Discourse and manipulation

TLDR

Manipulation is a key concept in Critical Discourse Analysis and is socially defined as illegitimate domination that reinforces inequality. The article seeks to triangulate manipulation as social power abuse, cognitive mind control, and discursive interaction. Cognitively, manipulation distorts understanding and biases mental models, while discursively it employs typical ideological discourse such as praising “our” and denigrating “their.” The authors show that manipulation differs from legitimate mind control by claiming to serve the dominated group’s interests, and illustrate this with a partial analysis of Tony Blair’s 2003 House of Commons speech endorsing the Iraq war.

Abstract

‘Manipulation’ is one of the crucial notions of Critical Discourse Analysis that require further theoretical analysis. This article offers a triangulated approach to manipulation as a form of social power abuse, cognitive mind control and discursive interaction. Socially, manipulation is defined as illegitimate domination confirming social inequality. Cognitively, manipulation as mind control involves the interference with processes of understanding, the formation of biased mental models and social representations such as knowledge and ideologies. Discursively, manipulation generally involves the usual forms and formats of ideological discourse, such as emphasizing Our good things, and emphasizing Their bad things. At all these levels of analysis it is shown how manipulation is different from legitimate mind control, such as in persuasion and providing information, for instance by stipulating that manipulation is in the best interest of the dominated group and against the best interests of dominated groups. Finally, this theory is illustrated by a partial analysis of a speech by Tony Blair in the House of Commons legitimating the participation of the UK in the US-led war against Iraq in 2003.