Trolling as speech act

The acceptance of trolling as a feature internet communication and the clustering together behaviors that range from playfulness to abusive bullying under term “trolling” has interesting moral implications. For it seems sometimes such behavior is dismissed “mere trolling” consequently trolls who perform these acts are granted partial exemption responsibility for content or consequences their speech. A result this some which might ordinarily be considered bullying, abuse threats when uttered outside can mere carried out on internet. One popular response categorize based perceived intentions argue that, more virulent particularly, not an appropriate label applied. Although I agree example, there should no special racist speech basis used in act trolling, here we also ignore structural similarities often described “trolling.” Application tools philosophy language consideration complex make clear similarities. Once made clearer then start understand little about what is. suggest central notion seriousness its interplay between troll, target, any onlookers trolling. By viewing way better rhetorical nature why end up facing call dilemma—that is, many directions reply either respond seriously utterance so trolled, acknowledge unserious dismiss Though far complete account present grounds understanding systematically divisive act. In audience targeted by troll prop manipulated entertainment onlookers. This in-built division different audiences makes particularly powerful political device, dilemma responding difficult. So consider itself essentially difficult effectively, regimes movements thrive have successfully embraced propaganda tool. Some terminological notes begin. Trolling targets. particular target need necessarily pre-determined but simply anyone responds amenable performed to, (which includes troll) for. linguistic usage still flux. As such, defining both pithily satisfactorily occasion, though, etymology perhaps helpful. “Trolling” originally referred method fishing whereby bait placed hook, hook dangled boat, angler gently moves boat downstream waiting fish bite.1 With few slight changes, see how similar. generally provocative comment, social media written on, leaves dangling bite. entirely new type either. Expressions “baiting,” “codding,” “winding-up,” “teasing,” “goading” probably capture similar (the first two three even plausibly fishing-derived terms too). Just like “trolling,” those refer appears amusing, innocuous, playful behavior, cases harassment. later, bears relation certain types humor, best characterize it. What think worthy close attention, however, scale proliferation successes communicative It conspicuous discourse, implement corporate marketing2 and, most importantly, become tool disseminating ideas.3 following examples all been They chosen differences, reflect termed them only with relevant contextual information analysis follows subsequent sections. (T1): Ben Franklin said politicians pampers, they stink babies.6 comment received user Karl: “ken hate tell you pampers around 50 years. True moron.” (T2): “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, came countries whose governments total catastrophe … Why don't go back help fix totally broken crime infested places came. references four non-white US congresswomen, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley Ilhan Omar. There numerous ways one view (T2) racist, current purposes though striking provides rendition “send own countries” rhetoric eternally racists. responses Trump's condemned interestingly same critics noted he was report Guardian “The presidential may meant distraction immigration raids were due major cities Sunday.”8 An LA Times editorial day tweets said; “He just usual. He trying get rise us. baiting us.”9 (T3) rest world pleased your piece shit family dead squashed filthy rotting ground. Especially babies REST IN PISS YOU FUCKING RODENT PIECES OF SHIT.11 RIP articles, videos, memorial pages relating tragedies deaths. Generally, supposed post comments amusement other trolls. motivations “humor” evokes will touched upon Section 4.3.12 academic discussion distinguish example classifying “kudos others “flame trolling.”13 whereas troll” provokes others, carrying intended humorous. Without knowing context above come from, naively (T1) case kudos flame example. plausible could, face it, appear simple abuse, previously mentioned (Section 2.2.3), discussed further 4.3, component entertaining audience. merits drawing distinctions sense certainly offensive damaging than others. However, fundamental problem draw distinction; at least, way, themself, beyond warped version utilitarianism do good distinction abusing someone saying P entertain oneself, hand, oneself other. very say every least person intends entertain—themself. When analyzing act, therefore, would way. arguments find labeling dangerous doing suggests online abusers trolls, rather than, cases, anti-social criminals, “e-bile” “cyberabuse” apt name.14 aims project; redemption because deemed paying attention seemingly disparate called important part task avoiding dismissing unifying properties, operates conversation spread. We nothing “mere” intrinsically manipulative regardless specific goals troll. does entail morally bad, manipulation justifiable after all. consequence somehow acceptable (“mere trolling”); fact questionable manipulative, thought manipulative. if something wrong lie held liable wrongs discovered about), too using speech, means implications, cumulative diminishing. (HT) [computer mediated communication] constructs identity sincerely wishing group question, including professing, conveying pseudo-sincere intentions, real intention(s) is/are cause disruption and/or trigger exacerbate conflict amusement. (237)16 useful starting point, restrictive purposes. Consider above, Trump nor Troll making attempt construct wanting wish disrupt, yet Ordinary changed since Hardaker proposed (HT), longer correct attempts “identity group,” I'll remove consideration. defines my focus adjust accordingly. main point departure, move talk “sincerity” “seriousness,” discuss next. Hardaker's definition suggest, expect considering role sincerity plays duplicitous essential want sincerity. reason being thinking right our relationship speaker utterance.17 her (not directly, least), audiences.18 More specifically, interest multiple take utterance. [T]he motive guiding controlling [his speech] unconcerned things speaks truly care whether says describe reality correctly. picks out, up, suit his purpose.19 babies. (T2a): sincere statement (T2a). reasons genuinely congresswomen “go back” “from came.” Whether thinks not, salient response(s) importance. uttering (T2a) secondary did utter (and use tropes) likely. mind, KenM aiming related seriousness. works next offer thoughts be. joking.21 Say S joke audience, conventionally joke, laugh.22 could believes expresses truth, clichés true word jest, funny it's true. requirement nature. Satire, parody, irony, sarcasm, absurdity well-worn jocular devices, nature, none require sincerely.23 Take Traditionally philosophers treated irony convey not-P. speaker, insincerely.24 although discussing jokes, general interest. general, takes insincerity joker. And Of importance sincere, she return Sections 4.2 4.2, speak specifically onlooker target. u likely serious utterance, utterance.25 3.3 discusses (under guise seriousness) foundational work theory, J.L. Austin perlocutions. says; “[s]aying produce[s] consequential effects feelings, thoughts, actions done design, intention purpose producing them.”26 Perlocutionary acts, then, aim effects, “‘perlocutionary act[s] always include consequences’; ‘what bring achieve something, convincing, persuading, deterring” (1962, 108). persuade u, requires persuaded u. perlocutionary effect persuaded, persuading François Recanati27 refers produce intention, produced Considering seriousness, correlate Trivially speaking, naturally diverse within single cannot hope primary common Typically deterring, surprising misleading. troll's might, disruption, anger, confusion, fluster unnerve case-specific, indeed specifying prove difficult, responses. step away traditional general. That less complex, propose multifaceted notion. distinct sets attached relate audiences. Recall 3.3, audiences, catch) second benefit of). Let's look now, differ elaborating corresponding intentions.28 set relates (or more, less) (depending act), plus taken (another put statement). Regardless case-specific contents set, To another number each provoke into response. response, requiring preclude uncertain level strongly suspect suspicious suspecting statement. (T2), targets assume he's trolling—that entertains him audience—yet SHIT. clearly norm rarely ill dead. socially distasteful insulting mourning families deceased, shocking layer added light death know much disposition author beliefs regarding intending distress, isolated well-documented phenomenon, merely victims, this. If engaged Phillips (2015, Ch. 7) argues rationale behind reaction mawkishness tragedies, utterances wider trend. case, viewed angles form satire. Which again us toward dual-intentional Suppose, wishes satirize tragedy found polar-extremity customarily left pages. statement—it's satire.30 clearly, posting space wherein sympathetic effect, addressed “joke” thing strong emotional Unless accept satire, seem choice clear. This, dilemma. Central spread success phenomenon socio-linguistic dilemma.31 faced really arise successful unaware trolled dilemma, almost potential encountered Many readers encountering utterances. reader seriously, sense, accordingly.32 Responding allows troll—the respondent thus becomes precisely wants. statements, therefore allow president tropes, direct mourners without challenge. tropes engaging trolling.33 It's joke; verifiably sense. receive though; recall pointed exist during Franklin's time. Again knowledge (T1), remark, enough troll-target intentions. Suppose acute concern false innocuous push From view, is: suspected let demonstrably claim unchallenged? arises actors recent years, propagate violent ideologies. ambiguous dual-identity trolling—as responded unseriously—allows views, public ideas, ambiguity effective formulate. give appearance response—the succeeds views remain unchallenged unseriously—provides status befitting actual content. argument adequate carries built-in device (an trolling) deliver it.34 closely side appeal groups too, topic next; cloak humor. conclude, passion laughter else sudden glory arising conception eminency ourselves, comparison infirmity wonder men heinously laughed derided, triumphed over.36 Hobbes's fit forms captures terms, triumph over onlooker. correct, natural figure fun, 6.2, consequences. Before provide deniability avoid invoked defence (even implicitly critics). available gives respects racial figleaf, Jenny Saul.37 figleaf offering block inference utterer conclusion (“I'm …,” familiar example). accepted open possibility read unseriously. “wind-up” force confront taking changes say.38 Saul puts it; “[i]f accepts blocks racism sentence R, R seen racist.” Similarly, entail. racist. characterized qualifying Again, points posed credence (without caveat) non-racist strongly, “less-racist” way), danger accepting figleaf. racism, props trolling.39 humor new. Humorous cartoons caricatures effectively history messages. apart disseminate people ideas reach equipped further—even “just joking.” initially drawn solely seeming irreverent taboo-breaking using, slurs themselves hold beliefs, spreading ideas. contributing climate using. unpalatable detract insidiousness, broadcast further. Not them, appealing; humorousness unseriousness attractive qualities Following authoritarian far-right times, previous discussion, vehicle idea. Jason Stanley's overall tactics fascists gain power seek separate populations.40 onlooker, objectified—the worth source divisive, absurd divisive. innocuous-seeming at, already loaded divisiveness itself, combination content, powerfully disruptive I'm division. lacking “joke.” “get joke” not. enforcer disharmony underestimated. Humor lightly, matter. question leads matter be.41 frequent exhortation environments “do feed trolls.” Such approach ignoring course applied tweet realistic contrary commitments challenging encounter position challenge it) unchecked propagation (T2). dynamics (in forces dilemma) victory sorts having Further structures spreads entails well-meaning draws itself. Part paralysis creates. solution vary depending cross-disciplinary work. structurally stakes lower. societal Yet misogynistic, xenophobic great interested developing to. exactly develop alone. needed collaboration psychologists, linguistics, sociologists, philosophers. issues well consider, collaborate ramifications. inclination going coincide practically this, insights data linguists, sociolinguists, sociologists. grateful Saul, Komarine Romdenh-Romluc, Will Hornett early discussions topic. Jenny, Komarine, Neri Marsili, Eliot Michaelson, anonymous reviewers helpful feedback various drafts. Linguistic utters and; P. J. Connolly research affiliate University Sheffield. generally, focused application theories broad Patrick epistemology, philosophy, sociology psycholinguistics. deceptive matters semantic-pragmatic distinction.