Abstract
In contemporary digital publics, rhetoric and culture intertwine, shaping collective understanding and moral judgement. Taking the public accusations against Katherine Diez as its point of departure, this article explores the rhetorical dynamics of a public accusation through which communities articulate and enforce shared norms while simultaneously reconstituting their own identities. By tracing and mapping how the accusation emerged, circulated, and crystallized across platforms, the article examines how rhetorical participation and cultural meaning-making unfold collaboratively in a networked media ecology. Drawing on theories of narrative rhetoric, accusatory rhetoric and participatory communication, the article demonstrates how a single accusation becomes a site where participants negotiate authority, moral legitimacy, and identity. The article contributes to recent research on accusatory rhetoric and offers a method for delimiting an object of analysis within a networked media ecology.