In this article I scrutinise a crucial tension in understanding the debate over shale gas production in Europe. On the one hand, analyses predominantly grasp the debate in terms of pro-and-con dialectics, as if the pro-shale gas camp faced the anti-shale gas camp in a dyadic clash of opposing voices. On the other hand, it is commonly recognised that this debate is driven by multi-party and multi-position argumentative dynamics. In this broader context, I focus on one pivotal contribution to the debate – Gazprom’s press release from October 2013 outlining Russia’s energy giant’s strategy of dealing with unconventional gas production. I employ concepts and methods of argumentative discourse analysis to contend that an arguer to a multi-party debate – argumentative polylogue – faces a number of constraints and opportunities that cannot be adequately grasped in terms of dyadic pro-and-con dialectics. The analysis reveals how Gazprom needs to simultaneously design its discourse to address a number of other parties who might also disagree among themselves: from Greenpeace to European Union governments to shale gas companies. I show why and how a stakeholder analysis used in organisational communication might lead to a better understanding of this form of multi-party public argumentation.
To carry a message through effectively to the public, newspaper editors need to employ the generic pattern of editorials as a rule of thumb. Yet few studies have investigated the schematic structure and persuasive style of editorials. Hence, this study aims to compare the generic characteristics in 240 editorials of The New York Times (NYT, n = 120) and New Straits Times (NST, n = 120). To realize the objectives, the corpus was subjected to a content analysis based on a composite framework drawn from the data and previous models. The findings revealed that American and Malaysian editorials share a similar schematic structure at the move level including four obligatory moves. However, at the step level, evidence of disparity of the style of writing was apparent. The data obtained could be used as informed input in the English for Specific Purposes (ESP) classroom, so that English as a Secondary Language (ESL)/English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students’ awareness on the conventional structures in editorial writing could be heightened.
This article reports a corpus-aided ecological discourse analysis (EDA) of texts from an international mining company and an environmental advocacy group regarding a proposal to build a massive open-pit copper mine in the Santa Rita Mountains of Arizona, USA. The analysis details the grammatical and semantic clusters within the controversial environmental debate and how these clusters reflect the values and beliefs of each group as well as their conceptualization of the mountains and the environment. The integration of the ecolinguistic framework with corpus linguistic methods of keyword analysis as well as part of speech (POS) and semantic tag analysis facilitated the identification of clusters of linguistic features perpetuating a dominant and ultimately destructive cultural discourse that places humans in a role of dominion and authority over the environment in the company texts. In contrast, clusters within the oppositional discourse forwarded by the environmental group promote the aesthetic value of the land and a need for responsible environmental stewardship.
The growing cultural complexity in the face of new immigration waves influences the public understanding of religious diversity. The two central questions of this article are as follows: first, ‘how much religious difference and of what kind is compatible within Europe?’ and second, ‘to what extent can Muslim diversity be integrated into Europe?’. This article undertakes an investigation of these questions and explores the extent to which discourses on religious diversity imply boundary making and aim at limiting the religious freedom of Muslims. Empirically, I scrutinize press coverage between 2009 and 2010, the years in which the minarets ban entered the sociopolitical arena of European public debate. The methodology adopts a social network analysis to uncover semantic macro-structures and elicit common discourses in the press of France, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom. Subsequently, discourse analysis of relevant samples is applied to examine textual strategies used to legitimate inclusion or exclusion of religious difference.
This article is part of the research project ‘Representacão midiática da violacão de direitos e da violência contra pessoas em situacão de rua no jornalismo on-line’, associated with Red Latinoamericana de Análisis Crítico del Discurso de la Extrema Pobreza (REDLAD), and focuses upon the ways in which electronic news media represent homeless people in Brazil. The focus is a pair of texts, related through internal hyperlinks, about the controversy concerning the installation of a social center in a middle-class neighborhood in central Sao Paulo. The texts are analyzed on the theoretical basis of critical discourse analysis (CDA) and considering the following analytical categories: metaphor, representation of social actors and intertextuality. Analyses show a scenario of ‘invasion by unwelcome people’, who are not perceived as rights holders, but as a threat to the rights of others.
This article explores the interrelationships and tensions between public engagement in higher education and media discourse. It tracks the mediated trajectory of an attempt by a group of academics to connect with audiences beyond academia, comparing a magazine article in which their opinions first became public, to its recontextualisation across various UK newspapers and their Internet spin-offs. A mediated stylistic analysis reveals the discursive, rhetorical and performative techniques via which a sociologically imaginative attempt to transform a seemingly-personal-trouble into a definitively-public-issue got recontextualised as if merely the public projection of personal angst. The article concludes by noting that in an era where public engagement increasingly means mediated public engagement, to take seriously the interactive, intertextual and rhetorical affordances of media discourse is to understand that and how sociologically imaginative work can – but does not always – end up circulating within public debate.
In Swiss semi-direct democracy, citizens are often summoned to the polls. To vote reasonably, they need to be properly informed. The media therefore have the responsibility to provide them with arguments for and against each issue of voting. Here, we focus on argumentation in a television ‘civic debate’ about abolishing compulsory military service. To provide a unified and integrated overview of the debate dynamics, we combine the Dialogical Model of Argumentation and the Argumentum Model of Topics, which share a similar emphasis on the discursive dimension of argumentation. This analysis underlines the importance of linguistic and communicative resources and procedures, without neglecting the macro socio-political environment of the debate.
Despite the adoption of the term headline for both print news and broadcast news, their roles in the different media are not the same. Print headlines are mostly contiguous with the story to which they refer. Broadcast headlines, however, are often at some temporal distance from their associated news item. In the print medium every story carries a headline. In broadcast news only some items are headlined. And yet, whereas the linguistic properties of print headlines have been much studied, almost no attention has been given to broadcast headlines. This article uses a corpus of headlines from BBC television news to explore their discursive form and function. It isolates a basic structure of {heading (+supplement)} for television news headlines and delineates a repertoire of patterns through which the structure is realised. In doing so, it suggests that the core function of television news headlines is to engage with the audience by projecting aspects of their news values forward through the programme.
Since their emergence, discourses of sustainability have been widely resemioticised in different genres and have intertextually merged with other discourses and practices. This article examines the emergence of Integrated Reporting (IR) as a new hybrid genre in which, along with financial information, organisations may choose to report the social and environmental impacts of their activities in one single document. Specifically, this article analyses a selected sample of IRs produced by early adopters to explore how discourses of sustainability have been recontextualised into financial and economic macro discourses and how different intertextual/interdiscursive relations have played out in linguistic constructions of ‘sustainability’. We contend that, by and large, the term sustainability has been appropriated, mixed with other discourses and semantically ‘bent’ to construct the organisation itself as being financially sustainable, that is, viable and profitable and for the primary benefit of shareholders. From this stance, we argue that, through the hybridity of IR, most companies have primarily colonised discourses of sustainability for the rhetorical purpose of self-legitimation.
The deadly attacks on a public meeting and on a Jewish citizen in Copenhagen in February 2015 have given rise to a vast amount of public discussion and interpretation of the events themselves, their background, their causes, their significance, and their repercussions. During these discussions, various conceptions of publicness and public space have been articulated. Indeed, one may view the killings as a ‘critical discourse moment’ in which a range of discourses have been employed to help interpret, understand, and deal with what happened. In several of these discourses, conceptions of publicness play a central part. This article sets out to investigate the conceptions of publicness that were articulated in the Danish public spheres following the attacks. The article maps out some of the key different and partly contradictory notions of publicness that the reactions to the killings brought to the fore. The investigation thus focuses on the articulation of normative expectations and ideals of public spheres, on the limitations and restrictions that were acknowledged, and on the main societal problems and (inter)national contexts to which publicness was viewed as related. The analysis will cover national newspapers and center on the discursive resources of the media elite in early responses to the attacks, for example in editorials, or comments by writers, academics, debaters, and intellectuals.
Why did different agencies, promoting diverse products, create three ads featuring violence perpetrated by women on their rather immature and submissive male partners in order to sell their products? I posit that the female viewers connect subconsciously with the image of the proactive female protagonists through the psychological mechanism in which we identify with ‘our like’ on the screen. This, in turn, allows for the projection of ‘common ground’, a positive politeness strategy, to favourably dispose the female audience towards the protagonists and, by extension, the products advertised. The success of these ads depends on women viewers identifying with the apparently dominant female protagonists – a case of ‘gender stereotype reversal’. However, I put forward that through the violent modification of their partners’ behaviour, the women become responsible for them, and so the ads convey the common gender stereotype of women as carers.
Studies on terrorism with bias towards Boko Haram (BH) have mainly been carried out from non-linguistic fields. The few linguistics-related studies that have examined the media reportage of the BH activities, with emphasis on the discourse and linguistic strategies deployed in the representations, have not been sufficient. This study, therefore, identifies the linguistic and discourse strategies deployed by selected newspapers in representing the BH and other social actors. For data, headline and overline stories are purposively sampled from four newspapers, published from 2011 to 2014, from the northern (Daily Trust and Leadership Nigeria) and southern (The Punch and The Nation) parts of Nigeria. The analysis is guided by a combination of critical discourse analysis and systemic functional linguistics. In all the reports subjected to analysis, 13 representational strategies were identified, while at least 15 tools from Van Leeuwen’s categorisations were used in representing social actors. The newspapers also deployed discourse strategies to manage the voices of social actors, identify and specify the social actors and action, label, condemn BH activities, among others. The mediated reports on BH insurgency orientate Nigerians.
This article explores the discursive behaviour of Chinese local officials in press conferences handling the recent 2015 crisis of Tianjin blasts. Drawing upon the previous analyses on relations of trust and discourse, and on the crucial aspects of trustworthiness, it examines how the officials struggled for trustworthiness discursively, and how their ‘doing’ trustworthiness varied in two phases of crisis communication. The analysis reveals markedly different approaches to the officials’ ‘doing’ trustworthiness in two phases. In the ‘unsatisfactory’ phase, the officials mainly constructed the aspect of expertise, with few expressions conveying integrity and none conveying care; while in the ‘well-handled’ phase, the officials constructed all three aspects. In addition, their discursive strategies of constructing expertise changed from extensively using ‘techs’ to combining ‘techs’ and vernacular language, and those of constructing integrity changed from not saying ‘what lacks evidence’ to providing information with adequate evidence. Effects of different aspects and discursive strategies on trust are also discussed.
Ways of communicating effectively in spoken English, using technology, in a virtual globalized context have received little attention from applied linguists. The role of language in synchronous computer-mediated discourse (CMD) used in virtual teamwork is now emerging as a key area of research concern in business management and information technology disciplines. This article uses linguistic frameworks, most particularly critical discourse analysis (CDA) and systemic functional linguistics (SFL), in particular appraisal analysis, to demonstrate how interpersonal meanings may create dominance, power and solidarity within a sample of a virtual team management meetings. Focusing on one manager case study, we investigate how language is used, consciously or unconsciously, to dominate and close down discussion with his colleagues. We first present the key findings from a turn-taking analysis and then present, through the application of appraisal analysis, how this manager opens or contracts the space available for others to participate. By revealing how power and control unfold through this analysis, the findings may lead to an enhanced self-awareness among all members in virtual teams and reveal how language plays a crucial role in engaging members during a meeting, or in this case, disengaging them.
This study analyses how online participants of celebrity gossip position themselves in relation to their audience through forms of moral argumentation and thereby contribute to social hierarchies. In this study, forms of moral argumentation are seen as enthymemes, that is, claim-reason units based on moral norms as premises. The material consists of a total of 900 asynchronous online comments in English and 900 in Finnish. In addition to rhetorical argumentation analysis, the study investigates the dependency of moral argumentation on three contextual variables: gendered violence as the topic of discussion (domestic violence/female celebrities’ fights), as the shared culture of participants (Finnish-speaking, ‘national’/English-speaking, ‘multicultural’ participants) and a media institution as the moderator of online discourse (media-generated/user-generated websites). Four forms of moral argumentation were found in the material: 1) theoretical (deductive), 2) practical (contextual), 3) categorical (stereotype-based) and 4) digital (‘crowding’) enthymeme. Theoretical, practical and categorical enthymemes are rhetorical in a traditional sense because they include the hierarchical idea of moral norms as the shared, more or less authoritarian, basis of a community. Digital enthymemes, conversely, are texts without clear borders or any notion of moral norms. Such arguments characterized especially user-generated, English-language discussions concerning female celebrities’ fights. This indicates that the digital enthymeme is particularly prevalent where there is a lack of obvious hierarchies in the context of argumentation. As this study argues, however, the seemingly non-hierarchical and individualistic participation through digital enthymemes is a mere illusion, for these enthymemes are based on crowd behaviour supportive of sexist and class-bound domination.
Using critical discourse analysis, this article analyzes the discursive representation of the Fukushima nuclear disaster in The Daily Yomiuri, part of the largest and most influential media conglomerate in Japan. A critical discourse analysis of The Daily Yomiuri reveals that Japanese national identity and the ideology of technoscience are reproduced through two discursive constructions: a diminished ‘risk’ from Fukushima radiation and citizens’ national duty in the nuclear crisis. Within these two constructions, 11 major techniques are identified by which The Yomiuri discursively mitigates the risks from Fukushima and calls Japanese national identity into the service of the nuclear industry. The article concludes with implications for understanding the impact of political discourse in mass media on other policy debates in Japan and elsewhere.
New technologies provide new forums for the expression and challenging of racism. This article explores the potential of an interactive blog about asylum-seekers to serve as part of the Habermasian ‘public sphere’, facilitating debate between those with opposing views. We offer evidence that pro- and anti-asylum seeker arguments made in blogs construct a binary between those in favour and those against. Arguments are collectively constructed producing relatively coherent discourses, despite being articulated by different individuals. We then explore the ways in which pro-asylum seeker postings utilize strategies which social scientists have identified as effective in challenging racism. As such, the blog is a site where what has come to be called ‘bystander anti-racism’ is being practised, producing a counter-hegemonic discourse. Our evidence suggests that despite arguments to the contrary, blogs are potentially useful sites for the development of communicative consciousness in relation to race issues, particularly the challenging of racism.
Drawing on gender-role theories and considering the potential new media environments brought to the dynamics of strategic political communication, this study explores the nature of US Midwestern congresswomen’s strategic online self-presentations in comparison to those of congressmen. The discourse analysis presented in this study shows that in their official online biographies, that is, as given on websites provided by the US government, congresswomen devoted more space to describing their own personal traits than did congressmen. In particular, women tended to stress the masculine aspects of their personalities by using so-called masculine words such as tough and fighter much more than their male counterparts did. Such masculine terminology was scarcely evident in the biographies of male House members in the same states and committees as the female members. These findings imply that female politicians are more active in strategically presenting themselves as tough leaders in what appears to be a self-conscious effort to counteract detrimental gender stereotypes.
The blogosphere’s heterogeneity has significantly increased in recent years. Thus, the blog-as-diary approach has shown its limitations. Viewing blogs as a genre is also misleading, as it confuses medium and genre. Considering that the studies of blog genres still need further theoretical and empirical investigations, we propose a method to assess blog posts, understood as utterances, the minimal unit of a blog. We then conduct an analysis of two large datasets from 100 Brazilian blogs. Three reviewers read and judged 5218 posts from 50 A-list blogs and 1527 posts from 50 non-A-list blogs, captured in a 30-day period. Posts’ compositional form, theme and style were cross-analyzed in and between datasets. Our findings lead to the conclusion that blogs in the A-list group tend to post more and stick to themes that attract audiences. Non-A-list blogs post less and focus on themes of interest to bloggers themselves, not necessarily hype topics.
News Simulcast, the flagship news program for China Central Television (CCTV), has been widely studied by Chinese scholars. However, little attention has been paid to its representation of ideological meanings. To address this issue, the present study, drawing upon Van Dijk’s (1988b) framework of three-level analysis of discourse structure, carries out a comprehensive discourse analysis of the news broadcast on this program. A corpus of 10 episodes of News Simulcast was selected as the database, from which a subset of four episodes were thoroughly examined from the macro-level of discoursal and thematic structure to the micro-level of linguistic and semiotic structure. It demonstrates that, due to its historic background and political privilege, News Simulcast broadcasts news with an authoritative national voice, speaking primarily in the interests of the Communist Party, the government and the people, and it thus forms a rather stereotyped discourse structure: positive ‘us’ versus negative ‘them’.