HRMARS - As the Israeli-Palestinian conflict escalated between 2023 and 2024, Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) emerged as a pivotal non-state actor, using boycott campaigns to influence Malaysian socio-economic discourse. Despite their significant impact, the formal rhetorical strategies employed in their advocacy communication remain under-researched in the Southeast Asian context. This study examines how BDS Malaysia crafts persuasive messaging to mobilize public support and influence policy. Grounded in Aristotle’s rhetorical theory, the study utilizes qualitative rhetorical analysis to examine 19 purposively sampled press releases from BDS Malaysia’s official website. The analysis evaluates the rhetorical situation speaker, audience, exigence, and purpose alongside the deployment of ethos, pathos, and logos. Findings indicate that pathos is the primary appeal, leveraging emotionally charged narratives to elicit moral indignation. Ethos follows, establishing credibility through shared values and international legal norms. Logos, while least frequent, provides factual substantiation via legal-political precedents. Strategies are notably tailored to specific audiences, including policymakers and corporations, to maximize persuasiveness. This research reaffirms the relevance of Aristotelian frameworks in contemporary digital advocacy. It offers practical insights for social movements to design ethically anchored messages that transcend cultural and political divides.
Xin et al. (Mon,) studied this question.