20.500.12556/RUL-131426 Proticepilska mobilizacija v Sloveniji: taktike prepričevanja diplomsko delo Anti-vaccine mobilization in Slovenia: persuasion tactics Diplomska naloga preko diskurzivne analize raziskuje način nagovarjanja publike in podajanja argumentov izbranih proticepilskih virov tako na spletu kot tudi v tiskani obliki, ki so dostopni v Sloveniji. V tem delu nismo raziskovali situacije s koronavirusom, temveč dogajanje na področju proticepilstva pred začetkom pandemije. Tema o cepivih je postala zelo občutljiva v javni sferi, saj je prišlo do poplave različnih javno dostopnih informacij in raziskav, ki preizprašujejo varnost in učinkovitost cepiv ter verodostojnost inštitucij, ki zagovarjajo njihovo rabo. Ker redno cepljenje zadeva večinoma starše šolskih in predšolskih otrok, v nalogi zagovarjamo hipotezo, da sta argumentacija in prepričevanje v teh medijih podkrepljena s čustvenim nabojem, različnimi despektivnimi oznakami podpornikov cepljenja in same industrije, ter opisovanjem žalostnih zgodb ljudi, predvsem otrok, ki so utrpeli posledice stranskih učinkov cepljenja, da bi izzvali strah, dvom in zaskrbljenost glede cepljenja. V teoretičnem delu ugotavljamo, da je nasprotovanje cepljenju prisotno že od 18. stoletja, razplamtelo pa se je v sedemdesetih letih 20. stoletja s proticepilsko kampanjo Gordona Stewarta v Veliki Britaniji in kasneje z znamenito afero Andrewa Wakefielda v ZDA, kjer je s kasneje ovrženo raziskavo povezal OMR cepivo z razvojem avtizma. Prvo obširno delo v Sloveniji, ki je spodbudilo proticepilsko mobilizacijo v Sloveniji, je bila doktorska disertacija Mateje Černič v letu 2014 in kasnejša izdaja znanstvene monografije Ideološki konstrukti o cepljenju. Leta 2015 se je zgodil prvi protestni shod za »svobodo odločanja o cepljenju in drugih medicinskih posegov v telo«. V empiričnem delu smo analizirali proticepilske vire s perspektive štirih avtorjev, ki so v svojih delih razpravljali o načinu podajanja informacij: Anne Kate, Aristotela, Johna Fiska in Rolanda Barthesa. Preko analize proticepilstva v dobi interneta avtorice Anne Kate, smo ugotovili, da so taktike prepričevanja ostale bolj ali manj enake, kot so bile v njeni raziskavi, ko družabna omrežja še niso bila tako razširjena kot v letu 2020. Taktike prepričevnaja so sledeče: manipulacija z znanostjo in raziskavami, spreminjanje hipoteze o tem katera komponenta cepiva povzroča nastanek določene bolezni, ustvarjanje t.i. »varnega prostora« s cenzuro določenih informacij in mnenj ter retorično napadanje opozicije. Analiziranje preko Aristotelove Retorike je pokazala, da je na Facebook straneh najmočnejši »patos«, še posebej tam, kjer so zbrana subjektivna pričevanja staršev, ki trdijo, da so cepiva poškodovala njihove otroke. »Logos« je bil najizrazitejši v tiskanih delih, kjer je z mnogimi viri in citati podkrepljena argumentacija, »etos« pa se izkaže le ob citiranju znanih oseb, kot je Mahatma Gandhi, ali pa imunologa, ki piše v prid njihovemu cilju. S pomočjo Fiska smo lahko II ugotovili, da je v pisnih virih prisotna kategorizacija informacij, s čimer bralec med seboj lažje poveže informacije, ki izven konteksta proticepilstva niso povezljive. V proticepilskih virih je uporabljenih tudi veliko metafor, ki so na eni strani zdravstvo in farmacevtsko industrijo prikazovale kot tirane in okrutneže, na drugi strani pa nasprotnike cepljenja kot odrešenike in razsvetljence. Po sledeh Barthesa se v slikovnem gradivu na Facebook straneh razbere konotativno sporočilo, da imajo cepiva slab vpliv in povzročajo tudi trpljenje. Sama argumentacija je bila v tiskanih virih veliko bolj strukturirana in jasna kot pa na Facebook straneh. Vsi viri imajo močan čustven naboj, izstopala sta le Facebook stran Civilna inciativa za prostovoljno cepljenje in delo Iluzije o cepivih, kjer ni bilo tako močnih negativnih čustev kot v ostalih virih. Through the method of discursive analysis, the diploma thesis explores the persuading of the audience of a few selected anti-vaccine sources that are available in Slovenia both online and in paperback form and how they are presenting the arguments. We did not investigate the anti-vaccine movement during the coronavirus pandemic but rather what was happening beforehand. The topic of vaccines has become very sensitive in the public sphere because there has been a flood of various publicly available information and research questioning the safety and efficacy of vaccines and the credibility of institutions advocating their use. Since regular vaccinations generally concern parents of school and preschool children, we defend the hypothesis that the arguments and beliefs in these media are supported by: emotional charge, various despective labels of vaccination supporters and the industry itself, and describing the sad stories of people, especially children who have suffered consequences of vaccination side effects to provoke fear, doubt, and concern about vaccination. In the theoretical part, we find that opposition to vaccination has been present since the 18th century and flared up in the 1970s with Gordon Stewart's anti-vaccination campaign in Great Britain and later with the famous Andrew Wakefield affair in the USA linked the MMR vaccine to the development of autism. The first extensive work in Slovenia that stimulated antivaccination mobilization in Slovenia was Mateja Černič's doctoral dissertation in 2014 and the later publication of the scientific monograph Ideološki konstrukti o cepljenju. In 2015, the first protest rally for "freedom to decide on vaccinations and other medical interventions in the body" occurred. In the empirical part, we analyzed anti-vaccine sources from the perspective of four authors who discussed the way pieces of information were presented: Anna Kata, Aristotle, John Fisk, and Roland Barthes. Through an analysis of anti-vaccination in the age of the Internet by author Anna Kata, we found that persuasion tactics remained more or less the same as they were in her research when social networks were not yet as widespread as in 2020. The persuasion tactics are: manipulated science and research, changing the hypothesis about which component of the vaccine causes a particular disease, creating Safe spaces by censoring certain information or opinions and finally attacking the opposition. Analysis through Aristotle’s Rhetoric has shown that the strongest appeal of persuasion on Facebook pages is pathos, especially where the subjective testimonies of parents who claim vaccines have harmed their children are collected. Logos was most distinctive in paperback sources. There the arguments are supported by many references and IV quotations. Ethos is revealed only by quoting famous people like Mahatma Gandhi or an immunologist who writes in favor of their goal. With the help of Fiske, we were able to establish that categorization of information is present in paperback sources, which makes it easier for the reader to connect information that is not compatible outside the context of vaccination. Many metaphors are used in anti-vaccination sources, portraying healthcare and the pharmaceutical industry as tyrants and savages on the one hand and opponents of vaccination as saviors and enlightened on the other. Through the analysis of Barthes, the images on the Facebook pages present the connotative message that vaccines have a damaging effect and cause suffering. The argument itself was much more structured and explicit in print sources than on Facebook pages. All sources have a strong emotional charge. Only the Facebook page Civilna inciativa za prostovoljno cepljenje and the work Iluzije o cepivih stood out, where the negative emotions were not that strongas strong as in other sources. proticepilstvo taktike prepričevanja konotativna sporočila sobe odmeva argumentacija notranja sredstva prepričevanja anti-vaccination persuasion tactics connotative messages echo rooms argumentation internal appeals of persuasion true false false [T. Čerin] Slovenski jezik Angleški jezik Diplomsko delo/naloga 2021-09-27 07:15:14 2021-09-27 07:15:35 2022-09-10 04:11:36 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2021 0 Ljubljana 0 Ljubljana 39 str. 0000-00-00 NiDoloceno NiDoloceno NiDoloceno 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 [316.658.4:614.47]:616-036.22(497.4)(043.2) 484186 87108355 15293.pdf 15293.pdf 1 79ED5DFE2506F5CF1CF34CFD7755A73D 24e7fdb44fbcba68290c9dffe8ebd6c81af8a86b33ca4fde372b56aaf45a4e14 ab2c734d-1f51-11ec-a523-00155dcfd717 https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/Dokument.php?lang=slv&id=148742 Filozofska fakulteta 0 0 0