The effectiveness of manipulative communicative practices in political discourse

Abstract

The aim of the article is to conduct a comprehensive analysis of manipulative communicative practices in political discourse. In particular, attention is focused on identifying their main features, distinguishing between manipulation and political persuasion, and substantiating criteria for assessing the effectiveness of influence in the context of the digital information environment.

The study employs systemic-structural, discourse-analytical, comparative, and logical-analytical methods, which made it possible to examine manipulative communicative practices as a complex phenomenon of political discourse. Elements of content analysis are applied to identify mechanisms of manipulative influence, including emotional framing, selective information presentation, message repetition, and the discrediting of political opponents.

The essence of manipulative communicative practices is clarified, and the boundary between political persuasion and manipulation is outlined, which is determined by the degree of imposed interpretations and the restriction of alternative interpretations. It is found that the effectiveness of manipulative influence cannot be assessed solely by quantitative indicators of media activity. A system of criteria is substantiated, encompassing changes in political evaluations, the level of trust in institutions, the degree of political polarization, and the perception of alternative interpretations of events. It is established that manipulative practices are aimed at forming an emotionally charged perception of political reality and may intensify the cognitive fragmentation of the audience.

It is proved that the effectiveness of manipulative communicative practices in political discourse is determined not only by the scale of message dissemination but also by the depth of transformation of political perception. The distinction between manipulation and political persuasion is crucial for the correct analysis of communicative processes, as it makes it possible to differentiate between influence that restricts alternative interpretations and the argument-based formation of positions. The proposed approach enables a comprehensive assessment of both mechanisms of influence and their consequences for political consciousness and the level of social polarization.