IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsoctx/v13y2023i2p22-d1042907.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

#NotDying4Wallstreet: A Discourse Analysis on Health vs. Economy during COVID-19

Author

Listed:
  • Merve Genç

    (Research Group on International Political Sociology, Kiel University, Kiel 24118, Germany)

Abstract

This paper combines political/poststructuralist discourse theory with actor–network theory to explore dystopian visions in the context of a discourse around the hashtag #NotDying4Wallstreet. The call for protest against former US president Donald Trump’s demand to reopen the economy during lockdown dominates the discourse. The tweets were analyzed with quantitative discourse analysis and network analysis to identify key terms and meaning clusters leading to two main conclusions. The first (A) is an imaginary dystopic future with an accelerated neoliberal order. Human lives, especially elderly people, are sacrificed for a well-functioning economy in this threat scenario. The second (B) includes the motive of protest and the potential of the people’s demands to unite and rally against this threat. Due to the revelation of populist features, this (online) social movement seems to be populist without a leader figure. The empirical study is used to propose a research approach toward a mixed-methods design based on a methodological discussion and the enhancement of PDT with ANT. Thus, the article has a double aim: an update of contemporary approaches to social media analysis in discourse studies and its empirical demonstration with a study.

Suggested Citation

  • Merve Genç, 2023. "#NotDying4Wallstreet: A Discourse Analysis on Health vs. Economy during COVID-19," Societies, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:13:y:2023:i:2:p:22-:d:1042907
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/13/2/22/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/13/2/22/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernard J. Jansen & Mimi Zhang & Kate Sobel & Abdur Chowdury, 2009. "Twitter power: Tweets as electronic word of mouth," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(11), pages 2169-2188, November.
    2. Lama Altoaimy, 2018. "Driving Change on Twitter: A Corpus-Assisted Discourse Analysis of the Twitter Debates on the Saudi Ban on Women Driving," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-14, May.
    3. Johann W Unger, 2016. "The interdisciplinarity of critical discourse studies research," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 2(1), pages 1-4, December.
    4. Leticia Bode & Alexander Hanna & Junghwan Yang & Dhavan V. Shah, 2015. "Candidate Networks, Citizen Clusters, and Political Expression," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 659(1), pages 149-165, May.
    5. Koen Abts & Stefan Rummens, 2007. "Populism versus Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 55, pages 405-424, June.
    6. Koen Abts & Stefan Rummens, 2007. "Populism versus Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 55(2), pages 405-424, June.
    7. repec:pal:palcom:v:2016:y:2016:i:palcomms201537:p:15037- is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Johann W Unger, 2016. "Erratum: Corrigendum: The interdisciplinarity of critical discourse studies research," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 2(1), pages 1-1, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dovilė Budrytė & Erica Resende, 2023. "COVID-19 as a Collective Trauma in Global Politics: Disruption, Destruction and Resilience," Societies, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-3, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Krause, Werner & Giebler, Heiko, 2020. "Shifting Welfare Policy Positions: The Impact of Radical Right Populist Party Success Beyond Migration Politics," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 56(3), pages 331-348.
    2. Antonino Castaldo & Luca Verzichelli, 2020. "Technocratic Populism in Italy after Berlusconi: The Trendsetter and his Disciples," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 485-495.
    3. Johannes Angermuller, 2018. "Truth after post-truth: for a Strong Programme in Discourse Studies," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-8, December.
    4. Nicolás Cachanosky & Alexandre Padilla, 2020. "A panel data analysis of Latin American populism," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 329-343, September.
    5. Kim, Seongcheol, 2022. "Von Lefort zu Mouffe. Populismus als Moment und Grenze radikaler Demokratie [From Lefort to Mouffe: Populism as moment and limit of radical democracy]," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 32(4), pages 767-786.
    6. Laura Cervi & Santiago Tejedor, 2020. "Framing “The Gypsy Problem”: Populist Electoral Use of Romaphobia in Italy (2014–2019)," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, June.
    7. Reinhard Heinisch & Carsten Wegscheider, 2020. "Disentangling How Populism and Radical Host Ideologies Shape Citizens’ Conceptions of Democratic Decision-Making," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 32-44.
    8. Manuel Hensmans, 2021. "Exploring the dark and bright sides of Internet democracy: Ethos-reversing and ethos-renewing digital transformation," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/321232, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    9. Krause, Werner & Wagner, Aiko, 2021. "Becoming part of the gang? Established and nonestablished populist parties and the role of external efficacy," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 27(1), pages 161-173.
    10. Stefan Rummens & Koen Abts, 2010. "Defending Democracy: The Concentric Containment of Political Extremism," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(4), pages 649-665, October.
    11. Krause, Werner & Spittler, Marcus & Wagner, Aiko, 2017. "Attraktion und Repulsion. AnhängerInnen rechts- und linkspopulistischer Parteien im europäischen Vergleich," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 45(Sonderban), pages 106-137.
    12. Carlos de las Heras-Pedrosa & Carmen Jambrino-Maldonado & Patricia P. Iglesias-Sánchez & Elena Millán-Celis, 2020. "Populism and Independence Movements in Europe: The Catalan-Spanish Case," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-20, March.
    13. Nicolás Cachanosky & Edward J. Lopez, 2020. "Rediscovering Buchanan’s rediscovery: non-market exchange versus antiseptic allocation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 183(3), pages 461-477, June.
    14. Matthijs Rooduijn & Wouter van der Brug & Sarah L. de Lange & Jante Parlevliet, 2017. "Persuasive Populism? Estimating the Effect of Populist Messages on Political Cynicism," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(4), pages 136-145.
    15. Emiliana De Blasio & Michele Sorice, 2018. "Populism between direct democracy and the technological myth," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-11, December.
    16. Hensmans, Manuel, 2021. "Exploring the dark and bright sides of Internet democracy: Ethos-reversing and ethos-renewing digital transformation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    17. Zsolt Enyedi, 2024. "Concept and Varieties of Illiberalism," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 12.
    18. Smith, Andrew N. & Fischer, Eileen & Yongjian, Chen, 2012. "How Does Brand-related User-generated Content Differ across YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter?," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 102-113.
    19. Xuan Yang & Xiao Li & Daning Hu & Harry Jiannan Wang, 2021. "Differential impacts of social influence on initial and sustained participation in open source software projects," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(9), pages 1133-1147, September.
    20. Bertrand Jayles & Clément Sire & Ralf H J M Kurvers, 2021. "Crowd control: Reducing individual estimation bias by sharing biased social information," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(11), pages 1-28, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:13:y:2023:i:2:p:22-:d:1042907. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.