A Study of Crisis Discourse on the COVID-19 in Brazil: Discourse Manipulation and Power Struggles

IF 2.6 3区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT
Liu Peng
{"title":"A Study of Crisis Discourse on the COVID-19 in Brazil: Discourse Manipulation and Power Struggles","authors":"Liu Peng","doi":"10.1111/1468-5973.70007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Public health safety belongs to the category of ‘securitization’. However, in some countries, there is a tendency of discourse manipulation and desecuritization in COVID-19's discourse. This paper first embarks from the perspective of the Copenhagen School's securitization theory and employs an analytical framework of discourse manipulation to deconstruct the process of Bolsonaro's ‘desecuritization’ crisis discourse construction in response to the COVID-19 threat in his country, which consists in discourse restraint, discourse framing, discourse positioning. The results show that: in terms of discourse restraint strategy, Bolsonaro's government realizes this strategy by reducing the frequency of epidemic topics, continuously suppressing scientific discourse on epidemic prevention and control and suppressing public health and safety discourse through political discourse. In terms of framing strategies, the nature, severity, causes and responsibilities of COVID-19 problem are diagnosed, respectively. Through the negative frame of other programmes and the positive frame of the epidemic plan, the president constructs the expected frame of COVID-19 problem. Through incentive framing, his discourse stimulates Brazilian people's support for the federal government and the president himself and enhances public confidence in Brazil's success in overcoming the epidemic. In terms of discourse positioning strategy, the plots of ‘focusing on economic issues’, ‘life first’, ‘freedom first’ and ‘sovereignty first’ are adopted, respectively. Drawing on the three-dimensional analytical framework as a Critical Discourse Analysis tool, Bolsonaro's discourse manipulation and desecuritization strategies reflect an antagonistic regard towards the relations between economic development and epidemic prevention and a rival perspective towards the relationship between administrative authority and professional authority, and furthermore, the overlapping left-right power struggles under the crossover of the era of ‘Great changes not seen in a century’ and the COVID-19's non-traditional security crisis.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47674,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","volume":"32 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-5973.70007","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Public health safety belongs to the category of ‘securitization’. However, in some countries, there is a tendency of discourse manipulation and desecuritization in COVID-19's discourse. This paper first embarks from the perspective of the Copenhagen School's securitization theory and employs an analytical framework of discourse manipulation to deconstruct the process of Bolsonaro's ‘desecuritization’ crisis discourse construction in response to the COVID-19 threat in his country, which consists in discourse restraint, discourse framing, discourse positioning. The results show that: in terms of discourse restraint strategy, Bolsonaro's government realizes this strategy by reducing the frequency of epidemic topics, continuously suppressing scientific discourse on epidemic prevention and control and suppressing public health and safety discourse through political discourse. In terms of framing strategies, the nature, severity, causes and responsibilities of COVID-19 problem are diagnosed, respectively. Through the negative frame of other programmes and the positive frame of the epidemic plan, the president constructs the expected frame of COVID-19 problem. Through incentive framing, his discourse stimulates Brazilian people's support for the federal government and the president himself and enhances public confidence in Brazil's success in overcoming the epidemic. In terms of discourse positioning strategy, the plots of ‘focusing on economic issues’, ‘life first’, ‘freedom first’ and ‘sovereignty first’ are adopted, respectively. Drawing on the three-dimensional analytical framework as a Critical Discourse Analysis tool, Bolsonaro's discourse manipulation and desecuritization strategies reflect an antagonistic regard towards the relations between economic development and epidemic prevention and a rival perspective towards the relationship between administrative authority and professional authority, and furthermore, the overlapping left-right power struggles under the crossover of the era of ‘Great changes not seen in a century’ and the COVID-19's non-traditional security crisis.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
12.90%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management is an invaluable source of information on all aspects of contingency planning, scenario analysis and crisis management in both corporate and public sectors. It focuses on the opportunities and threats facing organizations and presents analysis and case studies of crisis prevention, crisis planning, recovery and turnaround management. With contributions from world-wide sources including corporations, governmental agencies, think tanks and influential academics, this publication provides a vital platform for the exchange of strategic and operational experience, information and knowledge.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信