CDA of Racism and Ethnicity in Trump's Tweets

Literature Review and CDA Principles

Van Dijk (2015) observes that critical discourse analysis (CDA) is discourse analysis "with an attitude" (p. 466). What is meant by this is that CDA is a lens through which a critical perspective on material is applied, allowing one to "take an explicit position and thus want to understand, expose, and ultimately challenge social inequality" (Van Dijk, 2015, p. 466). Van Dijk (2015) is explicit when he states that CDA itself is not a method. Rather, all methods of discourse analysis can be used and applied within CDA. CDA is therefore best understood by its characteristics and properties, which Van Dijk (2015) lists as eight basic principles or tenets:

These principles establish that CDA is focused on the sociological impact of language and discourse. Power relations are complex but can be simplified. In CDA, the foundation stones are critical theory and conflict theory, in which society is best characterized as being in a power struggle between two or more groups competing for vital resources, wherein the group with power attempts to prevent other groups from obtaining it (Wodak, 2001). CDA essentially looks at discourse from that same perspective.

It is important to consider how persons in power use the means of communication — or mass communication tools of new media — to control or influence discourse, and thereby influence receivers of the message (Lozano et al., 2017). When American people use hashtags on Twitter such as #ChineseVirus, it sends a message to ethnic minorities in the US that their native region of the world is responsible for killing millions of people (Pei & Mehta, 2020). When the President of the United States refers to the "Wuhan Virus" in his Twitter account, that message is also wrapped up in the context of power. As an influential leader of a populist movement, Trump is able to convey powerful messages that can create hostility towards groups that lack the power to defend themselves.

This study helps to explain how that power dynamic works and what those on the receiving end of the message can do in terms of being aware of it. Using cultivation theory and agenda-setting theory, it can be seen that Trump is using Twitter to communicate a message of animosity towards others, with the intention of rallying his base to further echo that message and create an oppressive action against those others. If the principles of equity are to be established in society, it is important that every stakeholder recognize the power dynamics at play when a powerful person like Trump takes to Twitter to give voice to antagonism against ethnic minorities.

Ideological and Linguistic Aspects of Trump's Tweets

The tweets of Donald Trump have ideological and linguistic dimensions that reveal a great deal about the discourse processes currently operating in America. The text of these tweets — how they are interpreted and explained — offers insight into the ideology and language of the powerful in opposition to the targeted groups who often receive antagonism from this source. When the text is in all capital letters, it signifies something more emphatic than standard text. Punctuation affects how text is read. The context of the tweet — what tweets came before and after — offers more clues about interpretation. The target or perceived target of the tweet also provides interpretive clues. Whether the language is formal or informal, whether it expresses a complete thought or an incomplete one, whether correct grammar is used or not — all of this provides additional points of information for interpretation.

Language is important to all groups, and all groups have what can be called their own in-group language. In academia there is an in-group language; in medicine there is an in-group language; in finance it is the same; and in politics, as well as in marginalized and ethnic groups, in-group languages can also be found. These languages and modes of discourse carry their own meaning with respect to critical and conflict theoretical lenses. Yet what do these languages say when it comes to cultivation theory or agenda-setting theory? Clearly there is an agenda at work when the president tweets, and clearly something is being cultivated.

For example, Ouyang and Waterman (2020) found in their analysis of Trump's tweets that the more negative the rhetoric used, the more the tweet is retweeted by followers. Most of Trump's tweets are rhetorically neutral — neither positive nor negative (Ouyang & Waterman, 2020). However, the tweets that energize the public and lead to an increase in discourse are those that contain negative rhetoric. That should be a signal of ideological cultivation that warrants closer examination (Oborne & Roberts, 2017).

The language used by Trump and the ideology expressed in his tweets also affects users, who may voice negative rhetoric in response as well as positive rhetoric, depending upon how they align with Trump's views (Frederick, Pegoraro & Schmidt, 2020). Thus, there is a reaction and pushback within the discourse that makes it more complex. Trump will retweet comments and respond to others, keeping the discourse alive over the course of days.

Theoretical Framework: Fairclough Model, Cultivation, and Agenda-Setting

Twitter is a form of mass communication that is part of the new media spectrum of communication methods. Twitter allows a person to share a short expression of thought with millions of followers all at once. That sharing is not limited to one's followers, as they can retweet it to their own followers; others can comment on it, like it, or retweet it further. Thus, a single tweet can have a significant impact on discourse. Because new media differs from old media in various ways, it is important to consider how new media operates in relation to the communication theories that have been applied to old media. The framework for this study therefore applies agenda-setting theory and cultivation theory while using the approach of critical discourse analysis (CDA) through the Fairclough model.

As Janks (1997) observes, the Fairclough model for CDA has three integrated processes that link to the dimensions of discourse. The dimensions of discourse are:

In the Fairclough model, each dimension is associated with its own type of analysis: the first is text analysis (description of the object); the second is processing analysis (interpretation); and the third is social analysis (explanation).

For this study, the framework focuses on history, politics, and culture and incorporates the mass media communications notion of agenda-setting theory. In Trump's tweets, it is assumed that Trump has an agenda and is using Twitter to set that agenda for the public. Concomitant with agenda-setting theory is cultivation theory, which posits that mass media is used to cultivate beliefs in the public. Both theories are used here to explain that Trump's tweets are intended to have a specific effect on the public (Griffin, Ledbetter & Sparks, 2015).

Fairclough's model shows that there are multiple points of entry when it comes to analysis. What matters is that one explores the interconnectedness of patterns in order to explain the whole. One type of analysis is not separate from another; rather, there is a constant dialogue between them, moving into and out of one another. Any one type of analysis must be seen in the context of the other types.

The model also shows that there are constraints on how the discourse can be analyzed. The parameters of analysis are located in the conditions of production and interpretation. For tweets, this means the nature of the medium must be considered. Twitter is obviously different from a longer textual medium such as a pamphlet or book. It has its own character and conditions of production and interpretation — a distinct sociocultural practice is involved in its production. Situational analysis will show what the sociocultural context is. Institutional analysis will show what the character of the discourse is within the systems and structures of society. Societal analysis reveals the essence of the exchange between members of those systems and the representation of their place and role within those structures.

The discourse practice itself is analyzed to help explain the social analysis, and vice versa. The text is described to aid in the interpretation of the process. The text, the interpretation, and the explanation are all integrated to allow for a holistic and comprehensive understanding of the discourse (Janks, 1997). The Fairclough model thus enables a comprehensive approach to understanding discourse within its appropriate context.

Trump's tweets have been widely characterized as racist, xenophobic, divisive, and insensitive (Anspach, 2020). The question is, however, whether they are deliberately so or whether Trump is unaware of what he is doing with language on Twitter (Ott, 2017). From the perspectives of cultivation and agenda-setting theories, it is unlikely that Trump's words are anything but deliberate. The very reason for communication — and even mass communication — is to convey a meaning to others. That is what Trump does in his tweets via Twitter, a new media form of communication. Social media has created a way for individuals to speak outside the boxes normally set by studios and production companies, creating the opportunity for new ideologies to be communicated. The effect of those ideologies on others is what CDA examines.

Boyce (2018) contends that the racist past of America can be construed in the tweets of President Trump, yet Trump contends that he is not a racist and has never communicated anything racist. When Trump attacks illegal immigrants in his tweets, his political adversaries identify this as racism and xenophobia, while he and his supporters view it as rhetoric that promotes the law and the concept of border security and community. There is disagreement in the interpretation of the tweets, and the explanation for this disagreement is located in the contexts of the two parties and their perception of power.

The group with power is never wholly comfortable in its position, as it always perceives threats to its hold on power. The group without power is not always fully aware of its inferior position, because it sees its own position as a strength that can be utilized — much as resistance fighters use guerrilla-warfare tactics to overcome a much larger enemy. Understanding Trump's tweets and their effects is best approached with such a metaphor in mind, alongside an understanding of CDA's roots in critical and conflict theories.

Conclusion

Trump's tweets have had an impact on ethnic minorities, but that impact is not necessarily the same for all minorities — some have come over to Trump's side while others have resisted him. What then is going on with his tweets that they appeal to some and not to others? What is the context of these circumstances that makes them have a different effect for some? Is there an ethical or moral component that is often overlooked? Is the agenda set for one group and not for another? Has a certain narrative been cultivated in one group and not in another? Is the power structure conceived differently by each? These are the questions motivating this study and guiding the overall focus of the literature review.

The literature review reveals that the CDA approach provides one with a way to describe the text under analysis, interpret it within its context, and explain it in terms of its social and political place. The rise of CDA out of critical theory gives it a mandate to focus on the power struggle and the way the Culture Industry shapes that power struggle. Trump's tweets can certainly be seen as part of that Culture Industry, but it is also a Culture Industry that has become democratized — which complicates it, since new media (social media) is controlled both by legacy actors (boards of directors) and by end-users who generate their own content.

References

Anspach, N. M. (2020). Trumping the equality norm? Presidential tweets and revealed racial attitudes. New Media & Society, 1461444820936292.

Boyce, T. (2018). After #Charlottesville: Interrogating our racist past in the Trump era. Radical Teacher, 111, 49–56.

Dimitrov, K. (2018). Geert Hofstede et al.'s set of national cultural dimensions — popularity and criticisms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.02621.

Dyer, A. (2020). President, military leaders at odds over Confederate names and symbols. Retrieved from https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/military/story/2020-06-15/president-military-leaders-at-odds-over-military-protest-response-army-base-name-controversy

Fairclough, N., & Fairclough, I. (2018). A procedural approach to ethical critique in CDA. Critical Discourse Studies, 15(2), 169–185.

Frederick, E. L., Pegoraro, A., & Schmidt, S. (2020). "I'm not going to the f***ing White House": Twitter users react to Donald Trump and Megan Rapinoe. Communication & Sport, 2167479520950778.

Griffin, E., Ledbetter, A., & Sparks, G. (2015). A first look at communication theory. McGraw-Hill.

Horkheimer, M. (1972). Critical theory. Seabury Press.

Janks, H. (1997). Critical discourse analysis as a research tool. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 18(3), 329–342.

Kalantari Khandani, E., Farrokhi, M. H., & Ghonchepour, M. (2020). A critical discourse analysis of Trump's tweets based on Van Dijk model. ZABANPAZHUHI (Journal of Language Research), 12(34), 131–156.

Lozano, E., Cedeño, J., Castillo, G., Layedra, F., Lasso, H., & Vaca, C. (2017, April). Requiem for online harassers: Identifying racism from political tweets. In 2017 Fourth International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (ICEDEG) (pp. 154–160). IEEE.

Oborne, P., & Roberts, T. (2017). How Trump thinks: His tweets and the birth of a new political language. Head of Zeus Ltd.

Ott, B. L. (2017). The age of Twitter: Donald J. Trump and the politics of debasement. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 34(1), 59–68.

Ouyang, Y., & Waterman, R. W. (2020). Trump tweets: A text sentiment analysis. In Trump, Twitter, and the American Democracy (pp. 89–129). Palgrave Macmillan.

Pei, X., & Mehta, D. (2020). #Coronavirus or #ChineseVirus?!: Understanding the negative sentiment reflected in tweets with racist hashtags across the development of COVID-19. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.08224.

Ritzer, G., & Stepnisky, J. (2017). Modern sociological theory. SAGE.

Robertson, N., & Dewan, A. (2017). G20: World leaders at odds with Trump on trade, climate. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/08/europe/g20-trump-merkel-trade-climate-change/index.html

Van Dijk, T. A. (2015). Critical discourse analysis. Discourse Analysis, 466.

Wodak, R. (2001). What CDA is about — a summary of its history, important concepts and its developments. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, 1, 1–13.