Critical Discourse Analysis and Political Facebook Posts in Bangsamoro Tapatan Lane


  • Hameeda L. Linog


Critical Discourse Analysis, Political Posts, Social Inequities, Manipulation, Persuasion, Purposeful Language


This study examined political posts in the Facebook Group, Bangsamoro Tapatan Lane. More specifically, it investigated (1) the ways political posts in the Bangsamoro Tapatan Lane constructed social inequalities; (2) the ways Facebook contributed to represent public opinion; (3) the ways the Facebook posts impacted beliefs and value systems; and (4) the possible actions to mitigate the issue. To determine these, the paper employed Norman Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis, which was a qualitative analytical approach to critically describe, interpret, and explain the ways in which discourses construct, maintain, and legitimize social inequalities. It asserted that discourses could be used to resist power, criticize and assert power, and express knowledge and identity. The findings revealed that political posts on the Facebook Group, Bangsamoro Tapatan Lane, constructed social inequities through the effective use of language. The language in the posts was purposeful, conscious, measured, manipulative, and persuasive. Important findings were: (1) derogative adjectives were used in the posts to call for reform in the government and expose erroneous actions done by the government. The choice of adjectives communicated that something was wrong with the administration, which required the public to correct or fix the government system. They were used as a political ploy to rule the public. That is, they were used to subtly influence the audience to take the side of the writer; (2) passive voice was used in the posts to hide agents or to hide lack of information; (3) intertextuality was used to strengthen the argument of the writer and/or for the writer to emphasize a point; (4) modals were used as a mode of persuasion; (5) pronouns were used to show inclusivity; (6) Facebook was used as a platform to influence the public through the effective use of language and the media. It had become a platform to let people know of one’s knowledge, thoughts, and opinions in just in a few clicks of a button; (7) Facebook became a platform where people could reach a large number of audience and freely talk about their political ideologies and convince other people to adapt their way of thinking; (8) the posts were made to try and turn the audience against their government by feeding their sense of insecurity; (9) political beliefs and ideologies could be hidden underneath the simple structure of language choices in text, thereby changing the audiences’ perspective, attitude, and even beliefs; and (10) raising awareness through webinars and seminar-workshops among the youth and all social media users about critical reading and critical discourse analysis is important as indeed, with the use of simple personal pronouns and adjectives, people could be persuaded to accept and even embrace another person’s political ideologies. 


Bucholtz, M. (1999). Purchasing power: The gender and class imaginary on the shopping channel. In M. Bucholtz, A. C. Liang, & L. A. Sutton (Eds.), Reinventing Identities: The Gendered Self in Discourse (pp. 348-68). New York: Oxford University Press.

Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. Addison Wesley Longman Inc.

Caves, R. W. (2004). Encyclopedia of the City. Routledge. ISBN 9780415252256.

Dong, J. Y. (2014). Study on gender differences in language under the sociolinguistics. Canadian Social Science, 10(3), 92-96.

Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. Longman. London.

Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis. Longman. London.

Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: textual analysis for social research. New York and London. Routledge.

Fairclough, N. & Chouliaraki, L. (1999). Discourse in late modernity: Rethiniking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Goodyear, S. (2014). The power of social media. Huffpost.,get%20our%20opinions%20out%20there

Hammerlund, B. (1985). Politik utan partier: studier I Sveriges politiska liv 1726-1727. Almqvist and Wiksell International. ISBN 978-91-22-00780-7.

Holmes, J. & Meyerhoff, M. (2003). The handbook of language and gender. USA: Blackwell Publishing.

Kulaszewicz, K. (2015). Racism and the media: a textual analysis. Master of Social Work Clinical Research Papers. St. Catherine University.

Leftwich, A. (2004). What is politics: the activity and its study. Polity. ISBN 0-7456-3055-3. OCLC 61585455.

Li, J. (2014). A socioliguistic study of language and gender in Desperate Housewives. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(1), 52-57.

Machin, A. & Mayr. (2012). How to do critical discourse analysis: A multimodal introduction. London, UK: Sage.

Paul, T. (2018). The power of social media today. Careeranna.

Rambe, P. (2012). Critical discourse analysis of collaborative engagement in Facebook postings. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(2).

Saragih, M. & Arika, A. (2020). Critical Discourse Analysis on the politicians’ social media posts. English Teaching and Linguistics Journal, 1(1). ISSN 2716-0831.

Sipra, M. & Rashid, A. (2013). Critical Discourse Analysis of Martin Luther King’s speech in socio-political perspective. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 4(1).

Van Dijk, T. (2004). Critical discourse analysis. In Schiffrin, D., Tannen, D., & Hamilton, H.E. (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Van Dijk, T. A. (1993a). Elite discourse and racism. Newbury Park, CA:

Van Dijk, T. A. (1993b). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse and Society, 4(2), 249-83.

Wade, R. H. (2014). The Piketty phenomenon and the future of inequality. Real World Economics Review, 69(4), 2–17.

Wodak, R. (2001). What CDA is about: A summary of its history, important concepts and its developments. In Wodak, R., Meyer, M. (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 1-12). London, England: Sage.

Wodak, R. (Ed.) 1989: Language, power, and ideology: Studies in political discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Wodak, R. (1999). Critical discourse analysis at the end of the 20th century. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 32(1-2), 185-93.

Xia, X. (2013). Gender differences in using language. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(8), 1485-1489.