Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Language and Politics
Vol. 20:6 (2021) ► pp.894–912

The struggle between the power of language and the language of power

Pro- and anti-vaccination memes and the discursive construction of knowledge

ORCID logo | Aalborg University
| Aalborg University

In this study we look at how pro- and anti-vaccination groups construct alternative knowledge and facts discursively and linguistically in order to challenge or support the established scientific knowledge on vaccines. Through this case study we wish to examine how the power of language interacts with a language of power when memes in creative ways mimic, produce and reproduce scientific language and practices. Drawing on a dialogical-semiotic and a discourse theoretical analytical strategy, we, first, adopt Austin’s speech act theory and Bakhtin’s concept of speech genres to argue that memes are performative with an especially illocutionary force and are made up of alien language from scientific discourses. Second, we argue that Laclau’s discursive approach to how political positions are articulated in an antagonistic terrain allows us to see vaccination memes as either subversive or supportive of a scientific social imaginary.

Keywords: alternative knowledge, dialogical-semiotic analysis, discourse analysis, internet memes, vaccination debate
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Discursive contestations of knowledge and facts in digital public spheres
    • 2.1Speech act, speech genres and truth
    • 2.2Contested discourse on knowledge
  • 3.Methodology: Memes as text and discourse
    • 3.1Data
  • 4.Analysing memes as speech act, speech genre and the alien language
  • 5.Analysing memes as antagonistic discourse
  • 6.Conclusion: The power of language and the language of power
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 18 May 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.19101.ros
References
Askanius, Tina
2013 “Online Political Activism and Political Mash-up Genres.” Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies 41: 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Austin, John L.
2003 “Truth”. In Philosophical Papers, ed. by J. O. Urmson, and G. J. Warnock. 118–133. (Oxford: Oxford University Press 1979 [1961]) Oxford: Oxford Scholarship Online . DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 How To Do Things With Words: The William James Lectures delivered at Harvard University in 1955, ed. by J. O. Urmson, and M. Sbisà. (Oxford: Oxford University Press 1975 [1962].) Oxford: Oxford Scholarship Online 2011 doi:  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail M.
1981 “Discourse in the Novel.” In The Dialogic Imagination, ed. by Michael Holquist, trans. by Caryl Emerson, and Michael Holquist. 259–422. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail M.
1986 “The Problem of Speech Genres.” In Speech Genres & Other Late Essays, ed. by Carol Emerson, and Michael Holquist, trans. by Vern W. McGee. 60–102. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Barthes, Roland
1977 “Rhetoric of the Image”. In Image – Music – Text, ed. and trans. by Stephen Heath. 32–51. New York: The Noonday Press.Google Scholar
Bruns, Axel
2008 Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond. From Production to Produsage. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Buts, Jan
2020 “Memes of Gandhi and mercury in anti-vaccination discourse.” Media and Communication 8 (2): 353–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Campell, James B., Jason W. Busse, and H. Stephen Injeyan
2000 “Chiropractors and Vaccination: A Historical Perspective.” American Academy of Pediatrics 43 (105):1–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carpentier, Nico, and Benjamin De Cleen
2014 “Bringing Discourse Theory into Media Studies: The Applicability of Discourse Theoretical Analysis (DTA) for the Study of Media Practices and Discourses.” Journal of Language and Politics 6 (2): 265–293. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Castells, Manuel
2000 The Rise of the Network Society, 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Clarke, Christopher E.
2008 “A Question of Balance: The Autism-Vaccine Controversy in the British and American Elite Press.” Science Communication 30 (1): 77–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, Richard
1976 The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman
1995 Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Fenton, Natalie
2012 “The Internet and Radical Politics.” In Misunderstanding the Internet, by James Curran, Natalie Fenton and Des Freedman. 149–176. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Flyvbjerg, Bent
2001 Making Social Science Matter. Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gauchat, Gordon
2012 “Politicization of Science in the Public Sphere: A Study of Public Trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010.” American Sociological Review 77 (2): 167–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hartley, John
2010 “Silly Citizenship.” Critical Discourse Studies 7 (4): 233–248. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harvey, Amanda M., Sharlynn Thompson, Andrew Lac, and Frederick L. Coolidge
2019 ”Fear and derision: A quantitative content analysis of provaccine and antivaccine internet memes.” Health, Education & Behaviour 46 (6): 1012–1023. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jasanoff, Sheila
2004 “The Idiom of Co-production.” In States of Knowledges: The Co-Production of Science and Social Order, ed. by Sheila Jasanoff. 1–12. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, Henry
2006 Convergence Culture. Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Laclau, Ernesto
1990 New Reflections on the Revolution of Our Time. London: Verso.Google Scholar
2005 On Populist Reason. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Mouffe, Chantal
2000 The Democratic Paradox. London: Verso.Google Scholar
2005 On the Political. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ross, Andrew S., and Damien J. Rivers
2017 “Digital Cultures of Political Participation: Internet Memes and the Discursive Delegimization of the 2016 U.S. Presidential Candidates.” Discourse, Context and Media 161: 1–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R.
1976 “A Classification of Illocutionary Acts.” Language in Society 1 (5):1–23. [URL]. DOI logo
Shifman, Limor
2014 Memes in Digital Culture. Cambridge: Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Strydom, Piet
2008 “Risk communication: World Creation through Collective Learning under Complex Contingency Conditions.” Journal of Risk Research 11 (1): 5–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Dijck, José
2012 The Culture of Connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wakefield, Andrew J., Simon H. Murch, Andrew Anthony, John Linnell, David M. Casson, Mohsin Malik, Mark Berelowitz, Amar P. Dhillon, Michael A. Thomson, P. Harvey, Alan Valentine, Susan E. Davies, and John A. Walker-Smith
1998 ”Ileal-lymphoid-nodular Hyperplasia, Non-specific Colitis, and Pervasive Developmental Disorder in Children.” Lancet 351 (9103): 637–41 (retracted). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wiggins, Bradley E., and G. Bret Bowers
2015 “Memes as Genres: A Structurational Analysis of the Memescape.” New media & society 11 (17): 1886–1906. DOI logoGoogle Scholar