The Use of Manipulative Tactics in Hate Speech

Abstract

The aim of the present article is to study some ways of verbal expression of adversary social relationships. It is a study based on the linguistic material of one online article, which shows clearly that the language resources used by the Azerbaijani propagandists manipulate the public, create an exaggeratedly negative image of Armenia as an aggressor state and impose anti-Armenian opinion on the readers. The need for a linguistic study of hate speech is quite actual since at the modern Information Age or New Media Age the confrontation between the conflicting sides is often escalated via verbal duelling, accusation and repudiation that spreads rapidly far and wide with the help of online resources. The spread of fake, misleading and falsified information that discredits the opposing side, inciting hatred and animosity against a group of people is growing dangerously. Worst of all, we cannot but admit the fact that, unfortunately, malice and antagonism are becoming part of modern civilization. The linguistic analysis carried out in the present article demonstrates how certain verbal manipulative tactical tools that are deliberately used by the author, create abusive hate speech against Armenia and its policy.

Critical Thinking as Dynamic Shield against Media Deception. Exploring Connections between the Analytical Mind and Detecting Disinformation Techniques and Logical Fallacies in Journalistic Production

“…The same material was then analyzed by contrasting its content upon a list of 19 logical fallacies. The specific cognitive errors were selected based on their instrumental use in manipulative settings (Goldberg & Vandenberg, 2021;Macagno, 2022;Paronyan, 2020;Paul & Elder, 2019). Density and variety of disinformation technics and logical fallacies are related to findings extracted through CDA analysis.…”

Euphemistic Replacement as Communicative Strategy in the News Media

“…Due to this creative camouflage of words and phrases, their perception in conflict situations is softened. Euphemisation of meaning functions either for the sake of maintaining polite verbal behavior or in order to manipulate the audience (Hoggart, 1986;Brown & Levinson, 1987;Eliecer, 2005;Paronyan, 2020).…”

Realization of Implicit Warning in Political Interview

“…Meaning can be expressed both literally, with the help of direct speech acts and metaphorically, with the help of indirect speech acts. Furthermore, meaning can be negotiated (when the content of the message is expressed ambiguosly to allow for different variants of interpretation), twisted (when ironic expressions like sarcasm are used) and manipulated (when the content of the message is conveyed in a sneaky fashion to play on emotions and manage a situation) (Bach & Harnish, 1979;Gasparyan, Paronyan, & Muradian, 2019;Paronyan, 2020).…”