Home⇛International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research⇛vol. 5 no. 1 (2024)

Arguments on Social Media: A Conceptual Analysis of Senior High School Students’ Election-Related Facebook Posts

Dhemer P. Cabreros

 

Abstract:

This study analyzed the arguments, specifically the fallacies and the posting strategies present on the eleven (11) Facebook posts of the WCC Aeronautical and Technological College senior high school students on election-related issues. The researcher utilized conceptual analysis using deductive method in this study. The fallacies and posting strategies were tallied and ranked, categorized based on the emerging themes, and subjected to conceptual analysis. The 11 fallacies were categorized into three themes based on the rhetorical triangle and the themes that emerged are influence in facts, influence in credibility, and influence in emotions. On the other hand, four themes emerged in the posting strategies: praising, sarcasm, name-calling and invalidating, and straightforwardness, where positive impoliteness garnered the highest number of commissions. There are also other themes that emerged in the analysis of data: the image functions and the communication styles.



References:

  1. Ääpälä, J. (2020). " Your point lol?" Impolite-ness in Internet Discussion: A Case-Study of/r/Dota2 (Master's thesis, Itä-Suomen yliopisto).
  2. Alcosero, I. R., & Gomez, D. (2022). Analysis of politeness strategies in Youtube reaction vlogs. International Journal of Research, 11(3), 99-156.
  3. Al-Shaikhli, K., & Al-Santareesi, M. (2021). Po-liteness Violated: A Study of Selected Tweets by Donald Trump. Jerash for Re-search and Studies Journal مجلة جرش للبحوث والدراسات, 22(1), 21.‎
  4. Amalia, I., & Prasetyorini, K. A. (2018, July). Politeness System Portrayed in Social Me-dia: A Case Study of Facebook Account “Sapawarga Kota Surabaya”. In Internation-al Conference on Language Phenomena in Multimodal Communication (KLUA 2018) (pp. 244-250). Atlantis Press.
  5. Amper, G. Y. G. (2018). Team Identity and Po-liteness: an Analysis of The University of The Philippines Diliman Student Council Election Standard Bearers’speech in Philip-pine Collegian Interviews (Doctoral disser-tation, University of the Philippines Dili-man).
  6. Antonio, R. P., & Prudente, M. S. (2021). Meta-cognitive Argument-Driven Inquiry in Teaching Antimicrobial Resistance: Effects on Students' Conceptual Understanding and Argumentation Skills. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 18(2), 192-217.
  7. Baizas (2021). Investigating troll farms: What to look out for. https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/investigating-troll-farms-what-to-look-out-for/.
  8. Bader, Y. & Obeidat, H. (2020). The language of Facebook Comments on Political Articles in Jordan. International Journal of Linguis-tics, 12(6), 180-205.
  9. Batas Pambansa Bilang 881 (1985). https://www.set.gov.ph/resources/election-law/batas-pambansa-bilang-881/.
  10. Benkaddour, C. (2021). Gender and Politeness Negotiation on the Net a Case Study of the Facebook (Doctoral dissertation).
  11. Bhat, P., & Klein, O. (2020). Covert hate speech: White nationalists and dog whistle communication on twitter. Twitter, the pub-lic sphere, and the chaos of online delibera-tion, 151-172.
  12. Biana, H. T., & Joaquin, J. J. B. (2020). The eth-ics of scare: COVID-19 and the Philippines' fear appeals. Public health, 183, 2.
  13. Blassnig, S., Büchel, F., Ernst, N., & Engesser, S. (2019). Populism and informal fallacies: An analysis of right-wing populist rhetoric in election campaigns. Argumentation, 33(1), 107-136.
  14. Brailovskaia, J., & Bierhoff, H. W. (2020). The narcissistic millennial generation: A study of personality traits and online behavior on Facebook. Journal of Adult Development, 27(1), 23-35.
  15. Brey, Gautties, & Milam (2019). Harmful Inter-net Use Part II: Impact on culture and socie-ty. Scientific Foresight Unit. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2019/624269/EPRS_STU(2019)624269_EN.pdf.
  16. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1978). Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction (pp. 56-311). Cambridge University Press.
  17. , P., & Levinson, S. C. (1978). Positive and Negative Face. http://www.glottopedia.org/index.php/Positive_and_negative_face.
  18. Bulusan, F. (2019). College ESL learners’ po-liteness in using linguistic taboos and eu-phemisms: Looking through the socio-pragmatic lens. International Journal of English Linguistics, 9(3), 148-157.
  19. Bustan, E., & Alakrash, H. M. (2020). An analy-sis of impoliteness strategies performed by Donald Trump tweets addressıng the mid-dle east countries. Global journal of Social Science and Humanities, 1, 66-74.
  20. Cantina, J. M. (2021). Analysis on the Linguistic Landscapes in Dipolog City, Philippines. Agathos, 12(2), 143-158.
  21. Cenk, A. G., & Yalman, F. E. (2022). The Obser-vation of Pre-service Teachers' Argumenta-tion Skills on Different Socioscientific Is-sues. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 11(1), 31-53.
  22. Chen, Y. Y. (2020). Migrant health in a time of pandemic: Fallacies of us-versus-them. YY Brandon Chen," Migrant Health in a Time of Pandemic: Fallacies of Us-Versus-Them" in Colleen M Flood et al, eds, Vulnerable: The Law, Policy and Ethics of COVID-19 (Otta-wa: University of Ottawa Press, 2020), 407.
  23. Chua, Y. (2020). Digital News Report. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. https://www.digitalnewsreport.org/survey/2020/philippines-2020/.
  24. Clark II, W. W., & Fast, M. (2019). Mead and Blumer: Social Theory and Symbolic Inter-actionism. In Qualitative Economics (pp. 141-182). Springer, Cham.
  25.  University Mailman School of Public Health (2019). Content Analysis. https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/research/population-health-methods/content-analysis.
  26. Culpeper, J. (2011). Impoliteness: Using lan-guage to cause offence (Vol. 28). Cambridge University Press.
  27. , R. (2020). An Analysis of Logical Fallacy in Argument of Campaign Team of Joko Widodo and Prabowo Subianto. English Language and Literature, 9(4), 458-464.
  28. DEMİR, Y. (2020). Patterns of Responses to Abusive Ad Hominem Attacks: The Case of Facebook News-commenting. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 37(2), 290-303.
  29. Digital News Report (2021). https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report/2021.
  30. Downden, B. (n.d.) Fallacies. https://iep.utm.edu/fallacy/.
  31. GCF Global (n.d.) What is trolling? https://edu.gcfglobal.org/en/thenow/what-is-trolling/1/.
  32. Gonzales, G. (2021). Trust in news from social media decreases, ABS-CBN reach tumbles in 2021 Reuters study. https://www.rappler.com/technology/social-media-news-trust-decreases-filipinos-2021-reuters-digital-news-report/.
  33. Goffman, E. (1955). On face-work: An analysis of ritual elements in social interaction. Psy-chiatry, 18(3), 213-231.
  34. Gymglish (n.d.) Post. https://www.gymglish.com/en/gymglish/english-translation/post-social-media.
  35. Hameed, A. F. (2020). The Realization of Strat-egies of Impoliteness in Iraqi Facebook Comments on Covid_19. PalArch's Journal of
  36. Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology, 17(6), 15802-15813.
  37. Hanna, R. (1998). Conceptual analysis. In The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Tay-lor and Francis. Retrieved 24 Feb. 2022, from https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/conceptual-analysis/v-1.doi:10.4324/9780415249126-U033-1.
  38. Hidayani, N. A. (2020). Language Politeness on Facebook Status: An Analysis of Gymglish (n.d.) Posting Strategy. https://www.gymglish.com/en/gymglish/english-translation/post-social-media.
  39.  (1969). Social Control Theory. https://open.lib.umn.edu/sociology/chapter/7-2-explaining-deviance/.
  40. Holmes, K. (2016). Cultural Appreciation vs. Cultural Appropriation: Why it Matters. https://greenheart.org/blog/greenheart-international/cultural-appreciation-vs-cultural-appropriation-why-it-matters/.
  41. Horne C. (2018). Norms. Oxford Bibliog-raphies. https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199756384/obo-9780199756384-0091.xml.
  42. Hossain, M., Kim, M., & Jahan, N. (2019). Can “liking” behavior lead to usage intention on Facebook? Uses and gratification theory perspective. Sustainability, 11(4), 1166.
  43. Imran (2019). Why do people troll and what can you do about it? https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zfmkrj6.
  44. Jazeri, M., & Sumarti, E. (2019). Turnitin Ar-gumentum ad Hominem in Presidential Candidate" s Debate in Indonesia: Forms and Functions.
  45. Jensen, J. L. (2020). FACEBOOK: FROM PER-SONAL MEDIUM TO MASS MEDIUM–AND BACK AGAIN?-THE USE OF FACEBOOK ACROSS AGE GROUPS 2015-19. AoIR Se-lected Papers of Internet Research.
  46. Krippendoff (2013). Content analysis. Pocket Guide to Social Work Re.
  47. Krobová, T., & Zàpotocký, J. (2021). “I Am Not Racist, But...”: Rhetorical Fallacies in Argu-ments about the Refugee Crisis on Czech Facebook. Journal of Intercultural Commu-nication, 21(2), 58-69.
  48. Lancaster University (n.d.) Impoliteness: Using and Understanding the Language of Of-fense. https://www.lancaster.ac.uk/fass/projects/impoliteness/strategy.htm.
  49. Lander, D. (2020). Historical arguments and the narrative mode in vaccination objection communication: A critical discourse analy-sis of Facebook comments.
  50. Lewiński, M., & Mohammed, D. (2016). Argu-mentation theory. The International Ency-clopedia of Communication Theory and Phi-losophy, 1-15.
  51. Maurya, P., & Kumar, N. (2020). The Member of ‘Quality’and the ‘Other’: Colonial Fallacy and Othering in James G. Farrell’s Troubles. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Hu-manities, 28(3), 2167-2180.
  52. Meneses, M. C. E. G. (2018). Code-switching as a Politeness Marker in Sangguniang Pan-lalawigan Regular Sessions in Albay. Bicol University R & D Journal, 22(3).
  53. Metts, S., & Cupach, W. R. (2008). Face theory. Engaging theories in interpersonal commu-nication, 203-214.
  54. , F., Badarneh, M. A., & Khwaylih, L. (2021). Jordanian graduate students’ com-plaints on Facebook: Semantic formulas and politeness. Lebende Sprachen, 66(1), 144-165.
  55. Morris, J. A. (2018). The Internet as a Game. Parlor Press LLC.
  56. Moskalyova, L., Maksymov, O., Gurov, S., Gurova, T., & Yakovleva, V. (2020). Peda-gogy of Argumentation: Teaching the Skills of Argumentation to Older Teens. Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 9(1), 156-171.
  57. Navera, J. A., Garinto, L. A. B., & Valdez, P. N. M. (2019). Teaching against the meme: poli-tics, argumentation and engagement in an ESL classroom in the Philippines. Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(1), 393.
  58. Nickerson, C. (2021). Symbolic Interactionism Theory and Examples. https://www.simplypsychology.org/symbolic-interaction-theory.html.
  59. Norquist, R. (2020). Politeness Strategies in English Grammar. https://www.thoughtco.com/politeness-strategies-conversation-1691516.
  60. Oandasan, R. L. (2021). A pragmatic investiga-tion of linguistic politeness and power rela-tions in request emails. Asian Journal of English Language Studies (AJELS) Volume.
  61. Official Gazette (n.d.) Pantawid Pamilyang Pil-ipino Program. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/programs/conditional-cash-transfer/.
  62. Oreskes, N. (2020). The False Logic behind Science Denial. Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-false-logic-behind-science-denial/.
  63. Ozturk, N., Bozkurt-Altan, E., & Yenilmez-Turkoglu, A. (2021). Discussing socio-scientific issues on twitter: The quality of pre-service science teachers’ arguments. Journal of education in science, Environ-ment and health, 7(1), 72-85.
  64. Pazzanese, C. (2020). Battling the ‘pandemic of misinformation’. The Harvard Gazette. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/05/social-media-used-to-spread-create-covid-19-falsehoods/.
  65. Pinay-an, M. E. D., & Buslon, J. B. POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN RESTAURANT REVIEWS ON TRIPADVISOR.
  66. Pratama, H. (2019). Linguistic Politeness in Online Communication. http://lib.unnes.ac.id/36058/1/Linguistic_Polite-ness_in_Online_Communication_final.pdf.
  67. Publicus Asia (2022). No movement in Pres, VP races on PUBLiCUS Mar 30 to Apr 6 sur-vey. https://www.publicusasia.com/no-movement-in-pres-vp-races/.
  68. Pulse Asia Survey (2022). January 2022 Na-tionwide Survey on the May 2022 Elections. https://pulseasia.ph/updates/january-2022-nationwide-survey-on-the-may-2022-elections/?portfolioCats=243.
  69. Quinlan, J.P. (1992). Cory Aquino – A Prob-lematic Legacy. https://www.csmonitor.com/1992/0702/02192.html.
  70. Ranalan, R. S. (2018). Linguistic Politeness in Online Discussion Boards: Animé Fandom as Virtual Speech Communities. Linguistics & the Human Sciences, 14.
  71. Rashidovna, D. L. (2020). Speech etiquette in online communities: Medialinguistics analy-sis. Russian journal of linguistics, 24(1), 56-79.
  72. Sheng, E., Chang, K. W., Natarajan, P., & Peng, N. (2020). " Nice Try, Kiddo": Investigating Ad Hominems in Dialogue Responses. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.12820.
  73. Siljanovska, L., & Stojcevska, S. (2018). A Criti-cal Analysis of Interpersonal Communica-tion in Modern Times of the Concept “Look-ing Glass Self (1902)” By Charles Horton Cooley. Seeu Review, 13(1), 62-74.
  74. Soldatova, G., Rasskazova, E., & Chigarkova, S. (2021). Flaming and trolling as a type of cyberaggression: the role structure and fea-tures of digital sociality. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal, 42(3), 87-96.
  75. Sotelo, Y. (2022). Pangasinan leaders back Bongbong-Sara tandem. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1560436/pangasinan-leaders-back-bongbong-sara-tandem.
  76. Statista Research Department (2021). Most popular social networks worldwide as of October 2021, ranked by number of active users. From: https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/.
  77. Statista Research Department (2021). Number of Facebook users in the Philippines from 2017 to 2020, with forecasts until 2026. From: https://www.statista.com/statistics/490455/number-of-philippines-facebook-users/.
  78. Statista Research Department (2020). Total number of cyberbullying incidents in the Philippines in 2019, by region. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1136192/philippines-number-cyberbullying-incidents-by-region/.
  79. Strangio, S. (2022). In response to this, on Feb-ruary 3, 2022, Philippine lawmakers. https://thediplomat.com/2022/02/philippine-parliament-passes-law-to-tackle-online-abuse-trolling/.
  80. Subyantoro, S., & Apriyanto, S. (2020). Impo-liteness in Indonesian language hate speech on social media contained in the Instagram account. Journal of Advances in Linguistics, 11(2), 36-46.
  81. Torres, J. (2020). Politeness Strategies vis-à-vis genders and exposures to Western culture: The case of ‘The Voice of the Philippines’ coaches. International Journal of Linguistics and Translation Studies, 1(3), 100-117.
  82. Trifiro, B. M., Paik, S., Fang, Z., & Zhang, L. (2021). Politics and Politeness: Analysis of Incivility on Twitter During the 2020 Dem-ocratic Presidential Primary. Social Media+ Society, 7(3), 20563051211036939.
  83. University of Texas at El Paso (n.d.) Master list of Logical Fallacies. https://utminers.utep.edu/omwilliamson/ENGL1311/fallacies.htm).
  84. Wawrzuta, D., Jaworski, M., Gotlib, J., & Pan-czyk, M. (2021). What arguments against COVID-19 vaccines run on Facebook in Po-land: Content analysis of comments. Vac-cines, 9(5), 481.
  85. We Are Social & Hootsuite (2021). PH remains top in social media, internet usage world-wide – report. From: https://www.rappler.com/technology/internet-culture/hootsuite-we-are-social-2021-philippines-top-social-media-internet-usage.
  86. Welch, J. (2018). Argument Quality and Delib-eration on Facebook: An Exploratory Study.
  87. Widyaningrum, N., Trisnantoro, L., & Kur-niawan, N. I. (2022). Variations and Argu-ments of Anti-Vaccine Movement Groups on Facebook. KnE Social Sciences, 398-416.

Tools


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic