We are facing a lot of new communication strategies during the phylogenesis of the world wide web and the use of social media. One of these strategies is the concept of labelling speech as whataboutism. With the argument of whataboutism an utterance can be regarded as “a fail”, “topic missed” or “out of context”. This labelling might be pure subjective perception but as well can be objective and reflect the opinion of a majority. According to the concept of whataboutism some comments and utterances are not regarded as opinions or hints but as problematic speech out of the context which has do be detected. It is claimed that a specific utterance has got nothing to do with the main topic we’re talking about. These commentators responsible of whataboutism can even be called trolls in modern online communication.
But on the other hand, labelling utterances as whataboutism might be a form of discrimination. Finally, you might find the counterargument of bothsideism. Bothesideism claims that an utterance is not at all out of context but shows a different approach of a problem. The counterargument bothsideism caricatures the given argument of whataboutism. When the argument of whataboutism is used of discrimination reasons it is a form of linguistic corruption. Thus, it would be a way to dominate or disrespect the opinion of others or even bully them. A reasonable discussion might even become absurd when the accusation of whataboutism comes up. But it is a part of human nature to criticize others but it has to remain fair.
Hinweis: Du kannst diesen Text leider nicht kommentieren, da der Verfasser keine Kommentare von nicht angemeldeten Nutzern erlaubt.