How Groups Talk about Their (Perceived) Marginalization (Even If It’s Not Real)

• In Event: The Media's Role in Forming and Reinforcing Political Identity and Community

Abstract

Democracy in the United States has never been equally accessible to all, and the story of groups working, campaigning, and organizing to gain, expand, or hold on to a seat at the political table has been constant. Throughout American history many groups, communities, and organizations have described themselves as politically marginalized, though this term is often subjectively used without a consistent clear meaning. Marginalized groups, often defined by race, ethnicity, gender, religion, nationality, ability, and sexual orientation have constantly attempted to communicate about their status in society and the need for change. Some of these efforts have grown out of a history of discrimination and weak or nonexistent political status such as those fighting against racial discrimination of Black Americans, and efforts for greater political access and representation for women and members of the LGBTQ+ community. Others have grown out of changing demographics, values, and norms in American society that have affected communities that have been historically centered in American politics. This would include organizations fighting for men’s rights, Christian values, and a number of efforts focused on ending “reverse discrimination,” based on race, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation. Regardless of whether these communities actually face disproportionate discrimination or marginalization, the perception that they are marginalized is one characteristic that promotes unity and action including strategic messaging and political organizing.

Building on previous work, this study aims to explore the communication approaches of the second broad set of groups, those that perceive themselves to be marginalized despite a history of political inclusion, by centering their words and strategies. How do they advocate for greater political power, access, and representation and does that differ from marginalized communities that have never been proportionally represented in American democracy and politics? These communities form counterpublics (Warner, 2002), because they don’t feel they are being represented by the dominant public discourse. These groups and their rhetoric would not be considered subaltern counterpublics (Frazier 1992) however, because they have not been politically, socially, or economically marginalized or oppressed through history. But they perceive their marginalization nonetheless and are counterpublics that organize to create an alternative public square in order to build and maintain their identity and challenge what they perceive as social norms that marginalize them and their values.

We use a mixed methods approach to explore the rhetorical and framing strategies, form, and goals of political messages communicated by these groups. First, we identify a diverse sample of organizations that perceive themselves to be marginalized, such as those advocating for greater political power and protection for Christians, Men, and those who advocate against ”reverse discrimination” based on ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation. Next, we gathered a large set of digital communication efforts including websites, social media posts, and video and audio transcripts from these organizations. We then analyze these communication efforts qualitatively and quantitively in order to compare them with one another and other subaltern counterpublics of more traditionally defined marginalized communities.

Applying a framework developed over a number of related studies, we qualitatively compare how these diverse organizations work simultaneously to 1) define and position themselves, 2) articulate position statements and policy demands, and 3) make calls to action, all while 4) trying to build internal morale and external support. Finally, we conduct content analysis to evaluate rhetorical qualities of the social media posts and websites from these organizations. Initial results suggest that the areas of emphasis and rhetorical strategies of these groups varied substantially, but overall emphasize themes of victimhood, persecution and history more than marginalized communities who have faced a long-documented history of tangible political marginalization. Further the process of identity formation and the development of counterpublics and political activity for these groups is shown to have been transformed by digital tools, yet maintains some similarities to marginalized advocacy using more traditional communication technology like the newspaper and radio.

Author

• Ben Epstein, DePaul University