City Research Online

Abstract

Despite concerns over the ability of citizens to understand and act on their legal rights, there has been little debate about what the effective provision of public legal information about rights entails. Viewed through the lens of epistemic injustice, this article reveals the ways in which organizations with epistemic privilege can obfuscate the understanding of rights by resorting to displays of epistemic superiority and pre‐emptive smothering of testimony. The article draws on the results of a critical discourse analysis of over 250 authoritative webpages that provide information on how to complain about healthcare provision. Focusing on tone, language, vocabulary, and format, the analysis looks at the role played by political design and fragmented discursive infrastructures, the characterization of information seekers as occupying liminal spaces, the use of professional and rarefied language in pre‐emptively undermining the testimony of the laity, and the ways in which the internet and hyperlinks facilitate epistemic obfuscation.

Publication Type:	Article
Additional Information:	© 2026 The Author(s). Journal of Law and Society published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Cardiff University (CU). This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Subjects:	H Social Sciences > H Social Sciences (General) H Social Sciences > HM Sociology K Law > K Law (General)
Departments:	School of Policy & Global Affairs School of Policy & Global Affairs > Department of Sociology & Criminology
SWORD Depositor:	Symplectic Administrator

Export

Downloads