiced on an everyday basis while new ways of doing propaganda continue to be developed. In fact, propaganda practices are constantly being adapted to specific social, political and technological developments. As new technologies become available, the range of actors able to practice propaganda expands.
We welcome contributions that focus on the multimodal propaganda strategies and material (text, images, video, digital content, digital education, algorithms, Virtual Reality) of states, political parties, and corporate actors. We equally welcome contributions focusing on the communicative activities of social movements, think tanks, algorithms, advertising agencies, social media and public relations counselors. All abstracts fitting one or more of the following themes will be considered but we also leave space for interesting contributions that may not be that easy to classify:
• Theme 1: Conceptual and methodological issues for studying activism and propaganda
• Theme 2: Historical and contemporary transformations in activism and/or propaganda
• Theme 3: Democratic and anti-democratic modes of discourse, communication and ideology
• Theme 4: Digital and multimodal forms of activism, persuasion and disinformation
• Theme 5: Transdisciplinary dialogues on discourse and communication as propaganda and/or activism
• …
We especially welcome papers that rethink the notions of propaganda and activism in relation to key concepts in discourse studies. Such notions include power, subjectivity, reflexivity, critique, identity, context, language use and multimodal communication. Papers may also focus on the ethical problems that come with propagandistic activities. For instance, what does propaganda mean for notions such as knowledge, political correctness, freedom of speech or critical awareness?
As the field of discourse studies is inherently transdisciplinary, we welcome authors from disciplines as varied as communication science, psychology, sociology, philosophy, literature, media studies and linguistics. Likewise, we seek to provide a forum for all methodological and theoretical orientations provided that the authors connect with the themes outlined in this call for papers.
Research Interests: Discourse Analysis, Critical Discourse Studies, Propaganda, Advertising, Public Diplomacy, and 14 moreIdeology, Political communication, Social Activism, Social Media, Critical Discourse Analysis, Public Relations & Social Media, Ideology and Discourse Theory, Discourse Theory, Online Communication, Advocacy and Activism, Political Marketing, New Media and Political Activism, New Media and Political Communication, and Fake News
With the COVID-19 pandemic dominating the public sphere in recent months and no aspect of social and political life left unaffected, it seems almost natural that this unprecedented public health crisis would soon be reflected on... more
With the COVID-19 pandemic dominating the public sphere in recent months and no aspect of social and political life left unaffected, it seems almost natural that this unprecedented public health crisis would soon be reflected on discussions around the other buzzword of our time: populism. This report aims at providing a concise yet rigorous global comparative mapping of populist politics in the context of the ongoing pandemic. This will not only shed further light on the specificities, the potentials and limitations of the phenomenon, but we also expect it to highlight its irreducible heterogeneity and diversity as a way of doing politics.The key questions that we posed to contributors in this report when looking at different countries across the world can be summarised as follows:
• How have populist actors reacted to the COVID-19 pandemic when in
government or opposition?
• Has their ideological position on the left or right, or indeed somewhere inbetween, played a role to that reaction?
• How have the rates of approval and vote intensions for populist actors
developed during that period?
• More generally, how have discussions around ‘populism’ and the role of ‘experts’ and ‘science’ developed in each country during this time? Have they reproduced standard anti-populist stereotypes?
In order to shed light on these crucial aspects of the discussion and set the agenda for future comparative research as well as conceptual enquiry, we approached a series of well established scholars, along with several dynamic younger researchers specialising on both populism and the study of politics in different countries and regions. This gave us a sum of sixteen (16) case studies of countries and political actors from across the world, making the scope of our report truly global, extending from Australia to Sweden and from the Philippines to Brazil and the United States.
• How have populist actors reacted to the COVID-19 pandemic when in
government or opposition?
• Has their ideological position on the left or right, or indeed somewhere inbetween, played a role to that reaction?
• How have the rates of approval and vote intensions for populist actors
developed during that period?
• More generally, how have discussions around ‘populism’ and the role of ‘experts’ and ‘science’ developed in each country during this time? Have they reproduced standard anti-populist stereotypes?
In order to shed light on these crucial aspects of the discussion and set the agenda for future comparative research as well as conceptual enquiry, we approached a series of well established scholars, along with several dynamic younger researchers specialising on both populism and the study of politics in different countries and regions. This gave us a sum of sixteen (16) case studies of countries and political actors from across the world, making the scope of our report truly global, extending from Australia to Sweden and from the Philippines to Brazil and the United States.