Edited by Massimiliano Demata and Donatella Montini This issue of Status Quaestionis seeks to investigate contemporary political communication from a sociolinguistic perspective, with particular attention to the phenomena of post-truth and populist discourse. In recent years, the relationship between language, politics, and society has been profoundly reshaped by the impact of social media, the spread of polarizing narratives, and the erosion of the traditional link between factual truth and public credibility. In this context, where “fake news”, “alternative facts”, and algorithmically driven amplification circulate at scale, the stakes for democratic debate are increasingly high. This issue of SQ aims to provide a critical contribution to the understanding of ongoing transformations in political communication, while reflecting on the risks and opportunities for democratic debate in a context increasingly marked by fragmentation, disinformation, and discursive oversimplification. It welcomes analyses that foreground how discursive practices shape public credibility, the mobilization of identities, and the production of simplified oppositions between “the people” and “the elites.” We will publish original papers drawing on textual corpora from public speeches, electoral campaigns, and digital interactions, examining how rhetorical strategies and linguistic choices contribute to redefining discursive authority, influencing not only electoral dynamics but also the collective perception of reality (including, crucially, social reality). Approaches may include or combine insights from discourse analysis, pragmatics, and critical sociolinguistics, with the goal of identifying recurring patterns in populist political language and assessing how these contribute to the construction of a simplified, oppositional, and identity-based imaginary. In view of the publication of this issue, we invite scholars to submit a 250-word proposal for an article. Contributions may address one or more of the following areas, or propose alternative topics closely related to them:Discursive constructions of truth, authority, and legitimacy in the post-truth eraPopulist rhetoric: linguistic, pragmatic, and stylistic strategiesPolitical discourse, polarization, and identity-buildingLanguage, emotions, and the mobilization of publicsThe role of metaphors, narratives, and frames in populist communicationDigital discourse, social media dynamics, and disinformationCritical Discourse Analysis, corpus-based studies, and computational approaches to political languageComparative perspectives on populist discourse in national and international contextsInterdisciplinary intersections: sociolinguistics, political science, media studies, and philosophy of languageWe further welcome contributions that explore:Platform-mediated dynamics (algorithmic visibility, virality, and influencer ecologies) and their effects on discursive authority and credibility;Conspiracy and post-truth formations as pragmatic and interactional practices (e.g., social validation through repetition).Abstracts (250 words), together with a short bio, should be sent to Massimiliano Demata (massimiliano.demata@unict.itD and Donatella Montini (donatella.montini@uniroma1.it).Final manuscripts should average 6,500 words (approximately 40,000 characters, including spaces).Deadline for abstract submission: 15 November.Deadline for final papers: 15 April.Expected publication date: December 2026ReferencesBergmann, Eirikur (2018). Conspiracy & Populism: The Politics of Misinformation. London: Palgrave.Bouvier, Gwen, & Machin, David (2020). Critical Discourse Analysis and the Challenges and Opportunities of Social Media. London: Routledge.Charteris-Black, Jonathan (2005). Politicians and Rhetoric. The Persuasive Power of Metaphor. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.Charteris-Black, Jonathan (2014). Analysing Political Speeches. Rhetoric, Discourse, Metaphor. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Demata, Massimiliano (2018). ““I think that maybe I wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t for Twitter”. Donald Trump’s Populist Style on Twitter.” Textus 31, 1, pp. 67-90.Di Martino, Elena, Blaxill, Luke. (eds.) (2018). Aspects of Political Language in the Age of “Post-Democracy” and Beyond. Textus 31, 1.Edelman, Murray (1964). The Symbolic Uses of Politics. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Edelman, Murray (1988). Constructing the Political Spectacle. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Fairclough, Norman (1989). Language and Power. London: Longman.Foucault, Michel (2002) (1969). The Archaeology of Knowledge. London: Routledge.Foucault, Michel (1976). Sorvegliare e punire. Torino: Einaudi.Judis, John B. (2016). The Populist Explosion. How the Great Recession Transformed American and European Politics. New York: Columbia Global Reports.Khosravinik, Majid (2018). “Social Media Techno-Discursive Design, Affective Communication and Contemporary Politics.” Fudan J. Hum. Soc. Sci. 11, 427–442.Khosravinik, Majid (ed.) (2020). Social Media Critical Discourse Studies. London, Routledge.Levitsky Steven & Ziblatt, Daniel (2018). How Democracies Die. What History Reveals About Our Future. New York: Penguin.Mazzoleni, Gianpietro (1998). La comunicazione politica. Bologna: Il Mulino.Moffitt, Benjamin (2016). The Global Rise of Populism. Performance, Political Style, and Representation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Montini, Donatella (2019). “Hockey Moms and Pitbulls: Populist Discourse and Female Leaders”. Costellazioni 8, 89-108.Mudde Cas, Rovira Kaltwasser, Cristòbal (2015). “Vox Populi or Vox Masculini? Populism and Gender in Northern Europe and South America.” Patterns of Prejudice 49 (1-2), 16-36.Mudde Cas, Rovira Kaltwasser, Cristòbal (2017). Populism. A Very Short Introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Taggart, Paul (2000). Populism. Buckingham: Open University Press.van Dijk, Teun (1997). Discourse as Structure and Process. London: Sage.Wodak, Ruth (2020). The Politics of Fear. The Shameless Normalization of Far-Right Discourse. Second edition. London: Sage.
