ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the rhetorical origins of the natural gas hydrofracking controversy in the United States. The analysis presented illuminates how the meaning of flammable tap water became pivotal in fracking politics. Through a case study of the influential documentary film Gasland and the U.S. natural gas industry’s responses, I show that rather than dismissing or deflecting attention from Gasland’s charges and its accounts of residents living near gas wells lighting their tap water on fire, industry sought to redefine their meaning. By reappropriating the film’s key rhetorical devices, most notably the ideographic synecdoche in the form of the flaming faucet, industry invited uncertainty regarding the water contamination’s causes and significance. The chapter concludes with theoretical implications.
