Hate speech is an inclusive emotional response as it does not exclude or exempt anyone from becoming its victim, and it does not occur in a vacuum but within disparate and sometimes unexpected contexts. By the same token, hate speech manifestations can be detected in acts of homophobia, bullying, race/ethnicity-based discrimination, but also in equally dangerous but less recognizable behaviors embedded in discursive representations of denial, conspiracy, misinformation, and even radicalization (Rasulo 2023). By referring to the powerful metaphor of the Hate Speech Pyramid devised by the Anti-Defamation League (2018), this paper explores the plurality of higher and lower levels of the hate emotion (Solovev and Pröllochs 2022), with a particular focus on hate-inducing language, symbols and images. Endowed with a critical escalation potential, these linguistic and other semiotic expressions are often regarded as acceptable by the general public as they are seemingly unrelated to hate phenomena, and can therefore become discursively normalized. As such, they effortlessly permeate even the most guarded environments, such as educational institutions where safety and protection should be the rule. It is the case of PragerU, an American right-wing media organization whose controversial K12 video teaching materials, recently adopted by some American schools, have been accused of distorting historical and scientific facts, and disseminating half-truths about critical social phenomena. Referring to the abovementioned Hate Speech Pyramid, the paper investigates the extent to which the discursive strategies contained in these videos created for young children and adolescents can escalate to higher levels, thus constituting dangerous narratives of hate speech that impede pluralism and diversity. Comprising multiple modes of representation and argumentation, the videos are analyzed by employing Multimodal Critical Discourse Analysis (Machin and Mayr 2012; Kress and van Leeuwen 2020), and Wodak’s argumentation strategy in the DHA (Reisigl and Wodak 2015), with specific reference to the classical foundation concept of topos as formulated by Aristotle (Wodak 2016).
Exposing Bias, Disinformation, and Hate Speech in Educational Materials
M. RASULO
2025
Abstract
Hate speech is an inclusive emotional response as it does not exclude or exempt anyone from becoming its victim, and it does not occur in a vacuum but within disparate and sometimes unexpected contexts. By the same token, hate speech manifestations can be detected in acts of homophobia, bullying, race/ethnicity-based discrimination, but also in equally dangerous but less recognizable behaviors embedded in discursive representations of denial, conspiracy, misinformation, and even radicalization (Rasulo 2023). By referring to the powerful metaphor of the Hate Speech Pyramid devised by the Anti-Defamation League (2018), this paper explores the plurality of higher and lower levels of the hate emotion (Solovev and Pröllochs 2022), with a particular focus on hate-inducing language, symbols and images. Endowed with a critical escalation potential, these linguistic and other semiotic expressions are often regarded as acceptable by the general public as they are seemingly unrelated to hate phenomena, and can therefore become discursively normalized. As such, they effortlessly permeate even the most guarded environments, such as educational institutions where safety and protection should be the rule. It is the case of PragerU, an American right-wing media organization whose controversial K12 video teaching materials, recently adopted by some American schools, have been accused of distorting historical and scientific facts, and disseminating half-truths about critical social phenomena. Referring to the abovementioned Hate Speech Pyramid, the paper investigates the extent to which the discursive strategies contained in these videos created for young children and adolescents can escalate to higher levels, thus constituting dangerous narratives of hate speech that impede pluralism and diversity. Comprising multiple modes of representation and argumentation, the videos are analyzed by employing Multimodal Critical Discourse Analysis (Machin and Mayr 2012; Kress and van Leeuwen 2020), and Wodak’s argumentation strategy in the DHA (Reisigl and Wodak 2015), with specific reference to the classical foundation concept of topos as formulated by Aristotle (Wodak 2016).I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
