De/re-contextualization on twitter – spreading mis/disinformation

Earlier this semester, I wrote this brief analysis about Senator Blumenthal trending on Twitter. In the analysis, I draw on intertextuality (Kristeva, 1986) and Bauman’s (2004) notion of entextualization which captures intertextuality as a dynamic process. Through these frameworks, I was demonstrating to the class how misinformation (and disinformation – i.e. the intentional spread of false information) occurs on Twitter.

In September, I came across this tweet by Eric Morrow (@morroweric) from Buzzfeed News. The tweet (screen captured below) includes a video of a hearing conducted by the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. The specific hearing is entitled Protecting Kids Online: Facebook, Instagram and Mental Health Harms and was held Thursday (September 30, 2021). Broadly, purpose of a hearing is “to obtain information and opinions on proposed legislation, conduct an investigation, or evaluate/oversee the activities of a government department or the implementation of a Federal law.” Congressional hearings are conducted by the house, senate, joint, or special committee. They’re open to the public so anyone can watch.

In the tweeted video, we have Sen. Blumenthal asking Facebook’s global head of security, Antigone Davis, if Facebook will commit to ending Finsta. For those unaware – finsta means “fake instagram” and usually consists of the user’s more candid life. This is akin to Goffman’s (1959) concept of back stage expression of self. In contrast, user’s can also have a front stage instagram account known as a rinsta meaning “real instagram.” These are often curated and created for parents, family, etc.

Screenshot 2021-10-01 094134.png

While skimming through the responses (most of which disparaged the Senator for being uninformed), I came across this tweet (see below) from “Cody the Copy Editor (@SirGramarye). Here, Cody challenges the accuracy of the original tweet and presents a video clip (via a quote tweet) that shows Blumenthal defining what Finsta is.

Screenshot 2021-10-01 103611.png

To elucidate what’s going on here, I draw on Kristeva’s (1986) notion of intertextuality and Bakhtin’s (1986) notion of dialogicality. Kristeva’s conceptualization of intertextuality draws on Bakhtin’s notion of dialogicality where “any concrete utterance is a link in a chain of speech communications” (p. 91). Kristeva expands on this notion in her concept of intertextuality which infers that “any text is constructed as a mosaic of quotations; any text is the absorption and transformation of another” (p. 37). Indeed, and Bauman (2004) captures this process of intertextuality in his notion of “entextualization” where every utterance or text has the potential to be “decontextualized.” Put simply – when text (i.e. an utterance, tweet, or even a video) is captured (entextualized), it is “decontextualized” (taken out of context) and often made to be “recontextualized” for some purpose. This recontextualization point is important because it is often all that we see when doom scrolling twitter.

In the original tweet above, that purpose emerges through the shortened clip which frames Blumenthal as an “uninformed boomer” that evinces why we need term limits. Watching the video, we can observe how Davis navigates responding to Blumenthal, suggesting the strong disconnect between his understanding of Finsta and how Finstas are used by younger generations.

In contrast, the second tweet presents more context to the question by Blumenthal. In the second video, Blumenthal provides (arguably) an accurate definition of Finsta with the presupposition that Facebook has embraced Finstas as a serendipitous social phenomenon into their business model. This, I would argue, is what Blumenthal negatively evaluates/criticizes Facebook for. I think watching a full version of Blumenthal’s question and response, we would see that maybe the final question was worded sloppily. Or, that Davis strategically avoided responding to the presupposition in Blumenthal’s inquiry which reinforced the “strong boomer vibes.”

If I were super interested in examining how this question was “taken up” elsewhere – I might l also explore how different news outlets discuss the hearing. Outside of this example, I think that the notion of entextualization is a useful theoretical framework in identifying how misinformation is spread – or even how disinformation is created and spread on platforms like Twitter.

References

Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Eds.; V. McGee, Trans.). University of Texas Press.

Bauman, R. (2004). A world of others’ words: Cross-cultural perspectives on intertextuality. Blackwell.

Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Anchor Books.

Kristeva, J. (1986). The Kristeva reader (T. Moi, Ed.). Basil Blackwell.

Linguistic Landscapes on US Navy Ships

This week in Language and Society (a class I’m a teaching assistant), we’re talking about linguistic landscapes. I remember when I was a kid, I used to read signs and billboards out loud when driving around with my parents. I always thought it was cool when there were signs in other languages because it felt like I was traveling further away. These signs were (and are) different because they can say what a community is about, and if that community is welcoming or not.

Language can also have a very specific function as well. For this class, I shared the linguistic landscapes of the inside of a US warship. These aren’t my photos – I friendsourced via facebook, found some on DVIS (defense Visual Information Service), and found one on navalhistory.org. On a US Navy ship you’ll find pretty much everything labeled. Every door is labeled, every bulkhead (wall) is labeled, and every kind of pipe you can find is labeled. These first three pictures demonstrate that.

In the first photo, the officer is in their living quarters playing guitar hero. You can tell they’re likely an officer because of the khaki colored belt. (US Navy Chiefs, or E-7s and above, also where khaki belts.) Above the television is a pipe that says “SPLY Vent.” It’s probably part of the HVAC (heating, ventilation, air conditioning) system, and supplying air for that purpose. In the second (center) photo is a ladder well that leads to a vertical hatch to the outside. It has a Z (super small sorry) on it. All doors (hatches) leading to the outside will have a letter code on it (X for X-ray, Y for Yoke, and Z for Zebra). These refer to material conditions of readiness. X-ray is the least secure and Zebra is the most secure. During certain events on a ship (from entering port to general quarters), a material condition is set. If Zebra is set, then anything marked with a X, Y, or Z are secured (i.e. closed). In the third photo, there is a fire hose on the left and fire extinguishers marked with AFFF ( read A triple F), which means Aqueous Film Forming Foam). These are obviously to fight fires – but the type of fire will determine how to fight it. AFFF is used for flammable liquids, e.g. if fuel catches on fire.

These three photos are a small sample of the types of identification systems you’ll find on a ship. And, they convey the highly technical nature of the linguistic landscape that’s predicated on safety and awareness – a responsibility of all sailors.

It’s important to note that each section of the ship is “owned” by a specific department of the ship. So engineering spaces (i.e. where the engines are located), will be “owned” by the engineering department. Sailors who work in that department are responsible for keeping it clean and making sure everything throughout it is labeled correctly. So what about living quarters? Or the mess decks (where sailors eat)? Those spaces are owned by the supply department. As we see in the first photo, there is a supply vent going through the officer’s room. Nearby there’s likely a bunch of fire fighting equipment as well. While these are equipment owned by engineers, they run through supply department spaces. Sailors in supply department must be aware of what these things do in cases of emergency.

These next two photos demonstrate how intertwined the systems are and how important this linguistic landscape serves the sailors on a ship in regard to safety and awareness.

The photo on the left with the sailor in red has several things going on in the background. The space is likely an engineering space (specifically a passage way) and is below the main deck. The door has a yellow sign with noise protection ear muffs. That’s likely an engine room that requires double hearing protection (ear muffs and ear plugs). Above the sailor are a bunch of pipes. The white wipes are probably air. The purple pipe is likely fuel. And then there’s a small pipe labeled AFFF. In cases of collision or fire, it’s probably important to know that there’s fuel running through that space in a pipe. It’s also really helpful to know there’s an AFFF source there to fight a liquid fire.

The photo on the right has a sailor cleaning in a passageway. This kinda looks like an Operations Department space. The door in the back leads to the outside so it’s definitely on or above the main deck. On right right-side of the photo we have a bunch of pipes again. Since these are blue they’re likely water. There’s also a fire hose for fighting fires. On the left side of the photo there is a poster that says OPSEC which means Operational Security. It’s a reminder to sailors to not share sensitive information about the ship or their jobs.

In these two photos, we again see how safety and awareness is present throughout the linguistic landscape. The sailor on the left (who is likely a boatswain because he’s wrapping rope around a bar) has a bunch of things going on behind him that he might want to be aware of if there was a fire. If it’s a liquid fire, he knows he has an AFFF source nearby. If he wanted to enter that door, he knows he needs to have ear protection. The sailor on the right who is cleaning, is reminded that he shouldn’t share sensitive information about the ship with people who don’t need to know.

The last photo I want to share is one of the most fundamental elements of shipboard knowledge that conveys a sense of awareness in a ship’s linguistic landscape. It is the compartment identification system. The photo is a door to “Female Officer Country” and I borrowed it from navalhistory.org. It was taken in 1994 on board the USS Eisenhower when women were first able to serve on US warships. Today for officers, the women’s living spaces are integrated in with the men’s living spaces. But women are assigned to rooms with the same gender. I want to point to the “FR 44” and the “02-44-3” on the door.

On every door (likely above it), you’ll find the compartment identification number. In this photo, you have 02-44-33. It’s crucial that all sailors are able to read and understand what this means. These numbers represent (from left to right) deck number, frame number, centerline, and usage. I further explain them here:

Deck Number: The main deck is 1. Anything above it is labeled 01, 02, 03 etc. Anything below is 2, 3, ,4, 5 etc. So 5 would be 5 decks below 1 and 05 would be 5 decks above the main deck.
Frame Number: This is the foremost bulkhead. It indicates where the compartment is in relation to the front of the ship.
Centerline: Where the compartment is in relation to the centerline. If it’s an even number it’s on the port side (i.e. left side), if it’s an odd number it’s on the starboard side (i.e. starboard side). So a 1 would be on the starboard side but close to the centerline while a 7 would be further away from the centerline.
Usage: These are usually letters. An E is for Engineering spaces. An L would indicate a living quarter.

In the example above, the FR 44 refers to the frame of the bulkhead (wall). On the door, the compartment label is 02-44-3-Female Officer Country. So it’s on the 02 deck meaning it’s 2 decks above the main deck. It’s frame 44 (i.e. where it is in relation to the front of the ship). And it’s the 3rd compartment, starboard from the centerline at that frame. Instead of “Female Officer Country” it could also be L for living quarters.

This has a lot of practical implications. It means anyone who’s familiar with this system can go on board any ship and independently find a space. One of the most crucial implications is fighting fires and floods, or other emergencies. With this system, a ship can direct the appropriate fire/flooding teams to the emergency.

It’s fun using my experiences in the Navy to demonstrate to the class how a linguistic landscape is more than just signs on the street. It can also be signs in an office building, a school, or a navy warship. The examples I used here convey the technical nature of a warship’s linguistic landscape that serves to inform sailors of their surroundings (situational awareness) and ensure their safety, the safety of others, and the safety of the ship.

css.php