Polarization and desinformation: an analysis of discursive strategies on Black Awareness Day on Twitter
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14195/2182-8830_10-1_10Keywords:
Polarization, Black Consciousness Day, Discursive strategies, TwitterAbstract
This article aimed to understand how Black Consciousness Day in 2021 was constructed discursively on Twitter and how it circulated on the platform. We also sought to analyze which actors and groups were involved in the debate on the date and which meanings were produced and legitimized by them. For data collection, the Twitter API was used, with the help of the Social Feed Manager, from the keywords #diadaconsciencianegra; #black Consciousness; racism; racist and racist groups, between November 18 and 21, 2021. The analysis showed polarized social interactions, marked (1) by the dissemination of denialist and racist comments, whose objective seems to marginalize the black movement, and (2) by groups distinct but who share the recognition and resignification of the anti-racist struggle.
Downloads
References
BRASIL. Lei nº 10.639, de 9 de janeiro de 2003. Altera a Lei nº 9.394, de 20 de dezembro de 1996, que estabelece as diretrizes e bases da educação nacional, para incluir no currículo oficial da Rede de Ensino a obrigatoriedade da temática “História e Cultura Afro-Brasileira”. Brasília, 2003. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/2003/l10.639.htm. Acesso em: 7 jul. 2022.
BRASIL. Lei nº 12.092, de 10 de novembro de 2011. Institui o Dia Nacional de Zumbi e da Consciência Negra. Brasília, 2011. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2011/lei/l12519.htm. Acesso em: 9 jul. 2022.
BRASIL, Lei nº 7.716, de 5 de janeiro de 1989. Define os crimes resultantes de preconceito de raça ou de cor. Disponível em: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l7716.htm. Acesso em: 03 de jan.2023.
FACEBOOK.COM (META). (2021) A prevalência de discurso de ódio diminuiu quase 50% no Facebook. Disponível em: https://about.fb.com/br/news/2021/10/a-prevalencia-de-discurso-de-odio-diminuiu-quase-50-no-facebook/. Acesso em: 26 jun. 2022.
FALLIS, Don. (2015) What Is Disinformation?. Library Trends, v. 63, n. 3, p. 401-426.
HERRING, S. C. (2001). Computer-mediated discourse. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. Hamilton (Eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis (pp. 612-634). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/cmd.pdf
LOPES, Carla. (2019) Movimento Negro no Brasil: Resistências e Lutas. Que República é essa? Portal Estudos do Brasil Republicano. Disponível: http://querepublicaeessa.an.gov.br/temas/186-movimento-negro-no-brasil-resistencias-e-lutas.html. Acesso em: 8 jul. 2022.
PALMARES, Gilberto. (2009) Desigualdades étnico-raciais nos 120 anos da República brasileira. Acervo, v. 22, n. 2, p. 45-56.
POLETTO, Fabio et al. (2021) Resources and benchmark corpora for hate speech detection: a systematic review. Lang Resources & Evaluation, n. 55, pp. 477-523. DOI: 10.1007/s10579-020-09502-8. Disponível em: https://www.brunel.ac.uk/life/library. Acesso em: 05 jun. 2022.
PROM, C. (2017) Tool Report: Social Feed Manager. MAC Newsletter, v. 45, n. 2, Article 9.
RECUERO, Raquel. (2009) Redes sociais na internet. Porto Alegre: Sulina.
RECUERO, Raquel. (2017) Introdução à análise de redes sociais. Salvador: EDUFBA.
RECUERO, Raquel. (2019) Mídia social, plataforma digital, site de rede social ou rede social? Não é tudo a mesma coisa?. Medium. Disponível em: https://medium.com/@raquelrecuero/m%C3%Addia-social-plataforma-digital-site-de-rede-social-ou-rede-social-n%C3%A3o-%C3%A9-tudo-a-mesma-coisa-d7b54591a9ec. Acesso em: 28 de maio 2021.
RECUERO, Raquel; GRUZD, Anatoliy. (2019) Cascatas de “Fake News” Políticas: Um estudo de caso no Twitter. Galáxia (PUCSP), v. 41, p. 31-47.
RECUERO, Raquel; SOARES, Pricilla. (2013) Violência simbólica e redes sociais no facebook: o caso da fanpage “Diva Depressão”. Galáxia (São Paulo) [online], vol.13, n.26, pp.239-254.
Disponível em: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1982-25532013000300019.
RECUERO, Raquel; SOARES, Felipe Bonow. (2021) O Discurso Desinformativo sobre a Cura da COVID-19 no Twitter: Estudo de caso. Revista e-Compós. v. 24, jan./dez. publicação contínua, p. 1-29. DOI: doi.org/10.30962/ec.2127
RECUERO, Raquel; SOARES, Felipe; ZAGO, Gabriela. (2021) Polarização, Hiperpartidarismo e Câmaras de Eco: Como circula a Desinformação sobre Covid-19 no Twitter. Contracampo, Niterói, v. 40, n. 1, p. XXX-YYY, jan./abr.
ROSCOE, Beatriz. (2021) 79% acham que há racismo no Brasil, mas só 39% se consideram preconceituosos. Poder360. Disponível em: https://www.poder360.com.br/brasil/79-acham-que-ha-racismo-no-brasil-mas-so-39-se-consideram-preconceituosos/. Acesso em: 10 jul. 2022.
SCOTT, J.; CARRINGTON, P. J. (Orgs.) (2011) The SAGE handbook of social network analysis. London: SAGE Publications.
SHU, K.; SILVA, A.; WANG, S.; JANG, J.; LIU, H. (2017) Fake news detection on social media: a data mining perspective. Arxiv. Disponível em: https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.01967. Acesso em: 05 jul. 2021.
SILVA, Nelson Fernando Inocencio da. (1993) Consciência negra em carta 1993. Dissertação (Mestrado em Comunicação) — Programa de Pós-Graduação em Comunicação, Universidade de Brasília, Brasília.
SILVA, Vanessa Cristina Pacheco. (2014) O Dia da Consciência Negra no Brasil: Algumas Reflexões. Revista de História Bilros, Fortaleza, [S. l.], v. 2, n. 3, p. 153-166, jul./dez. Disponível em: https://revistas.uece.br/index.php/bilros/article/view/7582. Acesso em: 10 jun. 2022.
SILVA, Luiz Rogério Lopes et al. (2019) A gestão do discurso de ódio nas plataformas de redes sociais digitais: um comparativo entre Facebook, Twitter e Youtube. Revista Ibero-Americana de Ciência da Informação, v. 12, n. 2. DOI: 10.26512/rici.v12.n2.2019.22025. Disponível em: https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/RICI/article/view/22025. Acesso em: 08 jun. 2022.
SOCIAL FEED MANAGER. (2016) George Washington University Libraries. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.597278
SOARES, Felipe Bonow et al. (2019) Desinformação e esfera pública no Twitter: disputas discursivas sobre o assassinato de Marielle Franco. Revista Fronteiras — Estudos midiáticos, setembro/dezembro. Unisinos — doi: 10.4013/fem.2019.213.01. Disponível em: http://www.revistas.unisinos.br/index.php/fronteiras/article/view/fem.2019.213.01/60747379. Acesso em: 1 jul. 2022.
SUNSTEIN, Cass. (2001) Echo Chambers. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
TWITTER.COM. Regras e políticas. Disponível em: https://help.twitter.com/pt/rules-and-policies/hateful-conduct-policy. Acessado em: 26 de junho de 2022.
VAN DIJK, TA. (2006) Discourse and manipulation. Discourse & Society, v. 17, n. 3, pp. 359-383. Doi: 10.1177/0957926506060250
WARDLE, C.; DERAKHSHAN, H. (2017) Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making. Report. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. WE ARE SOCIAL; HOOTSUITE https://www.amper.ag/post/we-are-social-e-hootsuite-digital-2022-resumo-e-relatorio-completo
WODAK, R. (2005) “Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis: New Perspectives for Interdisciplinary Gender Studies.” Symposium on CDA: Feminist CDA and Interdisciplinary; Righwing Populism Local Answers to Global Issues, Athens. Disponível em: http://www.isotita.uoa.gr/wodak%20ruth.pdf
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Taiane de Oliveira Volcan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
MATLIT embraces full open access to all issues. Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
- A CC licensing information in a machine-readable format is embedded in all articles published by MATLIT.
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
- You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
- No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
