Skip to main content
Open Book Publishers

8. Pictured hate: A visual discourse analysis of derogatory memes on Telegram

  • Lisa Bogerts (author)
  • Wyn Brodersen (author)
  • Maik Fielitz (author)
  • Pablo Jost (author)
Chapter of: Imagery of Hate Online(pp. 173–200)

Export Metadata

  • ONIX 3.1
  • ONIX 3.0
    • Thoth
    • Project MUSE
      Cannot generate record: No BIC or BISAC subject code
    • OAPEN
    • JSTOR
      Cannot generate record: No BISAC subject code
    • Google Books
      Cannot generate record: No BIC, BISAC or LCC subject code
    • OverDrive
      Cannot generate record: No priced EPUB or PDF URL
  • ONIX 2.1
  • CSV
  • JSON
  • OCLC KBART
  • BibTeX
  • CrossRef DOI deposit
    Cannot generate record: This work does not have any ISBNs
  • MARC 21 Record
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
  • MARC 21 Markup
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
  • MARC 21 XML
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
Metadata
Title8. Pictured hate
SubtitleA visual discourse analysis of derogatory memes on Telegram
ContributorLisa Bogerts (author)
Wyn Brodersen (author)
Maik Fielitz (author)
Pablo Jost (author)
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.11647/obp.0447.08
Landing pagehttps://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/obp.0447/chapters/10.11647/obp.0447.08
Licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
CopyrightLisa Bogerts; Wyn Brodersen; Maik Fielitz; Pablo Jost;
PublisherOpen Book Publishers
Published on2025-05-02
Long abstractMemes have become a propaganda weapon of far-right groups. While several studies highlight the strategic use of memes in far-right contexts, there is little empirical research on which groups these memes target, and how. As the visual stigmatisation of outgroups is a central means of communicating far-right worldviews, this study examines the visual propaganda of far-right and conspiratorial actors from a quantitative and qualitative perspective. To do this, we analysed memetic communication using computational and interpretive tools selected according to the visual discourse methodology. We collected our material from 1,675 alternative right-wing German-speaking channels of the messenger service Telegram, which we categorised into different sub-milieus and monitored continuously. Our findings suggest that there are significant differences in the way certain groups are targeted and a tendency to highlight the trigger points of current polarised public debates.
Page rangepp. 173–200
LanguageEnglish (Original)
Contributors

Lisa Bogerts

(author)
https://protestinstitut.eu/mitglieder/lisa-bogerts

Dr Lisa Bogerts is a Berlin-based independent political scientist and visual culture professional. For eleven years she has been researching, teaching and working practically on political conflicts and protest as well as visual communication and art. She wrote her doctoral thesis at the Goethe University Frankfurt (Cluster of Excellence "Normative Orders") and at the New School for Social Research, New York City.

Wyn Brodersen

(author)
Researcher at Jena Institute for Democracy and Civil Society
https://www.idz-jena.de/ueber-das-institut/mitarbeitende/wyn-brodersen

Wyn Brodersen is a sociologist and researcher at the Jena Institute for Democracy and Civil Society. His work examines the influence of digital interactions on radicalisation processes, focusing on digital subcultures, right-wing terrorism, and their intersections. He is part of the editorial team of the online magazine Machine Against the Rage (machine-vs-rage.bag-gegen-hass.net).

Maik Fielitz

(author)
Head of Research Unit at Jena Institute for Democracy and Civil Society
https://www.idz-jena.de/ueber-das-institut/mitarbeitende/maik-fielitz

Maik Fielitz is a social scientist and conflict researcher. He is the head of the research unit on digital conflict studies at the Jena Institute for Democracy and Civil Society, as well as co-editor of the online magazine Machine Against the Rage (machine-vs-rage.net). His research examines the ways in which digital technologies and digital cultures influence the emergence and evolution of right-wing extremism, as well as the strategies employed by liberal democracies to counter authoritarian tendencies in online contexts.

Pablo Jost

(author)
Visiting Professor / Strategic Advisor at Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz
https://www.polkom.ifp.uni-mainz.de/pablo-jost

Dr Pablo Jost is a communication scientist at the Institute of Journalism at the Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany, where he received his Ph.D. in 2022 with a thesis on "Popularity Indicators in Political Communication Research". He is currently a visiting professor at the Department of Journalism and Communication Research at the University of Music, Drama and Media, Hannover. As co-founder and strategic advisor of the Federal Association for Countering Online Hate, he investigates the communication of radical and extremist protest movements on digital platforms and their offline effects. His research also focuses on the media representation of social controversies, how political actors communicate, and how they adapt to the conditions of digitalization.

References
  1. Adorno, Theodor W., 2005. Minima Moralia: Reflections on a Damaged Life. London/New York: Verso.
  2. Askanius, Tina, 2021. “On Frogs, Monkeys, and Execution Memes: Exploring the Humor-Hate Nexus at the Intersection of Neo-Nazi and Alt-Right Movements in Sweden”. Television & New Media, 22 (2), 147–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476420982234
  3. ―, and Nadine Keller, 2021. “Murder fantasies in memes: fascist aesthetics of death threats and the banalization of white supremacist violence”. Information, Communication & Society, 24 (16), 2522–2539. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2021.1974517
  4. Bell, Philip, 2004, “Content Analysis of Visual Images”. In: T. van Leuwen and C. Jewitt (eds), The Handbook of Visual Analysis. London: Sage, 10–34.
  5. Beran, Dale, 2019. It Came from Something Awful: How a New Generation of Trolls Accidentally Memed Donald Trump into the White House. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
  6. Beyer, Jessica Lucia, 2014. Expect Us. Online Communities and Political Mobilization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  7. Bogerts, Lisa, 2022. The Aesthetics of Rule and Resistance. Analyzing Political Street Art in Latin America. New York: Berghahn Books Incorporated.
  8. ―, and Maik Fielitz, 2019. “‘Do You Want Meme War?’. Understanding the Visual Memes of the German Far Right”. In: Maik Fielitz and Nick Thurston (eds), Post-Digital Cultures of the Far Right. Online Actions and Offline Consequences in Europe and the US. Bielefeld: Transcript, 137–153.
  9. ―, and Maik Fielitz, 2023. “Fashwave. The Alt-Right’s Aesthetization of Politics and Violence”. In: Sarah Hegenbart and Mara Kölmel (eds), Dada Data. Contemporary Art Practice in the Era of Post-Truth Politics. London: Bloomsbury Visual Arts, 230–245.
  10. Brodie, Richard, 2009. Virus of the Mind. The New Science of the Meme. Seattle: Hay House.
  11. Buehling, Kilian and Annett Heft, 2023. “Pandemic Protesters on Telegram: How Platform Affordances and Information Ecosystems Shape Digital Counterpublics”. Social Media + Society, 9 (3), Article 20563051231199430. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231199430
  12. Cicchetti, Domenic V. and Sara A. Sparrow, 1981. “Developing criteria for establishing interrater reliability of specific items: applications to assessment of adaptive behavior”. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 86 (2), 127–137.
  13. Crawford, Blyth and Florence Keen, 2020. “Memetic irony and the promotion of violence in chan cultures”. Centre for Research and Evidence on Security Threats, London.
  14. Dawkins, Richard, 2006. The Selfish Gene. 30th Anniversary edn. New York: Oxford University Press.
  15. Dafaure, Maxime, 2020. The “‘Great Meme War’: the Alt-Right and its Multifarious Enemies”. Angles. New Perspectives on the Anglophone World, (10), 1–28.
  16. Doerr, Nicole, 2021. “The Visual Politics of the Alternative for Germany (AfD): Anti-Islam, Ethno-Nationalism, and Gendered Images”. Social Sciences, 10 (1), 20. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10010020
  17. Donovan, Joan, Emily Dreyfuss and Brian Friedberg, 2022. Meme Wars. The Untold Story of the Online Battles Upending Democracy in America. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.
  18. Gagnon, Audrey, 2023. “Far-right virtual communities: Exploring users and uses of far-right pages on social media”. Journal of Alternative & Community Media, 7 (2), 117–135. https://doi.org/10.1386/jacm_00108_1
  19. Galip, Idil, 2024. “Methodological and epistemological challenges in meme research and meme studies”. Internet Histories, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2024.2359846
  20. von Gehlen, Dirk, 2020. Meme. Muster digitaler Kommunikation. Berlin: Verlag Klaus Wagenbach.
  21. Grundlingh, L., 2018. “Memes as speech acts”. Social Semiotics, 28 (2), 147–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2017.1303020
  22. Hokka, Jenni and Matti Nelimarkka, 2019. “Affective economy of national-populist images: Investigating national and transnational online networks through visual big data”. New Media & Society, August. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819868686
  23. Jost, Pablo and Leyla Dogruel, 2023. “Radical Mobilization in Times of Crisis: Use and Effects of Appeals and Populist Communication Features in Telegram Channels”. Social Media + Society, 9 (3), Article 20563051231186372. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231186372
  24. Kirschen, Yaakov, 2010. “Memetics and the Viral Spread of Antisemitism Through ‘Coded Images’ in Political Cartoons”. Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy.
  25. Landis, J. Richard and Gary G. Koch, 1977. “An Application of Hierarchical Kappa-type Statistics in the Assessment of Majority Agreement among Multiple Observers”. Biometrics, 33 (2), 363–74.
  26. Macklin, Graham, 2019. “The Christchurch Attacks: Livestream Terror in the Viral Video Age”. CTC Sentinel, 12 (6), 18–29.
  27. Marwick, Alice, 2013. “Memes”. Contexts, 12 (4), 12–13.
  28. McSwiney, Jordan, Michael Vaughan, Annett Heft and Matthias Hoffmann, 2021. “Sharing the hate? Memes and transnationality in the far right’s digital visual culture”. Information, Communication & Society, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2021.1961006
  29. Miller-Idriss, Cynthia, 2020. Hate in the Homeland. The New Global Far Right. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  30. Mortensen, Mette and Christina Neumayer, 2021. “The playful politics of memes”. Information, Communication & Society, 24 (16), 2367–2377. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2021.1979622
  31. Nowotny, Joanna and Julian Reidy, 2022. Memes – Formen und Folgen eines Internetphänomens. Bielefeld: Transcript.
  32. Phillips, Whitney, 2015. This is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things. Mapping the Relationship Between Online Trolling and Mainstream Culture. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  33. Rathje, Jan, 2021. “’Money Rules the World, but Who Rules the Money?’ Antisemitism in post-Holocaust Conspiracy Ideologies”. In: Armin Lange, Kerstin Mayerhofer, Dina Porat and Lawrence H. Schiffman (eds), Confronting Antisemitism in Modern Media, the Legal and Political Worlds. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter, 45–68.
  34. Regier, Darrel A., William E. Narrow, Diana E. Clarke, Helena C. Kraemer,, S. Janet Kuramoto, Emily A. Kuhl and David J. Kupfer, 2013. “DSM-5 Field Trials in the United States and Canada, Part II: Test-Retest Reliability of Selected Categorical Diagnoses”. American Journal of Psychiatry, 170 (1), 59–70.
  35. Rose, Gillian, 2016. Visual Methodologies. An Introduction to Researching with Visual Materials. 4th edn. London: Sage.
  36. Schmid, Ursula Kristin, 2023. “Humorous hate speech on social media: A mixed-methods investigation of users’ perceptions and processing of hateful memes”. New Media & Society, Article 14614448231198169. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231198169
  37. ―, Heidi Schulze and Antonia Drexel, 2023. “Memes, humor, and the far right’s strategic mainstreaming”. Information, Communication & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2024.2329610
  38. Schulze, Heidi, Julian Hohner, Simon Greipl, Maximilian Girgnhuber, Isabell Desta and Diana Rieger, 2022. “Far-right conspiracy groups on fringe platforms: a longitudinal analysis of radicalization dynamics on Telegram”. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 28 (4), 1103–1126. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565221104977
  39. Shifman, Limor, 2013. “Memes in a Digital World: Reconciling with a Conceptual Troublemaker”. J Comput-Mediat Comm, 18 (3), 362–377. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12013
  40. ―, 2014. Memes in Digital Culture. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  41. Thorleifsson, Cathrine, 2021. “From cyberfascism to terrorism: On 4chan/pol/ culture and the transnational production of memetic violence”. Nations and Nationalism (28), 286–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12780
  42. Tuters, Marc, 2019. “LARPing & Liberal Tears. Irony, Belief and Idiocy in the Deep Vernacular Web”. In: Maik Fielitz and Nick Thurston (eds), Post-Digital Cultures of the Far Right. Online Actions and Offline Consequences in Europe and the US. Bielefeld: Transcript, 37–48.
  43. Winter, Aaron, 2019. Online Hate: “From the Far-Right to the ‘Alt-Right’ and from the Margins to the Mainstream”. In: Karen Lumsden and Emily Harmer (eds), Online Othering. Exploring Digital Violence and Discrimination on the Web. Cham: Springer, 39–63.
  44. Zannettou, Savvas, Tristan Caulfield, Jeremy Blackburn, Emiliano De Cristofaro, Michael Sirivianos, Gianluca Stringhini and Guillermo Suarez-Tangil, 2018. “On the Origins of Memes by Means of Fringe Web Communities”. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1805.12512
  45. Zick, Andreas, Carina Wolf, Beate Küpper, Eldad Davidov, Peter Schmidt and Wilhelm Heitmeyer, 2008. “The Syndrome of Group-Focused Enmity: The Interrelation of Prejudices Tested with Multiple Cross-Sectional and Panel Data”. Journal of Social Issues, 64 (2), 363–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.00566.x
  46. Zidani, Sulafa, 2021. “Messy on the inside: internet memes as mapping tools of everyday life”. Information, Communication & Society, 24 (16), 2378–2402. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2021.1974519