LINGUISTIC STRATEGIES IN MISINFORMATION: A SEMANTIC-PRAGMATIC FRAMEWORK FOR DETECTING MANIPULATION IN MEDIA DISCOURSE

This article develops a semantic-pragmatic analysis methodology for identifying linguistic manipulation strategies in media texts. Through the application of six mechanisms – implicature, presupposition, pragmatic inferences, modality, genericity, and nominalisation (AUSTIN, 1975; CARLSON, 2011; GRICE, 1975; HEUSINGER; MAIENBORN; PORTNER, 2011; SIMONS, 2005; SPERBER; WILSON, 1995; STALNAKER, 1973; VON FINTEL, 2006) — I propose an analytical model that demonstrates how these linguistic resources can be exploited to create interpretive distortions. Although other mechanisms are available, I focus on these six as they are persistent in misinformation contexts. The analysis identifies five main manipulative strategies: (1) suggestion of biased meanings without explicit commitment to truth conditions, (2) naturalisation of controversial content as established fact, (3) obscuring the degree of commitment between epistemic necessity and deontic obligation, (4) promotion of essentialist universalisations, and (5) suppression of information about agents and responsibilities. The linguistic strategies that sustain misinformation are exemplified through a viral 2023 news story about inclusive terminology for transgender patients in healthcare. The case study serves as a paradigmatic example to demonstrate mechanisms commonly employed by misinformation fabricators. The results contribute to the semantics-pragmatics interface by operationalising the distinction between what is said and what is implicated, revealing how context-dependency mechanisms can be instrumentalised for manipulation, offering perspectives on semantic compositionality and pragmatic inferential processes, and contributing to media literacy and the growing field of digital pragmatics.