“Wait With Falling in Love”: Discursive Evaluation of Amicable Messages Conveyed by Opponents

Abstract

Amicable messages delivered in a conflict may have a positive effect on recipients’ willingness to reconcile. Although studies have examined their effect, we still lack understanding on what grounds amicable messages are accepted or rejected. This study identifies the interpretative repertoires Israeli news commenters apply to make sense of amicable messages delivered unexpectedly by foreign opponent leaders, and demonstrates how they are employed for drawing epistemic boundaries between members of an interpretative community. Analysis of 2,037 comments to reported messages toward Israel in the context of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict reveals 11 evaluative categories employed by Israeli commenters within two interpretative repertoires: suspicion and opportunity. Most commenters rejected the messages on grounds of the source’s lack of credibility. A minority of commenters accepted the messages, focusing on wishful outcomes and in-group policies. The conclusion discusses the importance of studying interpretative repertoires and their applicability to other communities involved in conflicts.

The democratic king: The role of ritualized flattery in political discourse

“…While rituals are traditionally seen as fulfilling a function of social integration, they can also ‘legitimize the social order by naturalizing socially constructed categories and the underlying values that these categories stand for’ (Boudana, 2014: 51). The coverage of the interaction leads to an online public debate in which commenters engage in heated discussions regarding the ‘correct’ interpretation of political actions, hence drawing epistemic boundaries around members of their interpretive community (Kampf et al, 2021). Ritualized political flattery thus demarcates the discursive boundary between those who evaluate the flatterers’ words as deserved praise and those who evaluate it as undeserved flattery.…”