The language of outrage
Defining and communicating outrage and incivility via social media during the Charlottesville Protests
Keywords:Protest, polarization, outrage language, online hate, social media
Media are often expected to be forums for open discussions about matters of public concern; new media, such as Facebook, are increasingly perceived as spaces for those conversations. However, social media have also come to be seen as a space of negativity where the language of anger and outrage dominates. This paper studies the nature of the outrage language used on Facebook during the Charlottesville rally and protests during the summer of 2017. Platforms like Facebook have become places for open expression of extreme political ideologies with the very nature of the platform perpetuating the development and growth of insular feedback loops that present very narrow feeds of information. Outrage language permeates these loops enhancing polarization, creating conversations where only those with whom we agree are allowed to express opinions, and the rest are marginalized, insulted, or shouted down (Berry & Sobieraj, 2014). This paper will conclude that involvement with outrage media neither leads to an omnivorousness about all media, but, rather, media that think and speak like us, nor does it lead to more democratic engagement.
Abramowitz, A. (2010). The disappearing center engaged citizens, polarization, and American democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Alaimo, K. (2015). How the Facebook Arabic Page “We Are All Khaled Said” Helped Promote the Egyptian Revolution. Social Media + Society, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115604854
Baldassarri, D., & Gelman, A. (2008). Partisans without constraint: political polarization and trends in American public opinion.(Report). The American Journal of Sociology, 114(2), 408–446. https://doi.org/10.1086/590649
Berry, J., & Sobieraj, S. (2014). The outrage industry : political opinion media and the new incivility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bimber, B., Flanagin, A., & Stohl, C. (2005). Reconceptualizing collective action in the contemporary media environment. (Author Abstract). Communication Theory, 15(4), 365–388. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2005.tb00340.x
Bonilla, Y., & Rosa, J. (2015). #Ferguson: digital protest, hashtag ethnography, and the racial politics of social media in the United States. (Author abstract). 42(1), 4–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/amet.12112
boyd, d. (2011). White flight in networked publics? How race and class shaped American teen engagement with MySpace and Facebook. In L. Nakamura & P. A. Chow-White (Eds.), Race After the Internet (pp. 203–222). New York, NY: Routledge.
Brown, M., Ray, R., Summers, E., & Fraistat, N. (2017). #SayHerName: a case study of intersectional social media activism. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 40(11), 1831–1846. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2017.1334934
Bruni, F. (2017). I am OK, you are pure evil. [Blog] New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/17/opinion/sunday/im-ok-youre-pure-evil.html Accessed 1 Jun. 2019].
Bryant, E., & Marmo, J. (2012). The rules of Facebook friendship: A two-stage examination of interaction rules in close, casual, and acquaintance friendships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29(8), 1013–1035. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407512443616
Davis, J. (2015, November 26). Social media fuels modern student activism. TCA Regional News. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1736334399/
De Zuiga, H. (2012). Social Media Use for News and Individuals’ Social Capital, Civic Engagement and Political Participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(3), 319–336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01574.x
Deuze, M. (2006). Participation, Remediation, Bricolage: Considering Principal Components of a Digital Culture. Information Society, 22(2), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240600567170
Diamond, L. (2012). Introduction to Liberation Technology: Social Media and the Struggle for Democracy, edited by L. Diamond and M. F. Plattner, x–xxvii. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Fiorina M. P., & S. J. Abrams. (2008). Political Polarization in the American Public. Annual Review of Political Science 11: 566–88.
Gerbaudo, P. (2015). Tweets and the Streets. Retrieved from http://www.oapen.org/download/?type=document&docid=642730
Gross, R., & A. Acquisti. (2005). Information Revelation and Privacy in Online Social Network: The Facebook Case. ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society (WPES). https://www.heinz.cmu.edu/~acquisti/papers/privacy-facebook-gross-acquisti.pdf (accessed January 1, 2017).
Guntarik, O., & Trott, V. (2016). Changing Media Ecologies in Thailand: Women’s Online Participation in the 2013/2014 Bangkok Protests. Austrian Journal of South - East Asian Studies, 9(2), 235–251. https://doi.org/10.14764/10.ASEAS-2016.2-4
Hampton, K. N., Lee, C., & Her, E. J. (2011). How new media affords network diversity: Direct and mediated access to social capital through participation in local social settings. New Media & Society, 13(7), 1031–1049.
Khosravinik, M. (2020). Right Wing Populism in the West: Social Media Discourse and Echo Chambers. Insight Turkey, 31 Aug. 2020, www.insightturkey.com/commentaries/right-wing-populism-in-the-west-social-media-discourse-and-echo-chambers.
Loader, B. D., A. Vromen, & M. Xenos. (2014). The Networked Young Citizen: Social Media, Political Participation and Civic Engagement. New York: Routledge.
Lord, D. (2018, August 10). What happened at Charlottesville: Looking back on the rally that ended in death. Retrieved from https://www.ajc.com/news/national/what-happened-charlottesville-looking-back-the-anniversary-the-deadly-rally/fPpnLrbAtbxSwNI9BEy93K/
Meyer, D. S. (2007). The Politics of Protest: Social Movements in America. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mitchell, A., J. Gottfried, J. Kiley, & K. Masta. (2014). Political Polarization and Media Habits. http:// www.journalism.org/2014.10/21/political-polarization-media-habits/ (accessed January 1, 2017).
Papacharissi, Z. (2013). A Private Sphere: Democracy in a Digital Age. Oxford: Wiley.
Perrin, A. & Anderson, M. (2019). Share of U.S. adults using social media, including Facebook, is mostly unchanged since 2018. The Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/10/share-of-u-s-adults-using-social-
Pitman, B., Ralph, A. M., Camacho, J., & Monk-Turner, E. (2019). Social Media Users’ Interpretations of the Sandra Bland Arrest Video. Race and Justice, 9(4), 479–497. https://doi.org/10.1177/2153368717705420
Rao, S. & Haina, B. (2017). Mad as Hell: Campus Protests in the United States and Communicating Outrage via Facebook. African Journalism Studies. 38:2, 5-20. DOI: 10.1080/23743670.2017.1332660
Ross, C., Orr, E., Sisic, M., Arseneault, J., Simmering, M., & Orr, R. (2009). Personality and motivations associated with Facebook use. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 578–586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.024
Segerberg, A., & Bennett, L. (2011). Social media and the organization of collective action: using Twitter to explore the ecology of two climate change protests. Communication Review, 14(3), 197–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714421.2011.597250
Stevens, R., Gilliard-Matthews, S., Dunaev, J., Woods, M., & Brawner, B. (2017). The Digital Hood: Social Media Use among Youth in Disadvantaged Neighborhoods. New Media & Society, 19(6), 950–967. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815625941
Tufekci, Z., & Wilson, C. (2012). Social Media and the Decision to Participate in Political Protest: Observations From Tahrir Square. (Report). Journal of Communication, 62(2), 363–379. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01629.x
Valenzuela, S. (2013). Unpacking the use of social media for protest behavior: the roles of information, opinion expression, and activism. (Author abstract). American Behavioral Scientist, 57(7), 899–919.
Wolf, C. (2010) ‘Hate speech on the Internet and the law’. Retrieved from http:adl.org/osce/osce_legal_analysis.pdf
Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1816–1836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.012
LicenseAuthors 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 License 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).