Addressing audience through defining action: a rhetorical examination of civility and audience engagement on two online discussion forums

Lacy Hope

doi:10.29107/rr2018.3.2

Abstract

Web 2.0’s progressive use of personalizing algorithms has dangerously situated users into filter bubbles, or digital habitus. This insulated nature leaves users with an inability to engage civilly with others during online dialogues. This work examines how users on the sites Facebook and Countable frame and address online audiences, paying attention to the correlation between civility and action beyond the online dialogue. Through careful analyses on the respective comment threads, this work finds that the coupling of fewer personalizing algorithms and the inclusion of an established action beyond the dialogue can better ensure civility online.

Highlights

Social networking sites (SNS) have demonstrated their worth regarding action-oriented social movement organization, their connected nature seems more troublesome than helpful when hosting open, public dialogues with no actions beyond the dialogue defined
With online civility being greatly informed by a site’s algorithmic designs and available features, it’s important to consider how actions associated to, but possibly existing outside of, the online dialogue influence the ways in which participants situate themselves among others, as well as the language they utilize to engage with their addressed audiences
Facebook as a platform is heavily personalized through filtering algorithms and does not emphasize an action outside of the online dialogue itself, rather producing content for the dialogue is the action associated with the composition

Summary

Introduction

Social networking sites (SNS) have demonstrated their worth regarding action-oriented social movement organization, their connected nature seems more troublesome than helpful when hosting open, public dialogues with no actions beyond the dialogue defined. Though not as frequently utilized as SNS, there are digitally networked spaces like SNS that define clear action beyond the dialogue itself. Some of these platforms extend the dialogue to elected or appointed public officials who can act upon the arguments shared on these public digital dialogues. Contributions to these dialogues demonstrate that the action explicitly presented to participants on digitally networked platforms influences a participant’s argument structure through the subtle, yet critical, establishment of the addressed audience. The lack of a defined action beyond the dialogue itself on digitally networked forums is more likely to result in uncivil argument structures among participants,

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion