Justifying Assault between Colombian Politicians. The Case of Former Mayor Rodolfo Hernández on YouTube
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5294/pacla.2021.24.4.2Keywords:
Aggression, interactive communication, political communication, animal behaviour, speech, ethology, political leadership, public opinion, violenceAbstract
In November 2018, the then-mayor of Bucaramanga (Colombia) attacked a municipal councilor amidst a heated political discussion. The video of the assault spread like wildfire on social media and was used by the Attorney General’s Office as reliable evidence to suspend the mayor from office. This article analyzes a set of virtual comments from Internet users in reaction to the video. The corpus was extracted from the post made by the El Tiempo news outlet on YouTube using the YouTube Comment Scraper tool between November 28 and December 28, 2018, to focus on reactions to the political event in the first month. From an interdisciplinary interpretive perspective of discourse analysis, we determined the regularities of these reactions, the ways of explicitly and implicitly justifying acts of violence, and the political effects that ended up favoring the former mayor’s public image. The article concludes by inserting the studied case into the current debates on democratic representation and the rise of anti-political ideological matrices in rulers’ public discourse.
Downloads
References
Abad, A. y Trak, J. M. (2013). Desafección política en Bolivia, Ecuador y Venezuela en 2010: un análisis comparado. Cuadernos del Cendes, 30(82), 35-66. http://ve.scielo.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1012-25082013000100004&lng=es&tlng=es
Alloca, K. (2018). Videoycracy. How YouTube is changing the world. Nueva York: Bloomsbury.
Almond, G. (1990). The study of political culture. En G. Almond, A discipline divided. Schools and Sects in Political Science (pp. 138-156). Newbury Park: Sage.
Amossy, R. (2014). Apologie de la polémique. París: PUF. https://doi.org/10.3917/puf.amos.2014.01
Arnoux, E. (2019). El análisis del discurso como campo académico y práctica interpretativa. En Ó. I. Londoño y G. Olave (coords.), Métodos de análisis del discurso. Perspectivas argentinas (pp. 19-40). Bogotá: Ediciones de la U.
Bañuelos, J. (2009). YouTube como plataforma de la sociedad del espectáculo. Razón y Palabra, 66, 1-29. http://www.ww.w.razonypalabra.org.mx/N/n66/varia/jbanuelos.pdf
Barton, D. y Lee C. (2013). Language online. Investigating digital texts and practices. Londres-Nueva York: Routledge.
Berry, J. M. y Sobieraj, S. (2014). The outrage industry: Political opinion
media and the new incivility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Boczkowski, P. y Papacharissi, Z. (eds.) (2018). Trump and the Media. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11464.001.0001
Briceño, Y., Acevedo, M., Cogollo, D. y Sanabria, L. (2017). Interacción ciudadana frente al mensaje de un actor político emergente en Facebook. Revista La Tercera Orilla, 19, 42-56. https://doi.org/10.29375/21457190.2889
Briceño, Y., Manrique, J., Sanabria, L. y Gómez, A. (2018). Clasificación discursiva de los comentarios en Facebook desde la actitud política. Index.comunicación, 8(3), 43-64. https://journals.sfu.ca/indexcomunicacion/index.php/indexcomunicacion/article/view/425
Burgess, J. y Green, J. (2009). YouTube. Digital Media and Society Series. Cambridge: Polity Books.
Di Palma, G. (1970). Apathy and Participation. Mass Politics in Western Societies. Nueva York: The Free Press.
De Waal, F. (2007). El mono que llevamos dentro. Barcelona: Tusquets.
Du Bois, J. W. (2007). The stance triangle. En R. Englebreston (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction (pp. 39-182). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Dyke, S. (2013). Utilising a blended ethnographic approach to explore the online and offline lives of pro-ana community members. Etnografía y Educación, 8(2), 146-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2013.792505
Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. (2017). Human Etology. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203789544
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308385
Englebretson, R. (2007). Stancetaking in Discourse. Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction. Londres: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164
Forni, P. (2011). Los estudios de caso: orígenes, cuestiones de diseño y sus aportes a la teoría social. Miríada. Investigación en Ciencias Sociales, 3(5), 61-80. https://p3.usal.edu.ar/index.php/miriada/article/view/5/153
Fracchiolla, B. (2013). De l’agression à la violence verbal, de l’éthologie à l’anthropologie de la communication. En B. Fracchiolla, C. Moïse, C. Romain y N. Auger (eds.), Violences verbales: Analyses, enjeux et perspectives (pp. 19-36). Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
Gallardo-Camacho, J. y Alonso, J. (2010). La baja interacción del espectador de vídeos en Internet: caso Youtube España. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 65, 421-435. https://doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-65-2010-910-421-435
Graf, J., Erba, J. y Harn, R. W. (2017). The role of civility and anonymity
on perceptions of online comments. Mass Communication and Society, 20(4), 526-549. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2016.1274763
Hammerstein, P. (2013). What theoretical biology has to say on aggression in humans and animals. En H. Kortüm y J. Heinze (eds.), Aggression in humans and other primates (pp. 23-40). Berlín: Degruyter.
Happer, C., Hoskins, A. y Merrin, A. (eds.) (2019). Trump’s Media War. Suiza: Palgrave MacMillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94069-4
Hernández, R., Méndez, S., Mendoza, C. y Cuevas, A. (2017). Fundamentos de la investigación. México: McGraw-Hill.
Jaffe, A. (ed.) (2009). Stance. Sociolinguistic perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331646.001.0001
Klostermann, P. (2015). YouTube Comment Scraper. http://ytcomments.klostermann.ca/
Kortüm, H. y Heinze, J. (eds.) (2013). Aggression in humans and other primates. Berlín: Degruyter.
Ksiazek, T., Peer, L. y Zivic, A. (2015). Discussing the news: Civility and hostility in user comments. Digital Journalism, 3(6), 850-870. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.972079
Kwon, K. y Gruzd, A. (2017). Is aggression contagious online? A case of swearing on Donald Trump’s campaign videos on YouTube [Proceedings]. 50th International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2017.262
Lange, P. (2014). Commenting on YouTube rants: Perceptions of inappopriateness or civic engagement? Journal of Pragmatics, 73, 53-65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.07.004
Lanza, L. y Fidel, N. (2011). Política 2.0 y la comunicación en tiempos modernos. Centro de Estudios en Diseño y Comunicación, 35, 53-63. https://doi.org/10.18682/cdc.vi35
Lorenz, K. (2016). Sobre la agresión. El pretendido mal. F. Blanco (trad.). México: Siglo XXI.
May, A. (2010). Who Tube? How YouTube’s news and politics space is going mainstream. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 15(4), 499-511. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161210382861
McCosker, A. (2013). Trolling as provocation: YouTube’s agonistic publics. Convergence 20(2), 201-217. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856513501413
Moor, P., Heuvelman, A. y Verleur, R. (2010). Flaming on YouTube. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1536-1546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.05.023
Morini, M. (2020). Lessons from Trump’s political communication. How to dominate the media environment. Suiza: Palgrave MacMillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39010-5
Mouffe, Ch. (2003). La paradoja democrática. Barcelona: Gedisa.
Novaro, M. (2000). Representación y liderazgo en las democracias contemporáneas. Buenos Aires: Homo Sapiens.
Olave, G. (2019). Agresiones verbales en streaming: la disputa pública por la implementación del Acuerdo de Paz en Colombia [Ponencia], I Congreso Iberoamericano de Argumentación, agosto 14-16, Universidad EAFIT, Medellín.
Papacharissi, Z. (2018). The importance of being a headline. En P. Boczkowski y Z. Papacharissi (eds.), Trump and the Media (pp. 71-78). Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.
Pardo, N. (2012). Discurso en la Web: pobreza en YouTube. Bogotá: Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
Reddy, W. (2001). The navigation of feeling. A framework for the history of emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rodríguez-Breijo, V., Gallardo-Camacho, J. y Sierra-Sánchez, J. (2018). Información política en los vídeos que son tendencia en YouTube España. El profesional de la información, 27(5), 1041-1049. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2018.sep.08
Rosanvallon, P. (2007). La contrademocracia. La política en la era de la desconfianza. Buenos Aires: Manantial.
Salcedo, L. y García, J. (2015). La desafección política en Colombia: un análisis sistémico al respecto. Económicas CUC, 36(2), 49-65. https://doi.org/10.17981/econcuc.36.2.2015.4
Schmitt, A., Atzwanger, K., Grammer, K. y Schäfer, K. (eds.) (1997). New aspects of human ethology. Nueva York/Londres: Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/b102412
Schneebeli, C. (2015). Les modalités linguistiques du commentaire sur internet comme prise de position (“stance-taking”): l’exemple des commentaires sur YouTube. HAL-Sciences del Homme et de la Société. https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01406715/
Scolari, C. (2004). Hacer clic. Hacia una sociosemiótica de las interacciones digitales. Madrid: Gedisa.
Staiger, J., Cvetkovich, A. y Reynolds, A. (2010). Political emotions. New agendas in communication. Nueva York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203849538
Stake, R. (1995). Investigación con estudios de caso. Madrid: Morata.
Strauss, A. y Corbin, J. (2002). Bases de la investigación cualitativa. Técnicas y procedimentos para desarrollar la teoría fundamentada. Medellín: Universidad de Antioquia.
Wahl-Jorgensen, K. (2018). Public displays of disaffection: The emotional politics of Donald Trump. En P. Boczkowski y Z. Papacharissi (eds.), Trump and the Media (pp. 79-86). Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.
Yin, R. (1984). Case study research. Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Palabra Clave
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
1. Proposed Policy for Journals That Offer Open Access
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.