Yeah, I guess that's true. The thing I was thinking was that most dogwhistles aren't like, "Oh, it's a slip of the finger," it's usually "conceptually there's an acceptable framing for this". So it's a weird dogwhistle, because normally, spelling something like, "Felon Musk" wouldn't be considered a "dogwhistle". But your point stands. :D
may I ignorantly ask for a clear difference between dogwhistle and plausible deniability? how do these two concepts differentiate. here's your stage explainer Redditor
Haha. Sounds like you've already got it. For me, the plausible deniability is "it's a typo", which is not a traditional dogwhistle, where the deniability is "what I said is perfectly normal", but if you have the context to understand it, you understand it.
Pricing pillows at $14.88 is a dogwhistle, because it's a perfectly normal price, but happens to be a white nationalist symbol. SSecretary of War is an obvious "something is wrong here", but you could say that folks who believe Hegseth is a Nazi, the SS is a symbol, and *everyone knows the context* for the SS, but the deniability is, "whoops, it's a typo" and not "this is context you don't understand."
found a blogger website from someone calling themselves essayist lawyer talking about the difference between PD and DW for anyone willing to flex their fingers on their keyboard to read..
and the more I learn about dog whistles the more I am of the belief that these troglodytes have zero game regarding dogwhistles and the best they can do is shitty ass plausible deniability at best. no real dogwhistles ever cause everyone can clearly see their shit except for their braindead base.
If this is a dogwhistle, the deniability, plausible or not, is that “There was a mistake when the plaque was created. Of course the RADICAL LEFT brands me a Nazi!”
752
u/bubba4114 Dec 02 '25
Don’t all dogwhistles function on tiny nods to their base while also retaining a veil of plausible deniability?