The Role of Social Network Platforms for Discursive Legitimation: Unveiling Neoliberalism Behind the Discourse on Public Universities
Abstract
This article investigates the discursive dispute for the (de)legitimation of public universities in Brazil and demonstrates how the interactions on social network platforms privilege discursive strategies that shift the debate from technical to identarian argumentative topos. Using the sociocognitive approach by Teun van Dijk, our analysis focuses on meanings that reside in the sociopolitical context of the message and constitute the context model manipulated by the information architecture of social media platforms. Understanding this dynamic was important to reveal how the commodification of education and disinvestment in higher education (HE) were and continue to be legitimatized, and also to explain why managerial attempts of public organizations to gain legitimacy through engagement and participation on social media have achieved modest results despite the growing importance of social media for legitimation.
Downloads
References
Ball, S. J. (2003). The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 215–228. doi: 10.1080/0268093022000043065
Barros, A., & Wanderley, S. (2020). Brazilian businessmen movements: Right-wing populism and the (dis)connection between policy and politics. Organization, 27(3), 394–404. doi: 10.1177/1350508419883378
Bielschowsky, C. E. (2019). Avaliando o desempenho e custos da graduação das Instituições Federais de Ensino Superior. EaD em Foco, 9(1), 1–23. doi: 10.18264/eadf.v9i1.828
Bitektine, A., & Haack, P. (2015). The “macro” and the “micro” of legitimacy: Toward a multilevel theory of the legitimacy process. Academy of Management Review, 40(1), 49–75. doi: 10.5465/amr.2013.0318
Bouvier, G., & Machin, D. (2018). Critical discourse analysis and the challenges and opportunities of social media. Review of Communication, 18(3), 178–192. doi: 10.1080/15358593.2018.1479881
Bowes-Catton, H., Brewis, J., Clarke, C., Drake, D. H., Gilmour, A., & Penn, A. (2020). Talkin’ ’bout a revolution? From quiescence to resistance in the contemporary university. Management Learning, 51(4), 378–397. doi: 10.1177/1350507620925633
Carmo, E. F., Chagas, J. A. S., Figueiredo Filho, D. B., & Rocha, E. C. (2014). Políticas públicas de democratização do acesso ao ensino superior e estrutura básica de formação no ensino médio regular. Revista brasileira de estudos pedagógicos, 95(240), 304–327. doi: 10.1590/S2176-66812014000200004
Ceron, A., Curini, L., Iacus, S. M., & Porro, G. (2014). Every tweet counts? How sentiment analysis of social media can improve our knowledge of citizens’ political preferences with an application to Italy and France. New Media & Society, 16(2), 340–358. doi: 10.1177/1461444813480466
Chatelain-Ponroy, S., Mignot-Gérard, S., Musselin, C., & Sponem, S. (2018). Is commitment to performance-based management compatible with commitment to university “publicness”? Academics’ values in French universities. Organization Studies, 39(10), 1377–1401. doi: 10.1177/0170840617717099
Clegg, S., Dany, F., & Grey, C. (2011). Critical management studies and managerial education: New contexts? New agenda? M@n@gement, 14(5), 271–279.
Contu, A. (2018). “…The point is to change it” – Yes, but in what direction and how? Intellectual activism as a way of “walking the talk” of critical work in business schools. Organization, 25(2), 282–293. doi: 10.1177/1350508417740589
Costa, C. F., & Goulart, S. (2018). The academic capitalism and neo-liberal reforms in Brazilian higher education. Cadernos EBAPE.BR, 16(3), 396–409. doi: 10.1590/1679-395165788
Da Silva, D. R., & Kerbauy, M. T. M. (2019). Eleições 2018 e a forte influência das redes sociais. In C. Costa & P. Blanco (Eds.), Liberdade de Expressão Questões da atualidade (pp. 125–143). Universidade de São Paulo. doi: 10.11606/9788572052597
De Cock, C. (1998). Organisational change and discourse: Hegemony, resistance and reconstitution. M@n@gement, 1(1), 1–22.
Durham, E. R. (2003). O ensino superior no Brasil: público e privado. Trabalho apresentado ao Núcleo de Pesquisas sobre Ensino Superior da Universidade de São Paulo. Retrieved from https://sites.usp.br/nupps/wp-content/uploads/sites/762/2020/12/dt0303.pdf
Estadão. (2018). Equipe de Bolsonaro quer cobrança de mensalidade em universidades federais [Facebook post]. Retrived from https://www.facebook.com/estadao/posts/2850236591658051
Forelle, M. C., Howard, P. N., Monroy-Hernandez, A., & Savage, S. (2015). Political bots and the manipulation of public opinion in venezuela. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2635800
Gabielkov, M., Ramachandran, A., Chaintreau, A., & Legout, A. (2016). Social clicks: What and who gets read on Twitter? In S. Alouf & A. Jean-Marie (Chair.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Science—SIGMETRICS ’16 (pp. 179–192). Antibes Juan-les-Pins (France). doi: 10.1145/2896377.2901462
Glozer, S., Caruana, R., & Hibbert, S. A. (2019). The never-ending story: Discursive legitimation in social media dialogue. Organization Studies, 40(5), 625–650. doi: 10.1177/0170840617751006
Grima, F. (2011). Between authenticity and conformism: Ideological tension as a lever for change in Business School. M@n@gement, 14(5), 311–350.
Humphrey, C., & Gendron, Y. (2015). What is going on? The sustainability of accounting academia. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 26, 47–66. doi: 10.1016/j.cpa.2014.09.008
Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais (INEP). (2022). Censo da Educação Superior 2020. Retrieved from https://download.inep.gov.br/educacao_superior/censo_superior/documentos/2020/tabelas_de_divulgacao_censo_da_educacao_superior_2020.pdf
Jaidka, K., Ahmed, S., Skoric, M., & Hilbert, M. (2019). Predicting elections from social media: A three-country, three-method comparative study. Asian Journal of Communication, 29(3), 252–273. doi: 10.1080/01292986.2018.1453849
Jelonek, M., & Mazur, S. (2020). Necessary changes, adverse effects? The institutional patterns of adaptation of economics universities to changes prompted by the reform of Poland’s science and higher education system. Management Learning, 51(4), 472–490. doi: 10.1177/1350507620913896
Jones, D. R., Visser, M., Stokes, P., Örtenblad, A., Deem, R., Rodgers, P., & Tarba, S. Y. (2020). The performative university: “Targets”, “terror” and “taking back freedom” in academia. Management Learning, 51(4), 363–377. doi: 10.1177/1350507620927554
Kemp, S. (2022, January 26). Digital 2022: Global overview report. Datareportal. Retrieved from https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2022-global-overview-report
KhosraviNik, M. (2017). Social media critical discourse studies (SM-CDS). In J. Flowerdew & J. E. Richardson (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of critical discourse studies (pp. 582–596). Routledge.
Knight, E., & Tsoukas, H. (2019). When fiction Trumps truth: What “post-truth” and “alternative facts” mean for management studies. Organization Studies, 40(2), 183–197. doi: 10.1177/0170840618814557
Kreis, R. (2017). The “Tweet politics” of president trump. Journal of Language and Politics, 16(4), 607–618. doi: 10.1075/jlp.17032.kre
McCann, L., Granter, E., Hyde, P., & Aroles, J. (2020). “Upon the gears and upon the wheels”: Terror convergence and total administration in the neoliberal university. Management Learning, 51(4), 431–451. doi: 10.1177/1350507620924162
Miller, B. (2010). Skills for sale: What is being commodified in higher education? Journal of Further and Higher Education, 34(2), 199–206. doi: 10.1080/03098771003695460
Minto, L. W. (2018). Gratuidade do ensino superior em estabelecimentos oficiais: precisão e implicações. Educação & Sociedade, 39(142), 153–170. doi: 10.1590/ES0101-73302018181580
Nurunnabi, M. (2018). Accounting for accountability: A critical reflection on the private higher education in Bangladesh. Administration & Society, 50(3), 429–470. doi: 10.1177/0095399715587523
OECD (2021), Education at a Glance 2021: OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/b35a14e5-en
Ozden, P. K., & Tanko, A. R. (2019). From Cambridge analytica to “O To Ge” (enough is enough): The dynamics of political canvassing and elections in a social media environment. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, III(XII), 185–193.
Parker, L. (2002). It’s been a pleasure doing business with you: A strategic analysis and critique of university change management. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 13(5–6), 603–619. doi: 10.1006/cpac.2002.0561
Patriotta, G., & Starkey, K. (2008). From utilitarian morality to moral imagination: Reimagining the business school. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17(4), 319–327. doi: 10.1177/1056492608324449
Reisigl, M., & Wodak, R. (2009). The discourse-historical approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 63–94). Sage.
Schmidt, V. A. (2017). Britain-out and trump-In: A discursive institutionalist analysis of the British referendum on the EU and the US presidential election. Review of International Political Economy, 24(2), 248–269. doi: 10.1080/09692290.2017.1304974
Stillman, G. (1974). The concept of legitimacy. Polity, 7(1), 32–56.
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. doi: 10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331
Vaara, E. (2014). Struggles over legitimacy in the Eurozone crisis: Discursive legitimation strategies and their ideological underpinnings. Discourse & Society, 25(4), 500–518. doi: 10.1177/0957926514536962
Vaara, E., & Tienari, J. (2008). A discursive perspective on legitimation strategies in multinational corporations. Academy of Management Review, 33(4), 985–993. Retrieved from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02276724
Vaara, E., & Tienari, J. (2011). On the narrative construction of multinational corporations: An antenarrative analysis of legitimation and resistance in a cross-border merger. Organization Science, 22(2), 370–390. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0593
Vaara, E., Tienari, J., & Laurila, J. (2006). Pulp and paper fiction: On the discursive legitimation of global industrial restructuring. Organization Studies, 27(6), 789–813. doi: 10.1177/0170840606061071
Van Dijk, T. (1998). Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Sage. doi: 10.4135/9781446217856
Van Dijk, T. (2011). Discourse, knowledge, power and politics. In C. Hart (Ed.), Critical discourse studies in context and cognition (pp. 27–64). John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/dapsac.43.03van
Van Dijk, T. (2014). Discourse-cognition-society: Current state and prospects of the socio- cognitive approach to discourse. In C. Hart & P. Cap (Eds.), Contemporary critical discourse studies (pp. 123–148). Bloomsbury.
Van Dijk, T. (2015). Critical discourse analysis. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. E. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 466–485). Wiley-Blackwell.
Varman, R., Saha, B., & Skålén, P. (2011). Market subjectivity and neoliberal governmentality in higher education. Journal of Marketing Management, 27(11–12), 1163–1185. doi: 10.1080/0267257X.2011.609134
Wieners, S., & Weber, S. M. (2020). Athena’s claim in an academic regime of performativity: Discursive organizing of excellence and gender at the intersection of heterotopia and heteronomia. Management Learning, 51(4), 511–530. doi: 10.1177/1350507620915198
Willmott, H. (1995). Managing the academics: Commodification and control in the development of university education in the U.K. Human Relations, 48(9), 993–1027. doi: 10.1177/001872679504800902
Zulfiqar, G., & Prasad, A. (2021). Challenging social inequality in the Global South: Class, privilege, and consciousness-raising through critical management education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 20(2), 156–181. doi: 10.5465/amle.2019.0294
Copyright (c) 2023 Daniel S. Lacerda, Rita Santos
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright of their work, with first publication rights granted to the AIMS.
Published by 