Abstract:
This study examines the discursive strategies used in Twitter content regarding the 2023
Israel-Hamas conflict, highlighting how social, political, and historical contexts shape
public opinion and frame ideologies. Utilizing Wodak's Discourse Historical Approach
(DHA), the analysis focuses on influential figures such as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu and U.S. President Joe Biden, as well as the accounts of reputable organizations
and general public reactions. The study employs a four-level triangulatory analysis to
explore how language on social media serves as a tool for negotiating power, forming
identities, and disseminating ideologies in global conflicts. Central to this study is the
investigation of the linguistic choices that shape discursive strategies, influencing public
opinion by reinforcing existing ideologies and creating moral binaries for contesting
parties. The critical analysis reveals that political figures use these strategies to craft
arguments that promote solidarity, legitimacy, and moral superiority, while also
dehumanizing and indicting opposing actors. At the public discourse level, the study
illustrates how social media platforms like Twitter amplify polarized views by providing a
digital space to alter, restyle, and redefine geopolitical narratives in real time. The tweets
from various users, categorized into pro-Israeli, pro-Palestinian, humanitarian concerns,
and neutral positions, highlight how hashtags are utilized and how intensification or
mitigation strategies are employed to express ideological attitudes more forcefully. The
research reveals, through an analysis of intertextuality and interdiscursivity, how historical
grievances and cultural memory are continually recontextualized in ways that resonate with
emotional appeals and political affiliations. This study enhances our understanding of how
perceptions of conflict are shaped and how online discourse can reinforce ideological
differences, particularly during a time of rapid geopolitical change.
