View source for Social:Dog whistle (politics)

{{Short description|Political messaging using coded language}}

In politics, a '''dog whistle''' is the use of [[Social:Loaded language|coded or suggestive language]] in political messaging to garner support from a particular group without provoking opposition. The concept is named after [[Physics:Ultrasound|ultrasonic]] dog whistles, which are audible to dogs but not humans. Dog whistles use language that appears normal to the majority but communicates specific things to intended audiences. They are generally used to convey messages on issues likely to provoke controversy without attracting negative attention.

==Origin and meaning==
According to [[Biography:William Safire|William Safire]], the term "dog whistle" in reference to politics may have been derived from its use in the field of [[Opinion poll|opinion poll]]ing. Safire quotes Richard Morin, director of polling for ''{{wipe|The Washington Post}}'', as writing in 1988: <blockquote>
subtle changes in question-wording sometimes produce remarkably different results&nbsp;... researchers call this the "Dog Whistle Effect": Respondents hear something in the question that researchers do not.<ref name="Safire 2008 190">{{cite book |last=Safire |first=William |date=2008 |title=Safire's Political Dictionary |edition=Revised |location=New York |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |page=190 |isbn=978-0-19-534334-2}}</ref>
</blockquote>
He speculates that campaign workers adapted the phrase from political pollsters.<ref name="Safire 2008 190" />

In her 2006 book, ''Voting for Jesus: Christianity and Politics in Australia'', academic Amanda Lohrey writes that the goal of the dog-whistle is to appeal to the greatest possible number of electors while alienating the smallest possible number. She uses as an example politicians choosing broadly appealing words such as "[[Philosophy:Family values|family values]]", which have extra resonance for Christians, while avoiding overt Christian moralizing that might be a turn-off for non-Christian voters.<ref name="9I6xx">{{cite book |last=Lohrey |first=Amanda|title=Voting for Jesus: Christianity and Politics in Australia |date=2006 |publisher=Black Inc. |location=Melbourne |isbn=1-86395-230-6 |pages=48–58}}</ref>

Australian political theorist Robert E. Goodin argues that the problem with dog-whistling is that it undermines democracy, because if voters have different understandings of what they were supporting during a campaign, the fact that they were seeming to support the same thing is "democratically meaningless" and does not give the dog-whistler a [[Philosophy:Mandate (politics)|policy mandate]].<ref name="Goodin">{{cite book |last=Goodin |first=Robert E. |title=Innovating Democracy: Democratic Theory and Practice after the Deliberative Turn |date=2008 |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |isbn=978-0-19-954794-4 |pages=224–228 |edition=Reprint}}</ref>

==History and usage==

===Australia===
The term was first picked up in Australian politics in the mid-1990s, and was frequently applied to the political campaigning of John Howard.<ref name="bYiNp">Grant Barrett, ''The official dictionary of unofficial English'', McGraw-Hill Professional, 2006, p. 90</ref> Throughout his 11 years as Australian prime minister and particularly in his fourth term, Howard was accused of communicating messages appealing to anxious Australian voters using [[Social:Code word (figure of speech)|code words]] such as "un-Australian", "mainstream", and "illegals".<ref name="e7GL8">{{cite book |last=Soutphommasane |first=Tim |title=Reclaiming Patriotism: Nation-building for Australian Progressives |date=2009 |publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}} |location=Melbourne |isbn=978-0-521-13472-9 |pages=19–20}}</ref><ref name="tjWI1">{{cite book |last=Gelber |first=Katharine |title=Speech Matters: Getting Free Speech Right |year=2011 |publisher=University of Queensland Press |location=St Lucia, Qld. |isbn=978-0-7022-3873-4 |pages=end–notes}}</ref>

One notable example was the Howard government's message on refugee arrivals. His government's tough stance on immigration was popular with voters, but was accused of using the issue to additionally send veiled messages of support to voters with racist leanings,<ref name="IWoUi">{{cite book |last=Garran |first=Robert |title=True believer: John Howard, George Bush and the American Alliance |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=lKDKREH24PsC |date=2004 |publisher=Allen & Unwin |isbn=978-1-74114-418-5 |page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=lKDKREH24PsC&pg=PA18 18] |via=Google Books |access-date=August 5, 2016 |archive-date=July 26, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230726112118/https://books.google.com/books?id=lKDKREH24PsC |url-status=live }}</ref> while maintaining [[Social:Plausible deniability|plausible deniability]] by avoiding overtly racist language.<ref name="TAIFear">{{cite web |first=Josh |last=Fear |url=http://www.tai.org.au/sites/default/files/DP96_8.pdf |title=Under the Radar: Dog-whistle Politics in Australia] |work=TAI.org.au |publisher=[[Organization:The Australia Institute|The Australia Institute]] |date=September 2007 |access-date=April 11, 2019 |archive-date=November 12, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201112021055/https://www.tai.org.au/sites/default/files/DP96_8.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> Another example was the publicity of the Australian citizenship test in 2007.<ref name="TAIFear" /> It has been argued that the test may appear reasonable at face value, but is really intended to appeal to those opposing immigration from particular geographic regions.<ref name="KLDVx">{{cite news |url=http://www.smh.com.au/news/editorial/no-question-about-a-citizenship-test/2006/12/12/1165685675052.html |title=No Question About a Citizenship Test |work=The Sydney Morning Herald |date=December 13, 2006 |access-date=July 17, 2014 |archive-date=September 24, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924195822/http://www.smh.com.au/news/editorial/no-question-about-a-citizenship-test/2006/12/12/1165685675052.html |url-status=live }}</ref>

===Canada===

During the 2015 Canadian federal election, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) drew attention to the [[Finance:Conservative Party of Canada|Conservative party]] (led by incumbent Prime Minister Stephen Harper) communicating "[a] codeword for non-white Canadians" in a debate to appeal to his party's base supporters.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/harper-old-stock-canadians-debate-1.3233615 |title= Harper's 'Old-stock Canadians' Line is Part Deliberate Strategy: Pollster |date= September 18, 2015 |work=CBC News |publisher=Canadian Broadcasting Corporation |access-date= May 6, 2016 |archive-date= February 5, 2021 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20210205083436/https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/harper-old-stock-canadians-debate-1.3233615 |url-status=live | quote = A codeword for non-white Canadians [...] Former Quebec Liberal MP Marlene Jennings took offence to Harper's use of the phrase in the debate.}}</ref>
Midway through the election campaign the Conservative Party had hired Australian political strategist Lynton Crosby as a political adviser when they fell to third place in the polls - behind the Liberal Party and the New Democratic Party.<ref name="0kCMa">{{cite news |url= https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/conservatives-hire-high-profile-australian-strategist-to-reboot-campaign/article26315392/ |title= Controversial Australian strategist to help with Tories' campaign |first= Steven |last= Chase |date= September 11, 2015 |access-date=6 May 2016 |archive-date=March 8, 2021 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20210308172906/https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/conservatives-hire-high-profile-australian-strategist-to-reboot-campaign/article26315392/ |url-status=live }}</ref> On 17 September 2015, during a televised election debate, Stephen Harper, while discussing the government's controversial decision to remove certain immigrants and refugee claimants from accessing Canada's health care system, made reference to "Old Stock Canadians" as being in support of the government's position. Opposition leaders, including former Quebec Liberal MP Marlene Jennings, called his words racist and divisive, as they are used to exclude Canadians of colour.<ref name="9ISYP">{{cite web |url= http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/harper-old-stock-canadians-debate-1.3233615 |title= Harper's 'Old-stock Canadians' Line is Part Deliberate Strategy: Pollster |date= September 18, 2015 |work=CBC News |publisher=Canadian Broadcasting Corporation |access-date=May 6, 2016 |archive-date=February 5, 2021 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20210205083436/https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/harper-old-stock-canadians-debate-1.3233615 |url-status=live }}</ref>

=== Indonesia ===
Darmawan Prasodjo notes the use of the concept of "strong leadership" as a dog whistle in the context of Indonesian politics.<ref>
{{cite book
 |author1              = Darmawan Prasodjo
 |translator-last1     = Hannigan
 |translator-first1    = Tim
 |date                 = 28 December 2021
 |title                = Jokowi and the New Indonesia: A Political Biography
 |url                  = https://books.google.com/books?id=D_JPEAAAQBAJ

 |publication-place    = North Clarendon, Vermont
 |publisher            = Tuttle Publishing
 |isbn                 = 9781462922758
 |access-date          = 18 November 2023
 |quote                = With a 'strong leader,' the argument went, Indonesia had been better run. [...] On the campaign trail, Prabowo Subianto dressed in a retro white safari suit and black ''peci'' (cap), and did a passable impression of Sukarno at the microphone, while at the same time deploying dog-whistle references to 'strong leadership.'
}} 
</ref>

===Israeli–Palestinian conflict===
The popular Palestinian nationalist and [[Social:Anti-Zionism|Anti-Zionist]] slogan "[[Social:From the river to the sea|from the river to the sea]]" has been called dog-whistle for the complete destruction of Israel by Charles C. W. Cooke and Seth Mandel.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2018-11-30 |title=Dog-Whistle Expert Falls Prey to Dog-Whistle Experts |url=https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/marc-lamont-hill-firing-dog-whistle/ |access-date=2023-11-28 |website=National Review |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Shaw |first=Adam |date=2018-11-29 |title=CNN commentator accused of dog-whistling for Israel's elimination in well-received UN speech |url=https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cnn-commentator-accused-of-dog-whistling-for-israels-elimination-in-well-received-un-speech |access-date=2023-11-28 |website=Fox News |language=en-US}}</ref> Pat Fallon called its usage "a thinly veiled call for the genocide of millions of Jews in Israel," and the Anti-Defamation League notes that, "It is an antisemitic charge denying the Jewish right to self-determination, including through the [[Social:Ethnic cleansing|removal]] of Jews from their ancestral homeland."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Hernandez |first=Joe |date=2023-11-09 |title=How interpretations of the phrase 'from the river to the sea' made it so divisive |url=https://www.npr.org/2023/11/09/1211671117/how-interpretations-of-the-phrase-from-the-river-to-the-sea-made-it-so-divisive |website=NPR}}</ref>

===United Kingdom===
Lynton Crosby, who had previously managed John Howard's four election campaigns in Australia, worked as a [[Finance:Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]] adviser during the 2005 UK general election, and the term was introduced to British political discussion at this time.<ref name="Safire 2008 190" /> In what Goodin calls "the classic case" of dog-whistling,<ref name="Goodin" /> Crosby created a campaign for the Conservatives with the slogan "Are you thinking what we're thinking?": a series of posters, billboards, TV commercials and direct mail pieces with messages like "It's not racist to impose limits on immigration" and "how would you feel if a bloke on early release attacked your daughter?"<ref name="NA7A5">{{cite book |last=Lees-Marshment |first=Jennifer |title=Political Marketing: Principles and Applications |date=2009 |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |location=London |isbn=978-0-415-43128-6 |pages=169}}</ref> focused on controversial issues like insanitary<!-- NOT A MISTAKE ... while "unsanitary" is the more frequent form in North America, "insanitary" reflects British usage, (and this is after all the "United Kingdom" subsection) --> hospitals, land grabs by squatters and restraints on police behaviour.<ref name="FAwoS">{{cite magazine |last=McCallister |first=J. F. O. |title=Whistling in the Dark?|url= http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1044651,00.html| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130213221941/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1044651,00.html | archive-date=2013-02-13 | url-status=dead |access-date=September 9, 2012 |magazine={{wipe|Time (magazine)}} |date=April 3, 2005}}</ref><ref name="DLolj">{{cite book |last=Seawright |first=David |title=The British Conservative Party and One Nation Politics |date=2007 |publisher=Continuum |location=London |isbn=978-0-8264-8974-6 |page=134}}</ref>

===United States===

==== 20th century ====
The phrase "states' rights", literally referring to powers of individual state governments in the United States, was described in 2007 by journalist David Greenberg in ''Slate'' as "code words" for institutionalized segregation and racism.<ref name="pX4zL">{{cite web |url=http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history_lesson/2007/11/dogwhistling_dixie.html |title=Dog-Whistling Dixie: When Reagan said "states' rights", he was talking about race |work=Slate |date=November 20, 2007 |access-date=May 21, 2012 |last=Greenberg |first=David |archive-date=January 12, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120112144213/http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history_lesson/2007/11/dogwhistling_dixie.html |url-status=live }}</ref> ''States' rights'' was the banner under which groups like the Defenders of State Sovereignty and Individual Liberties argued in 1955 against school desegregation.<ref name="eqMSs">{{cite web |title=A Plan for Virginia Presented to the People of the Commonwealth by the Defenders of State Sovereignty and Individual Liberties |date=June 8, 1955 |publisher=Defenders of State Sovereignty and Individual Liberties |url=http://dc.lib.odu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/npsdp/id/1149 |via=[[Organization:Old Dominion University|Old Dominion University]] Libraries Digital Collections |access-date=August 30, 2017 |archive-date=August 30, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170830193048/http://dc.lib.odu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/npsdp/id/1149 |url-status=live }}</ref>  In 1981, former Republican Party strategist Lee Atwater, when giving an anonymous interview discussing former president Richard Nixon's [[Social:Southern strategy|Southern strategy]], speculated that terms like "states' rights" were used for dog-whistling:<ref name="twopartysouth">{{cite book |last=Lamis |first=Alexander P. |date=1990 |title=The Two Party South |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]]|display-authors=0}}</ref><ref name="NYTHerbert">{{citation |last=Herbert |first=Bob |date=October 6, 2005 |access-date=February 5, 2016 |url=https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C04E6DF1E30F935A35753C1A9639C8B63 |title=Impossible, Ridiculous, Repugnant |work=The New York Times |archive-date=January 4, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120104090130/http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C04E6DF1E30F935A35753C1A9639C8B63 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="62mU2">{{YouTube|id=X_8E3ENrKrQ|title=Exclusive: Lee Atwater's Infamous 1981 Interview on the Southern Strategy}}</ref>

{{blockquote|You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968, you can't say "nigger"{{snd}} that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights, and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now, you're talking about cutting taxes. And all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me{{snd}} because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this" is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."<ref name="i2haX">{{cite book|author1=Craig S. Pascoe|author2=Karen Trahan Leathem|author3=Andy Ambrose|title=The American South in the Twentieth Century|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BfWO5zvjFV4C|year=2005|publisher=University of Georgia Press|isbn=978-0-8203-2771-6|page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=BfWO5zvjFV4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq=%22you+start+out+in+1954%22# 230]|access-date=May 13, 2020|archive-date=July 26, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230726112118/https://books.google.com/books?id=BfWO5zvjFV4C|url-status=live}}</ref>}}

Atwater was contrasting this with then-President Ronald Reagan's campaign, which he felt "was devoid of any kind of racism, any kind of reference". However, Ian Haney López, an American law professor and author of the 2014 book ''Dog Whistle Politics'', described Reagan as "blowing a dog whistle" when the candidate told stories about "[[Company:Cadillac|Cadillac]]-driving 'welfare queens' and 'strapping young bucks' buying T-bone steaks with food stamps" while he was campaigning for the presidency.<ref name="Lopez_2014">{{cite book |last=Haney López |first=Ian |date=2014 |title=Dog Whistle Politics: How Coded Racial Appeals Have Reinvented Racism and Wrecked the Middle Class |location=New York |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |page=4 |isbn=978-0-19-996427-7}}</ref><ref name="JRsX9">{{Cite web |title=Ian Haney López on the Dog Whistle Politics of Race (Part I) {{!}} Moyers & Company |url=https://billmoyers.com/episode/ian-haney-lopez-on-the-dog-whistle-politics-of-race/ |access-date=2023-07-16 |website=BillMoyers.com |language=en-US |archive-date=December 17, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221217101310/https://billmoyers.com/episode/ian-haney-lopez-on-the-dog-whistle-politics-of-race/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="bpr_berkeley_2015">{{cite web |url=http://bpr.berkeley.edu/2015/11/09/a-coded-political-mantra/ |title=A Coded Political Mantra |work=Berkeley Political Review |publisher=University of California Berkeley |date=November 9, 2015 |access-date=February 5, 2016 |last=Yao |first=Kevin |archive-date=July 10, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170710162638/https://bpr.berkeley.edu/2015/11/09/a-coded-political-mantra/ |url-status=live }}</ref> He argues that such rhetoric pushes middle-class white Americans to vote against their economic self-interest in order to punish "undeserving minorities" who, they believe, are receiving too much public assistance at their expense. According to López, conservative middle-class whites, convinced by powerful economic interests that minorities are the enemy, supported politicians who promised to curb illegal immigration and crack down on crime but inadvertently also voted for policies that favor the extremely rich, such as slashing taxes for top income brackets, giving corporations more regulatory control over industry and financial markets, union busting, cutting pensions for future public employees, reducing funding for public schools, and retrenching the social welfare state. He argues that these same voters cannot link rising inequality which has affected their lives to the policy agendas they support, which resulted in a massive transfer of wealth to the top 1 percent of the population since the 1980s.<ref name="atxAG">{{cite web |url=http://billmoyers.com/episode/ian-haney-lopez-on-the-dog-whistle-politics-of-race/ |title=Ian Haney López on the Dog Whistle Politics of Race, Part I |work=Moyers & Company |date=February 28, 2014 |via=BillMoyers.com |access-date=January 4, 2015 |archive-date=August 15, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170815165213/http://billmoyers.com/episode/ian-haney-lopez-on-the-dog-whistle-politics-of-race/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="H8hjB">{{cite book |title=Dog Whistle Politics: How Coded Racial Appeals Have Reinvented Racism and Wrecked the Middle Class |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |date=2014 |isbn=978-0-19-996427-7 |url= https://global.oup.com/academic/product/dog-whistle-politics-9780190229252?cc=us&lang=en& |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20141218104049/https://global.oup.com/academic/product/dog-whistle-politics-9780199964277?cc=us&lang=en& |archive-date=December 18, 2014}}</ref>

In the US the phrase "international bankers" is a well-known dog whistle code for Jews. Its use as such is derived from the anti-Semitic fabrication ''The Protocols of the Elders of Zion''. It was frequently used by the fascist-supporting radio personality Charles Coughlin on his national show. His repeated use of the term was a factor in the distributor CBS opting not to renew his contract.<ref name="MacW20">{{cite book |last1=MacWilliams |first1=Matthew C. |title=On fascism: 12 Lessons from American history |date=2020 |publisher=St. Martin's Griffin |chapter=All Lies Matter |location=New York |isbn=9781250752697 |pages=30–41 |url=https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250752697/onfascism |access-date=May 23, 2022 |archive-date=July 16, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230716103237/https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250752697/onfascism |url-status=live }}</ref> The word "globalists" is similarly widely considered an anti-Semitic dog whistle.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/all/is-globalist-an-antisemitic-dog-whistle-well-it-depends-whos-using-it-2cp39IYnW48QkY6163cDS5 |title=Is 'globalist' an antisemitic dog-whistle? Well it depends who's using it |last=Aaronovich |first=David |date= |work=The Jewish Chronicle |access-date= |quote= |archive-date=May 17, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230517185330/https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/all/is-globalist-an-antisemitic-dog-whistle-well-it-depends-whos-using-it-2cp39IYnW48QkY6163cDS5 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-unga-un-speech-globalists-patriots-antisemitic-a9118581.html |title=Trump accused of using antisemitic trope during UN speech |last= |first= |date=September 25, 2019 |work=The Independent |access-date= |quote= |archive-date=May 17, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230517185332/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-unga-un-speech-globalists-patriots-antisemitic-a9118581.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/03/the-origins-of-the-globalist-slur/555479/https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-anti-semitic-globalist-koch-1052375 |title=The Origins of the 'Globalist' Slur |last=Zimmer |first=Ben |date=March 14, 2018 |work=The Atlantic |access-date= |quote= |archive-date=July 26, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230726112120/https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/03/the-origins-of-the-globalist-slur/555479/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-anti-semitic-globalist-koch-1052375 |title=Donald Trump Keeps Calling Adversaries 'Globalists,' Despite Warnings It's Anti-Semitic |last=Goodkind |first=Nicole |date=August 2018 |work=Newsweek |access-date= |quote= |archive-date=March 29, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230329203012/https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-anti-semitic-globalist-koch-1052375 |url-status=live }}</ref>

==== 21st century ====
Journalist Craig Unger wrote that President George W. Bush and Karl Rove used coded "dog-whistle" language in political campaigning, delivering one message to the overall electorate while at the same time delivering quite a different message to a targeted [[Religion:Evangelicalism|evangelical Christian]] political base.<ref name="83AUg">{{cite book |last=Unger |first=Craig |title=The Fall of the House of Bush: The Untold Story of How a Band of True Believers Seized the Executive Branch, Started the Iraq War, and Still Imperils America's Future |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=pSQJLqms8CcC |date=2007 |publisher=Simon & Schuster |isbn=978-0-7432-8075-4 |chapter=11. Dog Whistle Politics |chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=pSQJLqms8CcC&pg=PA159 |pages=[https://books.google.com/books?id=pSQJLqms8CcC&pg=PA172 172–173]}}</ref> [[Biography:William Safire|William Safire]], in ''Safire's Political Dictionary'', offered the example of Bush's criticism during the 2004 presidential campaign of the U.S. Supreme Court's 1857 ''Dred Scott'' decision denying the U.S. citizenship of any African American. To most listeners the criticism seemed innocuous, Safire wrote, but "sharp-eared observers" understood the remark to be a pointed reminder that Supreme Court decisions can be reversed, and a signal that, if re-elected, Bush might nominate to the Supreme Court a justice who would overturn ''Roe v. Wade''.<ref name="Safire 2008 190" /> This view is echoed in a 2004 ''{{wipe|Los Angeles Times}}'' article by Peter Wallsten.<ref name="Xu7b9">{{cite web |url=http://articles.latimes.com/2004/oct/13/nation/na-dred13 |title=Abortion Foes Call Bush's Dred Scott Reference Perfectly Clear |work={{wipe|Los Angeles Times}} |date=October 13, 2004 |access-date=November 19, 2013 |last=Wallsten |first=Peter |archive-date=December 22, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131222210008/http://articles.latimes.com/2004/oct/13/nation/na-dred13 |url-status=live }}</ref>

During [[Biography:Barack Obama|Barack Obama]]'s campaign and presidency, a number of left-wing commentators described various statements about Obama as racist dog-whistles. During the 2008 Democratic primaries, writer Enid Lynette Logan criticized Hillary Clinton's campaign's reliance on code words and innuendo seemingly designed to frame Barack Obama's race as problematic, saying Obama was characterized by the Clinton campaign and its prominent supporters as anti-white due to his association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright, as able to attract only black votes, as anti-patriotic, a drug user, possibly a drug seller, and married to an angry, ungrateful black woman.<ref name="s4hcV">{{cite book |last=Logan |first=Enid Lynette |title='At This Defining Moment': Barack Obama's Presidential Candidacy and the New Politics of Race |publisher=New York University Press |isbn=978-0-8147-5298-2 |pages=62|date=October 2011}}</ref> A light-hearted 2008 article by Amy Chozick in ''{{wipe|The Wall Street Journal}}'' questioned whether Obama was too thin to be elected president, given the average weight of Americans; commentator Timothy Noah wrote that this was a racist dog-whistle, because "When white people are invited to think about Obama's physical appearance, the principal attribute they're likely to dwell on is his dark skin."<ref>{{cite web |title=Noah's Shark |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB121795654750413657 |work=The Wall Street Journal |first=James |last=Taranto |date=August 5, 2008 |access-date=May 28, 2021 |archive-date=July 16, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230716103239/https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB121795654750413657 |url-status=live }}</ref> In a 2010 speech, Sarah Palin criticized Obama, saying "we need a commander in chief, not a professor of law standing at the lectern". Harvard professor (and Obama ally) Charles Ogletree called this attack racist, because the true idea being communicated was "that he's not one of us".<ref>{{cite web |title=Hot Enough for You? |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703382904575059270348147154 |work=The Wall Street Journal |first=James |last=Taranto |date=February 11, 2010 |access-date=May 28, 2021 |archive-date=July 16, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230716103237/https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703382904575059270348147154 |url-status=live }}</ref> MSNBC commentator Lawrence O'Donnell called a 2012 speech by [[Biography:Mitch McConnell|Mitch McConnell]], in which McConnell criticized Obama for playing too much golf, a racist dog-whistle because O'Donnell felt it was meant to remind listeners of black golfer Tiger Woods, who at the time was going through an infidelity scandal.<ref>{{cite web |title=MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell: Mocking Obama's Golfing is an Attempt to Portray Him as an Oversexed Black Man |url=https://reason.com/2012/08/30/msnbcs-lawrence-odonnell-mocking-obamas/ |work=Reason |first=Nick |last=Gillespie |date=August 30, 2012 |access-date=May 28, 2021 |archive-date=January 29, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230129194536/https://reason.com/2012/08/30/msnbcs-lawrence-odonnell-mocking-obamas/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

In 2012, Obama's campaign ran an ad in Ohio that said Mitt Romney was "not one of us".<ref name="P2e9N">{{YouTube |id=Mgiuq2uR6LA |title=Made in Ohio{{snd}} Obama for America TV Ad}}</ref> ''The Washington Post'' journalist Karen Tumulty wrote: "ironically, it echoes a slogan that has been used as a racial code over at least the past half-century".<ref name="svuVJ">{{cite news |first=Karen |last=Tumulty |date=October 22, 2012 |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/obama-mitt-romney-not-one-of-us/2012/10/22/e78714ba-1bb3-11e2-9cd5-b55c38388962_story.html |title=Obama's 'not one of us' attack on Romney echoes racial code |newspaper={{wipe|The Washington Post}} |access-date=August 26, 2017 |archive-date=May 30, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230530172416/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/obama-mitt-romney-not-one-of-us/2012/10/22/e78714ba-1bb3-11e2-9cd5-b55c38388962_story.html |url-status=live }}</ref>

During the 2016 presidential election campaign and on a number of occasions throughout his presidency, Donald Trump was accused of using racial and antisemitic "dog whistling" techniques by politicians and major news outlets.<ref name="zgfSo">{{cite web |first=Eli |last=Stokols |title=Jeb: Trump using racial 'dog whistle' |url=http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/bush-trump-dog-whistle-213334 |date=September 3, 2015 |access-date=May 1, 2017 |work=Politico.com |archive-date=August 30, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170830234307/http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/bush-trump-dog-whistle-213334 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="13gWa">{{cite news |first=Cheryl |last=Greenberg |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/10/26/donald-trumps-conspiracy-theories-sound-anti-semitic-does-he-even-realize-it/ |title=Donald Trump's conspiracy theories sound anti-Semitic. Does he even realize it? |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=October 26, 2016 |access-date=May 1, 2017 |archive-date=March 20, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170320024637/https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/10/26/donald-trumps-conspiracy-theories-sound-anti-semitic-does-he-even-realize-it/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="ZZjYX">{{cite news |last=Bernstein |first=David |newspaper=The Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/03/20/on-anti-semitism-and-dog-whistles/ |title=On anti-Semitism and dog whistles |date=March 20, 2017 |access-date=May 1, 2017 |archive-date=March 21, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170321025241/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/03/20/on-anti-semitism-and-dog-whistles/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="Vxdkq">{{cite web |url=http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-condemning-trump-s-dog-whistle-1478205426-htmlstory.html |title=Condemning Trump's 'dog-whistle' campaign, Clinton cites endorsement in KKK newspaper |work={{wipe|Los Angeles Times}} |first=Michael |last=Memoli |date=November 3, 2016 |access-date=May 1, 2017 |archive-date=January 11, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170111114239/http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-condemning-trump-s-dog-whistle-1478205426-htmlstory.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="8HiMG">{{cite news |title=Trump's white-nationalist dog whistles in Warsaw |newspaper=The Washington Post |last=Capehart |first=Jonathan |date=July 6, 2017 |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2017/07/06/trumps-white-nationalist-dog-whistles-in-warsaw/ |access-date=August 30, 2017 |archive-date=August 12, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220812224723/https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2017/07/06/trumps-white-nationalist-dog-whistles-in-warsaw/ |url-status=live }}</ref> ''{{wipe|New York Times}}'' columnist [[Biography:Ross Douthat|Ross Douthat]] remarked that the Trump campaign "slogan 'Make America Great Again' can be read as a dog-whistle to some whiter and more Anglo-Saxon past".<ref>{{cite web |first=Ross |last=Douthat |access-date=26 April 2023 |work=The New York Times |url=https://archive.nytimes.com/douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/08/10/the-donald-and-decadence/ |title=The Donald and Decadence |date=10 August 2015 |archive-date=April 26, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230426150234/https://archive.nytimes.com/douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/08/10/the-donald-and-decadence/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

Former Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson has been reported to use dog-whistling tactics on his former commentary show ''Tucker Carlson Tonight''.<ref>{{Cite magazine |date=2018-08-10 |title="The America We Know Doesn't Exist Anymore": Fox's Dog Whistle Becomes an Air Horn |url=https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/08/laura-ingraham-white-nationalist-rhetoric |access-date=2023-05-08 |magazine=Vanity Fair |language=en-US |archive-date=March 25, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230325174819/https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/08/laura-ingraham-white-nationalist-rhetoric |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2021-04-20 |title=ADL: Fox should fire Carlson for white-supremacist rhetoric |url=https://apnews.com/article/race-and-ethnicity-tucker-carlson-jonathan-greenblatt-immigration-3ef70ca8eff84dd2c424288be1cc2f48 |access-date=2023-05-08 |website=AP NEWS |language=en |archive-date=December 26, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211226183821/https://apnews.com/article/race-and-ethnicity-tucker-carlson-jonathan-greenblatt-immigration-3ef70ca8eff84dd2c424288be1cc2f48 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Davies |first=Dave |date= |title=Has Tucker Carlson created the most racist show in the history of cable news? |website=NPR |url=https://www.npr.org/2022/05/12/1098488908/has-tucker-carlson-created-the-most-racist-show-in-the-history-of-cable-news |access-date=May 8, 2023 |archive-date=June 28, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230628114636/https://www.npr.org/2022/05/12/1098488908/has-tucker-carlson-created-the-most-racist-show-in-the-history-of-cable-news |url-status=live }}</ref>

During the 2018 gubernatorial race in Florida, Ron DeSantis came under criticism for comments that were allegedly racist, saying: "The last thing we need to do is to monkey this up by trying to embrace a socialist agenda with huge tax increases and bankrupting the state. That is not going to work. That's not going to be good for Florida."<ref name="Cvm0V">{{cite news|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/desantis-under-fire-saying-florida-should-t-monkey-electing-gillum-n904746|title=Gillum responds to 'monkey this up' comment: DeSantis is joining Trump 'in the swamp'|website=NBC News|access-date=December 31, 2020|archive-date=June 17, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220617031928/https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/desantis-under-fire-saying-florida-should-t-monkey-electing-gillum-n904746|url-status=live}}</ref> DeSantis was accused of using the verb "monkey" as a racist dog whistle; his opponent, Andrew Gillum, was African-American. DeSantis denied that his comment was meant to be racially charged.<ref name="cUXyS">{{cite web|url=https://www.rollcall.com/2018/08/30/floridas-ron-desantis-doubles-down-on-monkey-this-up-comment/|title=Florida's Ron DeSantis Doubles Down on 'Monkey This Up' Comment|date=August 30, 2018|website=Roll Call|access-date=December 31, 2020|archive-date=January 7, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230107215312/https://rollcall.com/2018/08/30/floridas-ron-desantis-doubles-down-on-monkey-this-up-comment/|url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Italy ===
Roberto Saviano of ''{{wipe|The Guardian}}'' claimed that Italian right-wing politician Giorgia Meloni used the Mussolini-era slogan "God, homeland, family" as a dog-whistle to signal her anti-immigration stance, and in 2019, she used her identity as a dog whistle, proclaiming at a rally: "I am Giorgia, I am a woman, I am a mother, I am Italian, I am a Christian."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Giorgia Meloni is a danger to Italy and the rest of Europe {{!}} Italy {{!}} The Guardian |url=https://amp.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2022/sep/24/giorgia-meloni-is-a-danger-to-italy-and-the-rest-of-europe-far-right |access-date=2023-07-19 |website=amp.theguardian.com |archive-date=July 18, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230718105510/https://amp.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2022/sep/24/giorgia-meloni-is-a-danger-to-italy-and-the-rest-of-europe-far-right |url-status=live }}</ref> ''Washington Post'' columnist Philip Bump contended  that Meloni has used the term "financial speculators"<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/27/meloni-italy-united-states-far-right/ That Giorgia Meloni speech captivating the U.S. right doesn’t make sense] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230105210512/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/27/meloni-italy-united-states-far-right/ |date=January 5, 2023 }} ''Washington Post'', Philip Bump, September 27, 2022</ref> as a dog-whistle to conceal antisemitism.

== Criticism ==
Academics disagree on whether the dog-whistle notion has conceptual validity and furthermore on the mechanisms by which discourses identified as dog-whistles function. For instance, the sociologist Barry Hindess criticized Josh Fear's and Robert E. Goodin's respective attempts to theorize dog-whistles on the grounds that they did not pass the [[Biography:Max Weber|Weberian]] test of value neutrality: "In the case of the concept of ‘dog-whistle politics,’ we find that the investigator’s –in this case, Fear’s– disapproval enters into the definition of the object of study. Goodin avoids this problem, clearly signalling his disapproval –for example, with his ‘particularly pernicious’ (2008, p. 224)– but not letting it interfere with his own conceptualisation of the phenomenon. The difficulty here is that this abstinence leaves him with no real distinction between the general phenomena of coded messaging [...] and dog whistling in particular, leaving us to suspect that dog whistling should be seen not so much as a novel form of rhetoric, but rather, to borrow an image from Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan, as a familiar form misliked."<ref name="Whistling the Dog">{{cite book|last=Hindess|first=Barry|title=Whistling the Dog|date=August 31, 2023|pages=143–154|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt13www0c.12|access-date=August 22, 2023|publisher=Australia National University Press|jstor=j.ctt13www0c.12|isbn=9781925021868|archive-date=December 2, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221202222437/https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt13www0c.12|url-status=live}}</ref> In effect, the philosopher Carlos Santana corroborates Hindess's criticism of the dog-whistle notion as being dependent on the investigator's social and moral values during his own attempted definition writing: "We don’t want every instance of bi-level meaning in political discourse to count as dogwhistles, because not every instance of political doublespeak is problematic in the way prototypical dogwhistles like welfare queen and family values are. Some, like backhanded compliments to political rivals, aren’t a major source of social ills. Some, like aspirational hypocrisy (Quill 2010) and deliberate doublespeak meant to bring diverse constituencies together (Maloyed 2011), might even be socially beneficial. Keep in mind what makes dogwhistles problematic: they harm disadvantaged groups, undermine our ability to have a functioning plural society, and muddle our ability to reliably hold political figures responsible for their actions. Given our interest in addressing these harms, it makes sense to limit our definition of dogwhistles to the types of bi-level meaning which engender them."<ref>{{cite journal |last=Santana |first=Carlos |title=What's wrong with dog-whistles |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/josp.12409 |journal=Journal of Social Philosophy |date=2022 |volume=53 |issue=3 |pages=387–403 |doi=10.1111/josp.12409 |s2cid=233649655 |access-date=August 23, 2023 |archive-date=August 23, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230823035259/https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/josp.12409 |url-status=live }}</ref> For another instance of criticism, albeit from another direction, the psychologist [[Biography:Steven Pinker|Steven Pinker]] has remarked that the concept of dog whistling allows people to "claim that anyone says anything because you can easily hear the alleged dogwhistles that aren't in the actual literal contents of what the person says".<ref name="Reason_Pinker">{{cite web|last=Bailey|first=Ronald|date=July 10, 2020|title=Steven Pinker Beats Cancel Culture Attack|url=https://reason.com/2020/07/10/steven-pinker-beats-cancel-culture-attack/printer/|access-date=September 25, 2020|publisher=Reason magazine|archive-date=July 14, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200714135321/https://reason.com/2020/07/10/steven-pinker-beats-cancel-culture-attack/printer/|url-status=live}}</ref> Mark Liberman has argued that it is common for speech and writing to convey messages that will only be picked up on by part of the audience, but that this does not usually mean that the speaker is deliberately conveying a double message.<ref name="upenn">{{cite web|last=Liberman|first=Mark|date=September 26, 2006|title=The comma was really a dog whistle|url=http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003613.html|access-date=August 28, 2020|publisher=University of Pennsylvania|archive-date=October 13, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201013105208/http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003613.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Finally, Robert Henderson and Elin McCready argue that [[Social:Plausible deniability|plausible deniability]] is a key characteristic of dog whistles.<ref name="yjtGp">{{cite book|last1=Henderson|first1=Robert|last2=McCready|first2=Elin|title=New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence|chapter=How Dogwhistles Work|date=2018|chapter-url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-93794-6_16|series=Lecture Notes in Computer Science|volume=10838|pages=231–240|doi=10.1007/978-3-319-93794-6_16|isbn=978-3-319-93793-9|s2cid=51876325|access-date=October 4, 2020|archive-date=July 16, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230716103236/https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-93794-6_16|url-status=live}}</ref>

==See also==

* {{Annotated link |Aesopian language}}
* {{annotated link|Philosophy:Classical conditioning}} ('Pavlovian response')
* {{Annotated link |Doublespeak}}
* {{Annotated link |Euphemism}}
* {{Annotated link |Kafkatrap}}
* {{Annotated link |Framing (social sciences)}}
* {{Annotated link |Hey, Rube!}}
* {{Annotated link |Patellar reflex|Knee-jerk}}
* {{Annotated link |Loaded language}}
* {{Annotated link |Plausible deniability}}
* {{Annotated link |Poisoning the well}}
* {{Annotated link |Political correctness}}
* {{Annotated link |Incitement to ethnic or racial hatred}}
* {{Annotated link |Shibboleth}}
* {{Annotated link |Southern strategy}}
* {{Annotated link |Subliminal stimuli}}
* {{Annotated link |Wedge issue}}

==References==
=== Citations ===
{{reflist|1=30em}}

=== General and cited references ===
* {{Cite journal|last=Albertson|first=Bethany L.|date=2015|title=Dog-Whistle Politics: Multivocal Communication and Religious Appeals|journal=Political Behavior|volume=37|issue=1|pages=3–26|doi=10.1007/s11109-013-9265-x|s2cid=143764555|issn=0190-9320}}
*Stephens-Dougan, LaFleur. 2020. ''Race to the Bottom: How Racial Appeals Work in American Politics''. University of Chicago Press.
* {{Cite journal|last1=Goodin|first1=Robert E.|last2=Saward|first2=Michael|date=2005|title=Dog Whistles and Democratic Mandates|journal=The Political Quarterly|volume=76|issue=4|pages=471–476|doi=10.1111/j.1467-923X.2005.00708.x|issn=1467-923X}}
* {{cite book |last1=Henderson |first1=Robert |last2=McCready |first2=Elin |title=New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence |chapter=How Dogwhistles Work |date=2018 |chapter-url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-93794-6_16 |series=Lecture Notes in Computer Science |volume=10838 |pages=231–240 |doi=10.1007/978-3-319-93794-6_16 |isbn=978-3-319-93793-9|s2cid=51876325 }}
* {{Cite book|last=López|first=Ian Haney|title=Dog Whistle Politics: How Coded Racial Appeals Have Reinvented Racism and Wrecked the Middle Class|date=2015|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=978-0-19-022925-2}}

== Further reading ==
* Stephens-Dougan, LaFleur (2021). "The Persistence of Racial Cues and Appeals in American Elections". ''Annual Review of Political Science'' '''24'''(1).
* {{cite web |url= http://agonist.org/ian_welsh/20060925/just_a_comma_dog_whistle_politics |title=Just a Comma |first=Ian |last=Welsh |work=The Agonist |date=September 25, 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060926182516/http://agonist.org/ian_welsh/20060925/just_a_comma_dog_whistle_politics |archive-date=September 26, 2006 }}
* {{cite news |url= https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100401707.html |title='Just a Comma' Becomes Part of Iraq Debate |first=Peter |last=Baker |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=October 5, 2006 |page=A19}}
* {{cite web |url= http://www.doubletongued.org/index.php/dictionary/dog_whistle_politics/ |title=dog whistle politics |work=The Double-Tongued Dictionary |first=Grant |last=Barrett |date=April 12, 2005}}

{{Media manipulation}}
{{Propaganda}}

[[Category:Political campaign techniques]]
[[Category:Propaganda techniques]]

{{Sourceattribution|Dog whistle (politics)}}