Logical Fallacies in Social Media: A Discourse Analysis in Political Debate

Abstract

In the light of the growth of social media, information is easily available and accessible. When receiving information, social media users are likely to take information for granted without being aware of flawed arguments. This qualitative descriptive study aims at encouraging social media users to use critical thinking skills to reasonably evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of arguments by highlighting logical fallacies. By employing fallacy taxonomy, fallacious arguments are identified from a transcribed political debate among Indonesian political figures in a forum of discussion Indonesia Lawyers Club - an Indonesian tv program which is available and accessible on YouTube Channel. Four fallacious statements were successfully spotted, namely fallacy by manipulating through language, fallacy by manipulating through emotion appeal of fear, fallacy by manipulating through distraction red herrings, and inductive fallacy through fallacy inconsistencies and contradictions. Discussion is limited to judging fallacy without actually discussing the acceptable counterparts for fallacies listed. The transcribed debate is solely analyzed in terms of the presence of logical fallacies; it is regardless of the stance toward the issue or the overall discussion. Nevertheless, employing fallacy taxonomy as a framework strategy to spot fallacious arguments could be seen as a practical step to bridge the gap in the knowledge of logic. The results of this study can, therefore, be useful for pedagogical implications to do the possible practical steps to alert logical fallacy in everyday life and language teaching and learning as well.