Empowering the People’s Truth Through Social Media? (De)Legitimizing Truth Claims of Populist Politicians and Citizens

Bibliographic Data

ID13053557
AuthorsMichael Hameleers (0000-0002-8038-5005, University of Amsterdam, corresponding author)
Year2022
Volume10
Issue1
Publication date2022-01-06
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePolitics and Governance (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2183-2463 • E-ISSN: 2183-2463
PublisherCogitatio (PUBLISHER • PT)
DOI10.17645/pag.v10i1.4726
OpenAlexW4205419908
LanguageEN
Citations received16
References cited31

Right-wing populists have allegedly fueled increasing levels of distrust regarding expert knowledge and empirical evidence. Yet, we know little about how right-wing populist politicians and citizens use social media to construct and oppose truth claims. Using a qualitative analysis of Twitter and Facebook posts communicated by right-wing populists and citizens supporting populist ideas in the Netherlands, this article offers in-depth insights into processes of legitimization (confirming truth claims) and de-legitimization (opposing truth claims). The main conclusion is that right-wing populists and citizens supporting populism do not share a universal way of referring to reality. They use social media to communicate a confirmation-biased reality: Expert knowledge and evidence are de-contextualized or reinterpreted and aligned with right-wing populist agendas. References to the people’s experiences and worldviews, conspiracy theories and crisis sentiments are used to legitimize people’s opposition to expert knowledge and empirical evidence. Based on these findings, we coin the idea of an “adaptable construction of confirmation-biased truth claims” central in right-wing populist interpretations of reality. In times of increasing attacks on expert knowledge and empirical evidence, populist discourse may fuel an antagonism between the ordinary people’s experiences and the truth claims of established media channels and politicians in government. Social media offer a platform to members of the public to engage in discussions about (un)truthfulness, perceived deception, and populist oppositions—potentially amplifying divides between the ordinary people’s experiences and expert sources

Distrust · Empirical evidence · Epistemology · Opposition (politics · Political science · Politics · Populism · Public relations · Social media · Sociology · Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection · Law · Misinformation and Its Impacts · Social Media and Politics

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access