Shades of denialism

Abstract

This article explores rhetorical practices underlying productive deliberation about climate change. We analyze discussion of climate change on a Reddit subforum to demonstrate that good-faith deliberation---which is essential to deliberative democracy---exists online. Four rhetorical concepts describe variation among this subforum's comments: William Keith's distinction between 'discussion' and 'debate,' William Covino's distinction between good and bad magic, Kelly Oliver's notion of ethical response/ability, and Krista Ratcliffe's notion of rhetorical listening. Using a three-part taxonomy based on these concepts, we argue that collaborative climate change deliberation exists and that forum participation guidelines can promote productive styles of engagement.

Journal
Communication Design Quarterly
Published
2019-05-10
DOI
10.1145/3331558.3331561
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Topics

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

  1. Communication Design Quarterly

Cites in this index (18)

  1. Technical Communication Quarterly
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly
  3. Communication Design Quarterly
  4. Communication Design Quarterly
  5. Communication Design Quarterly
Show all 18 →
  1. Communication Design Quarterly
  2. Communication Design Quarterly
  3. Communication Design Quarterly
  4. Technical Communication Quarterly
  5. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  6. Communication Design Quarterly
  7. Technical Communication Quarterly
  8. Technical Communication Quarterly
  9. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  10. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  11. Technical Communication Quarterly
  12. Technical Communication Quarterly
  13. College Composition and Communication
Also cites 34 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1145/903893.903926
  2. How to do things with words
  3. 10.1086/590649
  4. Environmental politics and deliberative democracy: Examining the promise of new modes of …
  5. 10.1080/14791420903049736
  6. 10.1177/106591290505800203
  7. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.11.004
  8. 10.1080/10570310109374708
  9. 10.1353/rap.2010.0222
  10. 10.1080/17524032.2014.981560
  11. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.01.006
  12. 10.1177/0002764213477097
  13. 10.1080/17524032.2014.983536
  14. 10.1111/1540-6237.8401005
  15. The troubled rhetoric and communication of climate change
  16. 10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.03.010
  17. 10.1353/rap.2002.0029
  18. 10.1177/107769900908600405
  19. 10.1002/wcc.332
  20. Why we disagree about climate change: Understanding controversy, inaction and opportunity
  21. 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01402.x
  22. 10.1002/j.1538-165X.2005.tb00544.x
  23. 10.1353/rap.2002.0035
  24. 10.1080/17524032.2015.1029297
  25. The prospect of Internet democracy.
  26. Rebalancing climate change debate and policy: An analysis of online discussions
    Environmental Policy and Governance  
  27. 10.1080/17524032.2014.999694
  28. 10.1111/j.1533-8525.2011.01198.x
  29. Engaging the everyday: Environmental social criticism and the resonance dilemma
  30. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.03.001
  31. 10.1002/wcc.191
  32. 10.1080/19331681.2011.637711
  33. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.01.016
  34. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.12.008
CrossRef global citation count: 19 View in citation network →