Stratégie prezentovania väčšinového a menšinového názoru v online diskusiách o dotáciách do poľnohospodárstva

Drawing on discourse analysis and ethnomethodology, this study presents an analysis of online political discussions on the contentious issue of agricultural subsidies as a case of ‘talk-in-(inter)action’. A corpus retrieved from an internet forum biased towards right-wing framings of political issues furnished this study with a means to focus on an ‘inter-discursive’ contestation taking place within a debate setting characterised by an asymmetric representation of opposing viewpoints. Entries criticising and entries defending agricultural subsidies and/or farmers were juxtaposed and analysed as culturally adroit performances of the social role of a representative of a local majority or minority opinion. The paper provides an elucidation of the unequal demands on representation of these diverse positions and clarifies the effects of some frequently employed discursive strategies, which bolster both the persuasiveness of the promoted interpretation and the positioning of the represented discourse on the battlefield of gaining/maintaining discursive dominance. It is argued and shown that the position of local dominance vs. subordination is not a matter only of numerical prevalence, but also (and perhaps primarily) of the interactional co-production of respective positions and of the discursive accomplishment of corresponding social roles.