IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v12y2022i1p21582440221079884.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discursive Strategies of Manipulation in COVID-19 Political Discourse: The Case of Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro

Author

Listed:
  • Peggy A. Kakisina
  • Tantri R. Indhiarti
  • Muchamad Sholakhuddin Al Fajri

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the discursive strategies of manipulation and their realizations in political speeches about COVID-19 pandemic delivered by Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro. The scheme of manipulation strategies proposed by van Dijk was used to analyze the data. The findings show that the manipulation in both speeches is delivered through ideological polarization, discrediting the others, emotionalizing the argument, emphasizing the power, moral superiority and credibility of the speaker, and adducing seemingly irrefutable proofs of the speaker’s beliefs and reasons. Among these strategies, ideological polarization is the most frequent strategy used by both speakers. Polarization can indoctrinate a community with shared beliefs and values because of its close relation with particular ideology and belief. These findings add to a growing body of work on discursive manipulation, suggesting that political discourse can be a potential source of societal manipulation. Most importantly, these results draw a point whereby ideological polarization is the most effective and prevailing category while adducing seemingly indisputable proofs of the speaker’s beliefs appears to be less compelling.

Suggested Citation

  • Peggy A. Kakisina & Tantri R. Indhiarti & Muchamad Sholakhuddin Al Fajri, 2022. "Discursive Strategies of Manipulation in COVID-19 Political Discourse: The Case of Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:12:y:2022:i:1:p:21582440221079884
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440221079884
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440221079884
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440221079884?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Higgins, Colin & Walker, Robyn, 2012. "Ethos, logos, pathos: Strategies of persuasion in social/environmental reports," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 194-208.
    2. James Martin, 2015. "Situating Speech: A Rhetorical Approach to Political Strategy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 63(1), pages 25-42, March.
    3. Colin Higgins & Robyn Walker, 2012. "Ethos, logos, pathos: Strategies of persuasion in social/environmental reports," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(3), pages 194-208, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ionel Bostan & Ionela-Corina Chersan & Magdalena Danileț & Mihaela Ifrim & Viorica Chirilă, 2020. "Investigations Regarding the Linguistic Register Used by Managers to Convey to Stakeholders a Positive View of Their Company, in the Context of the Business Sustainability Desideratum," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    2. Mohammed Hossain & Md. Tarikul Islam & Mahmood Ahmed Momin & Shamsun Nahar & Md. Samsul Alam, 2019. "Understanding Communication of Sustainability Reporting: Application of Symbolic Convergence Theory (SCT)," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 160(2), pages 563-586, December.
    3. Andersen, Sophie Esmann & Høvring, Christiane Marie, 2020. "CSR stakeholder dialogue in disguise: Hypocrisy in story performances," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 421-435.
    4. Isabel‐María García‐Sánchez & Valentina Minutiello & Patrizia Tettamanzi, 2022. "Gender disclosure: The impact of peer behaviour and the firm's equality policies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(2), pages 385-405, March.
    5. Wendy Stubbs & Colin Higgins & Markus Milne, 2013. "Why Do Companies Not Produce Sustainability Reports?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(7), pages 456-470, November.
    6. Keramitsoglou, Kiriaki M. & Mellon, Robert C. & Tsagkaraki, Maria I. & Tsagarakis, Konstantinos P., 2020. "Designing a logo for renewable energy sources with public participation: Empirical evidence from Greece," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 1205-1218.
    7. Tuvana Cüre & Emel Esen & Arzu Özsözgün Çalışkan, 2020. "Impression Management in Graphical Representation of Economic, Social, and Environmental Issues: An Empirical Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, January.
    8. Beattie, Vivien, 2014. "Accounting narratives and the narrative turn in accounting research: Issues, theory, methodology, methods and a research framework," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 111-134.
    9. La Torre, Matteo & Dumay, John & Rea, Michele Antonio & Abhayawansa, Subhash, 2020. "A journey towards a safe harbour: The rhetorical process of the International Integrated Reporting Council," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    10. Lorenzo Gelmini & Valentina Minutiello & Patrizia Tettamanzi & Maurizio Comoli, 2021. "Rhetoric, Accounting and Accountability: COVID-19 and the Case of Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-21, April.
    11. Christensen, Lars Thøger & Morsing, Mette & Thyssen, Ole, 2020. "Timely hypocrisy? Hypocrisy temporalities in CSR communication," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 327-335.
    12. Kougiannou, Nadia K. & O'Meara Wallis, Matthew, 2020. "‘Chimneys don't belch out carnations!’ The (in)tolerance of corporate hypocrisy: A case study of trust and community engagement strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 348-362.
    13. Carlota Rocha Araújo & Paulo Botelho Pires & Catarina Delgado & José Duarte Santos, 2023. "Persuasive Determinants in the Hotel Industry’s Newsletter Opening Rates," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-27, February.
    14. Charl de Villiers & Jing Jia & Zhongtian Li, 2022. "Corporate social responsibility: A review of empirical research using Thomson Reuters Asset4 data," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(4), pages 4523-4568, December.
    15. Charles H. Cho & Michele Fabrizi & Silvia Pilonato & Federica Ricceri, 2024. "Not all bad news is harmful to a good reputation: evidence from the most visible companies in the US," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 28(1), pages 9-36, March.
    16. Charles H. Cho & Matias Laine & Robin W. Roberts & Michelle Rodrigue, 2018. "The Frontstage and Backstage of Corporate Sustainability Reporting: Evidence from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Bill," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 865-886, October.
    17. Nazim Hussain, 2015. "Impact of Sustainability Performance on Financial Performance: An Empirical Study of Global Fortune (N100) Firms," Working Papers 1, Venice School of Management - Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    18. Colin Higgins & Wendy Stubbs & Markus Milne, 2018. "Is Sustainability Reporting Becoming Institutionalised? The Role of an Issues-Based Field," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 147(2), pages 309-326, January.
    19. Colin Higgins & Markus Milne & Bernadine Gramberg, 2015. "The Uptake of Sustainability Reporting in Australia," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 129(2), pages 445-468, June.
    20. Adriana Calu & Costel Negrei & Daniela Artemisa Calu & Viorel Avram, 2015. "Reporting of Non-Financial Performance Indicators – a Useful Tool for a Sustainable Marketing Strategy," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 17(40), pages 977-977, August.

    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:sae:sagope:v:12:y:2022:i:1:p:21582440221079884. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.