Analysis of a discourse arguing against reverse racism published on the TikTok

Abstract

In this article, we study how argumentation works in digital media, analysing a discourse argued against reverse racism published on TikTok. We based on the interactional conception of argumentation, by Plantin (2008) and Grácio (2011), and mobilize the discursive, logical and linguistic-enunciative dimensions of argumentation, according to the model of analysis of the argumentative text by Padilla, Douglas and López (2011). We selected the corpus from two videos from lawyer Felipe Lopes on TikTok, which respond to the digital influencer Ingred Silveira. We indicate how the orator refutes the discourse of reverse racism, by (1) giving himself the image of specialist, (2) justifying his thesis by argumentative schemes of rule, signal, and authority, and (3) setting an assertive tone to project a degree of certainty in his argumentation. Finally, we suggest that the prototypical conception of mono- and poly-managed argumentative interactions requires further study.