The architecture of partisan debates: The online controversy on the no-deal Brexit

L'architecture des débats partisans: La controverse en ligne sur le "no-deal" Brexit

Carlo Santagiustina and Massimo Warglien
Additional contact information
Massimo Warglien: University of Ca’ Foscari [Venice, Italy]

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: We propose a framework to analyse partisan debates that involves extracting, classifying and exploring the latent argumentation structure and dynamics of online societal controversies. In this paper, the focus is placed on causal arguments, and the proposed framework is applied to the Twitter debate on the consequences of a hard Brexit scenario. Regular expressions based on causative verbs, structural topic modelling, and dynamic time warping techniques were used to identify partisan faction arguments, as well as their relations, and to infer agenda-setting dynamics. The results highlight that the arguments employed by partisan factions are mostly constructed around constellations of effect-classes based on polarised verb groups. These constellations show that the no-deal debate hinges on structurally balanced building blocks. Brexiteers focus more on arguments related to greenfield trading opportunities and increased autonomy, whereas Remainers argue more about what a no-deal Brexit could destroy, focusing on hard border issues, social tensions in Ireland and Scotland and other economy- and healthcare-related problems. More notably, inferred debate leadership dynamics show that, despite their different usage of terms and arguments, the two factions' argumentation dynamics are strongly intertwined. Moreover, the identified periods in which agenda-setting roles change are linked to major events, such as extensions, elections and the Yellowhammer plan leak, and to new issues that emerged in relation to these events.

Keywords: Partisan debates; Online controversy; Brexit; Causal arguments; Structural Topic Modelling (STM); Dynamic Time Warping; Argumentation structure; Brexit debate; Hard border issues; Referendum; Yellowhammer plan leak; Political discourse analysis; Factional arguments; No deal; European Union (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022-06-30
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04874686v1
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Published in PLoS ONE, 2022, 17 (6), pp.e0270236. ⟨10.1371/journal.pone.0270236⟩

Downloads: (external link)
https://hal.science/hal-04874686v1/document (application/pdf)

Related works:
Working Paper: The architecture of partisan debates: The online controversy on the no-deal Brexit (2022)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04874686

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0270236

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().