In this paper I survey a range of trolling behaviors and analyze a particular species that stands out. After a brief discussion of some of the inherent challenges in studying internet speech, I describe a few examples of behaviors commonly described as ‘trolling’ in order to identify what they have in common. I argue that most of these behaviors already have well-researched offline counterparts. In contrast, in the second half of the paper I argue that so-called ‘subcultural trolling’ calls out (...) for further analysis: it cannot be fully explained using standard tools like insincerity or bullshit, or even using new tools like dogwhistling. Instead, I propose a new species of speech act force. I conclude by highlighting some implications for broader issues in pragmatics and ethics. (shrink)

In this essay, Doris Santoro examines the discourse of “fidelity of instruction” to show how it is doublespeak for teacher compliance that is incompatible with democracy and education. Analyzing the distorted use of the term “fidelity” by market-based reformers, Santoro illustrates how it can be used as a weapon against teacher intelligence and moral response. She argues that John Dewey's philosophy provides conceptual resources to reframe some teacher infidelity as intelligent response, the moral agency required for pedagogical responsibility.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Actors in the Audience: Theatricality and Doublespeak from Nero to HadrianJohn T. KirbyShadi Bartsch. Actors in the Audience: Theatricality and Doublespeak from Nero to Hadrian. Cambridge, Mass., and London: Harvard University Press, 1994. x + 310 pp. Cloth, $37.50. (Revealing Antiquity 6)The unsuspecting reader, if such exists in the 1990s, will probably not know what to make of the title of this book. Even deeply suspicious (...) ones will not be able to predict its contents. Nor does the subtitle produce full disclosure. The reason, I think, is that classical philologists will, by virtue of their training, expect something rather different from a book so titled: they might suppose it to be a work on technical aspects of Roman theater, or perhaps an assessment of oratory in the imperial Senate. The author is deliberately coy in the preface:I have not written an introduction to this book, preferring to let the reader travel through its twists and turns unequipped with the lamp of foreknowledge. All I will say at the outset is that it is a book about representation, not reality, although much of its content serves to undermine that distinction (a trait in which I follow the tendency of my ancient sources); a book about the ways in which antithetical categories such as spectator and spectacle, intention and interpretation, and praise and blame were variously conflated and exploited by writers and historians of the first century a.d. as a reaction to the transformation of Rome from republic to empire; a book about what happens to language’s ability to mean when all communication is distorted by the pull of a centralized and autocratic authority.(vi)But these compressed remarks in fact offer a serviceable précis of what is to come. Put another way, this is a book about rhetoric, about Rezeptionsästhetik, about the reciprocal reflexes of language and power.What are the effects of political power upon the free and fearless use of language? The question is not new. Hesiod and Demosthenes both posed it, answering in quite different ways. Tacitus revisited the issue explicitly in his Dialogus de oratoribus, and more subtly in the historical writings. Indeed the problem continues to be a pressing one today, as the whole scholarly project of Michel Foucault demonstrates. This is a main theme of Actors in the Audience.A contrapuntal issue is that of how texts of all kinds problematize the distinction between reality and illusion (“fiction”?). Here again we may reach back as far as Hesiod and—though he might balk at a subpoena to such testimony—Plato. This latter theme is at least as persistently (post-)modern as the first; one thinks of Pirandello’s Sei personaggi in cerca d’autore and Woody Allen’s The Purple Rose of Cairo.Bartsch’s project begins to come into focus by page 2. After a brief meditation on the savagery of Caligula, she moves to a vivid evocation of Nero as scaenicus and of his scrutiny of the audiences at his thespian and musical performances, “as if the spectators were the performers here” (5); for Tacitus, Dio, and Suetonius, “Nero’s rule is the occasion for a transformation of the theater into the site of a reversal of actor-audience relations, and as an emperor onstage, [End Page 155] Nero literally constrained his audience to be actors” (10). Moreover, according to Bartsch, Tacitus sees this phenomenon extending beyond the theater itself to encompass the Neronian political scene in general.The first three of the book’s five chapters—“The Emperor’s Audience: Nero and the Theatrical Paradigm,” “The Invasion of the Stage: Nero Tragoedus,” and “Oppositional Innuendo: Performance, Allusion, and the Audience”—all have to do with Nero in some respect. Chapter 2 turns to the issue of reality versus illusion. Bartsch demonstrates that, in the realm of politics, this is already of explicit interest to Philostratus. She then goes on to consider its implications for the reign of Nero. We read of popular graffiti, sparked by Nero’s murder of his mother Agrippina, that classed him with the legendary matricides Orestes and Alcmeon. These, plus the numerous theatrical roles (such as Oedipus and... (shrink)

The articles comprising this thematic symposium suggest options for exploring the nexus between freedom and unfreedom, as exemplified by the British abolitionists’ anti-slavery campaign and the paradox of freedom. Each article has implications for how these abolitionists achieved their goals, social activists’ efforts to secure reparations for slave ancestors, and modern slavery. We present the abolitionists’ undertaking as a marketing campaign, highlighting the role of instilling moral agency and indignation through re-humanizing the dehumanized. Despite this campaign’s eventual success, its post-emancipation (...) phase illustrates a paradox of freedom. After introducing mystification as an explanation for the obscuring rhetoric used to conceal post-emancipation violations of freedom during the West’s colonial phase, we briefly discuss the appropriateness of reparations. Finally, we discuss the contributions made by the articles in this thematic symposium. (shrink)

Les politiques et l’administration sont les maîtres de la langue de bois. C’est pour eux une question de survie avec les risques que cela implique : la démocratie est dévoyée, les électeurs sont souvent trompés et le fonctionnement de l’État en pâtit. Pour remédier à cela, les think tanks – des organismes privés de recherche représentant la société civile – ont été créés. Leur rôle : dévoiler les discours ambigus des politiques, dénoncer la démagogie et les abus de l’État et (...) de l’administration, critiquer les mauvaises politiques publiques, proposer des solutions. Financés uniquement grâce à des dons privés, les think tanks se sont imposés dans la société américaine comme une force presque aussi importante que les médias.Politicians and bureaucrats are masters of doublespeak. To them, it is a matter of survival with all the risks this implies: democracy has gone astray, voters are frequently misled and the functions of the State are being corroded as a result. Think tanks – which are private research organisations representing civil society – have been set up in an attempt to remedy the situation. Their role is to reveal the ambiguity of political discourse, denounce demagoguery and the misuse of power by the State and its bureaucracy, criticise bad public policy and propose solutions. In the US, these think tanks are funded exclusively by private donations and have become, in American society, almost as powerful as the media. (shrink)

Cet article prend d’abord appui sur différents exemples de phénomènes qui semblent susceptibles d’être qualifiés de « langue de bois » pour tenter de caractériser cette notion, qu’il oppose à celle de « parler vrai ». Il montre ensuite que la langue de bois comporte beaucoup de traits communs avec la stéréotypie, dont elle apparaît comme une spécification : la « langue de bois », ce serait des stéréotypes d’un langage spécialisé ou de la parole publique qui permettraient au locuteur (...) de ne pas s’exposer ou se compromettre. Bien que son usage soit essentiel à la construction de l’éthos du locuteur, cette langue est affublée d’une connotation fondamentalement négative : on ne la nomme que pour la stigmatiser, pour dénoncer un manque de clarté ou de transparence. Pourtant, comme la stéréotypie dont elle partage en partie les usages et les fonctions, la langue de bois est susceptible d’une diversité de modes d’énonciation et de réception, qui dépassent de loin la seule négativité.This article takes a variety of examples of usage that could be described as « doublespeak » in an attempt to characterise the meaning of the term, which we contrast with what is known as « straight talk ». We then show that « doublespeak » has many traits in common with stereotyping, of which it appears to be a specific form: « doublespeak » is a stereotype of a form of specialised or public-speaking language that enables the speaker to avoid exposure or discredit. Although its use is essential to the ethos the speaker is attempting to convey, it has fundamentally negative connotations: it is referred to only to stigmatise and denounce its lack of clarity and transparency. And yet, like stereotyping with which it shares a number of uses and functions, doublespeak can be delivered and received in a variety of ways that are by no means confined to the negative register. (shrink)

A growing frustration with “spin doctors,” doublespeak, and outright lying by public officials has resulted in a deep public cynicism regarding politics today. It has also led many voters to seek out politicians who engage in “straight talk,” out of a hope that sincerity signifies a dedication to the truth. While this is an understandable reaction to the degradation of public discourse inflicted by political hype, Elizabeth Markovits argues that the search for sincerity in the public arena actually constitutes (...) a dangerous distraction from more important concerns, including factual truth and the ethical import of political statements. Her argument takes her back to an examination of the Greek notion of _parrhesia_, and she draws from her study of the Platonic dialogues a nuanced understanding of this ancient analogue of “straight talk.” She shows Plato to have an appreciation for rhetoric rather than a desire to purge it from public life, providing insights into the ways it can contribute to a fruitful form of deliberative democracy today. (shrink)

Appréhendée à partir de son fonctionnement dans les régimes totalitaires, la « langue de bois » a été traitée comme une langue étrange, et étrangère aux sociétés démocratiques. En rapprochant ses procédés des figures de la rhétorique classiquement dessinées, elle perd quelque peu de sa singularité. Elle est liée, en fait, à des potentialités, des tendances, des dispositions de la « langue naturelle » – une permanente propension à métaphoriser, notamment – qu’elle exploite ou accentue, radicalise et pervertit. Les affinités (...) que présente alors la langue de bois avec des pratiques langagières très courantes, tel le « politiquement correct », font voir en elle non plus un dialecte exotique, un parler vernaculaire, mais un mode de communication effectivement véhiculaire.Based on its functions in totalitarian regimes, the type of language George Orwell called « newspeak » has been treated as an oddity, a language foreign to democratic societies. However, when compared with the classic figures of rhetorical speech, its singularity begins to fade. It is related, in fact, to a potential, a tendency or a predisposition of « natural language » to create metaphor – a propensity that « newspeak » exploits, accentuates, radicalises and subverts. But the affinities that appear between this particular type of language and other very common forms, such as the language of « political correctness », suggest that rather than an exotic dialect, it is actually very much a kind of « lingua franca ». (shrink)

The present paper describes a number of ethical quandaries facing the implementors of motivational interventions in organizational settings. A critical analysis of the traditional solutions to these issues within the organizational literature finds them lacking for want of considering unwitting cognitive biases and self presentational doublespeak, both of which may result in the rights of research participants being underprotected. The establishment of an Institutional Review process, loosely analogized from the biomedical and behavioral science research traditions, is suggested as a (...) means of protecting the rights of research participants as well as humanizing future motivational interventions. (shrink)

The relation of social ethics to knowledge production is explored through a study about academic research enquiry on minoritised and racialised populations. Despite social change related to migration and ethnicity being a feature of contemporary Northern Ireland, local dynamics and actors seemed under-studied by its research-intensive ‘anchor universities’. To explore this, a critical discourse analysis of published research outputs (n = 200) and related authors’ narratives (n = 32) are interpreted within this paper through conceptualisations of consciousness. Insiders’ perspectives on (...) the influences and structures of the research journey demonstrate the ways in which research cultures (mis)shape the politics of representation, authorship and ethicality. Societal and political disregard for the new publics, reproduced within universities’ hidden curriculum, has been negotiated and to some extent resisted in the research practices of those marginalised (such as women academics), those entering the system (migrant academics), and those local-born whose referential frames were developed external to local universities. Of concern is that the few research enablers were characterised by techno-rationality and doublespeak, impoverishing the depth of theorisation, complexity and intellectual debate necessary for challenging the existing dysconscious racism and xenophobiaism of the social imaginary. (shrink)

Code-switching is the adjustment of one’s speech, behaviors, or appearance across various contexts. Sometimes we code-switch to adapt to the communication norms of different groups, and sometimes we code-switch from social necessity. In many cases, code-switching is not morally blameworthy. It demonstrates an agent’s discernment or practical wisdom in navigating various situations. However, not all cases of code-switching are compatible with a good moral character. Many cases of code-switching involve a kind of impression management or doublespeak that can compromise (...) integrity. This article examines the conditions under which code-switching is duplicitous. More specifically, it explores code-switching regarding theological identity and plausible psychological and spiritual repercussions of code-switching for the agent. (shrink)

The vast number of high quality corporate image and advocacy films, combined with the many other instruments of persuasion and control by corporations, powerfully direct the attitudes of the populace. In the absence of equal access, the best protection against deception from any powerful institution is skepticism — minds trained in critical thinking. But technically proficient, expensive films (costing from $50,00 to $600,000) encourage credulity instead of thought. The schools should train young people, therefore, how to resist corporate film propaganda (...) by teaching them the kinds of questions to ask. An analysis of Chesebrough-Pond Corporation's Family offers an effective method through combining traditional rhetorical awareness of the speaker in a communication, knowledge of informal fallacies, the National Council of Teachers of English Committee on Public Doublespeak's intensify/downplay approach, and Richard Ohmann's method in Doublespeak and Ideology in Ads. (shrink)

La politique de « réformes et ouverture » vers l’étranger, initiée par Deng Xiaoping au sortir de la Révolution culturelle en 1978 s’est avérée, d’un point de vue économique, une véritable réussite qui a amené la Chine au rang des grandes puissances mondiales en à peine trente ans. D’un point de vue social par contre, le résultat est tout autre : transfigurée par ces réformes qui ont acté le basculement d’une économie planifiée vers une économie de marché, la société chinoise (...) s’est retrouvée bouleversée par la disparition de l’État-providence et la restructuration du secteur de production étatique, autant de dommages collatéraux qui vont brutalement vulnérabiliser et « précariser » des millions d’individus. Dès la fin des années 1980, vont se constituer de nouvelles « classes dangereuses » de paysans sans terres, de chômeurs et de pauvres, des « masses dangereuses » que l’État-parti chinois va devoir discipliner, puisque c’est sur leur exploitation que va se construire le miracle chinois. C’est donc un véritable arsenal discursif, une langue de bois élaborée et complétée sur trois décennies, que les dirigeants du Parti communiste chinois vont mettre en place pour formuler les perceptions et « corriger les consciences erronées » de ces populations vers une acceptation d’un ordre social qui leur est foncièrement défavorable.From the economic point of view, the policy for « reform and openness » to other countries initiated by Deng Xiaoping as the Cultural Revolution ended in 1978 was a genuine success that made China a top-ranking world power in the space of barely thirty years. The outcome was very different from the social point of view, however: the reforms that turned a planned economy into a market economy caused radical upheaval in Chinese society as collateral damage from the demise of the welfare state and the restructuring of the State-controlled production sector plunged millions into precariousness and insecurity. The late 1980s saw the emergence of a new « dangerous class » of landless peasants, unemployed workers and poverty-stricken individuals: the « dangerous masses » that the Chinese party-state would have to discipline so that the « Chinese miracle » could be built by exploiting their labour. Thus did China’s Communist party leadership deploy a whole arsenal of political doublespeak, developed and honed over three decades, designed to formulate perceptions and « correct » the « erroneous conceptions » of these populations to lead them to acceptance of a social order which is fundamentally opposed to their interests. (shrink)

Comment combattre la langue de bois ? Ce devrait être la première préoccupation des commentateurs politiques, chargés de commenter, d’analyser et d’éditorialiser. Mais, comme celle des hommes politiques, la langue de bois des commentateurs a pour objectif principal de ne pas tout dire. Elle est faite pour leur permettre de s’adresser au plus grand nombre, sans choquer, souvent même en délivrant à l’auditeur ou au lecteur une pensée dans laquelle il peut se reconnaître. Il existe aussi une autre sorte de (...) langue de bois, plus problématique dans les métiers de commentateurs : une langue de bois réflexe, faite de formules creuses, de poncifs et de métaphores . Par ailleurs, l’une des tendances les plus spectaculaires de ces dernières années est l’avènement de ce que l’on peut appeler le « parler cash », façon de rejeter la langue de bois. Une parole cash devient un acte politique en lui-même, un acte creux, et les journalistes en sont coresponsables puisque travaillant à jet continu avec Internet et les chaînes tout-info. En revanche, le numérique permet de conserver et de classer ce qui se dit. La mémoire politique s’est démocratisée et Internet met à la disposition de chacun l’ensemble des propos des hommes politiques. Cette évolution du rapport entre le discours et son commentaire est bienvenue après des décennies de consanguinité entre les politiques et les commentateurs.How do you fight doublespeak? This ought to be the main concern of every political commentator, whose job is to comment on, analyse and editorialise what politicians say. But, like politicians, commentators use a language whose main purpose is to not say everything. It is made for them to address the widest possible audience, without giving offence and often by offering listeners or readers thoughts they can recognise as their own. This sort of language also exists in another more problematical form among commentators, as a kind of reflexive newspeak made up of clichés, commonplaces and metaphors involving warfare, sports or cookery. One of the more spectacular trends in the last few years is the advent of what the French call « parler cash », meaning « rude straight talk », as an antidote to doublespeak. « Talking rude and straight » then becomes a political – and hollow – act in itself, for which journalists are equally responsible since they are constantly working live with the Internet and 24-hour news channels. On the other hand, everything that is said can now be stored and classified on digital media. The archives of politics are becoming available to all and anyone can use the Internet to access anything a politician has ever said. This is a welcome development for the relationship between discourse and commentary, after decades of blood relationships between politicians and political commentators. (shrink)

Cet article montre l’influence des fonds structurels européens sur la langue polonaise. On assiste aujourd’hui à l’émergence d’une nouvelle langue euro-polonaise, version polonaise de l’euro-langue, à moins que ce ne soit l’euro-version du polonais. Cette langue a toutes les apparences du polonais, mais elle est si imprégnée de termes bureaucratiques que l’on est en droit de se demander s’il s’agit toujours de la même langue. Par quel mécanisme ce problème d’ordre linguistique est-il apparu ? Pourquoi l’euro-polonais est-il si inutilement compliqué (...) ? Pourquoi éprouve-t-on autant de difficultés à comprendre les textes de l’UE, et singulièrement les appels d’offre ? Telles sont les questions auxquelles répond l’article, qui plaide pour une plus grande lisibilité des textes, sans laquelle il n’est pas de réelle démocratie.This article shows how the EU’s structural funds have influenced the Polish language. What is emerging today is a new language called Euro-Polish, the Polish version of Eurospeak – or possibly the Euro-version of Polish. It certainly looks like Polish, but it is so saturated with bureaucratic terms that one may well wonder whether it is really the same language. How did this problem – a linguistic one – arise? Why is Euro-Polish so pointlessly complicated? Why are EU texts so difficult to understand, and particularly its calls for tenders? This article answers these questions, and pleads in favour of the plain language, without which true democracy cannot exist. (shrink)