The Language of Threat in our Political Discourse

Abstract

This chapter is a report about negotiating the boundaries of appropriate political discourse via Twitter. The instance looked at in depth is the communication about the shooting of Representative Giffords in 2011. The first month over 400,000 messages referred to Giffords and substantially more referred to the controversy about the campaign rhetoric of targets and reloading. The authors tracked the communication in 6 ongoing collections of streams of messages and 2 that resulted from the shooting and controversy. One stream was about how “terrorist” was used in characterizing the shooter. The major controversy was about the use of targeting or gun references in campaign rhetoric. Palin released a video using the phrase “blood libel” leading to opposing interpretations of the appropriate use of the term. The authors look in less depth at the controversy in early 2012 about Rush Limbaugh's characterization of a student who testified to a committee of the House of Representatives. That controversy reinforced points found in the communication about the Giffords shooting. It also reminds us that the boundaries of appropriate political rhetoric are continuously negotiated in a free speech society and that there is now a new domain for the negotiation in the new media.