Publications and Research
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
12-15-2019
Abstract
A science museum exhibition about human health contains an exhibit that minimizes health impacts of air pollution. Relevant details, such as the full range of health risks; fossil fuel combustion; air quality statutes (and the local electrical utility’s violations of these statues), are omitted, while end users of electricity are blamed. The exhibit accomplishes this, not through outright falsification, but through selected “alternative facts” that change the focus and imply misleading alternate explanations. Using two classical rhetorical concepts (the practical syllogism and the enthymeme) allows for the surfacing of missing evidence and unstated directives underlying multimodal rhetoric. By stating multimedia arguments syllogistically, a technique is proposed for revealing hidden political sub-texts from beneath a putatively disinterested presentation of facts. The piece should be of interest to researchers, message designers and policy makers interested in the rhetoric of science, ecology, health and museums.
Included in
Critical and Cultural Studies Commons, Health Communication Commons, Museum Studies Commons, Social Influence and Political Communication Commons, Speech and Rhetorical Studies Commons
Comments
This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Lee, D.H. (2019), Minimizing the Dangers of Air Pollution Using Alternative Facts: A Science Museum Case Study. World Medical & Health Policy, 11: 379-394, which has been published in final form at doi:10.1002/wmh3.319. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions.