Cover not available
Part of
Social Media and Society: Integrating the digital with the social in digital discourse
Edited by Majid KhosraviNik
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 100] 2023
► pp. 146–166

Online counterspeech and the targeting of digital discourses of racism in New Zealand

| Auckland University of Technology
This chapter seeks to locate online counterspeech in the relatively new framework of Social Media Critical Discourse Studies (SM-CDS) by examining the discursive strategies used to counter the racist discourse beneath a YouTube video. I argue that online counterspeech – a phenomenon whereby the Internet is used as a platform to challenge another person’s speech or ideology whether race, religion, or political beliefs – is worthy of critical examination as its associated discourses are inherent in the many-to-many dynamic of bottom-up online social interaction. Innovative ways of investigation such as SM-CDS are called for on top of the traditions in CDS where existing frameworks may fall short in accounting for the techno-discursive dynamic of digital discourse and the way new environments may produce new dynamics of power and influence in discourse formation and consumption.
Keywords: online counterspeech, racism, Social Media-Critical Discourse Studies, YouTube, New Zealand
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Researching online counterspeech
  • Social Media-Critical Discourse Studies
  • The case study: Countering anti-racist rhetoric on YouTube
  • Analysis and discussion
  • Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 14 April 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.100.08smi
References (51)
References
Ainsworth, Susan, and Cynthia Hardy. 2004. “Critical discourse analysis and identity: why bother?” Critical Discourse Studies 1 (2): 225–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Androutsopoulos, Jannis. 2008. “Potentials and limitations of discourse-centred online ethnography.” Language@internet 5 (8).Google Scholar
. 2011. “Language Change in Digital Media. A Review of Conceptions and Evidence.” In Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe, ed. by Tore Kristiansen, and Nikolas Coupland, 145–159. Oslo: Novus Press.Google Scholar
Avner, Ziv. 1988. “Humor as a Social Corrective.” In Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum. 3rd ed. Edited by Laurence Behrens, and Leonard J. Rosen, 356–360. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.Google Scholar
Bartlett, Jamie, and Alex Krasodomski-Jones. 2015. Counter-speech: Examining Content that Challenges Extremism Online. London: Demos. Accessed 30 October 2018 [URL]
Benesch, Susan, Derek Ruths, Kelly P. Dillon, Haji Mohammad Saleem, and Lucas Wright. 2016. “Counterspeech on Twitter: A Field Study.” Dangerous Speech Project. Accessed 21 January 2020. [URL]
Benson, Phil. 2015. “YouTube as Text: Spoken Interaction Analysis and Digital Discourse.” In Discourse and Digital Practices: Doing Discourse Analysis in the Digital Age, ed. by Rodney Jones, Alice Chik, and Christof Hafner, 81–96. New York, NY: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bou Franch, Patricia, Nuria Lorenzo-Dus, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich. 2012. “Social Interaction in YouTube Text-Based Polylogues: A Study of Coherence.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 17 (4): 501–521. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crystal, David. 2006. Language and the Internet. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan. 2011. Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan, Derek Bousfield, and Anne Wichmann, A. 2003. “Impoliteness revisited: With special reference to dynamic and prosodic aspects.” Journal of Pragmatics 35 (10–11): 1545–1579. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan, Michael Haugh, and Daniel Z. Kadar. 2017. The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
del Mar Garcia de los Salmones, Maria, Rafael Dominguez, and Angel Herrero. 2013. “Communication Using Celebrities in the Non-profit Sector.” International Journal of Advertising 32 (1): 101–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Devoy, Susan. n.d. “New Zealand: Give Nothing to Racism.” Commonwealth Forum of National Human Rights Institutions. Accessed 14 October 2017. [URL]).
Dynel, Marta. 2014. “Participation Framework Underlying YouTube Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 73: 37–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fiser, Darja, and Philippa Smith (eds.). 2020. The Dark Side of Digital Platforms: Linguistic Investigations of Socially Unacceptable Online Discourse Practices. Slovenia: Ljubljana University Press.Google Scholar
García-Gómez, Antonio. 2018. “Managing conflict on WhatsApp: A contrastive study of British and Spanish family disputes.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 6 (2): 318–340. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hardaker, Claire. 2015. “‘I Refuse to Respond to this Obvious Troll’: An Overview of Responses to (Perceived) Trolling.” Corpora 10 (2): 201–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herring, Susan. 2004. “Computer-mediated Discourse Analysis: An Approach to Researching Online Behaviour.” In Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning, ed. by Sarah Barab, Rob Kling, and James H. Gray, 338–376. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herring, Susan, and Jannis Androutsopoulos. 2015. “Computer-Mediated Discourse 2.0.” In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. 2nd ed. Edited by Deborah Tannen, Heidi. E. Hamilton, and Deborah Shriffen, 127–151. Wiley Online Library.Google Scholar
HRC. 2008. New Zealand Human Rights Commission. [URL]
Jaworski, Adam. 1993. The Power of Silence: Social and Pragmatic Perspectives. London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
KhosraviNik, Majid. 2017. “Social Media Critical Discourse Studies (SM-CDS).” In The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies, ed. by John Flowerdew, and John Richardson, 752–769. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. “Social Media Techno-discursive Design, Affective Communication and Contemporary Politics.” Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 11 (4): 427–442. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. “Populist Digital Media? Social media systems and the global populist right discourse.” Public Seminar 28 October 2019. Accessed 15 March 2021 [URL]
. 2020. “Digital Meaning-making Across Content and Practice in Social Media Critical Discourse Studies.” Critical Discourse Studies. Online first. Accessed 23 November 2020. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
KhosraviNik, Majid, and Mohammedwesam Amer. 2020. “Social Media and Terrorism Discourse: the Islamic State’s (IS) Social Media Discursive Content and Practices.” Critical Discourse Studies Online first. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
KhosraviNik, Majid, and Eleonora Esposito. 2018. “Online Hate, Digital Discourse and Critique: Exploring Digitally-mediated Discursive Practices of Gender-based Hostility.” Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 14 (1), 45–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
KhosraviNik, Majid, and Johan Unger. 2016. “Critical Discourse Studies and Social Media: Power, Resistance and Critique in Changing Media Ecologies.” In Methods of Critical Discourse Studies, ed. by Ruth Wodak, and Michael Meyer, 205–233. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
Locher, Miriam, and Richard Watts 2005. “Politeness theory and relational work.” Journal of Politeness Research 1: 9–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria, Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, and Patricia Bou-Franch. 2011. “On-line Polylogues and Impoliteness: The Case of Postings Sent in Response to the Obama Reggaeton YouTube video.” Journal of Pragmatics 43(10): 2578–2593. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marwick, Alice E., and dana boyd. 2011. “I Tweet Honestly, I Tweet Passionately: Twitter Users, Context Collapse, and the Imagined Audience.” New Media and Society 13 (1): 114–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mathew, Binny, Punyajoy Saha, Hardik Tharad, Subham Rajgaria, Prajwal Singhania, Suman Kalyan Maity, Pawan Goyal, and Animesh Mukherjee. 2019. “Thou Shalt Not Hate: Countering Online Hate Speech.” Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media 13 (1): 369–380. Accessed 29 November 2020 [URL]. DOI logo
Miškolci, J., Lucia Kovacova, and Edita Rigova. 2018. “Countering Hate Speech on Facebook: The Case of the Roma Minority in Slovakia.” Social Science Computer Review 38 (2): 128–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Red Ice.TV. 2017. “New Zealand Anti-Racism Campaign Targets Whites.” Accessed 5 August 2020. [URL]
Reisigl, Martin, and Ruth Wodak. 2016. “The Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA).” In Methods of Critical Discourse Studies, ed. by Ruth Wodak, and Michael Meyer, 23–61. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
Richards, Roberta, and Clay Calvert. 2000. “Counterspeech 2000: A New Look at the Old Remedy for “Bad” Speech.” Brigham Young University Law Review 2: 553–586.Google Scholar
Sarkhoh, Nadia, and Majid KhosraviNik. 2020. “Social media discourses of Arabism and the negotiation of Self in the Middle East.” World Englishes 39 (12): 609–622. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, Josephine, Diana Rieger, Olivia Rutkowski, and Julian Ernst. 2018. “Counter-messages as prevention or promotion of extremism?! The potential role of YouTube: Recommendation algorithms.” Journal of Communication 68 (4): 780–808. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sia, Choon-Ling, Bernard C. Y. Tan, and Kwok-Kee Wei. 2002. “Group Polarization and Computer-Mediated Communication: Effects of Communication Cures, Social Presence and Anonymity.” Information Systems Research 13 (1): 70–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soukup, Paul. 2014. “Looking At, Through, and With YouTube.” Communication Research Trends 33 (3): 3–34.Google Scholar
Southern, Matt. 2021. “YouTube removes dislikes on all videos.” Search Engine Journal 10 November 2021. Accessed 23 December 2022 from: [URL]
Stromer-Galley, Jennifer, Lauren Bryant, and Bruce Bimber. 2015. “Context and Medium Matter: Expressing Disagreements Online and Face-to-Face in Political Deliberations.” Journal of Public Deliberation 11 (1): 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Strossen, Nadine. 2018. HATE: Why we should Resist it with Free Speech, not Censorship. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stuff. 2017. “Taika Waititi tackles racism with Human Rights Commission and his brand of irony.” Stuff News 15 June 2017. Accessed 30 October 2017 from: [URL]
Sue, Derald Wing. 2010. Microaggressions in Everyday Life: Race, Gender, and Sexual Orientation. New Jersey, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc.Google Scholar
Suler, John. 2004. “The Online Disinhibition Effect.” Cyber Psychology and Behavior 7 (3): 321–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tagg, Caroline, Philip Seargeant, and Amy A. Brown. 2017. Taking offence on social media: Conviviality and Communication on Facebook. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Unger, Johan. 2016. “The interdisciplinarity of critical discourse studies research.” Palgrave Communications 2: 15037. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Unger, Johan, Majid KhosraviNik, and Ruth Wodak. 2016. “Critical Discourse Studies and Social Media Data.” In Qualitative Research. 4th ed. Edited by David Silverman, 277–293. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Wright, Lucas, Derek Ruths, Kelly P. Dillon, Haji Mohammad Saleem, and Susan Benesch. 2017. “Vectors for Counterspeech on Twitter.” Proceedings of the First Workshop on Abusive Language Online, ed. by Zeerak Waseem, Wendy Hui Kyong Chung, Dirk Hovey, and Joel Tetreault, 57–62. Association for Computational Linguistics. DOI logo Accessed 4 October 2018. [URL]