Redskins Revisited: Competing Constructions of the Washington Redskins Mascot

This project looks at how synecdoche and ideographs function in the construction of competing position in the controversy surrounding the Washington Redskins mascot. I examined the rhetoric produced by both the Washington Redskins organization and its fans, as well as the rhetoric of Change the Mascot, the Oneida Indian Nation of New York and other opponents between the years of 2013 and 2015. Based in part on Moore’s (1993, 1994, 1997) argument that synecdoche and ideographs often prevent resolution and produce irreconcilable conflict, I extend this notion insofar as the controversy surrounding the Redskins mascot appears to be shifted towards opponents position of over supporters’ claims of . This project examines how synecdoche can be used as a tool by rhetors to examine the challenges made by groups in such controversies against certain synecdochal relationships. Ultimately, this project suggests potential implications for the use of synecdoche and ideographs not only as tools for the skilled rhetor, but also how such theoretical perspectives may aid individuals and groups in denying the possibility of irreconcilable conflict. Furthermore, I explore what implications this project has for the larger discourse surrounding Native American mascot use including but not limited to the educational opportunities provided by the coverage of such controversies in the media

“We have a big crowd”: The different referents of the first-person plural in U.S. presidential candidates’ talk on entertainment-political interviews

During U.S. presidential elections, today, interviews at late-night talk shows are commonplace. As political and entertainment discourse co-occur in this type of communication, we refer to this genre as the Entertainment-Political Interview (EPI). Yet, research is lacking in clarifying how candidates, through their talk, appeal to their audience on these shows to realize their political goals. In this study, the different extralinguistic referents for the first-person plural (i.e. we, us, our) are investigated in order to understand which groups are referred to by U.S. presidential candidates, how these groups are presented and how this positions the candidate with respect to their audience in order to construct a discursive presentation of the world. Namely, even as we is a deictic term produced by a speaker, the referent can still be any group of people including the speaker. Investigating these genre-specific foundational group memberships is essential to understand this mode of political discourse as the discursive world projected through the talk serves as the context of interpretation for the audience. To study possible referents of we in EPIs, we use the taxonomy developed by Dori-Hacohen (2014) as a starting point, as it classifies different types of we based on the exclusivity of the group referred to (i.e. everyone on earth (humanity we), a group including the speaker and hearer (general we), a group including the speaker but not the hearer (social delimited we), and a group just consisting of the speaker and hearer (conversation we)). The genre-specific referents of we are U.S. society (general we), desirable social groups and political teams (social delimited we)

Giving Voice to the Voiceless: The Use of Digital Technologies by Marginalized Groups

This paper reports on a workshop hosted at the University of Massachusetts Amherst in September, 2018. The workshop, called “Giving Voice to the Voiceless: The Use of Digital Technologies by Marginalized Groups”, focused on discussing how marginalized groups use digital technologies to raise their voices. At the workshop, a diverse group of scholars and doctoral students presented research projects and perspectives on the role that digital technologies have in activist projects that represent marginalized groups that have gained momentum in the last few years. The studies and viewpoints presented shed light on four areas in which IS research can expand our understanding about how marginalized groups use digital technologies to address societal challenges: 1) the rise of cyberactivism, 2) resource mobilization for cyberactivism, 3) cyberactivism by and with marginalized groups, and 4) research methods for examining how marginalized groups use digital technologies

NATIVE AMERICA SPEAKS: BLACKFEET COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE IN GLACIER NATIONAL PARK

This study is a description and interpretation of a Blackfeet (Amskapi Piikuni) discourse of identity as expressed by Blackfeet presenters as part of the Native America Speaks (NAS) program in Glacier National Park, the longest-running Indigenous speaker series in the National Park Service. The study is based on what Blackfeet identify as being important parts of Blackfeet identity within this particular scene, as well as how they participate in that scene. Primary data include a corpus of 30 Blackfeet programs recorded during the summers of 2018 and 2019. Data were analyzed in response to an overarching research question which guides this study: How do Blackfeet presenters in NAS programs create and use discourses about their identity as Blackfeet people? The study is situated within the ethnography of communication research program and more specifically, the framework of cultural discourse analysis. The study employs cultural discourse analysis methods and concepts to describe and develop interpretations of how participants render their being “Blackfeet” symbolically meaningful, and of beliefs and values underpinning such meanings. One finding of the study is the discovery of a prominent discourse of Blackfeet identity which is comprised of two major symbolic units: one about who we (Blackfeet) are, another about who we are not. Major descriptive and interpretive findings within each, respectively, include (1) the use of the Blackfoot language as both demonstrative and an enactment of being “Blackfeet” but also as provides context for other things to be said including who they are, how they are related, where they are from, and how they interact with others; and, (2) as in contrast to their non-Native and Euro-American audience at NAS, juxtaposing the above with what they are called, who has control over them, where they are allowed to live, and how to interact with others. This research demonstrates that Blackfeet talk about their being “Blackfeet” in deeply cultural ways, whose symbolic communicative means and meaning shape and are shaped by tangible social and material realities as evidenced in their communication with Euro-American others in attendance at NAS programs. This research too suggests how cultural discourses as created and used in a contemporary and intercultural scene are rooted in historical and ongoing relationships as between the Blackfeet and their Euro- American audience