O mal-estar da regulação discursiva : o brasileiro e a aversão ao politicamente correto no período eleitoral de 2018

• Ano de defesa: 2020
• Autor(a) principal: Bruna Silveira Martins de Oliveira
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais; Brasil; FAF - DEPARTAMENTO DE COMUNICAÇÃO SOCIAL; Programa de Pós-Graduação em Comunicação Social; UFMG
• Palavras-chave em Português: Mal-estar da regulação discursiva; Politicamente correto; Intolerâncias; Eleições 2018; Comunicação - Teses; Eleições -Teses; Comunicação na política - Teses
• Link de acesso: http://hdl.handle.net/1843/59446; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0163-6102

This work investigates the phenomenon of the so-called discontent regulation malaise, taking the 2018 elections in Brazil as an analytical context. Discursive regulation is understood as a synonym for the use of politically correct language, as a care for language to respect the different social norms and demands for identities in the public sphere. The study has as its object of analysis the comments on the Facebook pages of three candidates for the Presidency of the Republic: Jair Bolsonaro (ex-PSL), Fernando Haddad (PT) and Ciro Gomes (PDT), during the official electoral propaganda. Through content analysis, this research allows us to understand what are the arguments triggered by the people who are indisposed to discursive regulation, as well as to understand the relations between such malaise, the identity guidelines and the defense of freedom of expression, from different political-ideological specters of political representatives. Among the important contributions of the dissertation, we can point out some. First, the so-called discomfort of discursive regulation is analyzed from the theoretical framework of deliberation as an ideal model of conversation. Second, although freedom of expression is considered fundamental to the modern democratic experience, the public sphere should not be seen as a given, since there are unequal conditions between social actors to express their interests, perspectives and opinions. The research helps to reveal disputes, in the discursive field, of problems related to the regulation of language, as part of a system of rights that is defined in the shadow of an exclusion based on the invisibility of certain groups. Third, and finally, this study, when addressing the digital context, also brings some analytical innovations. Among the results, in relation to the political-ideological spectra, it can be mentioned that the arguments triggered by indiscriminate people can affect discursively if they associate with the attack on the left and progress. Another finding leads us to understand that the positions unavailable for discursive control are, for the most part, a denial of advanced social problems in the identity guidelines. In addition, it is worth mentioning that the discomfort of discursive regulation is more noticeable among Bolsonaro supporters, so the behavior of the then candidate could be endorsing and stimulating this point of view. Focusing comments on the elections via Facebook at the time of the 2018 presidential elections in Brazil, in such a polarized context and with such diverse candidates, allows us to capture the current culture of political engagement.