Abstract
Since the referendum in 2016, Brexit has become the most controversial conundrum in the UK. This study aimed to revisit this issue by focusing on the communicative patterns of Brexit-related parties (the Conservatives, Labour, and UK Independence Party). Firstly, it attempted to provide the conceptual backgrounds of Brexit by explaining its development process from Cameron’s pledge of an in/out referendum to the present. Subsequently, it reviewed empirical studies on Brexit in diverse areas of social science. Most empirical studies point out that British political practitioners’ perceptions about Brexit were the root cause, but they were not able to provide an overview of these perceptions. The novelty of this study lies in examining the patterns of these perceptions by focusing on communicative framings embedded in the posts created in their official Facebook pages from the date of the referendum to that of the Brexit withdrawal agreement. To extract these framings, this study adopted an automated semantic network analysis geared by NodeXL—software for data collection and visualisation. The results show that these parties emphasised that they were the only legitimate political party to solve the Brexit crisis without providing concrete solutions or measures. These parties’ ill-founded communications endanger sustainable social media communications and interactions in the UK. Hence, it is vital to establish a more reliable fact-checking information-sharing system between the political elite and the general public.
Highlights
On 23 June 2016, the EU membership referendum (Brexit) revealed unexpected results, and on25 November 2018, 27 EU member countries approved the motion
The novelty of this study lies in examining the patterns of these perceptions by focusing on communicative framings embedded in the posts created in their official Facebook pages from the date of the referendum to that of the Brexit withdrawal agreement
Based from the financial market, the major political parties hoped that risk aversion would convince British on warnings from the financial market, the major political parties hoped that risk aversion would voters to remain in the EU; 52% of British voters were in favour of leaving the convince British voters to remain in the EU; 52% of British voters were in favour
Summary
On 23 June 2016, the EU membership referendum (Brexit) revealed unexpected results, and on25 November 2018, 27 EU member countries approved the motion. This research aimed to discover which information British political agents provided to the British public can be considered misleading (which created confusion). This study used framing theory as its methodology, and it considered how the unexpected results of Brexit came to be and examined which aspects accepted by the voters’ major parties were for the sake of promoting their own aims (i.e., to “remain” or for “Brexit”). In order to recall what was stated by both the “remain” and “leave” campaigns at the time of referendum, it is vital to understand the background of Brexit and its negotiation process. Identifying the change in framing from 2016 to 2018 in Britain is fundamental to this research. Based from the financial market, the major political parties hoped that risk aversion would convince British on warnings from the financial market, the major political parties hoped that risk aversion would voters to remain in the EU; 52% of British voters were in favour of leaving the convince British voters to remain in the EU; 52% of British voters were in favour
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
