Bolsonaro and Social Media: a Critical Discourse Analysis of the Brazilian President's Populist Communication on Twitter

Department of Informatics and Media

Master’s Programme in Social Sciences, Digital Media and Society specialization

Two-year Master’s Thesis

Bolsonaro and Social Media: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the Brazilian President’s Populist Communication on Twitter

Student: Yago Matheus da Silva Supervisor: Johan Lindell

June 2020

Abstract

The present study explores Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro’s online communication on the microblogging platform Twitter. The aim of the study is to present the populist characteristics embedded in the president’s tweets, as well as the strategies he uses in his communication on the social media platform. The pillars that structure this work are the different theories on the topic of populism, which address central points in relation to the phenomenon’s characteristics, such as dichotomization between groups (the good and the bad people), a strong anti- establishment stance, creation of scapegoats and enemies, and the centrality of the leader. Additionally, theories that explain the relationship between populism and social media are also employed for the full comprehension of the problem at hand. The analysis examines Bolsonaro’s first year in office (2019) and focuses mainly on three different periods within that year. The data consists of 110 tweets submitted to analysis utilizing Discourse-Historical Approach, an analytical approach with strong focus on context. The findings show how Bolsonaro’s communication on Twitter is immersed and dependent on strategies common to populist discourse, employing argumentative and discursive strategies that rely on the aspects such as topoi, demonization of others, shifting of blame, positive self- and negative other- presentation, provocation and calculated ambivalence. This study contributes to the understanding of populist online communication in the Brazilian context, shedding light on the phenomenon of populism, in particular the current populist wave, outside the European and North American contexts, expanding the understanding about the topic to the global south.

Key Words: Populism, Social Media, Twitter, Bolsonaro, Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA).

Table of Contents

List of Tables and Figures ...... 5

1. Introduction ...... 6 Disposition ...... 10

2. Background ...... 11 The Brazilian Case ...... 11 Bolsonarismo ...... 13

3. Theory and Previous Research ...... 17 Defining and Conceptualizing Populism ...... 17 Dichotomic Division ...... 18 The Centrality of the Leader...... 21 The People ...... 25 Populism and Democracy ...... 26 Populism and Social Media ...... 28

4. Methodology...... 36 Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) ...... 37 Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA) ...... 40 Discourse, Text, and Genre ...... 41 Intertextuality, Recontextualization, and Interdiscursivity ...... 42 Critique, Ideology, and Power ...... 43 Research Data ...... 46 Data Collection ...... 47 Data Management ...... 48 Sampling ...... 48 Sampling Process...... 50 Analytical Procedure...... 52 Categories of Analysis ...... 53 Ethical Considerations ...... 58

5. Analysis...... 59 Argumentation schemes – Different types of Topoi ...... 59 Construction of Dichotomies, Positive Self-presentation and Negative Other-presentation...... 75 Shifting of Blame and Demonization of “Others” ...... 78 Calculated Ambivalence and Provocation ...... 81

6. Discussion and Conclusion ...... 83 General Findings ...... 84 Polarization and Other Tools ...... 85 Centrality of Populist Leader...... 87 Performative Aspects...... 88 The Role of Social Media ...... 89

Emotional Dimension and Crises ...... 90 Similarities and Differences Between Political Contexts ...... 92 Recommendations for Future Studies ...... 93 Concluding Remarks...... 94

7. References ...... 96

8. Sources ...... 102

List of Tables and Figures

Table 1 - Overview of the number of tweets selected in the sampling process 51 Table 2 - List of different types of Topoi relevant for the analysis 56

Figure 1 - Simplified Model of Argumentation 55 Figure 2 - Symbolic aspect posted by Bolsonaro linked to example 5 62 Figure 3 - Screenshot from an online news piece in example 10 65 Figure 4 - Screenshot from the newspaper Folha de São Paulo in example 23 75

1. Introduction

The phenomenon of populism has regained power in recent times. Political events such as Brexit and Donald Trump’s election, make it possible to affirm that the political context in different societies is witnessing a populist moment (Mouffe, 2019), or a populist zeitgeist (Mudde 2004). Questions related to how this phenomenon develops and what consequences and risks it poses in its current form have been raised, while examples of the growing appeal to populism are abundant and growing.

A great effort has been made to explain the success of populism and to understand its problems. Different causes are pointed out as possible sources to its growing power, ranging from economic, political, social, and cultural to technological changes in society. As Gerbaudo (2018) explains,

Contemporary populists are the product of a tumultuous era marked, on one hand, by deep economic crisis that is affecting large sections of the population, significantly worsening their living conditions, and, on the other hand, by rapid and highly disruptive technological innovation, which is redefining the way in which people communicate, work and organise. The combination of these two trends has opened a window of opportunity for populist movements to appeal to electorates that are both digitally connected and politically disgruntled. (p. 748)

A variety of studies about the use of new technologies related to communication have focused on the role of the digital populism in different settings, with special attention to Donald Trump’s election in 2016. As debated by Gerbaudo (2018), Trump’s victory represents one case in a broader trend, as social media savviness has characterized different movements across the political spectrum. In short, it can be seen as an “[…] ‘elective affinity’ between social media and populism: social media has favoured populists against establishment movements by providing the former a suitable channel to invoke the support of ordinary people against the latter” (p. 746).

In this same context, despite the idea of populism bypassing traditional media and journalism in order to directly communicate with its audience, Kristof Jacobs and Niels Spierings (2019) point to the fact that populists’ online communication lacks a systematic theorization or studies that show this relationship empirically. There are also examples of studies dealing with the populist use of social media, which are relevant to understand how the phenomenon is

investigated and what aspects are prioritized. For instance, Engesser et al. (2017) deal with the fact that social media became a channel that provides populists with the possibility to spread ideas related to topics that characterize populism, such as emphasis on people’s sovereignty, invoking the heartland and the people, attacking the elites, and ostracizing others. In this same context, Ernst et al. (2017) investigate the role of social media in relation to how political actors make use of populist communication strategies online on social media to manifest themselves and reach their populist purposes. Flew & Iosifidis (2020) look at the problem of contemporary populism from the perspective of the many shifts in the world in the last decades, emphasizing the common association of populism, nationalism, authoritarianism, intolerance and other imbalances attributed to globalization as the main cause for such scenario. Moreover, the authors emphasize the importance of social media as a tool that enables populism to function, spread and mobilize supporters, exploit the public sphere and disrupt realities, as well as a way to manipulate political emotions with the help of social media technology.

Research about populism and social media has also developed around establishing explanations about the relationship between them and what the conditions that power the populist success are. For instance, Gerbaudo (2018) highlights the different global trends that have propelled the wave of populism nowadays, arguing that the worsening of economic prospects and technological changes could be the cause for populist gaining of power. John Postill (2018), on the other hand, advocates the necessity of expanding the scope of geographical breadth and historical depth in order to develop a general explanation of the link between populism and social media. The author defends the overcoming of geographical bias, based on the idea that social media and populism are considered global phenomena, thus making it necessary to expand the analysis from the United States, Britain and Europe, and breaking this almost exclusive focus on these regions. Moreover, he suggests that for a full understanding of the link between populism and social media, research must look at particular areas such as the rise of what he calls theocratic populism, investigate the roots of populism itself, the relation between populism and ideology, the relation of non-populist politicians and social media, as well as the embedding of social media in larger systems of communication. From Postill’s (2018) perspective these points are fundamental for building a global theory on the topic.

Taking into consideration the characteristics that define the current situation of investigation related to populism and social media, it is relevant to mention what the aim of this study is. Focusing on the Brazilian populist politician, Jair Bolsonaro, who was elected president in

2018, the present study deals with populist communication taking place online. In short, the aim of this study is to examine Bolsonaro’s communicates online via Twitter and showcase the populist characteristics present in his tweets, focusing on the arguments and strategies used by the president on the platform. Furthermore, an important aim of the study is to understand the populism away from central capitalist powers in the world, that is, it is important to observe the development of the populist phenomenon outside European and North American political scenarios, looking at the characteristics the populist phenomenon possesses in different political contexts and how it emerges and develops. The Brazilian case is an interesting one particularly because Brazil is a country with a disturbing recent past, where democracy has only recently been established, inequality is blatant, and the political scenario is marked by corruption and scandals that cause frustration and disbelief in politics.

Looking at contemporary populism outside the North American or European context is a necessary move in order to show how the phenomenon develops in the global South, and what its characteristics are in relation to the established notions about populism, its specificities and strategies.

In light of the above, this study aims to answer the following main research question:

- How did Bolsonaro communicate via Twitter in different moments during his first year as president?

The main research question is divided into the following sub-questions:

- What populist characteristics are embedded in Bolsonaro’s communication on Twitter? - What are the main strategies used by the president in his communication on the platform?

Twitter1 has a central role in this study, being one of the social media channels Bolsonaro makes most frequent use of, and thus, a platform which can provide rich and relevant content to be analysed. Tweets, which are the short texts of maximum 140 characters posted on the platform, were collected for the purpose of the present study. The analysis process focused on identifying

1 “[…] a form of blogging in which entries typically consist of short content such as phrases, quick comments, images, or links to videos” (Stieglitz & Dang-Xuan, 2013, p. 219)

strategies and populist characteristics in Bolsonaro’s communication, as well as understanding the tweets with the support of the concepts that are part of the theories that guide the study.

In short, the theoretical pillars that support the study are constituted by different theories dealing with the topic of populism, which employ different views on the problem, addressing different characteristics, as well as the common aspects that are agreed in relation to how populism is structured and understood. The theoretical framework is based on ideas such as dichotomization, the importance of the leader and the people, creation of enemies and scapegoats by populist leaders, as well as the relationship between social media and the practices and developments that rendered possible the wave of populism seen in recent times (Laclau, 2007; Moffitt, 2016; & Urbinati, 2019).

The present study focuses on Bolsonaro’s first year in office, more specifically, three different periods within the year of 2019 were observed in depth: May, August and November. These time periods were selected in order to make the analysis more efficient and manageable, but also due to their relevance in terms of context, which takes us to the method utilized in the analysis of the tweets: Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA)

Broadly speaking, DHA is a branch of Critical Discourse Analyses focused on developing conceptual frameworks for political discourse (Wodak, 2012). The main characteristics of this approach are the strong reliance on aspects that include historical and intertextual perspectives within a social and political background related to discursive practice. Another feature of this approach is its focus on establishing a theory of discourse through the connection between fields of action, genres, discourses and texts. Also, it focuses on how intertextual and interdiscursive relationship between utterances, texts, genres and discourses develop, taking into account the social, political and historical aspects related to events investigated (Wodak and Meyer, 2016).

The importance and relevance of examining Bolsonaro’s tweets and investigating the characteristics and main aspects of his online communication lies in the essential need for a detailed and complete understanding of the problematic aspects that the content of his tweets carry. His tweets are not mere words and expressions, they have intentions within them, they have power, they influence opinions and views, invoke feelings, instigate hate, conflict and polarization, they are embedded in contexts that offend and attack opponents, destabilize democratic practices and increase fear and frustration. The election of Bolsonaro as president

is the result of a political context immersed in chaos, where a figure like him gained power due to a scenario of crisis and instability.

Disposition

In this first section, a short introduction regarding the problem dealt with in the present study is provided, including a brief overview of the theoretical framework and methodology, as well as the study’s research questions. Section two presents the background of the case, including the main characteristics important for understanding the problem at hand. It introduces the events that occurred in Brazil during the last decades, beginning with the re-democratization period in the late 80’s. This section also includes a definition of the idea of Bolsonarismo and its main aspects. In section three the theory and previous research on populism are presented, including the main ideas that constitute the understanding of populism and the relevant concepts that guide the analysis, as well as the development of the knowledge on the topic of populism along the last decades. The methodology is presented in section four, where the approach utilized in the study, Discourse-Historical Approach, is explained in detail together with its main features, as well as details regarding the analytical procedure. Section five consists of the analysis presented along with examples that illustrate the points made in the process. Finally, the sixth section consists of the concluding discussion, where the findings are presented, and the analyst’s critical stance is developed in relation to the findings and with the support of the main theories that the study is based on. This chapter also presents suggestions for further research regarding populism and social media in the Brazilian context.

2. Background

Brazil’s political context has not been the most stable in the past years. The country went through turbulent political processes, including corruption scandals and mass demonstrations against politicians and governments. There has also been an increase in dissatisfaction and frustration due to the economic instability and political polarization in the country. It was in this scenario of chaos that Bolsonaro emerged and was elected president, with the promise of changing the Brazilian political context with his new way of doing politics. This section presents the main historical, political, social and economic events that took place in Brazil in the last decades in order to give the reader a base to understand the present situation of the country in terms of political, economic and social developments.

The Brazilian Case

Brazil is a complex country with many problematic aspects of its past reflecting in the present in different ways. Understanding the recent history of the country is important and relevant in order to be able to follow the development of the problem presented in this study. A good starting point to understand the recent history of the country is the year of 1988, when Brazil’s current federal constitution was created. From that point on, after a 25-year-long military dictatorship, Brazil experienced moments of democratic prosperity. The years that followed Brazil’s democratic rebirth were marked by economic, political and social difficulties (Schwarcz & Starling, 2015). Despite the struggles, the country came through, the 1990’s came to an end with a stable democratic scenario. The beginning of the new century was marked by an important shift in the political scenario, with the Worker’s Party (PT) coming to power in 2003 (Nobre, 2013). The party ruled Brazil for over a decade and during this period the country prospered economically and socially. Poverty and inequality decreased, the commodities boom guaranteed a stable and growing economic scenario, and oil reserves were found in the Brazilian coast, which gave the country the hope of a future of development and prosperity (Carvalho, 2018). This feeling of hope was predicted by influential economic periodicals such as The Economist (2009), which in one of its issues pointed that Brazil was “taking off”.

Although the time during which Worker’s Party government held office was also marked by corruption scandals that shocked the country, steady and stable economic growth guaranteed the stability in the social and political scenarios (Carvalho, 2018). In 2010’s presidential

election, Dilma Rousseff’s election represented a continuity of PT’s project in power. Her first four-year term in office was successful, whereas the second term was marked by chaos in the political and social scenarios. In fact, the problems, which have always been there, ignited and grew stronger in the 2013 mass demonstrations that took place around the whole country (Nobre, 2013). This unprecedented mobilization, which had many different aspects to it in terms of demands, brought to light the frustrations Brazilians had towards the political segment. 2013’s demonstrations are seen as a key moment to understand the country’s recent history (Santos & Guarnieri, 2016).

The following year the Brazilian economy started slowing down giving signs of failure. Inflation was growing, unemployment rising, and political polarization was as strong as ever in the political realm. Rousseff won her second term, but only to experience the worst moments of her time in power. The end of the Worker’s Party rule in Brazil came in 2016 with Rousseff’s impeachment (Santos & Guarnieri, 2016). After that, the country entered into economic recession, which is said to be the worst the country has ever experienced.

The end of PT’s time in power was marked by new corruption scandals being uncovered in the state-run oil company, Petrobrás. Operation Car Wash (Operação Lava Jato) became a key point to understand Brazil’s contemporary political events. Investigations by the Federal Police brought to light the biggest corruption schemes the country had ever discovered, which had PT deeply involved, as well as many influential and powerful businesspeople in the country (Feres Júnior & Kerche, 2018).

In a scenario of corruption scandals, economic and political crisis, the country found itself in deep frustration, distrust and anger in relation to the political class. Here it is possible to make a direct link to this study’s theme: populism. Nadia Urbinati (2019), argues that “populism finds fertile soil in countries in which the distrust of parties and partisanship has been very strong” (p. 173). This is exactly the scenario in Brazil, and where we can move the discussion to the central figure of this study: Jair Bolsonaro.

Jair Bolsonaro is not a new actor in the Brazilian political context. His political career started almost three decades ago as he had different mandates as a congress representative before becoming president. Within the chaos that was created in the Brazilian political context in recent years, his image gained visibility as an option outside the traditional and corrupt political

class. He was known for his politically incorrect remarks, which include homophobic, misogynistic and racist statements. Bolsonaro is also known for defending ideas that can be framed as conservative, being openly against many minorities’ rights, in favour of gun ownership by civilians, and pro authoritarian regimes. As well as that, the president has close ties and strong support from within the military segment, to which he himself belonged before starting his political career in 1988.

Bolsonaro’s success in the 2018 presidential election was possible due to different factors, particularly the influence of digital mobilization, which consisted of a rhetoric containing permanent use of alarmist and conspiratorial content, accusations against enemies, the existence of channels of direct communication between the leadership and the audience, as well as constant delegitimization of professional press and other institutions (Cesarino, 2019).

To summarize, Bolsonaro represents the blending of violence and brutality with an amusing or funny behaviour. He says what he wants, he acts stupidly and with violence, but plays the role of the funny and sympathetic man, which is precisely what allows people to identify with him (Catalani, 2018).

The next section deals briefly with the idea of Bolsonarismo, the name attributed to the phenomena related to Bolsonaro’s ascension to power. The section explains the main aspects necessary to understand what bolsonarismo represents and what constitutes its structure.

Bolsonarismo

Representing a central role in Bolsonaro’s recent political success, bolsonarismo can be explained as a mass ideological adherence mechanism, as pointed out by Catalani (2018), in which the fears and frustrations of the people are used by the president to gain support and political strength. Bolsonaro’s role within bolsonarismo is that of agitator and figure that provides stability in the context of tension, uncertainty and crisis the country has been through.

As Laclau (2005) argues, a context of crisis is necessary for the charismatic leader to thrive, as a claim to be the sole figure capable of bringing order to a corrupted system can only be made in such circumstances. In the Brazilian case, the scenario of crisis begins from the 2013 demonstrations, followed by the influence of operation Car Wash (Operação Lava Jato), the

anti-corruption and pro-impeachment movements that grew in the country in that period, as well as the worsening of the economic situation, which represented a strong component for frustration. Regarding this scenario, Urbinati (2019) explains that

populist leaders do not arise when the economy grows, and the citizens feel themselves to be in communication with democratic institutions. They arise in times of economic distress, in times when citizens witness gross violations of equality amid the general indifference of their representatives, and in times when the most powerful acquire more voice in the state. The populist leader’s claim to embody the condition of exclusion is what makes him or her attractive. (p. 118/119)

Letícia Cesarino (2019) further explains that the idea of chaos, mainly in the form of moral chaos, was produced through different media, particularly WhatsApp, where different groups supporting Bolsonaro were active and had a strong influence during the presidential campaign.

Further aspect that can be pointed as part of Bolsonaro’s strategies and vital to Bolsonarismo is its anti-petismo (anti-Workers Party – PT) that extends to the progressist or left-wing politicians and parties, as well as social movements and the intellectual segment. To understand Bolsonaro’s rhetoric one must understand his dependency on the groups he presents as enemies. Such factor can be explained from the perspective of Urbinati's (2019) who advocates the idea that populist leaders “deploy propaganda against enemies who are never fully repressed, as a tonic to secure their appeal and build the people’s faith. Irresponsible leaders can also shield their mistakes or failures with conspiratorial rhetoric; such rhetoric requires that enemies be alive and active.” (p. 133)

Combined with the need of an enemy that must be defeated, it is possible to identify the use of an emotional apparatus in Bolsonaro’s rhetoric that places him closer to his supporters. This idea can be understood from the perspective that Bolsonaro became the personalization of the nation after the knife attack he suffered before the presidential election in September 2018. Cesarino (2019) explains that the attack helped in the development of the idea of embodiment of the leader’s body as the political body, or as a symbol of the Brazilian nation. The attack symbolised the idea of the threat which the country is under, translated into what happened to Bolsonaro. Therefore, the need for prompt action is necessary, the idea of urgency in the enactment of actions within short timelines, or else terrible things will occur (Moffitt, 2016). For that reason, the fight against the common enemy, the left and the corrupt, is a must – a matter of urgency.

A populist leader has the power and ability to set what actions are necessary and who the enemies are, and this task is operated through emotional manipulation, combined with a language that contributes to a sense of fear, danger and insecurity and communicated through social media platforms. Nowadays, these platforms represent the main environment for the reproduction of their ideas and mobilization of supporters, giving media, not only social media but traditional as well, a central role that must be observed and taken into consideration for an understanding of the contemporary developments of populism to be established. As Maldonado (2017) elaborates the emotional apparatus associated with populism,

The affective core of populism reveals itself in the display of an emotional language that is both verbal and non-verbal, in the relationship between the leader and the followers, as well as in the make-up of a collective subject (the people) that stands against its enemies (the elite, or the establishment). […] populist movements tend to depend on their founding leaders, and it is reasonable to affirm that they play a key part in setting up the emotional regime of their movements. (p. 5)

Associated with these ideas is the notion of performance, which is a strong tool or aspect present in Bolsonaro’s communication. Maldonado puts forward the idea that populist performance relies strongly on the public support, and this performance does not only include verbal communication embedded with strong symbolic and affective power. Maldonado (2017) argues that in populist performance, the use of non-verbal aspects of communication are strong and a key aspect that builds the public image of the populist leader and is becoming more relevant in the task of catching the attention of the democratic society.

This performative idea can be understood and seen in Bolsonaro’s discourse, in the way he expresses himself, in his actions and behaviour, which are often aggressive and violent. His actions, speeches, and aggressive answers to journalists can be interpreted as funny, stupid, violent or as some believe, just a trace of his personality. However, since these aspects represent his style, thus, neglecting them make an analysis of his online communication empty, as even the simplest expression said or tweeted, a picture or video published, even clothing and appearance, carry a symbolic content that must be understood.

Therefore, having presented the main aspects that characterize and help to understand the Brazilian political and social context and how a figure like Jair Bolsonaro reached the highest political position in the country, it is now possible to move towards presenting the ideas and

concepts that will guide the analysis in the thesis, as well as an overview of the previous studies dealing with the topic of populism and the use of social media by populist leaders.

3. Theory and Previous Research

Different theories dealing with the populist theme guide this study throughout. This section starts by defining the idea of populism presenting the main aspects that constitute the phenomenon. Subsequently, the ideas of dichotomic division, centrality of the populist leader, the people, and the relation between populism and democracy are discussed. The main concepts and ideas that guide this study are also presented, focusing on the theme of populism as the core of this framework. Finally, the relation between populism and social media is exposed, focusing on the ideas that have led to the online world’s influence in politics and how populism benefits from it.

Defining and Conceptualizing Populism

A variety of different interpretations of what populism is have been formulated in the last decades. As Waisbord and Amado (2017) state, “[…] the populist label has been attached to such a wide variety of phenomena, it is hard to reach a consensus on the defining attributes of populism in order to build a family resemblance” (p. 1331). Indeed, a concise definition of populism is rather difficult to be found among the variety of different existing definitions. However, some common points can be defined and are presented below.

Defined by Ghita Ionescu and Ernst Gellne (1969) as a “spectre haunting the world” (p. 1), it is possible to affirm that populism is not a new phenomenon. Margaret Canovan (1981) explains that the term populism has been used to describe direct democratic techniques, dictatorships, parties with loose ideology, as well as reactionary feelings and movements. Some examples are commonly used to illustrate the origins of populism, such as the classic cases in the nineteenth century represented by the Populist Party in the United States and the Narodniki in Russia. According to Cas Mudde & Cristóbla R. Kaltwasser (2012), these experiences were different despite having the word populism as a common description: Populist Party in the United States represented a mass movement of farmers demanding the change of the political system, while the Russian Narodniki consisted of middle-class intellectuals with romanticized ideas and views of rural life. The twentieth century was marked by the emergence of important cases of populism, often used as examples for the phenomena. One such case is Peronism in Latin America, considered one of the most relevant examples of the phenomenon and the case that gave most visibility to populism in that region (Mudde & Kaltwasser, 2012).

Many scholars developed definitions of populism, its characteristics, modus operandi and consequences for society. Among these definitions are ideas that view populism as an ideology, with Cas Mudde as the main contributor to this conceptualization. He advocates a minimum definition of populism as a thin-centered ideology (Mudde & Kaltwasser, 2012). Populism has also been defined as political logic, which Ernesto Laclau defines as a structuring logic of political life that becomes powerful with the triumph of the logic of equivalence over the logic of difference (Laclau, 2007). Furthermore, populism has been defined as a discourse, an idea which is linked to Chantel Mouffe and Ernesto Laclau’s early theoretical work, as well as other scholars that represent the Essex School of discourse analysis. The approach looks at populism as an anti-status quo discourse that constructs a simplified symbolic division of society between the people and the other, in order to establish a simplified political space (Panizza, 2005). Another definition found for populism looks at it as a political style. For example, scholars such as Margaret Canovan and Pierre-André Targuieff have looked at populism from this perspective. Nowadays, the idea of populism as a style gained relevance in Benjamin Moffitt’s (2016) work, who defines it as “the repertoires of performance that are used to create political relations” (p. 38).

The resurgence of interest in populism in academia in recent years shows that an understanding of what the idea of populism represents still carries ambiguities, as a consensus is hard to established when it comes to studying the phenomenon (Panizza, 2005). Nevertheless, some common aspects exist and will be presented below.

Dichotomic Division

The departure point will be the idea of antagonism, that is, the separation of society into two groups. The notion of populism as an antagonistic phenomenon is a common denominator in the literature on the topic. This aspect is an important one due to the fact that it helps to understand the way populism functions, being a strong feature to characterize the phenomenon. The separation corresponds to there being an elite, a group that can represent a power bloc, a corrupt block or an enemy, which is opposed to the people, the good or right people, which according to Canovan (1981), populism produces an exaltation of (‘the people’). As Cas Mudde (2004) explains, populism can be seen as “an ideology that considers society to be ultimately separated into two homogeneous and antagonistic groups, ‘the pure people’ versus ‘the corrupt

elite’, and which argues that politics should be an expression of the volonté générale (general will) of the people” (p. 543).

It is important to mention that populism has its variants, that is, populism can be seen as “chameleonic” ideology (Taggart, 2004). It adopts different ideological colours according to where it stands in the political context. In other words, it is a phenomenon not representative of one specific side of the political spectrum, and it is possible to find examples of populist leaders both the political left, right and centre. As argued by Biegon (2019), “[…] populism can be leftist, rightist or centrist. It can be top-down or bottom-up, statist or neoliberal” (p. 520). The author further explains that populism operates differently for the different poles in the political spectrum: it “[…] implies a kind of demagogic agitation in right-wing criticism, while, for left- wing critics, it denotes the subornation of socialist struggle to common prejudices, assumptions and habits, as displayed in some fascist movements. It is ideologically ambiguous” (p. 520).

It is possible to affirm that populism attempts to go beyond the idea of ideology, due to its transversal political logic, which is centred on the principle of popular sovereignty (Postill, 2018). As well as the idea of transversal political logic, populists claim to break with the idea of party politics, advocating the idea that they represent the people, leaving aside the divisions established by Right and Left. As explained by Nadia Urbinati (2019),

while populists resist being identified, and while they claim to propose visions of popular interests that are alternative - either exclusionary nationalist (right wing) or radically inclusive (left wing) - they still have the populist style of political action in common. Left-wing forms of populism claim to be inclusive (for instance, of new immigrants) and antiprotectionist; in this sense, they are the opposite of right-wing nationalist populists. But they do not make their claim in the name of democratic promises - rather, they frame it as a movement of opposition against the establishment, much as right-wing populism does. Neither Right nor Left or beyond Right and Left is the common denominator of today’s various populists. (p. 204)

Urbinati (2019) argues that it is necessary to understand the populist ambition of transcending Right and Left divisions as an essential step to make the process of factionalism viable. Populism is a factional phenomenon, due to its claim of politics being a fight for supremacy between two different groups, which in essence is the idea of dualism that shapes populism as a phenomenon that excludes by creating a division in society.

In Bejamin Moffitt's (2016) conception, populism sees the people as its central audience, as well as the true holders of sovereignty. The idea of dualism for the author consists of a dichotomic opposition, which positions the elite as an idea of enemy of the people, characterized in different figures in different contexts (the Establishment, the system, minority groups, immigrant workers, asylum seekers, etc.). Moffitt (2016) explains, “[…] it is ‘the elite’ or ‘the Establishment’ that is the source of crisis, breakdown, corruption or dysfunctionality, as opposed to ‘the people’ who in turn have been ‘let down’, ‘ripped off’, ‘fleeced’, rendered powerless, or badly governed” (p. 44).

The idea of dualism is also advocated by Ernesto Laclau (2007) who explains the idea of populism as an opposition between two parts. According to the author, this idea can be best understood by the antagonistic characteristics that are present in populist discourse: the position of the people against the elite, or the idea of an underdog against an oppressive block. Politicians that are inclined towards populism claim that they are the ones to represent the people against the oppressive part, the elite, which has failed to deliver the demands by the people, or in other words, the will of the people. As Laclau (2007) observes, this dichotomic arrangement is clear for the fact that:

populism requires the dichotomic division of society into two camps – one presenting itself as a part which claims to be the whole; that this dichotomy involves the antagonistic division of the social field; and that the popular camp presupposes, as a condition of its constitution, the construction of a global identity, out of the equivalence of a plurality of social demands. (p. 83)

A fundamental point in Laclau’s theory is the distinction between the logic of difference and the logic of equivalence, which helps to further understand the idea of dichotomic division. The logic of difference can be understood as the logic of ordinary politics, in which different sectors of society have demands, and the hegemonic political bloc gain legitimacy by addressing such demands via the construction of alliances, coalitions and negotiation to make the overcoming of differences possible. The idea of equivalence, on the other hand, can be characterized by the demands not being fully satisfied, creating the perfect condition for populists to build an idea of equivalence, an idea of opposition between the people and the bloc in power (Hallin, 2019). Such notion is useful to understand populist discourse, and necessary in this study, for the fact that it is one of populism’s defining features. As Laclau (2007) explains it, the idea translates into the “[…] formation of an internal frontier, a dichotomization of the local political spectrum through the emergence of an equivalential chain of unsatisfied demands” (p. 74).

The dualism operated by populism is radical due to the fact that it excludes and fragments, emphasizing the dualism between the “pure” and the “inauthentic”. According to Urbinati (2019),

The people is the part: it is an entity with a social and substantive meaning that includes only the “ordinary” people, not all people, and certainly not the political establishment. Clearly, only one “part”—the ruling few and their acolytes—is expunged from the ordinary and authentic many. This because that part, in the populist mind, negates the other(s). In practical terms, this kind of radical polarization serves to justify calls to force the existing political class out of power. This is a task that populists achieve through a representative process that relies on a strong leader: someone who is as “pure” of political power as “his” or “her” people. The dualism between “impure” establishment and “pure” people, therefore, is only apparently moral. (p. 50/51)

The Centrality of the Leader

In Urbinati’s (2019) explanation, the leader is presented as a strong aspect that deserves to be defined. The leader must be understood as a figure that is capable of unifying claims, of representing the people and becoming the voice of the collective. These characteristics take to the notion of embodiment of the people which is the idea that relates to populist leaders’ claim of authority. In their rhetoric, populists employ a constant idea of condemnation against those they consider their enemies, the corrupted, the immoral. Their claim is that they are to bring the true people to power, giving them a divine status. Therefore, as well as being the voice and body of the people, these leaders also claim to be the only authority able to bring the right people back to power.

Populists rely on practices that allow them to build and develop these strategies in society. Urbinati (2019) explains such notion by presenting the idea of a tendency towards holism, that according to her, makes populists rely on a constant need to keep the people mobilized around issues they choose to focus on or stress. There is a constant need for instability, a constant feeling that anti-populists are conspiring against the people, which leads populists to be in a constant campaigning mode.

The populist leader has a variety of characteristics: they can be considered saviours or heroes with the mission to save the real people, they can be seen as charismatic figures or extraordinary leaders that present themselves as ordinary, as true representatives of the people. In other words,

The populist leader plays the role of the “reconstructor of authority,” not merely that of counterpower. Not by chance, this leader emerges in times of social distress, which see the decomposition of traditional representation. This does not mean that he replicates mandate representation and party democracy, though: he “absorbs” the collective body in his person and acts “as” the people, which is the condition for him to act “for” the people. This further distinguishes this leader from any ordinary party representatives, who would never claim to be “like” and speak “as” their people in order to act “for” them. (Urbinati, 2019, p. 118)

These ideas of Ordinariness and Extraordinariness are also discussed by Benjamin Moffitt (2016) who explains that populists must play both the role of an ordinary and extraordinary leader. They must project themselves as having political experience, as being an insider to politics, while also an outsider, in this way playing a contradictory game. As Moffitt (2016) states, the idea of extraordinariness must be blended with ordinariness, since “[…] populism is ultimately about ‘the people’, so populist leaders must be able to present themselves as possessing outstanding leadership qualities – that is, extraordinary – as well as being of ‘the people’ – that is, ordinary” (p.57).

From this perspective, the idea of ordinariness functions as a way of distancing the populist leader from other politicians, creating the idea that the populist is an outsider, in an attempt to dissociate themselves from the elite, technocratic or “political as usual” as Moffitt (2016, p.58) indicates. This performance of ordinariness is nothing more than a rhetorical and aesthetical matter.

Extraordinariness, on the other hand, can be understood in the way populists present themselves as figures that can solve problems, intending to sacrifice for the people they represent or symbolising the idea of a sacred saviour of the people. Regarding this topic, Moffitt (2016) states that

in populism, the leader does not simply represent ‘the people’ but is actually seen as embodying ‘the people’. […] In ‘doing’ populism, populist leaders attempt to present themselves as strong, virile and healthy in order to present ‘the people’ as strong and unified. This is because within populism, ‘the people’ are a homogeneous and united collective body who ultimately find their voice through the populist leader. (p. 64)

Ordinariness and extraordinariness play, as has been explained, an important role when it comes to the way populist leaders present themselves. These characteristics lead to a scenario where not only the discursive content used by populist leaders matter to understand their strategies,

but one in which it is essential to explore the aesthetical and performative practices that are present and define the populist phenomenon. For this reason, it is important to understand the idea of populism as a political style as put forward by Moffitt (2016). According to the author, the phenomenon of populism as a political style is used by different actors in different contexts. The definition of populism as a political style is not new, having been addressed before, but never fully developed.

Moffitt (2016) presents the definition of political style as “[…] the repertoires of embodied, symbolically mediated performance made to audiences that are used to create and navigate the fields of power that comprise the political, stretching from the domain of government through to everyday life” (p. 38). It should be stressed that such idea encompasses both rhetoric and aesthetics aspects related to populism. The relevance of performance within politics is a central point of Moffitt’s idea, having some overlapping aspects with the idea of populism as a discourse, but going beyond. As the author explains:

political style’s focus on the performative folds in a number of discursive features, such as use of language, speech, written texts and so forth. However, political style also moves beyond these features, taking in aesthetic and performative elements that the discursive approach does not take into account, including images, self-presentation, body language, design and ‘staging’. There is a clear distinction here: while discourse approaches focus primarily on discursive ‘content’ and have a tendency to side-line the ways in which this ‘content’ is presented, framed, performed, enacted or broadcast, the pollical style approach is sensitive to both features. It recognizes that ‘style’ and ‘content’ are linked, and that both need to be acknowledged. (Moffitt, 2016, p.40)

Having understood the idea of populism as a political style and the relevance of performance for this approach, it is possible to present the idea of bad manners, a notion that helps understanding manifestations by populists and how their performance is structured. What Moffitt (2016) calls bad manners is characterized as the disregard that populist leaders have towards following the appropriate ways of acting in the political realm. Bad manners can thus “[…] manifest in a number of different ways, including self-presentation, use of slang, political incorrectness, fashion or other displays of contempt for ‘usual’ practices of ‘respectable’ politics.” (Moffitt, 2016, p. 58). In other words, bad manners can be understood as the way in which politicians present themselves, ways that can be unexpected, or as Moffitt puts it, in more colourful ways, transforming the leader into a performer.

Bad manners can also take the form of political incorrectness. This can be understood as the populist leaders’ practice of mentioning the unmentionable, their claim to be saying what everyone thinks. Its opposite, political correctness, is usually associated as a feature of the elites, whose practices are maintained within the boundaries of what is considered expected behaviour. To summarize the point,

The central point is that it is populists’ performances – not just their policies. Ideology, discourse or so-called content of their populism – that are disruptive to ‘mainstream’ politics. […] We assume that they should be polished, professional, composed and ‘play the game’ correctly. In short, we expect them to have ‘good manners. As such, the unpolished, seemingly off-the-cuff ‘bad manners’ of populist leaders can appeal in an era when political performances often seem homogenous, circumscribed, stage- managed and predictable across the political spectrum. (Moffitt, 2016, p. 61)

The idea of bad manners is directly related to the figure of the leader. Populism can exist without a party or a movement but not without a leader whose image becomes the symbol that represents populism. As relevant as this idea, is the fact that populist leaders are often seen as extraordinary or an embodiment of the people. As argued by Moffitt (2016), the populist leader enjoys a position of celebrity or messiah-like status from the audience’s perspective, seen as a representative, able to channel their will and desires.

An interesting aspect associated with the power or strength put on the leader in populism is the name of the leader becoming a representation of the populist regime, as indicated by Urbinati (2019). As the author claims, the name of the leader becomes an element vital in the construction of a popular subjectivity, with a strong homogenizing function and the role to constitute the collective, which leads society to find a principle of identification in the name of this same leader. “[…] This leader carries (out) the people and becomes its voice and figuration” (p.117). In this same context, the notion of the leader as an embodiment of the people becomes ever so strong as “all populist leaders stage a representative performance, which makes them capable of being seen and accepted by their people as the embodiment of those same people” (p.123).

Considering the image of the leader and its representation as an embodiment of the people, where even the name becomes a homogenizing symbol, it is possible to present an important concept in Laclau’s theory, the idea of empty signifiers. Drawing from Ferdinand de Saussure (2011), who defines language as a system of signs, in which the sign is the combination of a

signifier, for instance a sound, and a mental concept, which represents the signified. This combination results in an understanding or a meaning. As Laclau (1996) explains, “we know, from Saussure, that language (and by extension, all signifying systems) is a system of differences, that linguistic identities – values – are purely relational and that, as a result, the totality of language is involved in each single act of signification” (p. 37). The idea of an empty signifier, therefore, can be defined as a signifier without the signified, a place constitutively irrepresentable within the system of signification that remains empty, but, as the author points out, it is an emptiness that can be signified, for the fact that it is a void within signification (Laclau, 2007). According to Gerbaudo (2018), empty signifiers allow populists to fuse together disparate demands. “[…] They attempt to overcome a situation in which people are fragmented along multiple class and identity lines, trying to make people aware of their common interests and common enemies ( p. 751).

In Laclau’s (2007) explanation, the name of the leader becomes the point of identification of the group, a point of singularity derived from heterogeneous elements kept equivalentially together, that is, “the equivalential logic leads to singularity, and singularity to the identification of the unity of the group with the name of the leader” (p. 100). In this scenario emerges the figure of the populist leader, whose role can be related to the idea of empty signifier for the fact that they represent a structural function of an empty signifier of unity (Hallin, 2019; Arditi, 2010) and. In Bolsonaro’s case, his name becomes the representation of Bolsonarismo, and he himself the leader and point of identification for the group. To summarize such notion in a clear way:

under populism, the name of the leader begins to act as an empty signifier in which ‘the people’ can lay their various demands and complaints about the system. Because of their shared opposition to the system, these demands become linked in what Laclau calls an ‘equivalential chain’ under the name of the leader, and thus it is through the leader that disparate identities become symbolically linked together as a new political subject – ‘the people’. (Moffitt, 2016, p. 53)

The People

In this context where the leader represents a central figure for equivalential unity, the people emerge as an essential piece necessary for the completion of the dichotomic arrangement. The conception of the people can be understood from Laclau’s (2007) perspective, whose explanation defines people for populism as “[…] populus, the body of all citizens; or as plebs,

the underprivileged. […] in order to have the ‘people’ of populism, we need something more: we need a plebs who claims to be the only legitimate populus – that is, a partiality which wants to function as the totality of the community” (p. 81).

Laclau (2007) discussed the process of discursive construction of the people, which he explains as having been built from a missing, the lack of a fulness which is necessary for the harmonious continuity of the social. This lack is decisive to the construction of the people, due to the fact that without it, an antagonism could not be constructed. In Laclau's (2007) words:

without this initial breakdown of something in the social order – however minimal that something could initially be – there is no possibility of antagonism, frontier, or, ultimately, ‘people’. This initial experience is not only, however, an experience of lack. Lack, as we have seen, is linked to a demand which is not met. But this involves bringing into the picture the power which has not met the demand. (p. 85/86)

As Laclau (2007) points out, a demand is always attributed to an actor, whose duty is to fulfil demands. Failing to fulfil them sets the ground for the dichotomic idea presented here: the plebs see themselves as the populus, “the part as the whole: since the fullness of the community is merely the imaginary reverse of a situation lived as deficient being, those who are responsible for this cannot be a legitimate part of the community […]” (p.86).

Populism and Democracy

Having identified the main characteristics of populism, namely, the idea of dualism, the power of the leader, the importance of the people opposed to the establishment, a good way to proceed is by presenting populism’s relationship with democracy, for the fact that populism features aspects that are directly related and opposed to it.

As has been argued up to this point, populism revolves around anti-establishment and anti- pluralism attitudes which claim to have moral monopoly over representation. Such notion puts populism in a concerning position in relation to democracy as

populism is therefore intrinsically anti-democratic as it challenges the very foundations of modern democracy: the polyphony of the people, political representation and pluralism, and the recognition of intermediate institutions. In the populist conception of politics, the people are envisaged as homogeneous, morally pure, and with nothing in common with the immoral, corrupt, and parasitic elites. According to the author, this vision illustrates a concerning relationship between populists and democracy: for populists, all other representatives of citizens are illegitimate in one way or another. (Berville, 2017, p. 2)

The debate around the effects of populism in relation to democracy has its pros and cons. Some authors advocate that populism is a part of democracy, an element that is itself important in democratic contexts, even considered a normal pathology or the purest form of democracy (Mudde & Kaltwasser, 2012), while others believe populism uses democracy and transfigures its foundations (Urbinati, 2019).

Some aspects of populism place it in a position that shows its negative sides. As argued by Mudde & Kaltwasser (2012), among the negative aspects of populism is the fact that it can, with its claim of popular sovereignty, undermine the ‘checks and balances’ and the vital separation of powers in liberal democracies. As well as that, populism tends to ignore minority rights by claiming the notion of the rule of the majority. It also undermines the formation of political coalitions through the antagonistic cleavage created between the populists versus non- populists, and creates an idea of moralization of politics, which makes compromise and consensus hard to be guaranteed. Populism also has a tendency to hang towards the plebiscitary transformation of politics, which puts the legitimacy of vital political institutions in check. Finally, populism’s anti-elite thrust promotes the shrinkage of the political, causing the contraction of the effective democratic space. A good way to summarize this complicated relationship between the two ideas is the notion that

it might be the case that populism emerges partly as a product of the very existence of democracy. Since the latter is based on the periodic realization of free and fair elections, it provides a mechanism by which the people can channel their dissatisfaction with the political establishment. At the same time, democracy generates aspirations, which if not satisfied might well lead to political discontent and thus a fertile soil for the rise of populism. […] there are good reasons to think that populism follows democracy like a shadow. (Mudde & Kaltwasser, 2012, p. 17)

Populism and Social Media

This section focuses on the way populists make use of social media and what the main characteristics of this proximity are. In Moffitt’s notion of populism as a political style, an aspect that helps understanding the approach further is the idea that the media has become a central stage for contemporary populism. The author presents an explanation of populism’s relationship with traditional media, its friend and foe aspects, and how traditional means such as television is still relevant for populism, due to the fact that it is a performative phenomenon. However, for the purposes of this thesis, the focus will be on the newer aspects of the media landscape, which have a major importance in current times. The internet nowadays represents a new power of which political leaders, not only populists, have taken advantage and opportunities to channel their ideas through social media networks.

The idea of mediation, Moffitt (2016) explains, is an essential point and cannot be put aside since cotemporary populism is not merely a direct or unmediated phenomenon when it comes to the way the people and populism interact, on the contrary, “[…] populist representations of ‘the people’ rely on a complex process of mediated claim-making between populist leaders, audiences, constituencies and media” (p. 96).

The concept of mediation, according to Roger Silverstone (2002), can be described as an uneven but fundamental dialectical process in which the different types of institutionalized media of communication, press, radio, television, and the internet, are an important part of general circulation of symbols in social life. He explains the idea of mediation being an uneven dialectical process

because while it is perfectly possible to privilege those mass media as defining and perhaps even determining social meanings, such privileging would miss the continuous and often creative engagement that listeners and viewers have with the products of mass communication. And it is uneven, precisely because the power to work with, or against, the dominant or deeply entrenched meanings that the media provide is unevenly distributed across and within societies. (Silverstone, 2002, p. 762)

In this context, Moffitt (2016) explains that there are two main changes that took place and must be addressed: populists no longer rely on traditional media outlets as the stages for their performative practices, and the more permeable and flexible geographical limits of their

performances. The latter will not play a relevant role for the focus in this thesis, while the former should be scrutinized.

Populist actors have the possibility to leave aside traditional media by being able to contact their audiences directly via social media networks, turning the internet and social media into an important asset for their political organization and mobilization. According to Moffitt (2016), “such sites and platforms allow populist leaders and parties not only to distribute their message more easily and freely but also to portray a sense of immediacy, closeness and intimacy with their followers, giving the appearance of direct accountability and representation” (p. 89). As the author further explains, populism takes advantage of this “new media galaxy” (p. 92) for three reasons: the idea of dichotomisation of the political flourishes in online environments such as, blogs, comment sections and other platforms in the Web 2.0; the notion of bad manners becomes evident in communication via online messages and posts on different platforms, that now find an easier channel to go viral through the internet; and finally, the glorification of the people is seen in these environments, where non-elites gain a special status and common sense takes the place of expert knowledge.

Moffitt understands mediation as an idea that goes against what the literature on populism establishes – the idea that the populist leader relies solely on a type of direct connection with the people in an unmediated way. However, a more complex setting exists, one in which mediation has a central role, since the idea that the mediation populists take advantage of nowadays has transformed itself. The experience of direct face-to-face interaction between citizens and their representatives has given place to a mediated form through media channels such as television and internet. “Rather than ‘real’ immediacy with political representatives, we instead now have a ‘simulation of immediacy’ or ‘virtual immediacy’ aided by channels of mediation” (Moffitt, 2016, p. 100).

As the author further explains, the notion of a “virtual immediacy” coincides with the imaginary identification of populist representation, that is, “[…] the presumption of enjoying a direct relation with the people and the imaginary identification of the latter with the leader”. This sense of directness or immediacy, however, does not mean that forms of mediation disappear from populism or other forms of representative politics” (Moffitt, 2016, p. 100).

The idea that the construction of the people relies to some extent on mediated images is a relevant point, as it represents an essential feature in the way contemporary politics function, that is, images and the idea of a spectacle are blatant in the claims certain politicians make to speak in the name of the people. Mediated images are essential in the construction of the people. They are presented as simplified and schematic mental representations that focus on who represents the legitimate people utilizing an aesthetics that is easy to grasp (Moffitt, 2016).

In this same context, the use of symbolism is also present in the attempt to spread the idea of the heartland. This symbolism combines elements that evoke sentiments and emotions, as well as vague and blurry aspects, in the sense that they lack any rational basis. It is represented by flags, signs, colours and other aspects that evoke complex notions of the heartland, combined with a sense of homogeneity and cohesion in the people. As explained by Moffitt (2016), “visual representations of ‘the people’ also give the heartland a certain sense of ‘concreteness’, strongly implying presence and corporality – and thus existence – of ‘the people’” (p.104).

Such idea connects to the perspective of Michael Billig’s work on banal nationalism, where the author advocates the idea that the concept of nationalism has been transformed into something unnoticed in our realities, a power that has supposedly lost its importance, but as argued by him, still reproduced and is ready to be triggered if needed. As stated by Billig (1995),

Because the concept of nationalism has been restricted to exotic and passionate exemplars, the routine and familiar forms of nationalism have been overlooked. In this case, ‘our’ daily nationalism slips from attention. There is a growing body of opinion that nation-states are declining. Nationalism, or so it is said, is no longer a major force: globalization is the order of the day. But a reminder is necessary. Nationhood is still being reproduced: it can still call for ultimate sacrifices; and, daily, its symbols and assumptions are. (p. 8)

The last aspect about mediation that must be addressed is how the transmission of performance takes place. On the one hand, traditional media do have an importance in this regard, being a significant and important means through which, depending on the level of support, populism is portrayed positively or negatively. On the other hand, new media has a broader reach in terms of addressing the voice of the people in relation to populist claims, owning to the fact that new media can be multidirectional. Therefore, both traditional and the new media have a multifaceted role when it comes to their relationship with populism, the role of broadcasting populist claims to the people, but also to judge the legitimacy of these same claims. This leads

to a scenario where the “[…] mediated representations of ‘the people’ have been short-fused: a populist actor makes a claim to represent ‘the people’, but rather than those who identify as ‘the people’ answering the claim, the mass media judges the claim for them, and speaks on their behalf.” (Moffitt, 2016, p. 110), which in turn shows that mass media acts both as the mediator of the image and voice of the people simultaneously.

In this context, the idea of mediatization of politics is an important aspect. According to Jesper Strömbäck and Frank Esser (2014), mediatization of politics can be understood as a process of increase in the importance of the media and its effects on political processes, involving institutions, organizations and political actors, or as Stig Hjarvard (2013) argues, the political, including its institutions, becoming gradually dependent on media and its logic.

The author further explains that the mediatization of politics is characterized by double-sided development, in which media integrates daily practices of political organizations and in the communication of political actors, serving different political ends. Moreover, “[…] the media have evolved into a partly independent institution in society that controls a vital political resource in democracy: society’s collective attention” (Hjarvard, 2013, p. 43).

In a context where politics become mediatized and media constitutes an important aspect in relation to the political scenario of society, it also becomes necessary to acknowledge the importance of Web 2.0 and take into consideration that politics have become an online practice in the current era. Taking to the online environment as a space, or even a new version or extension of the public sphere that in our times has significant power, has become a must for political actors. It is possible to affirm that “before the advent of the internet, interaction (not simply communication) used to entail some sort of physical presence. It also involved a vivid experience of the public sphere, as different from a private one. The internet changes this radically.” (Urbinati, 2019, p. 179). Social Media has changed the way connectivity happens, enabling users from around the world to express themselves, which in turn has modified democratic process and the public sphere itself (Flew & Iosifidis, 2020).

As Urbinati (2019) points out, “the revolutionary condition of ‘digital networks’ is one of several factors behind the populist renaissance” (p. 178). Social media and populism have a close relationship. However, it is true that populists are not alone, as politicians from the whole political spectrum make use of this powerful tool nowadays (Postill, 2018).

Interaction with audiences has changed in recent times, owing to the technological developments. Populists take full advantage of these developments, in terms of how they make use of different technologies to create the immediacy of emotions and beliefs within a propaganda environment (Urbinati, 2019). This process aims at deconstructing the traditional forms of intermediation and inaugurate a new reality where the immediacy of emotions and beliefs provided by the internet has a central role. Urbinati (2019), further argues that contemporary populism in its attempt to regain power over the audience profits from the technological revolution that has occurred in the domains of information and communication. She states that “just as fascism took advantage of the new media of its own day (particularly radio and the movie industry), populism is taking advantage of television and — even more importantly — the internet” (p. 176).

In this context, a new form of representation develops, with a sort of independency from traditional media as its main characteristic. In the populist rhetoric, there exists a strong opposition against the establishment and intermediation, which is stronger against professional journalism. Strong opposition and criticism are made viable thanks to the internet, as it becomes a valuable and accessible means to produce news, interpret and comment on facts. As Urbinati (2019) explains, the new media “[…] disseminates the populist performance and compels all politicians and parties to adopt a populist style of politics. Leaders can talk directly to the people, and they are eager to perform their commentary on everyday politics through social media, just like ‘ordinary’ citizens” (p. 176).

An example to illustrate this point is Donald Trump’s relationship with media. Since his election camping, the current US president has adopted a position of conflict in relation to traditional media, attacking and criticizing media channels and organizations that represent the traditional media. As Hallin (2019) argues, the coming to power of president Trump represented a change in the media ecology, which according to the author, caused the traditional media and journalism to be replaced from the position of centrality in regards to the flow of information. This new media ecology can be understood as a fragmented structure in which different facts, opinions and ideas are exposed to the different segments of the population. The author affirms that a powerful element of the new media ecology is social media, Twitter in particular, and associates this fact to how Trump makes use of such element for his own political benefit:

Twitter was to Trump what radio was to Perón. It was Twitter and other social media that enabled Trump to address his supporters directly and to mobilise their participation, and thus to build a following without the kind of organisational resources or support from traditional political elites normally required to run a successful campaign. (Hallin, 2019, p. 22)

To exemplify this relationship between populists and the digital or virtual dimension in which internet takes an important role in political communication, it is possible to examine the use of Twitter to illustrate how this powerful environment functions in reality. In different political contexts, such as in the United States in Donald Trump’s case, the use the social network by a leader or other political actor helps to create an illusion of direct rapport with its audience. As Alessandro Dal Lago (2017) states, due to the brevity of the messages offered by the platform (140 characters) it, “[…] allows a communication that often precedes that of online newspapers, the exchange of jokes, irony and so on. This social medium is used by those who intend to influence the public or convey beliefs, evaluations, and encouragement to their followers” (p. 86). This, Dal Lago (2017) explains, can be understood as a tool vital for a communicative strategy based on contradictory statements, containing vulgarity, sensationalism and dissemination of false information, which are essential ingredients in populist communication and a perfectly match the style of online environment.

It is possible to affirm that politics has entered a new dimension, a virtual or digital one, an environment capable of influencing decisions that affect society. This new dimension becomes a space for the transformation of the idea of public opinion into digital opinion, since a significant portion of political communication takes place online (Dal Lago, 2017). As the author further explains, this new political dimension makes the face to face political experience empty, it disappears in favour of its digital extension. Also, the internet becomes “[…] a powerful factor that helps narrowing the distance between the people and power” (Urbinati, 2019, p. 119/120), which enables the direct addressing of supporters, due to the sense of immediacy and closeness rendered by social media. This is the exact characteristic that defines the importance of social media in relation to populist leaders, in the sense that they perceived the powerfulness of this tool and the advantages and possibilities it makes viable, particularly in the way communication with the audience shifts and becomes simple and uncomplicated.

A final point worth discussing in this context is a characteristic inherent to the political communication that takes place online, which is its affective dimension. As Maldonado (2017) argues, the digiticization of the public sphere can be considered a revolutionary phenomenon

for the fact that it favours a “[…] political performance that populism excel at and facilitate the deployment of affective strategies: political emotions, populism, and new information technologies seem to converge in the new public sphere” (p. 7). This context is marked by the weakening of rational elements and the strengthening of a rhetoric that contains strong emotional appeal. The author observes that the audience receive messages that consist of simplified and deceptive content, filled with symbolic meaning and emotional valence.

Indeed, populist groups are formed around social media networks and channel their anger through these online spaces. Each one of us is provided with a device from which to circulate personal views, a way of reinforcing our subjectivity by differentiating ourselves from others by either rejecting or accepting what already exists in social media platforms. In this sense, social media do not encourage the formation of a rational, informed deliberation, for they inflect and magnify an irrational public mood where ‘chaotic enterprises are trapped in a daily staging where ethos, pathos and logos are all mixed up’ (Papacharissi, 2015: 26). These online spaces, populated by publics whose actions are motivated by shared feelings, contrast sharply with the traditional Habermasian public sphere, a space where informed public dialogue is supposed to take place. (Flew & Iosifidis, 2020, p. 16)

In light of the points presented above, it is possible to affirm that social media is a space for mobilization of political emotions and a tool for the digitization of the public sphere (Flew & Iosifidis, 2020), but also the space where populist performance can flourish through the features offered by it. The idea of bad manners is an example of such idea, in the sense that social media becomes the stage for the populist leader’s performance, that is, a space where the limits imposed by political correctness can be breached more easily, where the populist leader can say the unsayable, convey their ideas without any filter, or act in ways that do not respect manners and behaviours that are expected from a professional politician.

To conclude the discussion on social media, it should be mentioned that, as discussed by different scholars, the technological developments the internet has made viable have both an optimistic and a pessimistic side, depending on the perspective. The Web 2.0 represented a revolution in the way it was celebrated and seen as a positive and democratic tool. However, it did not only deliver the positive expectations attributed to it, but in fact, created new problems and challenges, developing rather differently from what had been predicted. The diffusion of social media transformed internet communication by introducing a new logic described as mass self-communication (Castells, 2009), which opened the way for advancements of democratic political movements. Concomitantly, it is also argued that the diffusion of social media contributed to the development of a more uncivil society, where different types of

communication, not always leaning towards democratic values, are able to spread (Ekman, 2018). As Kristoffer Holt (2019) states, “today, a little more than a decade after the ‘Web 2.0’ revolution […] There is more talk of ‘false news’ or disinformation, Russian troll armies and populism than about opinion pluralism, activism and grass roots democracy […]” (p. 70).

4. Methodology

The analysis in the present study follows a qualitative approach. Although a number of studies about politicians’ use of Twitter tend to follow quantitative approaches, both because of the platform’s structure and for the quantity of naturally occurring data publicly available in it (Stephansen & Couldry, 2014), dealing with Twitter data quantitatively is not a rule, and it is possible to combine approaches and apply qualitative perspectives in the analysis of such type of data.

Considering this study’s research questions are mainly based on the communication and strategies employed by Bolsonaro, it becomes clear that the study would not benefit as much from a quantitative approach, since the main aim that drives this study is to investigate discourse, that is, explore what lies within Bolsonaro’s tweets, expose the details and main aspects of his posts on the platform.

It is true that a quantitative approach would not be completely useless, since systematic analytical approaches based on quantitative methods exist and have been applied to similar studies. However, as Silverman (2017) states, the choice of research methods should be based on the task at hand and considered as a reasonable and effective tool to systematically explore a topic and pursue knowledge guided by the data. Therefore, the choice of method is never a predetermined one, but rather the most appropriate and convenient for what is being investigated.

For that reason, taking into account the data gathered for this study and considering the research questions and the need of a thorough understanding of the context involving the topic at hand, the choice to follow a qualitative approach in the analysis proved the best fitting option.

Taking into consideration the points above, the choice of method to tackle what is proposed here and to answer the research questions would necessarily need elements that provide options to explore linguistic and semiotic aspects, as well as tools to uncover useful details needed to explain the phenomenon of populism. Therefore, the method to conduct the analysis of Bolsonaro’s communication via Twitter in this study relies on Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA), which is a branch within the Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) tradition. Next, an introduction to the main characteristics of CDA and DHA will be provided exploring aspects

important to understand the approach, its main tools and concepts. This section will also present the research data and the sampling approach, as well as other relevant analytical concepts that were employed in this study.

Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)

The departing point is CDA, the main characteristics of which will be briefly presented as a way to set the ground for the explanation of DHA’s features and tools in the subsequently section.

CDA is a method to explore discourse and its relations with distinct elements of the social, such as power, ideologies and social identities. Different branches to CDA have been established, each with their own variations and specificities regarding methodology and theory. As explained by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer (2016), a common aspect shared by the different approaches to CDA is the fact that they focus on deconstructing ideologies and power relations through the analysis of language.

A central idea in CDA is the idea of discourse. The notion of discourse is strongly related to the ideas of the French philosopher Michel Foucault (1982), whose theory of discourse developed around a rejection and response to the orthodox Marxist belief which focused primarily on economic relations, where the structure and superstructure symbolise a system of ideological beliefs that sustain unjust economic relations. Foucault’s theory also goes against the ideas of Marxist representation of ideology, who considers it as a false consciousness in contrast to a hidden truth. In Foucault’s conception, the idea of truth is seen as relative to discourse, that is, the notion of discourse functions as statements and social practices organized in regular and systematic ways, representing regimes of truth and having its own internal rules and social divisions. “From this perspective individuals are never entirely ‘dominated’ or ‘oppressed’ by economic exploitation and a concomitant alienating ideology. Instead, they are objects and agents of discourse as discourse operates through their forms of being, valuing and acting […]” (Zotzmann & O’Regan, 2016).

The idea of discourse from the CDA perspective perceives written and spoken language as social practices, that is, language is seen as a mode of action that shapes and is shaped by society, which according to Fairclough et al (2011), has a dialectical relationship between the

discursive event and elements that constitute the situation, institutions, or social structure that frames it. Furthermore, it signifies a particular domain from a particular perspective within a social practice and is shaped and affected by situational, institutional and social settings, while it also has an influence over social and political processes (Wodak, 2001).

It is important to mention that CDA is a problem-oriented approach based on interdisciplinarity. As explained by Wodak and Meyer (2016) “CDA is therefore not interested in investigating a linguistic unit per se, but in studying social phenomena which are necessarily complex and thus require a multi-disciplinary and multi-methodical approach” (p.2). A strong characteristic of CDA is its common interest in de-mystifying ideologies and power through an investigation of semiotic data, which includes written, spoken and visual data, basing the investigation on a process that takes place through a systematic and reproducible dynamic.

CDA looks at language as a form of social practice, taking into consideration the context in which language is used, this being a crucial and fundamental point in the application of the approach. Therefore, investigating the relation between language, power and social inequality, focusing on the way such themes are expressed and legitimized by the use of discourse (language), is the main aim of CDA (Wodak and Meyer, 2016).

CDA’s interest goes beyond texts, spoken or written objects to construct its inquiry. Within CDA’s perspective there exists the need to include a theorization and description of social structures and processes involving it, which are required for a complete and valid critical account of discourse (Wodak, 2001).

The same is true when it comes to the use of CDA and the analysis of social media. The idea of a separation between the offline and online world does not apply or is not a notion that can be supported, accepted or endorsed, since there exists a strong interdependency between both worlds. The same applies when it comes to the idea of context: texts are embedded in different contexts, which cannot be neglected, neither in an online or offline setting (Khosravinik et al., 2016).

For these reasons, to efficiently carry out an analysis of social media using the methodological approach offered by CDA, it is necessary to consider the social context, as any attempt of analysis that tries to separate the online from the offline would be incomplete. Thus, it is essential that any analysis of social media from a CDA perspective explores beyond the surface

of a discourse and seeks a deep description which uncovers the details of communication and its complexities, always considering the context it is embedded in in the offline world (Khosravinik et al., 2016).

Social media can be seen as a space in which the idea of participatory web offers possibilities for communicative practices that involve a variety of different texts, including options that make it a dynamic and interactive space, where texts can take different forms, but also a place where more static and controlled types of texts can be found. From CDA’s standpoint in relation to social media data, texts available online “[…] should be viewed and analysed within their new interactive context, while bearing in mind that the social nature of communication is the core quality of textual practice in the participatory web” (Khosravinik et al., 2016, p. 6).

It is relevant to state that one of the defining aspects of CDA is its possibility to uncover important information that provides linguistic, social and ideological variables. Taking into consideration that Twitter is the main source of data in this study, using CDA in the analysis of tweets makes possible “the study of the functions of (social, cultural) contexts of language use” (Wodak, 2013). This becomes possible through the linking between related tweets that help determining and making reference to the social context and discursive strategies present in the data.

Some criticism has been drawn regarding CDA and its application. Critics raise objections in relation to some aspects of the method, such as the use of theories that are not always clearly defined or stem from incompatible intellectual traditions. CDA’s strong political aims have also been criticized and CDA practitioners accused of using impressionistic methodology in the analysis of texts. The method has also been criticized for paying insufficient attention to aspects of context, putting emphasis on the macrocontext of discourse, not focusing enough on the immediate context they are embedded in (Breeze, 2011). The present study takes these points into consideration and addresses them through the devices offered by the Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA), which will be explained in the next section.

Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA)

Once the base of critical discourse analysis is laid with the explanation of CDA’s main characteristics, it is possible to explain the details and main aspects that constitute the Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA), elaborated by Ruth Wodak, who is one of the main voices representing Critical Discourse Analysis and this specific branch.

A brief overview of DHA shows that the approach functions as a vehicle which enables researchers to scrutinize dynamics related to power. One of the distinguishing characteristics of DHA is the fact that it integrates and triangulates knowledge that includes aspects from historical and intertextual perspectives, taking into consideration the social and political background aspects in which events related to a discursive practice are embedded in. DHA focuses on establishing a theory of discourse by creating a connection between the fields of action, genres, discourses and texts. Furthermore, it focuses its efforts on politics, developing conceptual frameworks for political discourse (Wodak, 2001). The systematic application of DHA in a qualitative research setting can be understood by its process of analysis, which takes into consideration four different layers when it comes to context:

the intertextual and interdiscursive relationships between utterances, texts, genres and discourses; the extra-linguistic social/sociological variables; the history and archaeology of texts and organizations; and institutional frames of the specific context of a situation (the specific episodes under investigation). In this way we are able to explore how discourses, genres and texts change due to socio-political contexts, and with what effects. (Wodak, 2012, p.529)

The approach has a strong focus on texts, which include not only written format, but also audio, spoken and visual material. A text, according to Wodak (2015), can include posters, speeches, comics, television debates, postings and other Web 2.0 genres. Such focus on texts is based on the idea that the different texts possess a structured knowledge, a discourse, which is applied in different genres and embedded in different contexts and realities.

The choice to apply DHA in this study is supported by the characteristics offered by the approach in terms of features and analytical concepts. It provides the study with the necessary depth and attention to detail that encompass all necessary relevant aspects needed for a complete understanding of the problem at hand. The fact that DHA takes into consideration historical and contextual aspects gives this method central importance. It requires discourse to

be examined within a context, that is, it requires that the political, social and historical aspects are taken into consideration and become part of the interpretations developed by analysts. In order to understand Bolsonaro’s communication on Twitter and to interpret it, many relevant aspects embedded in his tweets must be thoroughly explored.

In order to carry out an analysis relying on DHA, some important concepts related to the approach must be addressed. The concepts of critique, ideology and power must be explained, as they are central notions related to DHA and CDA approaches in general. These concepts will be presented in more detail and their meanings will be explored. Later, the definitions of other significant terms such as discourse, genre, text, recontextualization, intertextuality and interdiscursivity will also be presented, for the fact that they are all relevant when it comes to the method used in this study (Reisigl & Wodak, 2016).

Discourse, Text, and Genre

DHA’s idea of discourse is in accordance with other approaches within CDA. The idea of discourse has been extensively used in the social sciences, with different abstract notions and interpretations attributed to it from a variety of philosophical and theoretical backgrounds, as can be seen in the definition provided in the previous section.

To further understand the idea of discourse in which the DHA is based on, it is necessary to define discourse as a “[…] set of ‘context-dependent semiotic practices’ as well as ‘socially constituted and socially constitutive’, ‘related to a macro-topic’ and ‘pluri-perspective’, that is, linked to argumentation […]” (Wodak, 2015, p. 51). Furthermore, discourse must be looked at as a notion dependent on the discourse analyst’s perspective, not as a closed unit, but a dynamic semiotic entity that is open to reinterpretation and continuation (Reisigl & Wodak, 2016).

As Wodak (2001) states, the idea of discourse can be understood as a “[…] complex bundle of simultaneous and sequential interrelated linguistic acts, which manifest themselves within and across the social fields of action as thematically interrelated semiotic, oral or written tokens, very often as `texts', that belong to specific semiotic types, that is genres” (p. 66)

Texts must be understood as a part of discourse. In a general and broad view, texts can be seen as a form of objectifying linguistic actions through oral or written means. As well as that, texts

are responsible for bridging dilated speech situations, that is, making the connection between speech production and the speech reception (Reisigl & Wodak, 2016).

To further explore the idea of texts, it is essential to understand the idea of genre, to which texts are directly associated to. The definition of genre presented by Wodak and Meyer, (2016) is taken from Norman Fairclough (1995), who characterizes genre as “[…] the conventionalized, more or less schematically fixed use of language associated with a particular activity, as ‘a socially ratified way of using language in connection with a particular type of social activity” (p. 14).

The relation of these ideas with the study’s case is perceived in different points: the notion of discourse in this particular case is characterized by Bolsonaro’s tweets, his linguistic acts embedded in a social and political context, manifested as written and spoken statements objectified in the text and additional media of each tweet.

Intertextuality, Recontextualization, and Interdiscursivity

The idea of intertextuality is an important element in DHA. The first point to mention in relation to intertextuality is the idea that all texts have a link to other texts. This relationship is possible across time, both in the past and the present. This relationship is established via the referencing to a topic or to its main actors; references to the same events, or reappearance of a text’s main arguments in another text (Wodak, 2012). Linked to this idea is the notion of recontextualization. Such element can be characterized as the process that places an argument, a topic, a genre or a discursive practice out of context and introduces the de-contextualized element into a new one (Wodak, 2012). It is relevant to mention that such process leads to the element acquiring a new meaning, as different meanings can emerge from use (Wodak & Krzyżanowski, 2008).

Regarding the idea of interdiscursivity, the importance of such notion for DHA lies on the fact that discourses are linked to each other in different ways, with different topics or subtopics of other discourses contributing to another. As stated by Reisigl and Wodak (2016) “Discourses are open and often hybrid; new sub-topics can be created at many points” (p. 28).

These concepts represent essential points for a full comprehension of what the content of Bolsonaro’s tweets represent. Taking into consideration the relationship of texts and discourses in this study with extra media material such as videos, pictures and references to other discourses that influence and mould Bolsonaro’s own communication. Intertextuality, recontextualization and interdiscursivity re vital and cannot be neglected or ignored in order to interpret Bolsonaro’s tweets.

It should be mentioned that DHA explores the way discourses, genres and texts are affected by social and political changes, and focuses on how the intertextual and interdiscursive relationship between utterances, texts, genres and discourses develop, taking into consideration the extra- linguistic social/sociological variables, the history of an organization or institution, and situational frames related to it (Reisigl & Wodak, 2016).

Critique, Ideology, and Power

A general notion of being critical can be understood as the necessary distance from the data, gained via embedding it in a social context and by the comprehensions and clarifications of political positioning of the actors in the discourse. A great deal of importance is attributed to the need to maintain a focus on self-reflection as an essential aspect in the process of conducting research (Reisigl & Wodak, 2016).

From the DHA perspective, which is guided by the socio-philosophical orientation of critical theory, the concept of critique is understood as the relation of three central aspects. 1) the idea of text or discourse-immanent critique, which focuses on discovering inconsistencies, self- contradictions, paradoxes and dilemmas in the structures of different texts and discourses, 2) the fact that socio-diagnostic critique should be sought to demystify persuasive or manipulative character of discursive practices, by applying contextual knowledge and by making use of social theories and theoretical models to help interpreting discursive events, and 3) its future- related prospective, which contributes to the improvement of communication.

As Reisigl and Wodak (2016) state, “It follows from our understanding of critique that the DHA should make the object under investigation and the analyst’s own position transparent and justify theoretically why certain interpretations and readings of discursive events seem more valid than others” (p. 25). The idea of critic becomes clear in the discussion section of this

study, where the analyst’s perspective and position in relation to the object of study is justified and supported by the theories on the topic.

When it comes to the idea of ideology, the concept has been given different meanings and functions along history, but according to Thompson (1990), it should be understood as social processes used to “[…] refer to the ways in which meaning serves, in particular circumstances, to establish and sustain relations of power which are systematically asymmetrical - what I shall call ‘relations of domination’. Ideology, broadly speaking, is meaning in the service of power” (p. 7). For DHA, the concept of ideology is seen as “[…] a perspective (often one-sided) i.e. a worldview and a system composed of related mental representations, convictions, opinions, attitudes values and evaluations, which is shared by members of a specific social group” (Reisigl & Wodak, 2016, p. 25). DHA aims to understand the ways linguistic and semiotic practices help reproducing ideology in different settings. Ideologies have a central role in the maintenance of power relations, and their relevance is expressed through discourse. As well as that, it helps establishing narratives of hegemony and control in the public sphere and has the capacity to radically transform power relations (2016).

The concept of power, from the DHA perspective, is based on an asymmetric relationship in which a structure where social actors have different social positions or belong to different social groups is established. Drawing from Weber’s conceptualization, DHA perceives power as one’s personal will being against the interest of others within a social relationship, in which power is employed in different ways: through the use of force and violence, thought threats and promises, attachment to authority through submission or exertion. DHA focusses on the different linguistic forms used in expressions and manipulations of power, in the way it is legitimized or de-legitimized in discourses and on how texts become means to manifest ideological fights for dominance and hegemony, as well as for social struggle. Thus, “[…] power is discursively realized not only by grammatical forms, but also by a person’s control of the social occasion, by means of the genre of a text, or by the regulation of access to certain public spheres” (Reisigl & Wodak, 2016, p. 26).

In this context, the idea of hegemony must be clarified, due to its direct relation to the ideas of ideology and power. Keeping in mind that one of the major concerns of DHA is to de-mystify the hegemony of discourses by deciphering the ideologies that establish and perpetuate dominance, the concept of hegemony must then be understood, as according to the Gramscian theorization, as a group’s dominant position in the political and social arena (Gramsci, 1999),

that is, “[…] the promotion and dominance of a particular set of ideas through the construction of a socio-cultural unity developed through both material and ideational struggles” (Donoghue, 2018, p. 396). It is possible to affirm that for the DHA “[…] language is not powerful on its own – it is a means to gain and maintain power by the use powerful people make of it and an expression of power relations” (Reisigl & Wodak, 2016, p. 26).

In view of the relevance of the ideas of critic, power and ideology in relation to DHA, the analysis in this study address these fundamental points in the way it seeks to understand Bolsonaro’s discourse in its essence. The study points out the main characteristics of a communication that resonates and manifests controversial and outraging ideas and opinions, in order to establish a position of power and hegemony, a parallel reality immersed in contradictions, fear, conspiracies, and lies, which can only be demystified and deciphered in a critical way.

Research Data

The primary source of data for the present study is content retrieved from the microblogging service Twitter. As argued by David Silverman (2017), the internet has become a site where a wide and rich variety of information is found and easily accessible. Looking at it from the political perspective, the internet represents a new environment where strategic political communication and an online political dimension develops and strengthens these days (Dal Lago, 2017). Twitter is a key tool for Bolsonaro, whose communication via the online platform takes place on a daily basis.

The use of Twitter by politicians has become a common practice, particularly for populists, since the platform enables these actors to circumvent the traditional channels for communication. As stated by Silvio Waisbord & Adriana Amado (2017), “Twitter facilitates the kind of horizontal, interactive communication praised by populist rhetoric. It offers a flattened communication structure in contrast to the top–down structure of the legacy media. It is suitable for unmediated exchanges between politicians and citizens” (p. 1332).

Qualitative analysis of data consisting of tweets are rather difficult to be found, as the majority of studies associated with big data and analysis conducted with the help of quantitative approaches. As Hilde C. Stephansen and Nick Couldry (2014) have argued, “Given its network structure and the vast quantities of naturally occurring data that it (ostensibly) makes publicly available, Twitter lends itself to the kinds of analytical approaches that have characterized the so-called turn to Big Data in the humanities and social sciences” (p. 1215).

However, criticism towards the use of big data is raised as the approach, despite its benefits for research, still presents problematic aspects. Danah Boyd & Kate Crawford (2012), present some of the problematic sides of big data use in Social Sciences. The authors present aspects that point to the reliance in numbers and statistics, affirming that big data has its limitations and bias that must be taken into consideration in research. Among the points raised by the authors are the ideas that big data can change the definition of knowledge, for the fact that it side-lines other forms of analysis, and the risk of value loss caused by data being placed outside context. Regarding the latter, the authors state that,

Data are not generic. There is value to analysing data abstractions, yet retaining context remains critical, particularly for certain lines of inquiry. Context is hard to interpret at scale and even harder to maintain when data are reduced to fit into a model. Managing context in light of Big Data will be an ongoing challenge. (Boyd & Crawford, 2012, p. 671)

Despite the tendency to tackle data collected from social media from a quantitative perspective, the possibility to explore such data qualitatively is not inexistent and has been debated. It is possible to affirm that social media communication challenges established theories and analytical approaches. According to Michal Krzyżanowski & Joshua A. Tucker, (2018), the “[…] new character of communication on online media – including brevity of social media texts, huge quantity and volume of messages, irregularity of language use, etc. – have all posed very significant challenges to many language and discourse-oriented theories and methodologies” (p. 145).

However, it must be taken into consideration that the role of language is central to political communication on social media (Dobkiewicz, 2019). By considering the growing and expressive role that social media represents in political communication nowadays, it becomes necessary to adapt established theories and methodologies in order to work and understand the tool social media data provides to answer the questions and challenges of our society.

Data Collection

The Twitter dataset utilized in this study consisted of secondary data collected and made available by the organization Aos Fatos2, which collects Bolsonaro’s tweets from the account (@jairbolsonaro) through Workbench’s API, an online tool to collect and analyse data without the need of coding. The ongoing collection of tweets by the API tool guarantees that all tweets posted in Bolsonaro’s account were collected, avoiding the risk of important data not being collected. The dataset retrieved from the website consisted of a corpus of 3196 tweets from 21st

October 2018 until 31st January 2020.

2 https://aosfatos.org/tweets-de-bolso/

Data Management

Tweets were placed in a Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet and the data was cleaned manually. Retweets (RT), tweets containing only a link, emoji/emoticons and mentions (@) or a combination of these features were removed from the dataset, as well as tweets containing short text such as greetings or other short expressions. Removing tweets containing such content made the data handling and processing easier by reducing the number of tweets in the corpus. It also guaranteed that only relevant tweets that represent Bolsonaro’s ideas would be analysed.

Sampling

Following Silverman's (2017) suggestion, to conduct an effective qualitative analysis, it is necessary to have a limited and manageable amount of data to work with. Based on this suggestion and taking into account the large number of tweets available in the dataset, it was necessary to decide on a smaller number of tweets to analyse. Therefore, in order to gather the most relevant content from the dataset, purposive sampling was employed.

Silverman (2010) states that purposive sampling is useful for the fact that it allows the illustration of features and processes that are interesting and relevant for a research, prioritizing the features and processes that provide answers for research questions, not leaving aside the importance to consider the demands for critical thinking when employing this approach to sampling. Therefore, the purposeful sampling strategy this study adopts is the theoretical sampling approach.

The use of theoretical sampling in qualitative research is explained through the selection of certain relevant aspects, which are important in relation to the research question and relevant to answering the questions raised in the research from a theoretical position. As argued by Jennifer Mason (2002) “theoretical sampling is concerned with constructing a sample […] which is meaningful theoretically, because it builds in certain characteristics or criteria which help to develop and test your theory and explanation” (p. 124).

To guarantee that the sampling is not only guided by aspects that are relevant and representative in relation to the theory, and to prevent a selection of data that is only beneficial or not challenging enough in terms of testing the theory, some aspects of theoretical sampling can be pointed out as vital in order to strengthen the representativeness of the sample. One such aspect

is the deviant sampling units that are included in order to challenge assumptions, since they function as a form of test for the theory, and the idea of a flexible sampling that can be enlarged or changed depending on the needs that are required during the research process, serving as a tool to enrich and make the research more informative (Silverman, 2010).

Based on the theory on populism and the strong focus on the idea of context required by DHA, a selection of the most relevant and rich data was made. In order to get acquainted with the content of the dataset, a first preliminary reading was conducted to identify the main topics and themes in the tweets. Subsequently, three different periods, represented by the months within the year of 2019 (May, August and November), were chosen by their theoretically related relevance, taking into consideration aspects of Bolsonaro’s discourse, as well as the political and social events occurring under the selected periods.

In order to address the need for deviant sampling units, tweets containing ideas that oppose the main theoretical aspects important to frame populism were selected. These were, for instance, tweets in which Bolsonaro puts forward an image of a defender of democratic values, praises democratic institutions, or addresses matters in a moderate and reasonable manner. Although such aspects could be pointed out as strategies used by populists in order to appeal as devoted to democracy (Urbinati, 2019), they represent deviant cases for the contrast they have in relation to ideas presented in other tweets, serving as a useful way to challenge the theory.

It is crucial to mention that, although the events that occurred during the months selected only lasted for specific weeks or days, their impact and repercussion influenced the political life for a longer period. The selection of periods includes moments in which the events turned irrelevant or were shadowed by others. Therefore, the three periods represent both typical and exceptional examples that provide insights into both routine and unusual communication patterns by Bolsonaro.

The idea of a flexible sample is addressed through tweets containing additional media linked to them in the form of short videos or pictures, which enlarges the possibilities for analysis. As well as that, adding tweets or looking for further information in periods other than those selected for analysis is a possibility, due to the amount of data available in the original dataset.

Sampling Process

A useful aspect of the sampling must be mentioned before going further into presenting its details. As well as based on the theoretical aspects presented in this study, it is possible to affirm that the sampling has a connection with Discourse-Historical Approach, due to the fact that the periods selected for analysis are strongly aligned with the approach in terms of how they represent key historical moments and events, creating a direct link with the content of the tweets, strengthening in this way the presence of context that is essential for the investigation.

The first period selected for the analysis was the month of May 2019. In that month, with the government already established, Bolsonaro experienced first big demonstrations during his government. The demonstrations were against the cuts in investment in education, which would directly affect the budgets of many universities funded by the federal government, as well as other research and educational institutions that are dependent on public funding. A significant number of people attended the demonstrations in all parts of the country. What is interesting and relevant in this period and a justification to its selection for analysis is the fact that during this period, different aspects related to the characteristics typical of populist discourse can be observed, particularly in the different arguments employed by Bolsonaro to support his government decisions.

The second moment analysed was the month of August in that same year. That month was marked by the repercussion of the Amazon rainforest wildfires in the Northern region of Brazil, a problem that created international concern, and which the government had difficulties to manage in a proper way. The incident was widely reported by different channels and became a major crisis for the government. Bolsonaro’s discourse emphasized the idea that the country’s sovereignty was being attacked. This period is relevant for the fact that many characteristics present in the discourse can be related to strategies employed in populist discourse, when it comes to the idea of protecting the homeland/heartland (Wodak, 2015).

The third and last period analysed in 2019 was the month of November. The release from prison of the former president Lula marked that period. His release was celebrated by many and criticized by his political opponents, in particular Bolsonaro. The event is relevant in the analysis for the fact that Lula represents the enemy (together with the political left and other social movements) that Bolsonaro addresses so often in order to construct the dichotomic scenario necessary for his own political benefit and success.

During these periods, other events are relevant in order to understand the context. Among them are the pension reform, the crisis in Venezuela and Argentinian elections, which are topics that had an impact in the Brazilian political scenario and have to be taken into consideration in the analysis. The pension reform caused intense debates in the society and was a major topic in the political agenda for many months. Its approval in October 2019 came after a long process which mobilized different parties and political leaders, as well as the media and society in general. Although the reform was approved under Bolsonaro’s government, the discussions on the need of reforming the Brazilian pension system had already started in previous governments. Nonetheless, the reform is constantly used as an argument in Bolsonaro’s discourse and must be understood for its relevance in the political developments in 2019.

When it comes to the crisis in Venezuela and the Argentinian presidential elections, the impacts of the crisis in the Venezuelan case and political changes in the Argentinian, can be perceived in Brazil and are used in different ways by populist rhetoric, in many cases by spreading fear and lies associated with the situations in those countries.

Table 1 shows the number of tweets for each period in the original dataset and the relevant tweets and deviant cases selected for analysis. 621 tweets were posted by Bolsonaro during the three months, excluding the tweets with features removed in the cleaning process. From this amount, 110 were submitted to close reading and analysis.

Table 1 - Overview of the number of tweets selected in the sampling process

May August November Total Total number of tweets (period) 245 168 208 621

Relevant tweets and deviant 50 (20.40%) 38 (22.61%) 22 (10.57%) 110 (17.71%) cases (%)

Analytical Procedure

An essential feature for Discourse-Historical Approach is its principle of triangulation, which works as a methodical way to help minimizing the risk of critical bias in discourse analysis. Research that adopts DHA investigates a variety of phenomena in society beyond the study of only language (as oral, visual or written), and takes an interdisciplinary stance, that is, takes into account different sources of data and different analytical perspectives. For these reasons, the principle of triangulation is an important aspect in DHA, as it “[…] implies taking a whole range of empirical observations, theories and methods as well as background information into account […]” (Reisigl & Wodak, 2016, p. 26). As summarized by Wodak & Krzyżanowski (2008) “[…] it attempts to transcend the purely linguistic dimension and to include more or less systematically the historical, political, sociological and/or psychological dimensions in the analysis and interpretations of a specific discursive event” (p. 12).

The present study addresses the triangulation principle, as well as the other features important to conduct the analysis of Bolsonaro’s tweets using the DHA approach. Different characteristics of the data and the choice of sampling will be essential to fulfil the required aspects necessary in the analysis.

The first point deals with the importance of context, which has a strong relevance for the DHA approach. As shown in the summary that presents the different periods selected for analysis, the political and social aspects in which the discourse is embedded can be understood, which in a general manner provides the necessary information in relation to what characterized each period, guaranteeing that the context is taken into consideration in the analysis, as it is a fundamental part of the interpretation of the Bolsonaro’s discourse.

The tweets make reference to past events and specific actors that, in the past and in the present, have relevance and influence in the political and social context. These historical aspects presented in the data are further explained in the analysis and their importance further explored in relation to the context of the tweets, and what they represent in each specific case related to Bolsonaro’s tweets.

The idea of intertextuality in this study is fulfilled through the relationship with the additional media linked to the tweets, which consists of additional text, videos or pictures that are key to

interpret and understand the context in which arguments are embedded in some of the cases presented in the analysis.

To guarantee that interdiscursivity in the context of Bolsonaro’s tweets is addressed, the relationship between his statements and other topics are overserved and taken into account in the content of the tweets and in the cases with additional media linked to them, especially when the president bases his arguments on members of his government, other politicians and statistical studies by institutions.

Categories of Analysis

The Discourse-Historical Approach follows a three-dimensional idea which constitute textual meanings and structures. According to Wodak (2012) the three different dimensions in DHA distinguishes as “[…] the topics that are spoken/written about; the discursive strategies employed; and the linguistic means that are drawn upon to realize both topics and strategies […]” (p. 529).

To realize the first of these dimensions, the coding of the tweets considered relevant for the analysis within the three selected periods was conducted. The tweets were coded inductively using the text analysis software MAXQDA. The coding process focused on identifying themes following the theories that constitute this study framework, consisting of ideas of phenomena related to populism rhetoric (Wodak, 2015) including:

- Focus on a homogeneous people, understood as the idea of a good people, with emphasis on the idea of being part of a group, belonging to a community;

- The idea of threat posed by the dangerous outsiders/enemies inside society;

- A strong claim to be protecting the fatherland (or homeland/heartland), based on the idea of narratives of the past and revisionism;

- The construction of a scenario of fear within a context where the idea of conspiracies organized by the media, opposition parties, and traitors of the fatherland is created;

- Strong association with traditional, conservative values and morals;

- Simplistic explanations and solutions for complex problems, emphasizing common sense ideas and driven by strong anti-intellectualism;

- The figure of a charismatic leader that presents themselves as a saviour/hero able to protect the people against the threats posed by the enemies.

The tools utilized to realize the subsequently two dimensions proposed by DHA, the linguistic means and discursive strategies, will be presented and briefly defined in order to establish a thorough and meaningful understanding of their application in the analysis.

It is important, tough, to make clear the notion of strategy, which DHA understands as an “[…] intentional plan of practice (including discursive practices) adopted to achieve a particular social, political, psychological or linguistic goal. Discursive strategies are located at different levels of linguistic organization and complexity.” P.

In this context the concept of topos is one of the most relevant strategies that DHA makes use of. It can be understood as formulas which help identifying arguments, while also guaranteeing the transition from argument to conclusion (Wodak, 2015). In a more detailed manner, Wodak explains the concept as follows:

Topoi are the content-related warrants or ‘conclusion rules’ that connect the argument or arguments with the conclusion or the central claim. They appeal to common sense knowledge, frequently without providing any evidence for establishing the warrant. As such, they justify the transition from the premise to the conclusion: topoi are thus central to the analysis of seemingly convincing fallacious arguments that are widely adopted in all political discourses. (Wodak, 2012, p. 529)

It is also possible to explain the idea of topoi as strategies of argumentation, which function through conditional or causal paraphrases, for example, “‘if x, then y’ or ‘y, because x’” (Wodak, 2015, p. 51). To further understand this notion, the model or argumentation presented in figure 1 provides a simplified and helpful example to grasp its logic.

Figure 1 - Simplified Model of Argumentation

Adapted from “The Politics of Fear – What Right-Wing Populist Discourse Mean”, by Wodak, R., 2015, Sage, p. 52.

Following the definition of the idea of topoi and as a way of making its meaning and purpose clear, a detailed presentation of the relevant types of topoi employed in the analysis is provided in table 2:

Table 2 - List of different types of Topoi relevant for the analysis

Topos Warrant Topos of people If the people favour/refuse a specific action, the action should be performed/not performed. Topos of advantage or usefulness If an action under a specific relevant point of view will be useful, then one should perform it. Topos of threat or topos of danger If there are specific dangers or threats, one should do something against them. Topos of burden or weighing down If a person, an institution or a country is burdened by specific problems, one should act in order to diminish these burdens. Topos of finance If a specific situation or action costs too much money or causes a loss of revenue, one should perform actions which diminish the costs or help to avoid/mitigate the loss. Topos of reality Because reality is as it is, a specific action/decision should be performed/made. Topos of numbers If the numbers prove/don’t prove a specific standpoint, a specific action should be performed or not be carried out. Topos of saviour If danger is to be expected because of X and if A has saved us in the past, then A will be able to save us again. Topos of history Since history teaches that specific actions have specific consequences, one should perform or omit a specific action in a specific situation (allegedly) comparable with the historical example referred to.

Adapted from “The Politics of Fear – What Right-Wing Populist Discourse Mean”, by Wodak, R., 2015, Sage, p. 53.

As well as topoi, other strategies are employed in populist rhetoric and are also relevant in combination with the idea of topoi. Based on the ideas in the theory section, the strategies consist of constructing dichotomies and positive self- and negative other-presentation, which translates into the notion of creating a division of the world between good and bad, us and them, inside and outside. Its main focus is to construct a simplistic dichotomy, creating a negative image of the other while the positive presentation is aimed towards the populist leader or party. This strategy is present in populist rhetoric, found in different examples of populist leaders, such as Donald Trump in the US, Beppe Grillo in Italy and Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, each with a different conception of enemy to create scenarios of dichotomy.

Shifting of blame is another strategy employed in populist discourse and also identified in the analysis being carried out in this study. This strategy also relates to the creation of a dichotomic worldview by creating scapegoats to which the blame for different problems can be transferred, creating a scenario where a victim-perpetrator reversal takes place.

In this same context the idea of demonization of others appears as a discursive strategy that depends on the creation of conspiracies and unreal scenarios, where a perpetrator, whose image can differ according to the context (establishment, parties, immigrants, etc.) is often accused of being responsible for a situation which is presented in a dramatized and exaggerated manner. Denouncing and association of the image of the other with lies and rumours is employed as ways to realize this strategy. Finally, the discursive strategy that uses provocation and calculated ambivalence characterizes the populist rhetorical in the way it makes use of different tools like aggressive tone and a continuous campaigning mode which helps setting the agenda in the media towards populist’s own benefit. Therefore, scandals are a constantly created and recreated and the use of political incorrectness, that is, unexpected or unsayable statements that transcend the limits of the permissible, are aspects that accompany this strategy (Wodak, 2015).

When it comes to the repertoire of linguistic means utilized in discourse, the systematic analysis of the tweets focuses on identifying the use of rhetorical tropes in the form of metaphors, personification, metonymies as well as a common use of analogies in order to make comparisons. Indirect pragmatic devices, such as insinuations and presuppositions associated with other discursive strategies are also utilized. Finally, sociolinguistic-discursive means also play a role, in particular forms of address, pronouns, footing and deixis, being these relevant aspects to pay attention to in the analysis (Wodak, 2012).

In order to address some Twitter specific aspects related to the communication on the platform, other resources related to linguistic aspects must be taken into consideration in the analysis. Such is the case with the use of capitalization and emoticons/emoji, which are resources that contribute to meaning making and stressing important ideas or statements that one wishes to emphasize (Darics, 2013).

Finally, it is necessary to reiterate that all these features are context-dependent, as context is vital aspect for DHA. In addition, the idea of contextualization must accompany the analysis in all stages, as the analytical focus depends on the immediate context (Wodak, 2012).

Ethical Considerations

Regarding ethical considerations related to the present study, it is possible to affirm that it does not raise any direct ethical concerns, neither in relation to the author nor to third party individuals. All data analysed consisted of legally collected content from Twitter, it being freely accessible once the tweet is posted on the platform. The study poses no harm to any individual, as it doesn’t deal with sensitive or private information capable of affecting anyone’s dignity or safety.

5. Analysis

The primary aim of this study is to understand Bolsonaro’s communication via Twitter during his first year as president, by investigating the main discursive strategies used by the president on the platform and what populist characteristics are found in it. The analysis is based on the Discourse-Historical Approach, the guidelines and concepts of which are followed and applied in the analysis process. Argumentative and discursive strategies, as well as linguistic means are used to uncover the details embedded in Bolsonaro’s tweets. These strategies provide a deep understanding of the meanings and what his communication entails in relation to arguments, critiques, provocation, attacks, and other aspects explored with the help of the tools offered by DHA. Explanations regarding the context and historical aspects linked to the content of tweets are provided and related to the three different periods during which the tweets were posted.

The analysis outline is structured by the different discursive strategies. Examples of topoi are provided in the first section of the analysis followed by the other discursive strategies used. The linguistic means are presented along the analysis depending on the particular example and its relevance in terms of linguistic features.

Including every tweet that was analysed, 110 in total, would not have been possible within the limited framework of this study. This chapter contains 34 tweets selected from the sampled dataset to illustrate Bolsonaro’s Twitter communication and the aspects that relate to populist characteristics in it. Their function is only to exemplify Bolsonaro’s communication and give the reader the possibility to understand the points raised in the analysis.

Argumentation schemes – Different types of Topoi

Bolsonaro’s tweets contain claims that put him in a position of a saviour, a figure that is uncorrupted or pure, associated with the idea of a strong leader capable of saving Brazil. The claim that he is, together with his government, capable of taking Brazil out of chaos is frequently used in combination with an idea of comparison with different actors presented in the discourse. In example 1, this idea is explicit due to the fact that Bolsonaro allegedly builds the idea of being against the establishment, represented here as the danger to Brazil, which he claims to be capable of defeating for the fact that he is not a part of it. The change of tense strengthens the claim, since it conveys the idea that in the future “We are going to change Brazil” (Bolsonaro, 2019), because he as president will act as a saviour.

1. The usual Brazil, with its old vices, has led Brazilians to a chaotic situation, with poverty, violence and unemployment. The establishment wants the usual because it does not feel the consequences of its ambitions. We are going to change Brazil because we

are not part of the establishment! (Bolsonaro, 2019)3

In this same context, his image as a saviour goes beyond only representing a defender against the dangers posed by the establishment. Bolsonaro very frequently uses the argument that during his time as president the numbers related to criminality, a serious and constantly debated problem in Brazil, had dropped. In the tweet presented in example 2, Bolsonaro does not directly relate the decrease to his government by making it explicit in writing, however, the idea is implied in the way he phrases the tweet, emphasizing the time period related to the decrease presented by the official data, as well as a comparison made with the previous year when he was not in office. This scenario can be further understood form the perspective that the populist leader must keep away from being perceived as part of the elite, that is, from being perceived as part of the establishment, which according to Urbinati (2019), represents the populist antiestablishmentarianism. That includes presenting themselves in favour of anti- intellectualism, realized in the use of quotes to refer to experts.

2. Official data from the federal states confirm a 24% drop in homicides in Brazil in the first quarter of this year compared to the same period in 2018. “Experts” will say that the drop is not related to our actions, but if the number had increased, certainly would blame the government. (Bolsonaro, 2019)

The ideas presented in these two examples can be related to the notion of extraordinariness presented by (Moffitt, 2016) where Bolsonaro pictures himself as an option contrary to the danger establishment represents, as well as an efficient leader who can defeat criminality and violence successfully.

A tendency to present himself as a charismatic leader who constantly emphasizes the fact that the people trusted him the position of president can be observe in Bolsonaro’s tweets. In this context, Bolsonaro employs a language where he shows gratitude and associates his statements with strong religious aspects, which appeals directly to many of his voters, consisting of a great number of Christians. In examples 3 and 4 such ideas are clear. Example 4 is particularly

3 All tweets and additional media linked to them were translated from Portuguese to English by the author.

interesting for the fact that capitalization is utilized in order to emphasize that he is a Christian, even though the state is secular. He acknowledges the secularity of the country but puts emphasis in his argument by identifying himself within the Christian segment of the population.

3. Thank you to God, always above everything and everyone, thank you people who entrusted this mandate to me, people I owe loyalty, respect and GRATITUDE! (Bolsonaro, 2019) 4. From the John 8:32 series (2) CAN THE PRESIDENT MIX POLITICS WITH RELIGION? - "The State is secular, YES. But the President of the Republic is CHRISTIAN, as are approximately 90% of the Brazilian people." - Romans 8:31, if God is for us, who can be against us? (Bolsonaro, 2019)

An interesting feature present in examples above is the emphasis marked by capitalization of words. Such tool functions as a way of expressing ideas the president wishes to reinforce in his discourse. Such is the case in other examples such as tweet 23 and 26, where Bolsonaro writes specific terms or full sentences in capital letters to emphasize national and religious symbols, evoke the people, attack the media and other enemies. As well as capitalization, Bolsonaro uses exclamation marks in different statements, which also works as a toll to further reinforce his messages.

As well as the idea of extraordinariness, Bolsonaro’s tweets can be associated to its opposed idea of ordinariness, which helps understanding this scenario. Bolsonaro claims to be a part of the people, a simple man, a Christian like his voters, while his image is also associated with a mythical figure. As Moffitt (2016) argues, populists maintain this contradictory game between extraordinary and ordinary, to both show their proximity to the people, in Bolsonaro’s case the good people, but also to show an image of extraordinary leader rising above the people as a great representative.

The idea of Bolsonaro representing an extraordinary leader is also visible in the way he manages to use symbolic aspects in his discourse. In the tweet 5, the notion that he has a mission is associated with the frequently cited biblical passage by John, and a picture where the president is smiling/laughing next to a picture displaying Jesus Christ and his disciples. It explicitly shows Bolsonaro in a positive way, linked to a Christian symbol that appeals to his audience.

5. “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” John 8:32. I carry this message always ahead of our mission. Good morning everyone! https://t.co/oHcCk2k1UL (Bolsonaro, 2019)

Figure 2 - Symbolic aspect posted by Bolsonaro linked to example 5

Bolsonaro, J. 2019, May 21. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1130797095122853888

The topos of numbers can also be observed in the tweets. In example 2, for instance, Bolsonaro’s claim that his government’s actions are effective and work in a positive way is endorsed with the official data he presents in the tweet. The use of such discursive strategy is legitimized by the support of the numbers presented, implying that the idea cannot be contested. The same strategy relates to the way he presents aspects of the economy, a topic as important as the topic of criminality in example 2, also employing a sort of comparison with previous governments. In example 6 he uses specific terms and language from economics to illustrate how the country’s economy has improved under his government, presenting a positive side of problems related to the recession the country has been recovering from, attributing the good results to himself. In example 7 the same strategy is employed, as can be seen in the video linked to the tweet, which brings a detailed explanation of the minister of education clarifying the need for expenditure restraint. The minister presents arguments based on universities’ budget in order to construct his claim and defend the measures by the government. What is interesting in the tweet is Bolsonaro’s emphasis on the idea of fake news, using a hashtag (#)

to associate the news reports on the topic with false information, creating a scenario where the explanation of his minister, supported by the numbers presented, is convincing to support the measures the government decided to take.

6. Risco Brasil4 reaches its lowest level since 2013, controlled inflation, Selic5 at a historic low and confident investor. Employability grows and crime decreases. In just 10 months of government we are changing Brazil for the better! (Bolsonaro, 2019) 7. The Minister of Education, Professor @AbrahamWeint, explains the difference between “cut” and “expenditure restraint” and denies #fakenews about universities’ budget. https://t.co/EWMseiGHjW (Bolsonaro, 2019)

Transcript tweet 7:

Abraham Weintraub (Minister of Education): Do you want to understand why it is 3,5% and not 30% as some newspapers are spreading about the expenditure restraints, which is 3,5% or cut of 30%. I’m going to explain it to you. Imagine that a university has a budget of approximately 100 million a year. In general, they have 85 million allocated to employees’ payroll. The 85 million is guaranteed, including other expected expenditures, so from that amount we are not touching a penny. As well as that, there is also the support to the students, the financial support which is also going to be preserved. Let’s presuppose that it is 3% or 3 million that we allocate to this type of expense, we have left 12 million to the dean to spend as he wishes. The Ministry of Education and Culture (MEC), in this case, had to restrain all 3,5% or 3 and a half million for this particular University. This applied, in a general way, for everything, but we tried to preserve all the areas we think there is no way to make a cut. What the media and other people that maliciously says is that 3,5 million over 12 million will be 30%, some even say it will be 40% or 50%, but the truth about the universities’ budget, we are asking to hold, restrain and postpone until September only 3,5%. This is the truth and the numbers are available. I ask you, you in your house, your family: did you ever experience a period when you had to postpone buying something, taking a decision for a few months, that’s what we are asking.

4 Risco Brasil is an economic indicator that determines the degree of economic instability in the country. 5 Selic, abbreviation for Sistema Especial de Liquidação e de Custódia, is the basic interest tax defined by the Brazilian government.

It is also possible to understand in this example how Bolsonaro uses the online platform to create a line of communication that establishes an idea of closeness, intimacy, direct accountability and representation (Moffitt, 2016), where the leader address the people directly, even to share information that would be expected from official governmental channels of communication, establishing a direct link between the leader and the people, without the need of the media. As well as that, the language is very simplified, showing his ordinariness, his ability to speak in a way the people understand.

Bolsonaro presents himself and his government as problem solvers to the country’s problems also when it comes to expenditures. The strategy of topos of finance can be identified in different tweets regarding different situations in which Bolsonaro creates scenarios implying that large amounts of money are spent unnecessarily, therefore the government must act in order to diminish or mitigate such expenditures. Example 8 illustrates how Bolsonaro criticizes the fact that a large amount of money, that accounts for compensations and pensions, is paid by the federal government to individuals and relatives of victims persecuted or killed during the military dictatorship. He presents the large amount spent for such compensations and pensions associating the cost with the money paid by ordinary people, praising them as hardworking and orderly, while at the same time addressing those who receive the money with doubt, by mentioning them as “so-called” persecuted and “self-entitled” democracy defenders.

Here the idea of dichotomic division advocated by Laclau (2007) becomes visible. The negative way in which Bolsonaro presents those who receive the money creates a direct antagonistic situation in relation to the good people, to whom Bolsonaro refers to as orderly and hardworking, creating the idea of division necessary for the populist discourse.

In example 9, which is directly related to example 8, Bolsonaro explicitly employs the word “stolen”, which gives a negative connotation to the money being spent in such way. In this same message, the president explicitly mentions the Worker’s Party, attributing to them the blame for this expenditure, presupposing it was in order to consolidate their supposed project of power.

8. To date, the Union has spent R $ 9.9 billion on compensations and pensions paid to “political” amnestied. Hard-earned money, from the orderly and hardworking people, paid to 39,370 so-called persecuted and self-entitled democracy defenders. (Bolsonaro, 2019)

9. Never in the world has a country been stolen as Brazil was during the PT era (2003 to 2016) by a project of power and enrichment. (Bolsonaro, 2019)

The same idea can be observed in example 10, where Bolsonaro explicitly states that the amount paid to Cuban medical doctors working in Brazil through an agreement established with Cuba during PT’s government, would be reverted to investments in the health program created by his government, instead of continuing the existent agreement with Cuba. Bolsonaro’s tweet is an answer to the Cuban president Miguel Díaz-Canel and posted as a screenshot together with the message from the same tweet.

10. The Cuban dictator received R$ 1 billion a year from Brazil, for the work of 10,000

health “professionals”, who lived here in conditions similar to slavery. The mamata6 is over, now these resources will be used for our Health in the program MÉDICOS PELO

BRASIL7. https://t.co/3j8cFIeyy1 (Bolsonaro, 2019)

Figure 3 - Screenshot from an online news piece in example 10

Bolsonaro, J. 2019, August 04. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1157791738234363904

6 Mamata: taking advantage of or being benefited from something without effort. 7 Médicos pelo Brasil is a program created in 2019 by the federal government to recruit doctors. It replaced the previous program called Mais Médicos, created by the Worker’s Party (PT) in 2013.

Translation tweet 10

Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel accused the colleague Jair Bolsonaro of lying about the island’s medical programs and criticized what he called submission of the Brazilian president to the North American government and ally, Donald Trump.

“President Bolsonaro lies again. Shameful his submission to the United States”, published the Cuban ruler on Twitter. “Your vulgar slanders against Cuba and the Mais Médicos program will never be able to deceive the Brazilian people, who knows very well the nobility and humanity of Cuban medical cooperation”, said the Cuban ruler.

In Bolsonaro’s tweet, the use of the word dictator to address the Cuban regime functions as a way to disqualify his opponent. In the same way, he uses quotes to refer to the medical doctors, “professionals”, creating the idea of doubt in relation to their skills. Also, the use of the word mamata, which can be understood as a situation where someone is taking advantage of or being benefited from something without effort, is employed in this tweet representing the end of a situation where a large amount of money was being paid to Cuban authorities in exchange of the doctors’ work, which he claims, without any evidence, to be almost like slavery. Bolsonaro implies that the situation is to come to an end, and thanks to his action and efficiency, the reallocation of that money will benefit the country’s health system.

In his discourse Bolsonaro employs aspects that can be understood as the strategy of the topos of history. In the sequence of tweets below (11, 12 and 13) he discusses the effects of the past governments, putting emphasis on the current situation of the country, which is of economic instability, as consequence of what he calls a socialist, populist and corrupt government, referring to the Workers’ Party. At the same time, he affirms that his government is not to make the same mistakes, since history has shown the consequences and the struggles can still be felt, leading his government to perform in a different way.

As well as that, the tweets show the shifting of responsibility of the current situation to the previous government, emphasizing the actions taken towards reverting the evil inheritance PT has left. The use of negative adjectives to qualify the previous government shows how he tries to construct a victim-perpetrator scenario, where he is presented as the one carrying the burden of changing the country with scarce resources.

11. There are only two ways to avoid expenditure restraint: either printing money and generating inflation or by committing a crime of fiscal responsibility. Whoever pretends not to understand this logic acts like a vulture, anxiously waiting for Brazil to fail. (Bolsonaro, 2019) 12. We have been working to contain these actions, necessary due to the inheritance of destruction caused by the PT's mismanagement, and to keep, as far as possible, the allocation of resources to essential areas, even with little money, but there is a reality and we cannot extrapolate it. (Bolsonaro, 2019) 13. Our present situation shows how serious the consequences of a socialist, populist and completely corrupt government are. There is no responsibility with the future of Brazil, but only for its ideological purposes. The bill always arrives, and the effects are felt for years. (Bolsonaro, 2019)

Bolsonaro constantly makes use of affective strategies (Maldonado, 2017) in order to channel people’s anger and frustration towards those actors characterized as guilty for the current situation, using arguments which invoke the mistakes made by previous governments and linking those actors with an idea of irresponsibility with the future. As well as that, linking the Workers’ Party and the political left with socialism, communism, populism and corruption is another aspect observable in Bolsonaro’s tweets, which strengthens an idea of fear and legitimizes the dichotomic division into the good people, the legitimate populus (Laclau, 2007).

The idea of the topos of reality is also present in Bolsonaro’s tweets. The strategy can be observed where Bolsonaro states that no alternative exists other than expenditure restraint related to the investments in education. In his argument the reality cannot be different, therefore the action must be taken. Example 14 presents an idea where Bolsonaro emphasizes that, due to the shortage of resources, the decision of expenditure restraint was taken. As well as the idea in written form, in the video linked to the tweet Bolsonaro repeats the same idea of how the reality is, the supposed shortage of resources, stating emphatically that “there is no money” and therefore the actions his government has decided to take are justified.

14. Due to lack of resources, expenditure restraint is adopted. All governments have already

done this, including in Education. Here in the United States, a journalist from Folha8 was unaware of the difference between cut and contingency. We explain. Watch: https://t.co/Lz6WoAuecX (Bolsonaro, 2019)

The video linked to the tweet is important in different aspects. A clear example of Bolsonaro’s performance style can be observed.

Transcript tweet 14:

Journalist (Folha de Sao Paulo): President, president, you said there is no Brazilian university among the 250 best universities in the world, is it by cutting investment that any Brazilian university will become… Jair Bolsonaro: [interrupts journalist] the cut of investment, you must understand, is nobody’s evil, there’s not money! The expenditure restraint, which is the correct expression, when a small percentage in the expenses… Journalist (from a different newspaper): Expenditure restraint is the same as cut, president! Member of government (specialists): Expenditure restraint is the suspension of expenses for a period until the revenue… Jair Bolsonaro: [interrupts the specialist]: Are you from Folha? Journalist (Folha de São Paulo): Yes, from Folha! Jair Bolsonaro: Did you learn? First, you journalists from Folha de São Paulo must go back to university, to a good university, in order to learn how to make good journalism. That’s what Folha must do, instead of hiring anyone to be a journalist, asking bullshit and publishing disgusting things [audience cheering]. I have all respect for you, go on, do you want to debate budget with me, go on… Journalist (Folha de São Paulo): No, I don’t want to debate, I want to know which areas you are prioritizing? Jair Bolsonaro: All the areas are fundamental; science and technology are as important as education. We must invest in knowledge, otherwise once our commodities are over, how are we going to live.

8 Folha de São Paulo is a Brazilian daily newspaper, one of the most circulated and influential in the country.

By answering in an aggressive and impolite way to the question asked by a journalist from Folha de São Paulo, Bolsonaro shows the aspects of populist style in his performance, creating a situation in which he attacks the media, one of the scapegoats used by him in different contexts, but also perform in a way which goes against the behaviour expected from a president. The idea of bad manners (Moffitt, 2016) applies perfectly to this specific case, for the fact that Bolsonaro’s politically incorrect behaviour, a common aspect in populist discourse, can easily be identified in his treatment and tone of voice towards the journalist in the occasion. The video clearly depicts him as annoyed by being confronted, answering in a rude and angry way, in order to demoralize and diminish the journalist and, through this performance, appeal to the audience’s support and present himself as a powerful figure.

Moving on to the idea of the topos of people, such strategy is found in the president’s discourse where he points to the people’s engagement to explain the demonstrations which took place in May 2019 and were major demonstrations against decisions by his government, specifically the cuts in investment in Education. His strategy in tweets 15 and 16 show an image of a leader that follows the voice of the masses, constituted by the people that now have a powerful voice. The construction of his statement gives the idea that before people’s voice did not have the same importance. The fact that the people are refusing a decision, justifies the action by the government, and such idea is used by Bolsonaro to show his submission to the people and to justify his performance.

15. As for the acts of the 26th, I see it as a spontaneous manifestation of the population, which in an unprecedented way has been the main voice for the political decisions that Brazil must take. (Bolsonaro, 2019) 16. When would we imagine an expressive demonstration in favour of reforms considered unpopular? The population was extremely conscious. The peculiarity of this event makes any attempt to minimize it unjustifiable. (Bolsonaro, 2019)

In this context, what becomes obvious is the idea of the populist leader creating a scenario of direct representation (Moffitt, 2015) where the idea of glorification of the people takes place, and the leader represents an ordinary servant that must listen to the will of its people. The same is observable in tweet 17 that is related to the pension reform.

17. The pension reform is the gateway to Brazil's progress. It is with its approval that several other beneficial economic actions for the country are feasible, such as the Tax Reform, which we intend to present soon after, understanding that it is an urgent desire of Brazilians. (Bolsonaro, 2019)

It becomes clear that a social demand exists, as suggested by Laclau (2007), and such demand must be fulfilled, as it is associated with an idea of necessity, an action that will benefit the people. In this particular example, Bolsonaro takes the mission of approving reforms to himself, arguing that this is an urgent desire by the Brazilian people, a demand strongly associated with the idea of progress that has not been fulfilled until then, but that he intends to fulfil.

In Bolsonaro’s tweets, it is also possible to observe examples of the topos of advantage or usefulness. The president disseminates ideas such as the one presented in example 18 in which he associates the approval of the pension reform, which according to him will make the country regain the confidence by investors, with Brazil’s capacity to evolve. Therefore, the reform must be approved as an action that will be useful in order to improve the country. Bolsonaro presents it as a necessary measure, with a positive outcome, although the impacts of such reform can be negative for society, particularly workers.

18. We need to approve the pension reform without many changes so that the market gains confidence in Brazil and we can evolve more and more. (Bolsonaro, 2019)

In this context an important aspect to look at is the use of different pronouns. In different examples, the first-person singular pronoun “I” is employed, usually to express a level of sincerity towards a situation or actor, expressing his own opinion or giving a suggestion. At the same time, Bolsonaro makes use of pronouns “we” and “our”, which functions to make explicit and to strengthen the idea of us versus them and includes the figure of the leader as part of the people, as has been presented in different examples. This tool is useful when it comes to establishing the dichotomic division (Laclau, 2007) populists rely on, in the way it defines who we are in opposition to who or what we are not.

Ideas of threat and danger are also employed in Bolsonaro’s tweets. Example 19 shows the case of Movimento dos Trabalhadores Sem Terra (MST), a social movement based on Marxist ideas and which fights for land reform and access for rural workers. In the tweet, Bolsonaro states that under his government the number of invasions by the group decreased significantly.

Additionally, the president states that the actions taken by the current government, through cutting of resources, have led to a fall in the terror attacks by the movement, to which he refers to as “parasites”, an analogy of the social movement which functions as a tool to represent the other as a dangerous threat, strengthening the idea of dichotomic division (Laclau, 2007).

19. From 56 in 2016, the number of land invasions by the MST9 fell to just 1 in 2019. The current government's position, as well as the cut in resources for these parasites, influenced the significant reduction of these terrorist acts. (Bolsonaro, 2019)

The idea of threat can be further developed and understood in example 20, where the president points to the danger posed by the return of the political left to power in Argentina, comparing the situation of the state of Roraima, which has a border with Venezuela and is the main point of access to Brazil for Venezuelans seeking refuge in the Northern part of the country. The situation in Roraima has been difficult due to the high number of Venezuelans entering the country and the lack of structure to receive them. Bolsonaro sates that the same situation can become a reality in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, which shares a border with Argentina in the most southern part of Brazil. Such scenario is only a hypothetical one, however, it shows the way Bolsonaro tries to build a situation of fear associating chaos and social disorder to left wing governments.

20. The state of Rio Grande do Sul runs the risk, due to the return of the left in Argentina, of going through the same suffering as Roraima in relation to Venezuela. (Bolsonaro, 2019)

Another example of danger is associated with the idea that Brazil is under threat regarding its control over the Amazon rainforest. During the crisis generated due to the wildfires in the region, Bolsonaro adopted a tone which emphasized the idea of Brazilian sovereignty being attacked. In example 21, the idea that Brazil has been looted for the last 22 years associated with the video linked to the post, presents information and statements that create a scenario of conspiracy. By associating foreign countries with interest in the valuable resources in the region, the video promotes the idea of danger and a strong idea of conspiracy embedded in it, presenting ideas without any proof, using features such as dramatic music and audio effects associated with images and exaggerated statements to create a setting of imminent danger.

9 Movimento dos Trabalhadores Sem Terra

21. In the last 22 years (1995 to 2016) Brazil was looted and made a dwarf in its international relations. Enéas Carneiro, Army Sergeant and doctor, gives us the certainty of the urgency to worry about the rich and coveted Amazon. https://t.co/AInqHtMb7H (Bolsonaro, 2019)

Transcript tweet 21:

If you look to the extension of Brazilian forests you can understand why there exists so much concern overseas in favour of the Amazon. It is not a concern for the good of the Amazon, but for the resources it has. In fact, the USA, England, Germany have zero concern with the native indigenous people, this is idle talk, lies, a talk to alienated people, for people with cerebral hypoxia. The concern is not with the native indigenous people, otherwise they would be concerned with our children starving on the streets, they would be concerned with child prostitution, they would be concerned with a massive number of people who don’t have access to anything. This is not the problem. The problem is that, for example, the Yanomami region, not in the surface, but underground lies immensurable riches. The problem is that in the Amazon rainforest lies the future of the whole planet, is from there that will come the energy to move the world, that’s what is hidden behind the ecological concern. This is the cruel truth. Our Amazon occupies half of the national territory. Forest, rivers, energetic potential, underground riches, all in the Amazon is gigantic. The Amazon makes us the richest country on earth, and this is the reason why the idea of internationalization of the Amazon is so discussed outside Brazil. We must put an end to this farce, lets defend what is ours, lets protect the Amazon from the aliens, blocking the access to it in order to stop the invasion to its riches. Let’s equip, train and praise our military forces so they can go back to protecting the national territory. We must develop strategic policies that demand the respect of Brazilian national sovereignty. Brazil has nothing to fear.

This example illustrates the idea argued by Dal Lago (2017) that the populist communication on Twitter is intended to influence their followers, and this influence happens through employing communicative strategies that consist of contradictory statements. Bolsonaro makes use of such strategy by supporting his statements on speculations in order to disseminate the idea of threat, using false information, sensationalism and vulgarity, always appealing to conspiracies and words that help to convey fear and anger in order to justify his arguments.

The idea of the topos of burden or weighing down can also be found in the tweets, being found explicitly in the way Bolsonaro deals with the newspaper Folha de São Paulo. Criticism against the newspaper is often associated with the idea of lies or the supposedly untrustworthiness of news published by it. As well as discrediting the newspaper, Bolsonaro explicitly shows his disapproval or disagreement and tries to create a feeling of it being a poor-quality newspaper, a product that he would not buy. The use of the word “jornaleco” in tweet 23 expresses this idea since the term possess the idea of an insignificant, meaningless vehicle of communication, a newspaper without importance, when in fact it is one of the most circulated and influential newspapers in Brazil, as well as one of the most critical to Bolsonaro’s government.

22. Folha asks and I answer: “I don't want to read Folha anymore, that’s it”

The people shout: “me neither, me neither!”

“Any product advertised by Folha de São Paulo; I don't buy that product.” https://t.co/AWpbzOfvRR (Bolsonaro, 2019)

23. Jornaleco10 cannot live without LYING.

I suspended my subscription and many businesspeople have cancelled advertising contracts in this newspaper which is the champion of fake news and misinformation. https://t.co/zdZKzY4NKB (Bolsonaro, 2019)

In these examples, the construction of a strong opposition against the establishment and intermediation, particularly when it comes to professional journalism, becomes clear. In this context, the possibility of direct representation and communication provided by the internet becomes a strong tool for the populist performance (Urbinati, 2019). Another important point in examples 22 and 23 is related to the accusatory tone used by Bolsonaro, implying that the newspaper lies, spreads fake news and disinformation to the public. The video that is linked to tweet 22 is a great example to emphasize this strategy. Bolsonaro explicitly attacks the newspaper by affirming it publishes false information, when in fact it should publish truthful information. At the same time, Bolsonaro suggests people should follow his example by boycotting it.

10 Jornaleco refers to a newspaper of low quality, not respectable or trustworthy.

Transcript tweet 22:

Jair Bolsonaro: I don’t want to read Folha anymore, and that’s it Audience shouts loudly “Me neither! Me neither!” Jair Bolsonaro: I recommend everyone not to buy Folha de São Paulo until they learn that there a biblical passage, John 8:32, the press has the obligation of publishing the truth, that’s all. And the advertisers that advertise, any advertisement made on Folha de São Paulo, I don’t buy the product, that’s it. [Audience cheering] Jair Bolsonaro: I want a free press, independent, but above all that says the truth. Am I asking for too much?

These statements clearly show an attempt to delegitimize and disqualify an opponent, contributing further to the idea of dichotomization of society (Laclau, 2007) as also seen in other examples. But, what can also be observed is the intensification of the idea of spectacle, in the way Bolsonaro makes the situation a moment to deviate the attention away from more relevant problems, creating a performance where his image is presented as an ordinary man that represents the will of the people and listens to them.

In this same context, the picture associated with tweet 23, the headline from an issue of the newspaper, emphasizes the idea that Folha de São Paulo is not a trustworthy source and focus on establishing a scenario of distrust in relation to the news published by the newspaper. The headline is presented by Bolsonaro out of context, omitting essential information based on truthful facts that can be found within the news piece itself.

Figure 4 - Screenshot from the newspaper Folha de São Paulo in example 23

Bolsonaro, J. 2019, November 20. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1197141391157202945

Translation of the figure in tweet 23:

Bolsa Família11 does not have money to pay the Christmas bonus salary promised by Bolsonaro

Construction of Dichotomies, Positive Self-presentation and Negative Other-presentation

One of the main aspects that is attributed to populist discourse is the construction of dichotomies. In the Brazilian case, dichotomies are created by Bolsonaro in his rhetoric and can be found in different examples in his tweets, associating different groups, institutions or individuals.

Example 24 illustrates the construction of a dichotomic scenario against the media, in this case not only attacking one organization in particular, but the whole segment that represents an opposition to him. Bolsonaro puts forward the idea that there exists a good and a bad type of media, the traditional media that manipulates and do not want the best for Brazil, and alternative media channels, which can be a safer and more trustworthy option according to him. This

11 Bolsa Família is a governmental social welfare program of direct transfer of money to households in extreme poverty in Brazil

context is built according to the logic that those channels that deal positively with the actions of the government, by not being critical, can be trusted, while the media actors that are in any level more critical, must be doubted.

24. When there are no problems in the government, most of the media create something to talk about and manipulate. Always inform yourself through alternative media, because unfortunately, many of the usual ones do not want the best for Brazil, only for themselves! (Bolsonaro, 2019)

When it comes to dichotomisation based on there being a good and bad people, two elements are key to understand such strategy. In example 25 Bolsonaro explains that his government is not an authoritarian regime, as opposed to previous governments, implicitly referring to the Worker’s Party, affirming that different to what had been done before, he is following the will of the good, respectful, and law-abiding people. He uses the idea of popular sovereignty to strengthen his argument, implying that the government in the past, an authoritarian one in his view, had not respected popular sovereignty expressed through the 2005 referendum on the prohibition of sale of firearms and ammunition.

25. We are following a path totally opposite to authoritarianism, which always seeks to disarm the population, enforcing the popular sovereignty manifested in the 2005 referendum. We are, above all, serving the good citizen, who follows the laws and respects society (Bolsonaro, 2019).

By emphasizing the figure of ex-president Lula as a criminal in tweet 26, Bolsonaro makes clear the dependency of his image with that of an enemy, consequently, he constantly associates Lula or other political actors, which he knows are necessary to maintain a contrast to his supposedly extraordinariness (Moffitt, 2016).

In the video linked to the tweet, Bolsonaro invokes the idea of good people, including himself as part of this group or segment. This can be understood by the use of the pronoun “we”, when referring to the idea of the good people being the majority in Brazil.

26. We started a few months ago a phase of recovery for Brazil and it is not a quick process, but we are moving forward with facts. Do not give ammunition to the scoundrel, who is for the moment free, but laden with guilt. - BRAZIL ABOVE ALL! - GOD ABOVE ALL! YouTube: https://t.co/ART03PFf5v (Bolsonaro, 2019).

Transcript tweet 26:

Jair Bolsonaro: I keep imagining what goes on in everyone’s mind. The will to get it right, to change the destiny of Brazil. But put it in your head, we, the good people, are the majority in Brazil. [Audience applause] Jair Bolsonaro: No one does anything alone, one must have a team by our side. Trust is above anything. I had the great satisfaction of being elected, and maybe the only who is delivering what promised during the campaign. Started by choosing a good team consisting of 22 ministers to be by my side. One present here right now, Sergio Moro, who I invited after, by the way, the incident at the airport with us, people might remember. That was in order to avoid disturbing the good service made by him, he would not be able to get involved with politicians, he would not be able to be part of a political party as he still isn’t. He was accomplishing his mission. If his mission hadn’t been well accomplished, I would not be here either. [Audience applause] Jair Bolsonaro: So, part of what happens in the Brazilian political scenario, we own to Sergio Moro. If we compare it with a chain, the strongest link in this chain is honesty, and I heard saying here the satisfaction of mission accomplished. Surely, he remembered his time of compulsory military service, when he was a member of the army in Maringá. Thank you, Moro!

The idea of the embodiment of the people (Moffitt, 2016) helps to explain this statement, as Bolsonaro not only represents the people as their leader, but also presents himself as part of them, the figure of the leader whose voice is the voice of the people, of the collective, homogeneous and united body, of which the populist leader includes claims to be true representative. The logic of equivalence (Laclau, 2007) offers further clarification in this case. It is a fact that the idea of a demand not being fully satisfied sets the ground for the populist leader to gather the frustrations from society and channel them to their own benefit. The redirection of frustration does not work in order to find a solution to overcome it, as the logic

of difference would suggest, but on the contrary, the populist leader takes advantage of the frustration and uses it to link a group which finds its equivalence, despite their different demands, having in common a figure to blame for the demands not fulfilled.

Moving on to the idea of positive self-presentation and the negative other-presentation, examples 27 and 28 contain statements with attacks by Bolsonaro towards the French president Emmanuel Macron during the Amazon rainforest wildfire crisis. Bolsonaro presents a scenario in which Macron would be trying to get political benefit from the situation, associating Macron’s concern with the wildfires with sensationalism, as well as implying that the French president used false proof in order to refer to the problem.

27. I am sorry that president Macron has instrumentalized an internal issue in Brazil and other Amazonian countries for public gains. The sensational tone with which he refers to the Amazon (even appealing to fake photos) does nothing to solve the problem (Bolsonaro, 2019)

Example 28 begins with a positive picture of the Brazilian government, presenting an idea of openness for dialogue, mutual respect and truth. The following sentence carries a negative tone towards Macron, associating the leader with an idea of colonialism, constructing a scenario that cannot be accepted or tolerated.

28. The Brazilian Government remains open to dialogue, based on objective data and mutual respect. The French president's suggestion that Amazonian issues be discussed at the G7 without the participation of countries of the region evokes an unreasonable colonialist mentality in the 21st century. (Bolsonaro, 2019)

Shifting of Blame and Demonization of “Others”

When it comes to shifting of blame, such strategy appears in different contexts in Bolsonaro’s tweets. Influenced by the notion of a dichotomic arrangement of society built by a populist, the need to set a victim versus perpetrator becomes necessary in the construction of such scenario. Tweet 29 exemplifies such notion as Bolsonaro explicitly points to the fact that the country’s economy is being repaired by his government, implying that the politicians form an opposition or members of the previous government should not be critical, since they caused the problem which is being solved by him. He explicitly states that the responsibility for the situation

belongs to “them”, the Worker’s Party, and his government is fixing the damage they have done.

29. As said by Paulo Guedes, they were in power for 16 years, ruined our economy and now they want to talk about unemployment and demand growth in 4 months of government, as if they had no responsibility for the current situation in Brazil. We are repairing the damage they have done! (Bolsonaro, 2019)

The same strategy is employed to explain problems in a simplistic way, associating negative events in the economic scenario to specific individuals. In tweet 30, after praising his government and the good results for the economic segment, Bolsonaro uses the fact that Lula came out of prison to justify oscillations in the stock market.

30. The stock market broke yet another record. Confidence in Brazil on the rise and growing! Homework being done and we still have to undo a lot of damage! The oscillations occurred due to the release of corrupt prisoners like Lula. Let's go ahead! (Bolsonaro, 2019)

In order to create a scenario of conspiracy where someone else is to blame, there needs to be an idea of the other, whose image must be transformed negatively through the spread of lies and rumours, in order to demonize such actors. Such idea is present in Bolsonaro’s statements in the way he denounces other political actors and institutions. A first example of such strategy can be observed in tweet 19, where he makes use of the topos of threat or danger associated with the social movement MST. Through the association of the movement with terrorist practices and by addressing them as parasites, Bolsonaro establishes a dramatized scenario where the exaggeration in his tone raises the idea of a dangerous and harmful group.

Example 31 shows how Bolsonaro uses such strategy in different contexts. The use of a scenario of conspiracy makes it possible to construct such an idea against other leaders. The idea expressed in the tweet is that there exists an interest regarding the Amazon region by richer nations, and such interest infringes Brazilian sovereignty over the region. The video linked to the tweet is a clear construction of such strategy in the way if depicts the German chancellor Angela Merkel after Germany declares the cut of a fund of millions of dollars which was used in the protection of the Amazon forest and against deforestation in the region.

31. After the G-20, if I had demarcated a few more dozen Indigenous Areas and imposed heavy fines on rural producers, the world would not be falsely accusing me of destroying the Amazon. The region's sovereignty and its wealth is what is really at stake. https://t.co/Y4pdP2SbpD (Bolsonaro, 2019)

Transcript tweet 31:

AFP news report: Germany will suspend the subsides which are part of projects for protection of the Amazon rainforest: The German minster of environment, Svenja Schulze, justified the decision to a German newspaper. To Schulze, the policies of the Brazilian government for the Amazon in doubtful in relation to the continuation of a sustainable reduction of deforestation. The first stage consists of blocking a subsidy of 35 million euros for preserving the forest and Brazilian biodiversity until the number is positive again. Jair Bolsonaro: I would like to send a message to dear Angela Merkel that suspended 80 million dollars to the Amazon: take the money and reforest Germany, ok, there they need it much more than here.

Example 32 expresses the same idea as example 31 but towards non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Bolsonaro creates a conspiracy scenario in which the organizations are portrayed as responsible for causing the fires in the Amazon rainforest, leading to the crisis. Although not directly associating the NGOs to the event, Bolsonaro presents the information implying that the organizations could be to blame. The video linked to the tweets corroborates such idea. The content of the video, a news report from a TV channel, does not point to the NGOs as responsible, only presents the fact that members of one specific NGO had been arrested for being suspected of involvement in the fires, nothing being proved until that point. Nonetheless, Bolsonaro uses the video as a way to construct a scenario of doubt, associating the NGOs to the crime, creating a scenario of conspiracy and antagonism for his own benefit.

32. In October I suggested that many fires could be linked to NGOs. Now the Pará police arrest some suspects for the crime. https://t.co/AT2SoBgNJV (Bolsonaro, 2019)

Transcript tweet 32:

Band TV news report: A police operation in the state of Pará arrested four brigadiers suspect to be involved in the fires that hit Alter do Chao in Santarem in September. The prisoners are brigadiers from NGO’s associated with the project Saúde e Alegria, a well- known organization for its projects in the Amazon. Investigations were also carried in the NGO’s office. According to the police’s report, the organization had signed a contract with the international organization WWF to sell images of the fires for R$ 70.000. According to the police, the propagation of the images touched the actor Leonardo DiCaprio who donated $500.000 dollars to fight the fires in the region. From the amount. $300.000 dollars went to brigadiers, who had faked invoices after receiving the money. The fires in Alter do Chao lasted four day until it was extinguished by brigadiers and the fire brigade. The location is one of the main tourist destinations in the state of Pará, by the Tapajos river. According to the federal public ministry, it is possible that the fire could have originated from an environmental preservation area which has been attacked by squatters. The area had already been illegally occupied before for the construction of a private allotment. The NGO Brigada de Alter do Chao affirmed that the innocence of the members will be proved. The members arrested in this operation had been interrogated by the police and helped with the investigations. The coordinator of the project Saúde e Alegria affirm that were taken by surprise…

Calculated Ambivalence and Provocation

Examples of calculated ambivalence and provocation are also present in Bolsonaro’s tweets. To illustrate the use of such ideas, tweets 33 and 34 are good examples. The tweets are also related to the crisis concerning the wildfires in the Amazon rainforest, which led to the already mentioned attacks against the French president, Emmanuel Macron. The event was marked by different scandals, where the Brazilian president and ministers of his government disrespectfully addressed and made offensive comments regarding Macron and his wife, Brigitte Macron. These events generated heated debates in the media, attracting the public’s attention to the matter, a common characteristic related to the idea of the discursive strategy being dealt here. Bolsonaro often manages to set the agenda for his own advantage, creating scandals through controversial statements and actions, always in a calculated way, finding excuses when necessary in order to get away with blame or responsibility, always expecting to benefit from such moves.

33. We cannot accept that a president, Macron, makes unreasonable attacks on the Amazon, nor that he disguises his intentions behind the idea of an “alliance” of the G-7 countries to “save” the Amazon, as if we were a colony or a no man's land. (Bolsonaro, 2019) 34. Other heads of State were in solidarity with Brazil, after all, respect for the sovereignty of any country is the least that can be expected in a civilized world. (Bolsonaro, 2019)

Bolsonaro repeatedly tries to create the impression that Macron’s intention was to attack Brazil’s sovereignty. He creates a situation in which the image of the French leader is used to raise anger and hate, using falsehood and victimization in order to support his arguments, denying his government’s irresponsibility towards the environment. Tweet 34 shows how Bolsonaro uses provocation in his discourse in order to increase the sense of conspiracy and distrust against Macron. Implied in the tweet is the idea that some governments are civilized and respect the sovereignty of other counties, while others are the opposite.

These examples are evidence of the political incorrectness, common in the populist performance (Moffitt, 2016), and that can be understood in the way Bolsonaro does not follow expected rules and protocols, often supporting his ideas by false assumptions and rumours, or based on ideas of conspiracy and sabotage.

6. Discussion and Conclusion

The aim of this study is to explore Bolsonaro’s communication on Twitter and to shed light on the strategies and populist characteristics present in his tweets. From the findings uncovered by the analysis, it is possible to affirm that Bolsonaro’s tweets present interesting and important points, which are in consonance with the main aspects attributed to populist communication, not only in the offline world, but also in the online context, confirming the ideas provided by the literature on populism. The following discussion establishes connections and relations between the analysis and the theories related to the topic of this study. As well as that, the analyst’s position and critique, important aspects for Discourse-Historical Approach, will be presented and supported by the results of the analysis and guided by the theories.

At this point, it is useful to clarify the contribution this study wishes to make to research related to populism and social media. It can be argued that an understanding of the current populist phenomenon and its relationship with social media platforms have taken a new dimension in relation to how they stand within the political realm, that is, they have gained central attention in political processes, and this reality is applicable to the Brazilian political context. Therefore, understanding how populist communication takes place, its specificities and problematic aspects, becomes necessary. This study points to the main characteristics found in Bolsonaro’s tweets as a way to map the main strategies utilized. Being familiar with the essence of populist communication online and interpreting the deeper meanings and intentions embedded in the tweets is a way to avoid normalizing a type of behaviour that is gaining power and can represent a threat to democratic values and practices.

Therefore, the following discussion takes into consideration the main points uncovered in the analysis, exploring the characteristics identified in the populist communication in the Brazilian political context, emphasizing the relevant points found in the analysis. Also, the discussion describes the problematic aspects of the characteristics and strategies uncovered, emphasizing the relevance of such aspects to the general understanding of populist communication in a context other than the European and North American, showing the reality of a country in the global south where populist ideas are currently part of the political reality.

General Findings

The points presented in this section contribute to the understanding of the big picture of populist communication in a general manner, giving an overview of the basic characteristics identified in the analysis carried out in the present study. It is possible to affirm that the populist communication in the Brazilian context, represented by Bolsonaro, follows the main aspects that also constitute populist communication in other political contexts. The role of social media is central and highly relevant. In sum, this study adds to the discussion on populism and populist communication, extending the understanding of this problem to a political context not central to the discussion, emphasizing the aspects that constitute what populism is and how it presents itself in the Brazilian political reality.

In general, it can be said that this study demonstrates how populist communication is marked by the use of language that is simple and direct in order to spread ideas and opinions to the audience. The tweets analysed present polarizing characteristics, which is a common and strong aspects of populist discourse, as exposed by the literature presented in the theory section (Laclau, 2007; Moffitt, 2016; Urbinati, 2019). To create a scenario of polarization, the use of analogies in the communication via Twitter is employed. For instance, the way the social movement MST is presented as a parasite, clearly shows an attempt to animalise the movement and associate it with something negative, a harmful organism threatening Brazil. It is important to understand that, historically, MST is a movement closely related to the political left, marginalized and criminalized by the elites. The social movement serves as a scapegoat, which can be connected to problems and used to intensify ideas of hate, fear and frustration.

Comparisons can also be found in the tweets, in particular in the way different tenses are applied in order to compare the past and the present, and how sentences in the future tense are used in an attempt to emphasize the qualities and achievements of the populist leader, always relying on comparative aspects in order to make claims stronger. This shows the populist dependency on creating poles and intensifying differences, which places the populist communication in the Brazilian context in close relation to the common characteristics of populism in other political contexts, as such practice is widely adopted by populists (Wodak, 2015).

Implicit connections were also identified. Such is the case where NGO’s are blamed for the fires in the Amazon rainforest. The association of NGO’s with the idea of evil and wrongdoing

serves the need to create enemies, scandals, the element of doubt, and the feeling of conspiracy. The same pattern can be seen in examples referring to Lula’s release from prison, implying that the former president is a threat, a criminal, corrupt or to blame for economic oscillations. What is made clear in this point is the way the populist response to problems is to revert the situation, usually using different strategies in order to transfer the blame and responsibility to other actors, creating unrealistic scenarios and new scandals to cover the ones that were not beneficial to the populist leader.

Linked to this is the idea of denial that populists often employ in their discourse. As Wodak (2015) points out, populists make affirmations, spread false information, offend minorities and others, create scandals and crises, or smoke screens in order to deviate attention. The result of such strategies is usually to deny these actions or play the victim in order to create a scenario of sabotage, only apologizing in very few occasions. It goes without saying that this aspect is a reality in the Brazilian case. This is an important characteristic demonstrated in the analysis, which shows how populist communication in Brazil is aligned with ideas that focus on destabilizing the political scenario with scandals and lies.

An important aspect observed in the analysis and relevant to explain populism in the Brazilian context is how ideological elements are embedded in the strategies employed by populist actors, noticeable in the appeal to ideas of conspiracy and fear. For instance, the association of Cuba with the idea of threat, as a communist power with a close relationship with former president Lula and the Worker’s Party (PT), has always been an argument used in an attempt to recreate an ideological discourse. The notion of a communist threat is still indirectly present, in particular in the way the political left is depicted as a threat, conspiring against Brazil’s freedom and liberal ideas. These characteristics show a disconnection with reality and the reliance on ideas that help gaining the trust of a group through the frustration and fear disseminated and is a strong characteristic that is found specifically in the Brazilian political reality.

Polarization and Other Tools

While the aspects of the populist communication identified in Bolsonaro’s tweets reveal general patterns that allow an understanding of how populism presents itself in the Brazilian context, some aspects must be discussed in more detail due to their relevance and centrality in populist communication worldwide.

One point that became clear from the analysis is how Bolsonaro as a populist leader manages to bring together the different social demands from distinct groups and establish the figure of saviour that can solve problems. These demands are brought together as a point of equivalence, against an actor or actors defined by the leader (Laclau, 2007). In this scenario, the tendency to create a division is noticed, which brings the discussion closer to the idea of polarization, using strategies that create an idea of exclusion and a barrier between segments of society. Addressing this point in this study focuses the attention into one of the most relevant aspects in populism and one that has been a reality in the Brazilian context. The political polarization, which was already strong before Bolsonaro’s election, was intensified and the tools that contribute to this intensification can be associated with the strategies and arguments that constitute the communication in the populist wave the Brazilian political context finds itself.

The study demonstrates how populist communication is dependent on the use polarization in different contexts and with different actors, in order to construct a division within society. This aspect in the Brazilian case can be seen in the demonization of the image of the political left, social movements, the media, and other political actors or individuals that oppose or that express any sign of criticism towards the government. Although the division is symbolic, reality shows that it is capable of creating a strong polarization in society.

A clear aspect indicated by the study is how populist communication, online and offline, managed to gather the groups in society whose demands had not been addressed, the plebs, and transformed them into the populus. Considering the Brazilian context, this strategic move was only possible thanks to the delegitimization of the elites and enemies, which created the perfect condition for a figure such as Bolsonaro to gather the dissatisfaction of the groups and transform it into a powerful unity that converges in himself, a figure that will address the demands, save Brazil from left wing corrupts and bring the country to prosperity again.

In this context, Bolsonarismo becomes a central idea where the power and strength of the populist leader is represented in the populist regime (Urbinati, 2019). It also relates to the notion of empty signifiers (Laclau, 2007) in the way he becomes the representation of the fusion of demands, linked by the frustration and anger that finds singularity in the populist leader’s figure. The president manages to associate himself as a leader that homogenizes the different demands and is the voice of the good people. This power is seen in his tweets, particularly in

how he takes the role of a redemptive actor that can solve the many problems the country faces. Through his close connection with the people, which is reflected in the tweets, he puts forward the idea of representation, be it in his word choices or in the constant repetition emphasizing that his government is changing Brazil.

Praising the people and emphasizing popular sovereignty is a strong populist characteristic that this study sheds light on. Such practice, although seemingly democratic, reinforces a tendency of populists to attempt against democracy while presenting themselves as defenders of it (Urbinati, 2019). This aspect has a relevance in the Brazilian context, in particular in the emphasis put on the cidadão de bem, the ‘good people’, as a majority, as a powerful segment of society, neglecting minorities and other opponents that are used as scapegoats to mark the superiority of a group. The discursive construction of the people is supported by simplified and easy representations that legitimate the people, appealing to sentimental and emotional, as well as symbolic elements that reinforce these ideas.

Centrality of Populist Leader

When it comes to discussing the centrality of the leader, the study exposes Bolsonaro’s attempt to present himself as an extraordinary figure. By emphasizing his own and his government’s efficiency, as well as implying the lack of responsibility by previous governments, Bolsonaro builds a positive self-presentation of himself as a hard-working and uncorrupted politician, combative of corruption and criminality, as well as a wise and knowledgeable leader capable of making the correct decisions and leading the country in the right direction. The analysis uncovers these characteristics very clearly in the way the president tries to emphasize a side associated with an extraordinary, messiah like (Moffitt, 2016), saviour to Brazil. The analysis also demonstrates how Bolsonaro presents himself as a leader close to the people. In an attempt to distance himself from the establishment, the president tries to show a side that puts him in a position of simplicity and ordinariness, as a common person that addresses the people using simple words and expressions, a leader that expresses his feelings, anger, dissatisfaction, beliefs, and opinions freely, without considering rules and expectations of the position he represents.

This ability to be both an extraordinary and ordinary figure applies to the idea that populists are chameleon like (Taggart, 2004), they must be able to adapt to situations, to show the side that

is most convenient, show strength in order to defeat the enemies, but also the commonness of a person that understands the struggles and represents the common people. In the Brazilian context, this ability becomes obvious in the way Bolsonaro presents himself as a defender of people’s interests, but at the same time, knows the need to fulfil the expectations of the segments that have taken him to power, which consists not only of the common voter, but also of powerful figures, such as business people, religious leaders and the financial sector, to whom his image must be that of an efficient doer.

Performative Aspects

When it comes to the notion of performance (Moffitt, 2016), based on the aspects the analysis uncovers, a clear tendency to make use of bad manners in different situations applies to populist communication also in the Brazilian context. Such characteristic is a strong aspect of populist style, a characteristic that is necessary in their performance and which has a link to the idea of extraordinariness, since the leader shows, through this breach of expected behaviour, a side that distances them from the establishment, whose political correctness is transformed into a negative practice.

Such idea is manifested in the tweets analysed in the form of controversial and disrespectful statements, but in particular in the use of political incorrectness as a common tool to address different political and social actors, the media, social movements, and other institutions. In the analysis, examples that demonstrate the use of political incorrectness are present in the practice of mentioning the unmentionable or stating ideas and opinions without measuring consequences.

As Moffitt (2016) explains, the idea of political style to which bad manners and political incorrectness are related to has its focus on language, written texts and speech. However, it is also necessary to take into consideration the aesthetic and performative elements as constitutive of political style, which is a crucial aspect to understand the issue being dealt with in this study. For instance, the videos that were presented along with some of the tweets show characteristics such as self-presentation, body language and symbols that give important information and help to understand the role of populist performance in the Brazilian political context.

The case analysed in this study emphasizes the figure of the leader as a performer with a central role when it comes to representing a segment that does not comply with expected rules. For that reason, associating Bolsonaro’s behaviour with the idea of bad manners translates the reality in a coherent way. The same applies to the idea of extraordinariness: Bolsonaro’s image is associated with a mythical figure, a ‘mito’12 as his supporters like to call him, a powerful and exceptional man who says what others do not dare to say and fights against the enemies of the people, in many cases, openly using racist, misogynistic, homophobic and conservative remarks.

The Role of Social Media

The performative characteristics observed in the tweets are, to a large extent, made viable by the possibilities that social media provides. When considering the way populists become an embodiment of the people, with the figure of the leader as a representative of the people and whose performance is a strong aspect in terms of how the leader’s image is constructed, it becomes impossible to neglect the importance of the idea of mediation (Moffitt, 2016). The idea of mediation is an essential aspect to understand the closeness, sense of immediacy and accountability that is made possible through the use social media.

The role of social media in relation to populist communication in the Brazilian context, as this study indicates, is marked by ideas and symbols that evoke the people and the heartland, attack traditional media, and other enemies. Also, it functions as a channel to reinforce the connection between the leader and the people, since the physical engagement that previously existed (and still exists to some extent) has diminished with the advancement of new technologies. The Brazilian case shows this online proximity in the way social media is used by the populist leader to bond with his audience, giving the impression of him being a leader who is reachable, that addresses the demands and claims of the good people, maintaining an illusion of direct rapport, as argued by Dal Lago (2017).

As well as a means to communicate directly with the audience, this study confirms the idea that the virtual environment becomes a place where politics can be done, not only related to the aspects mentioned above, but also related to how populists use social media as a channel for

12 A myth or mythical figure in Portuguese

accountability (Urbinati, 2019), transforming it into a vital tool where important discussions, mobilization and government related matters appear with more frequency.

With the development of new technologies, enhancements in the way people communicate and interact, and the myriad of options the internet made possible for reaching audiences, politicians (not only populists) saw in these developments and enhancements the opportunity to communicate with their audience directly. Bolsonaro is an example, although contradictory, of such revolutionary phenomenon. The contradiction is exactly related to the opposite effect attributed to the new possibilities these developments made possible to democracy: populist communication represents an antagonism in relation to a celebratory feeling attributed to the new technologies, supposed to enable opinion pluralism, activism and democratic values, but instead, the spread of ideas that harm democratic values have gained power through the internet and social media. As shown in this study, this notion is a strong aspect that must be taken into consideration to understand the development of populist communication in the Brazilian context, as social media has played a strategical role and it is the channel where populists can, through discourse, create equivalence, bond with supporters and share opinions openly without any barriers.

Emotional Dimension and Crises

The idea of emotional dimension is a strongly relevant characteristic present in the populist communication. The use of expressions, language and actions with heavy emotional appeal, be it in the form of the angry attacks and offences against the establishment, the way the populist leaders victimize themselves while creating a negative image of others, or even in the way fear and frustration is manipulated for political gains. The use of feelings is a tool that channels frustration and anger from demands that are not fulfilled, and builds a scenario of danger and risk, emphasizing ideas of threat to the safety and freedom of the good people.

This study shows how these strategies are used efficiently, as such notions usually remind people of situations of despair and chaos. By manipulating these feelings of fear, anger, frustration, dissatisfaction and directly associating them with real examples, populists manage to create the perfect crisis scenario that is needed for their rhetoric to flourish, and this is a point this study makes clear.

Moreover, the focus on the moments of crisis, illustrative of the necessity of populism to create these scenarios of unbalance and disagreement, always exaggerating and dramatizing situations, is also a case in point. The idea of crisis is internal to populism and is an important aspect indicated by the analysis of Bolsonaro’s communication on Twitter, not only for the aspects mentioned above, but also to deviate the attention from other problems and to set the agenda in the media. The conspiracies and dissemination of falsehood that sustain the trust in the leader as a hero or mythical figure is the fuel that keeps the populist engine functioning, and an important feature identified in the Brazilian political context as well as in other political contexts, as this study has indicated.

As argued by Laclau (2007) and Moffitt (2016), the idea of crisis is a precondition that populism needs in order to exist. Therefore, in the Brazilian context, the language of condemnation, denouncing, and shaming against different actors (global leaders, social movements, media, other politicians) is an element that works towards reinforcing the leader’s position and keeping the people mobilized through the feeling of threat. Also, the aspect of crisis is present in the claims of untruthful ‘fake news’ being spread by opponents. The use of such strategy not only reinforces and illustrates the modus operandi used by populists but proves to be an essential feature of easy dissemination via social media. It is possible to affirm that the populist moment (Mouffe, 2019) or Zeitgeist (Mudde, 2004) is marked by the dissemination of contradictory statements, false information, vulgarity, and sensationalism, aspects that constitute the base of populist communication in the Brazilian and in different political contexts.

Considering that the context where these dynamics take place is mostly online, where the interaction between populists and their audience finds space to develop, it is possible to look at this aspect as a result of the propaganda environment where populism grows nowadays. As has been mentioned, populism circumvents the intermediation of traditional formats of communication and establishes the direct interaction provided by the internet. This independency from traditional media is marked by a new form of communication that is combined with the immediacy of emotions, where beliefs and emotions are spread in a propaganda environment (Urbinati, 2019). These facts lead the discussion towards the idea of mediation (Moffitt, 2016), since it is possible to see a clear importance of the internet for the mobilization and organization, a tool that provides the possibility for an imaginary intimacy between the populist leader and the public, and a space for their performance to flourish. Thus, it is possible to affirm that the technological development did provide a space for such type of

communication in the Brazilian context, in the way that the populist leader’s performance and style has a direct impact over the audience due to the distrust manipulated against traditional media, institutions and political actors.

Similarities and Differences Between Political Contexts

Similarities and differences in relation to other political contexts where populism has gained power become clear in the way the populist communication in Brazil, represented by Bolsonaro, follows the main patterns indicated in other studies, such as the use of bad manners found in Trump’s communication and populist leaders in the European context (Kissas, 2019). It also becomes clear in the use of social media for the dissemination of ideas common in the populist communication, for instance, the emphasis on the people’s sovereignty, strong nationalism, and attacks against elites (Engesser et al., 2017). Other similarities are found in aspects such as the central role of the populist leader, the manipulation of fear and frustration, as well as the reliance on emotional and symbolic elements.

When it comes to relevant differences, the main point that this study makes clear relates to the complex Brazilian political context. Some specific points contribute to the empowering of populism in Brazil, and it can be argued that, as Gerbaudo (2018) explains, the developments that propelled the wave of populism nowadays are related to the worsening of economic prospects and technological changes, which are developments that apply to the Brazilian case. However, the Brazilian reality is marked by the shadow of authoritarianism represented by the military dictatorship, which is part of Brazil’s recent history (Schwarcz & Starling, 2015), and a characteristic that cannot be disregarded due to its traumatic influence. Thus, the aspects that constitute Brazil’s recent past and the new possibilities technological changes make viable, combined with the populist characteristics and discursive strategies, are fundamental to understand the unique characteristics that constitute the Brazilian political context and how the populist moment (Mouffe, 2019) develops and differentiate from other scenarios.

Recommendations for Future Studies

The analysis of Bolsonaro’s tweets presented in this study shows how Twitter is indeed a space where political actors can channel their messages and communicate with their audience in a close and simplified way, avoiding the filters of traditional media and neglecting rules and expectations in different levels. It is obvious that the examples presented here do not exhaust the variety of possibilities that the discourse and strategies employed by populists offers in their communication via Twitter and other social media platforms. Many aspects would deserve more attention in order to establish a deeper understanding of this populist leader and explain his communication online and the problematic aspects in it.

As Bolsonaro has not yet completed half of his mandate as president, the periods examined in this study are merely a glimpse of a year full of political scandals and important events that could be analysed in order to show how populist communication online develops from different perspectives in the Brazilian context. As well as that, while Twitter represents an important space where political ideas and debates find space to grow, it is not the only platform where political actors find opportunity for their communication. Based on the characteristics of Bolsonaro’s communication, an interesting aspect not dealt in the present study, but very important for his government, is the use of YouTube as a platform for weekly live sessions where the president addresses topics that are popular in the political context, debates, discussions, decisions made by his administration and other related themes. Without a doubt, it was not only the use of Twitter that granted Bolsonaro the political success he has enjoyed in recent times, but the use of a combination of different platforms that makes the reach to his voters and supporters efficient and uncomplicated.

Therefore, future research involving populism and social media in the Brazilian political context should explore the use of different social media platforms by populist actors, in order to understand the influence of the online world in the country’s political scenario.

Concluding Remarks

The present study contributes to the understanding of the phenomenon of populism by presenting populist characteristics and strategies found in the Brazilian context based on the specificities that constitute the historical, political, social, and economic aspects relevant to the comprehension of the context. The study aimed at exploring the populist communication via Twitter, focusing on the aspects embedded in the tweets and the discursive strategies employed by president Jair Bolsonaro.

Different aspects of populist communication were presented, such as the centrality of the populist leader, who is seen as an ordinary but also extraordinary figure or defender against the threats posed by enemies (the establishment). Performative aspects were also found in the tweets in the form of bad manners, as well as evidence of the importance of social media as a strategic tool that allows circumventing the mediation of traditional media. Aspects that emphasize the emotional dimension were identified in the form of expressions and actions containing heavy emotional appeal, as well as the reliance on the idea of crisis, which is constitutive aspect of populism. Furthermore, the notion of dichotomization, extremely necessary and efficient in the way it helps polarizing segments of society to create a distinguishing barrier between “us” and “them”, “good” and “bad”, is a characteristic of central relevance that populists are highly dependent on.

All these aspects are typical of populism and can be identified in populist communication in different contexts. The findings presented in this study expose the phenomenon of populism and the way it functions. Many of the characteristics this study uncovers regarding populist communication allow for the complete comprehension of the populist wave in the wider context. The communication style, arguments and strategies observed in Bolsonaro’s tweets are common practice and illustrative of the problematic characteristics embedded in populist communication.

The study makes clear how populists rely on ideas that do not comply with democratic values, ideas that are objectified in written and oral attacks against the media, political actors, institutions and social movements. These aspects are made evident in the way scenarios of conspiracy, fear and sabotage are created by populists and how scapegoats are constructed through the association of others with corruption, wrongdoing, and inefficiency. What is also

made evident is the fact that populists have learned how to control and manipulate the anger of the people for their own benefit with the help of digital tools, by invoking feelings of hate, fear, and frustration, linked with ideas and opinions that have a strong resonance and influence in society. The disregard towards pillars of democracy, combined with polarizing and controversial statements and behavior are the aspects this study sheds light on, contributing to the understanding of populism in action.

In light of the above, the use of social media by populist actors must be interpreted as strategic, in the sense that the it has gained relevance and power in political contexts. Above all, social media has turned into a tool of great importance in the creation of a bond between populist leaders and their supporters, a direct channel to manipulate and attack enemies and other political actors, as well as to gain the prestige and trust from those who are caught by the populist strategies. Social media is, without a doubt, a feature that that became a vital tool for the dissemination of ideas, as well as a strong element in the way it makes easier for a connection to be established between populist leaders and their audiences.

Understanding the power of populist strategies and arguments, exposing the structures that sustain the populist communication, its details and specificities, as well as its main tactics and ideas, is what this study adds to the big picture regarding populism. The findings present how the different arguments, ideas, and strategies utilized by populists play a central role in the way they strengthen their prestige and trust from the people. As well as that, the findings expose how the dependency on these tools becomes vital for their political success.

Finally, the main contribution the study makes to the wider understanding of populism becomes clear in the way it improves the comprehension of the populist phenomenon in different contexts. Reality shows that populism has gained power and, as Panizza (2005) indicates, it is here to stay. The consequences of such reality are uncertain, and the results of populist practices and actions online are still to be seen. For these reasons, it is necessary that a thorough understanding of populist strategies within the online context be investigated and interpreted as a way of avoiding naturalizing such practices and knowing which points must be combated, as this is the only way to understand the phenomenon and its problems.

7. References

Arditi, B. (2010). Review Essay: Populism is Hegemony is Politics? On Ernesto Laclau’s On

Populist Reason. Constellations, 17(3), 488–497. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-

8675.2010.00587.x

Berville, H. (2017). Populism is a Form of Anti-Pluralism. Retrieved 19 February 2020, from

Books & ideas website: http://www.booksandideas.net/Populism-is-a-Form-of-Anti-

Pluralism.html

Biegon, R. (2019). A populist grand strategy? Trump and the framing of American decline.

International Relations, 33(4), 517–539. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117819852399

Billig, M. (1995). Banal nationalism. London; Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage.

Boyd, D., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical Questions for Big Data: Provocations for a

cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information, Communication &

Society, 15(5), 662–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878

Brazil takes off. (2009, November). The Economist. Retrieved from

http://link.gale.com/apps/doc/GP4100902590/ECON?u=uppsala&sid=zotero&xid=b7f

2b51e

Breeze, R. (2011). Critical discourse analysis and its critics. Pragmatics, 21(4), 493–525.

https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.21.4.01bre

Canovan, M. (1981). Populism. New York and London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Carvalho, L. (2018). Valsa brasileira: Do boom ao caos econômico. São Paulo, SP: Todavia.

Castells, M. (2009). Communication power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Catalani, F. (2018). Aspectos ideológicos do bolsonarismo. Retrieved from

https://blogdaboitempo.com.br/2018/10/31/aspectos- ideologicos-do-

bolsonarismo/#_ftn1

Cesarino, L. (2019). Identidade e representação no bolsonarismo. Revista de Antropologia,

62(3), 530–557. https://doi.org/10.11606/2179-0892.ra.2019.165232

Dal Lago, A. (2017). Populismo digitale: La crisi, la rete e la nuova destra (1st edition).

Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore.

Darics, E. (2013). Non-verbal signaling in digital discourse: The case of letter repetition.

Discourse, Context & Media, 2(3), 141–148.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2013.07.002

Dobkiewicz, P. (2019). Instagram narratives in Trump’s America: Multimodal social media

and mitigation of right-wing populism. Journal of Language and Politics, 18(6), 826–

847. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.19039.dob

Donoghue, M. (2018). Beyond Hegemony: Elaborating on the Use of Gramscian Concepts in

Critical Discourse Analysis for Political Studies. Political Studies, 66(2), 392–408.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321717722362

Ekman, M. (2018). Anti-refugee Mobilization in Social Media: The Case of Soldiers of Odin.

Social Media + Society, 4(1), 205630511876443.

https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118764431

Engesser, S., Ernst, N., Esser, F., & Büchel, F. (2017). Populism and social media: How

politicians spread a fragmented ideology. Information, Communication & Society,

20(8), 1109–1126. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1207697

Ernst, N., Engesser, S., Büchel, F., Blassnig, S., & Esser, F. (2017). Extreme parties and

populism: An analysis of Facebook and Twitter across six countries. Information,

Communication & Society, 20(9), 1347–1364.

https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1329333

Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London;

New York: Longman.

Fairclough, N., Mulderrig, J., & Wodak, R. (2011). Critical Discourse Analysis. In T. Van

Dijk (Ed.), Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction.

https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446289068

Feres Júnior, J., & Kerche, F. (Eds.). (2018). Operação Lava Jato e a democracia brasileira.

São Paulo: Contracorrente.

Flew, T., & Iosifidis, P. (2020). Populism, globalisation and social media. International

Communication Gazette, 82(1), 7–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048519880721

Foucault, M. (1982). The archaeology of knowledge. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.

Gerbaudo, P. (2018). Social media and populism: An elective affinity? Media, Culture &

Society, 40(5), 745–753. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443718772192

Gramsci, A. (1999). Antonio Gramsci. London: ElecBook.

Hallin, D. C. (2019). Mediatisation, neoliberalism and populisms: The case of Trump.

Contemporary Social Science, 14(1), 14–25.

https://doi.org/10.1080/21582041.2018.1426404

Hjarvard, S. (2013). The mediatization of culture and society. London: Routledge.

Holt, K. (2019). Right-wing alternative media. London; New York: Routledge.

Ionescu, G., & Gellner, E. (Eds.). (1969). Populism: Its meanings and national

characteristics. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.

Jacobs, K., & Spierings, N. (2019). A populist paradise? Examining populists’ Twitter

adoption and use. Information, Communication & Society, 22(12), 1681–1696.

https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1449883

Khosravinik, M., Unger, J., & Wodak, R. (2016). Critical Discourse Studies and Social Media

Data. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative Research (4th edition). London: SAGE.

Krzyżanowski, M., & Tucker, J. A. (2018). Re/constructing politics through social & online

media: Discourses, ideologies, and mediated political practices. Journal of Language

and Politics, 17(2), 141–154. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.18007.krz

Laclau, E. (1996). Emancipation(s). New York: Verso.

Laclau, E. (2007). On populist reason. London; New York: Verso.

Maldonado, M. A. (2017). Rethinking Populism in the Digital Age: Social Networks, Political

Affects and Post-Truth Democracies.

Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative researching (2nd edition). London; Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage

Publications.

Moffitt, B. (2016). The global rise of populism. Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press.

Mouffe, C. (2019). For a Left Populism. London; New York: Verso.

Mudde, C. (2004). The Populist Zeitgeist. Government and Opposition, 39(4), 541–563.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2004.00135.x

Mudde, C., & Kaltwasser, C. R. (2012). Populism and (liberal) democracy: A framework for

analysis. In Populism in Europe and the Americas. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Nobre, M. (2013). Imobilismo em movimento: Da abertura democrática ao governo Dilma.

São Paulo, SP: Companhia Das Letras.

Panizza, F. (2005). Populism and the mirror of democracy. London: Verso.

Postill, J. (2018). Populism and social media: A global perspective. Media, Culture & Society,

40(5), 754–765. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443718772186

Reisigl, M., & Wodak, R. (2016). The Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA). In R. Wodak &

M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse studies (3rd edition). London;

Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE.

Santos, F., & Guarnieri, F. (2016). From Protest to Parliamentary Coup: An Overview of

Brazil’s Recent History. Journal of Latin American Cultural Studies, 25(4), 485–494.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13569325.2016.1230940

Saussure, F. de. (2011). Course in general linguistics (P. Meisel & H. Saussy, Eds.; W.

Baskin, Trans.). New York: Columbia University Press.

Schwarcz, L. M., & Starling, H. M. M. (2015). Brasil: Uma biografia. São Paulo, Brazil:

Companhia das Letras.

Silverman, D. (2010). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook (3rd edition).

London; Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE.

Silverman, D. (2017). Doing qualitative research (5th edition). London; Thousand Oaks,

California: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Silverstone, R. (2002). Complicity and Collusion in the Mediation of Everyday Life. New

Literary History, 33(4), 761–780. https://doi.org/10.1353/nlh.2002.0045

Stephansen, H. C., & Couldry, N. (2014). Understanding micro-processes of community

building and mutual learning on Twitter: A ‘small data’ approach. Information,

Communication & Society, 17(10), 1212–1227.

https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.902984

Stieglitz, S., & Dang-Xuan, L. (2013). Emotions and Information Diffusion in Social

Media—Sentiment of Microblogs and Sharing Behavior. Journal of Management

Information Systems, 29(4), 217–248. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222290408

Strömbäck, J., & Esser, F. (2014). Introduction. Journalism Studies, 15(3), 243.

Taggart, P. (2004). Populism and representative politics in contemporary Europe. Journal of

Political Ideologies, 9(3), 269–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/1356931042000263528

Thompson, J. B. (1990). Ideology and modern culture: Critical social theory in the era of

mass communication. Cambridge: Polity.

100

Urbinati, N. (2019). Me the People—How Populism Transforms Democracy. Cambridge;

London: Harvard University Press.

Waisbord, S., & Amado, A. (2017). Populist communication by digital means: Presidential

Twitter in Latin America. Information, Communication & Society, 20(9), 1330–1346.

https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1328521

Wodak, R. (2001). The discourse-historical approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.),

Methods of critical discourse analysis. London; Thousand Oaks [Calif.]: SAGE.

Wodak, R. (2012). Politics as usual—Investigating political discourse in action. In J. P. Gee

& M. Handford (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis. London; New

York: Routledge.

Wodak, R. (2013). In K. Hyland & B. Paltridge (Eds.), Bloomsbury companion to discourse

analysis. London; New York: Bloomsbury.

Wodak, R. (2015). The politics of fear: What right-wing populist discourses mean. London:

Sage.

Wodak, R., & Krzyżanowski, M. (Eds.). (2008). Qualitative discourse analysis in the social

sciences. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire [England]; New York: Palgrave

Macmillan.

Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (Eds.). (2016). Methods of critical discourse studies (3rd edition).

London; Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE.

Zotzmann, K., & O’Regan, J. P. (2016). Critical Discourse Analysis and Identity. In S. Preece

(Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Language and Identity.

https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315669816

101

8. Sources

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 11). O Brasil de sempre, com os velhos vícios,

levou os brasileiros a uma situação caótica, com pobreza, violência e desemprego. O

establishment quer o de sempre porque não sente as consequências de suas ambições.

Nós vamos mudar o Brasil porque não fazemos parte do establishment! [Tweet].

Retrieved from https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1127273932925689856

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 13). Dados oficiais dos estados confirmam queda de

24% dos homicídios no Brasil no primeiro trimestre deste ano em relação ao mesmo

período de 2018. “Especialistas” dirão que a queda não tem relação com nossas ações,

mas se o número tivesse aumentado, certamente culpariam o governo. [Tweet].

Retrieved from https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1128000810657427456

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, November 17). - Obrigado a Deus, sempre acima de tudo

e de todos, obrigado povo que me confiou esse mandato, povo esse que devo lealdade,

respeito e GRATIDÃO! [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1196165397843791875

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, August 06). Da série João 8:32 (2)

O PRESIDENTE PODE MISTURAR POLÍTICA COM RELIGIÃO?

- "O Estado é laico, SIM. Mas o Presidente da República é CRISTÃO, como

aproximadamente 90% do povo brasileiro também o É."

- Romanos 8:31, se Deus é por nós quem será contra nós? [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1158760627638362122

102

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 21). "E conhecereis a verdade, e a verdade vos

libertará" João 8:32. Carrego esta mensagem sempre à frente de nossa missão. Bom

dia a todos! [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1130797095122853888

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, November 03). 3- Risco-Brasil chega a seu menor

patamar desde 2013, inflação controlada, selic em mínima histórica e investidores

confiantes. A empregabilidade cresce e os crimes diminuem. Em apenas 10 meses de

Governo estamos mudando o Brasil para melhor! [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1191026234509139970

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 10). Ministro da Educação, Professor

@AbrahamWeint, explica a diferença entre "corte" e "contingenciamento" e desmente

as #fakenews sobre o orçamento das faculdades. [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1126923537745367040

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, August 04). - Até hoje, a União gastou R$ 9,9 bilhões

com indenizações e pensões pagas a anistiados "políticos." Dinheiro suado, do povo

ordeiro e trabalhador, pago a 39.370 pessoas ditas perseguidas e autointituladas

defensoras da democracia. [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1158007516233707520

103

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, August 04). - Nunca no mundo um país foi tão roubado

quanto o Brasil na era PT (2003 a 2016) por um projeto de poder e enriquecimento.

[Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1158007517722677248

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, August 04). - O ditador cubano recebia R$ 1 bilhão por

ano do Brasil, pelo trabalho de 10 mil "profissionais" de saúde, que aqui viviam em

condições análogas à escravidão. A mamata acabou, agora esses recursos serão

utilizados para nossa Saúde no programa MÉDICOS PELO BRASIL. [Tweet].

Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1157791738234363904

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 17). Há somente dois caminhos para evitar

contingenciamento de gastos: ou imprime dinheiro e gera inflação, ou comete-se crime

de responsabilidade fiscal. Quem finge não entender essa lógica age como um abutre,

aguardando ansiosamente pelo mal do Brasil para no fim se alimentar dele. [Tweet].

Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1129379566894690305

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 17). Temos trabalhado de modo a conter essas

ações, necessárias pela herança dos rombos causados pelo desgoverno do PT, e

manter, na medida do possível, a destinação dos recursos para áreas essenciais, mesmo

com pouco dinheiro, mas existe uma realidade e não podemos extrapolá-la. [Tweet].

Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1129379568211636224

104

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 17). Nosso presente serve para mostrar quão grave

são as consequências de um governo socialista, populista e completamente corrupto.

Não há responsabilidade com o futuro do Brasil, mas apenas com seus propósitos

ideológicos. A conta sempre chega e os efeitos são sentidos por anos. [Tweet].

Retrieved from https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1129379570241740801

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 16). Pela falta de recursos se faz

contingenciamento. Todos os governos já fizeram isso, inclusive na Educação. Aqui

nos Estados Unidos uma repórter da Folha desconhecia a diferença entre corte e

contingenciamento. Nós explicamos. Assista: [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1129077683856527362

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 22). Quanto aos atos do dia 26, vejo como uma

manifestação espontânea da população, que de forma inédita vem sendo a voz

principal para as decisões políticas que o Brasil deve tomar. [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1130997832704516096

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 27). Quando imaginaríamos uma manifestação

expressiva a favor de reformas consideradas impopulares? A população mostrou-se

extremamente consciente. A peculiaridade deste evento torna injustificável qualquer

tentativa de minimizá-lo. [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1133041751453765632

105

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 20). A Nova Previdência é a porta de entrada para o

progresso do Brasil. É com sua aprovação que se viabilizam diversas outras ações

econômicas benéficas para o país, como a Reforma Tributária, que pretendemos

apresentar logo após, compreendendo ser um desejo urgente dos brasileiros. [Tweet].

Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1130429982319239168

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 11). Precisamos hoje aprovar a Nova Previdência

sem tantas modificações para que o mercado ganhe a confiança no Brasil e possamos

evoluir cada vez mais. [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1127166908443320320

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 03). De 56 em 2016, caiu para apenas 1 o número

de invasões no campo praticados pelo MST em 2019. A postura do atual governo, bem

como o corte de recursos para esses parasitas, influenciou na significativa redução

desses verdadeiros atos terroristas. [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1124105569869156354

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, August 15). - O Rio Grande do Sul corre o risco, pela

volta da esquerda na Argentina, de passar pelo mesmo sofrimento de Roraima em

relação à Venezuela. [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1161806606293712903

106

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, August 17). - Nos últimos 22 anos (1995 a 2016) o Brasil

foi saqueado e transformado num anão em suas relações internacionais. Enéas

Carneiro, Sargento do Exército e Médico, nos dá a certeza da urgência de nos

preocuparmos com a rica e cobiçada Amazônia. [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1162690199517847552

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, November 30). - A Folha pergunta e eu respondo: "não

quero mais ler a Folha e ponto final."

- O povo faz coro: "nem eu, nem eu..."

"Qualquer anúncio que façam na Folha de SP, eu não compro aquele produto."

[Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1200569062692179968

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, November 20). - Jornaleco não vive sem MENTIR.

- Suspendi minha assinatura e muitos empresários têm cancelado contratos

publicitários nesse jornal campeão de fake news e desinformação. [Tweet]. Retrieved

from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1197141391157202945

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 04). Quando não há problemas no governo, a maior

parte da mídia inventa alguma para ter o que falar e manipular. Informe-se sempre

buscando uma mídia alternativa, pois infelizmente muitas das habituais não querem o

melhor para o Brasil, somente para si mesmas! [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1124508626394202112

107

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 08). Estamos seguindo um caminho totalmente

oposto ao autoritarismo, que sempre busca desarmar a população, fazendo valer a

soberania popular manifestada no referendo de 2005. Estamos, principalmente,

atendendo o cidadão de bem, que segue as leis e respeita a sociedade. [Tweet].

Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1125918484377088001

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, November 09). Iniciamos a poucos meses a nova fase de

recuperação do Brasil e não é um processo rápido, mas avançamos com fatos. Não dê

munição ao canalha, que momentaneamente está livre, mas carregado de culpa.

- BRASIL ACIMA DE TUDO!

- DEUS ACIMA DE TODOS! [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1193130529182355456

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, August 23). - Lamento que o presidente Macron busque

instrumentalizar uma questão interna do Brasil e de outros países amazônicos p/

ganhos políticos pessoais. O tom sensacionalista com que se refere à Amazônia

(apelando até p/ fotos falsas) não contribui em nada para a solução do problema.

[Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1164667765799694345

108

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, August 23). - O Governo brasileiro segue aberto ao

diálogo, com base em dados objetivos e no respeito mútuo. A sugestão do presidente

francês, de que assuntos amazônicos sejam discutidos no G7 sem a participação dos

países da região, evoca mentalidade colonialista descabida no século XXI. [Tweet].

Retrieved from https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1164667767242596354

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, May 09). Como disse Paulo Guedes, estiveram 16 anos

no poder, arruinaram nossa economia e agora querem falar de desemprego e cobrar

crescimento em 4 meses de governo, como se não tivessem nenhuma responsabilidade

sobre a atual situação do Brasil. Estamos reparando o estrago que fizeram! [Tweet].

Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1126271179315191810

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, November 10). 6 - Bolsa de valores bateu mais um

recorde. Confiança no Brasil em alta e crescendo! Dever de casa sendo cumprido e

temos que desfazer ainda muitos estragos! As oscilações ocorreram devido a soltura

de corruptos presos como o presidiário Lula. Vamos adiante! [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1193583787101360128

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, August 15). - Após o G-20, caso tivesse demarcado mais

algumas dezenas de Áreas Indígenas e orientado pesadas multas nos produtores rurais,

o mundo não estaria me acusando, falsamente, de destruir a Amazônia. Soberania da

região e suas riquezas é o que, verdadeiramente, está em jogo. [Tweet]. Retrieved

from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1161972492421992448

109

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, November 27). - Em outubro declarei que muitos focos

de incêndios poderiam estar ligados a ONGs. Agora a polícia paraense prende alguns

suspeitos pelo crime. [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1199697700796665857

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, August 26). - Não podemos aceitar que um presidente,

Macron, dispare ataques descabidos e gratuitos à Amazônia, nem que disfarce suas

intenções atrás da ideia de uma "aliança" dos países do G-7 para "salvar" a Amazônia,

como se fôssemos uma colônia ou uma terra de ninguém. [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1165970376725319680

Bolsonaro, J. [jairbolsonaro]. (2019, August 26). - Outros chefes de estado se solidarizaram

com o Brasil, afinal respeito à soberania de qualquer país é o mínimo que se pode

esperar num mundo civilizado. [Tweet]. Retrieved from

https://twitter.com/jairbolsonaro/status/1165970378470150146

110