1 / 31

Your 3 Tier Toolbox : Adopting, adapting and building frameworks of Critical Discourse Analysis for interdisciplinary,

Dr Darren Kelsey, Lecturer in Journalism and Discourse Studies Newcastle University Darren.Kelsey@ncl.ac.uk www.JDSjournal.net www.criticaldiscoursegroup.net @ drkelsinho @ KelsraviNik @ JDSjournal.

suki
Download Presentation

Your 3 Tier Toolbox : Adopting, adapting and building frameworks of Critical Discourse Analysis for interdisciplinary,

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Dr Darren Kelsey, Lecturer in Journalism and Discourse Studies Newcastle University Darren.Kelsey@ncl.ac.uk www.JDSjournal.net www.criticaldiscoursegroup.net @drkelsinho @KelsraviNik @JDSjournal Your 3 Tier Toolbox: Adopting, adapting andbuilding frameworks of Critical Discourse Analysis forinterdisciplinary, qualitative research

  2. Today we will… • Adopt this model for understanding discourse • Adapt this model for analysing mythology in newspapers • Build on and refine this model for analysing digital media • CDA used to examine texts and apply theory

  3. Critical Discourse Studies • Fairclough’s (1995) 3 layered model • Wodak’s (2001) discourse-historical approach (DHA) • Kelsey (2012, 2014a) discourse-mythological approach (DMA) • Van Dijk (1998) ideology, discourse and context • Wodak and Reisigl (2001) recontextualisation

  4. Critical Discourse Studies • Fairclough attempted to “transcend the division between work inspired by social theory which tends not to analyse texts, and work which focuses upon the language of texts but tends not to engage with social theoretical issues” (2003:2-3). • “… discourse analysis is not merely the linguistic analysis of texts. I see discourse analysis as ‘oscillating’ between a focus on specific texts and a focus on what I call the ‘order of discourse’” (ibid:3). • CDA focuses “on the ways discourse structures enact, confirm, legitimate, reproduce, or challenge relations of power and dominance in society” (van Dijk, 1998:353). • As Bell and Garrett explain, “CDA is best viewed as a shared perspective encompassing a range of approaches rather than just one school” (1998:6).

  5. Fairclough’s 3 layered model • Best way of explaining this model to students • Fairclough covered clearly • Other terms defined • Glossary available • Useful beyond newspapers

  6. Fairclough’s 3 layered model • Textual analysis • What is the text? What does it say? What does it mean and why analyse if further? • Discursive practice • How is it produced/consumed? What is the context? How do discursive dynamics function through the text to create meaning? • Social practice • Broader impact of text/discourse on society and/or influence of society on the text.

  7. Fairclough’s 3 layered model • Discursive practices account for the way in which “authors of texts draw on already existing discourses and genres to create a text and … how receivers of texts also apply available discourses and genres in the consumption and interpretation of … texts” (Phillips and Jorgenson, 2002:69).

  8. Fairclough’s 3 layered model • Social practice expands beyond texts and examines discourse on a wider social level. • This addresses questions regarding the social and political role of discourse: considering anything from what texts say about the society in which they are produced to the impact that they might have on social relations (Fairclough, 1995).

  9. Fairclough’s 3 layered model • Move from textual (micro) to social(macro) • By considering discursive and social practices CDA examines the socio-cultural practices of a text or “the social and cultural goings-on which the communicative event is part of” (Fairclough, 1995:57). • “Language use, discourse, verbal interaction, and communication belong to the microlevel of the social order. Power, dominance, and inequality between social groups are typically terms that belong to a macrolevel of analysis” (van Dijk, 1998:354)

  10. Some key terms for your toolbox Power, ideology, social relations (class, gender race), institutional values and interests… Interdiscursivity Intertextuality Context (and “context models”) Lexical choices Indexical meanings Neologism (e.g. Londonistan) Presupposition Metaphors Modality And many more…..

  11. Examples for today… • 1) Newspaper discourse: Ideology and mythology after July 7th bombings • 2) Digital technology: Power and surveillance on social media • 3) Toolbox group exercises

  12. Case 1: The myth of the blitz • and the July 7th bombings • Ministry of Information designed a set of messages to uphold morale when the nation was demoralised under the threat of invasion from Nazi Germany • “Business as usual” and “London can take it” became common slogans of the Blitz spirit propaganda • Winston Churchill: “We will fight them on the beaches…” (1940) • British identity: stoic; united; defiant; resilient; tough; humour; etc. • Various scholars have revisited the Blitz spirit as a myth….

  13. What is the myth of the Blitz? Calder, 1991; Ponting, 1990; Heartfield, 2005; Manthorpe, 2006: Crime rates increased dramatically. Racial frictions occurred. Class divides between rich and poor. The morale of London could not be summed up by one message and morale varied from city to city across the country. Media pressure: Churchill ordered Clement Atlee and Lord Beaverbrook to contact the Daily Mirror and threaten them with complete censorship of news

  14. Case 1: The myth of the blitz and the July 7th bombings • In past and present contexts, it was the ideological role of this myth that I analyse. • Use the tools that CDA offers to examine the construction of a myth from 1940 in newspapers from 2005. • These tools enable a thorough examination across large and smaller samples of texts

  15. British newspaper responses to the July 7th bombings • Discursive themes that referred to the Second World War in relation to the bombings: • Business as usual / London can take it • Business, FTSE and economy • Royalty and commemoration events • Nostalgic feelings of loss and injustice • 'Londonistan’ and multiculturalism • International relations and Western foreign policy

  16. Tony Parsons – London can take it • Some discourses of war did not explicitly refer to foreign policy or the War on Terror but language was problematic. • “07/07 war on Britain: We can take it; if these murderous bastards go on for a thousand years, the people of our islands will never be cowed” (Mirror, 2005:16-17). • “Let us seek the men who did • this - let us hunt them down • and destroy. But more than • that, let us send out the message • that they famously hung on • the front of a destroyed • shopfront in the London of • the Blitz - business as normal. • Three little words that said: • Up yours, Adolf” (ibid:16-17).

  17. International relations and Western foreign policy • Senior American sources evoked Blitz myth of unity and defiance: • “Rudolph Giuliani, the former mayor of New York who was America's hero on September 11, was visiting London on Thursday and immediately evoked the spirit of Winston Churchill and the Blitz… “In a strange way, a lot of our response to September 11 was modelling ourselves on the people of London during the Second World War” (Sunday Telegraph, 10/07/05:19). • “Terror in London, We’ll take fight to the enemy, says Bush … ‘They [Londoners] have faced brutal enemies before. The city that survived the Nazi blitz will not yield in the face of thugs and assassins’” (Independent, 12/06/2005:10). • ‘‘‘The resilience of Londoners is amazing – all Americans stand by them resolutely’. The new US ambassador to Britain [Bob Tuttle], in his first interview, tells Con Coughlin that the transatlantic alliance will prevail in the war on terror” (Sunday Telegraph, 24/7/05:19).

  18. Paradoxical persuasion: Encourage students to explore what they don’t expect to see… • Galloway criticised for blaming bombings on Iraq war. • Took explicitly critical stance re Blitz myth (in the Mail): • “The spirit of the blitz is often evoked, the stoicism, the ‘London can take it’ yells to Churchill as he toured the East End. This is a sepia-softened memory, of course… The people did not all act as one under Hitler's bombs. The rich booked into West End hotels. Some of them secretly treated - or wished to - with the Reich… There was looting of bombedout homes and businesses and fighting over places on the floor of the Underground (having had to fight to be allowed into the stations in the first place)” (Mail on Sunday,17/06/2005:27). • Across 257 articles, Galloway was the only explicit case of this kind • For more on paradoxical persuasion, see Kelsey (2012a; 2014c)

  19. Case 2: Twitter joke trial Refining application of toolbox for digital media (Kelsey and Bennett, 2014) “Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You’ve got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I’m blowing the airport sky high!!”. Although airport staff who saw the tweet did not view it as a threat, it was passed on to the authorities before anti-terror police later charged Chambers for “sending a public electronic message that was grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character contrary to the Communications Act 2003”

  20. Twitter joke trial • Chambers lost high court appeal • Eventually won with celeb and public support • #iamspartacus • Contextual readings of tweet influenced by social and institutional practices • Explained via surveillance theory • Panoptic; synoptic; omnioptic surveillance • “Synoptic resistance” reflected via social media

  21. Twitter joke trial • Considering the text (Chambers’ Tweet), discursive practice (contextual production / consumption of Tweet) andsocial practice (surveillance: theory / culture / society) • Fairclough’s 3 layers are applicable • But not so much through analysis of language • Rather, discourse as discursive / social practice

  22. Twitter joke trial • Text becomes an interpretive issue of power • Contextual nuances reflect oppositional readings of Chambers’ tweet • Issues concerning ICN and text production • Power conflicts between public / celebrity “freedoms” versus authorities / state security • Complex dynamic of panoptic (Foucault, 2001), synoptic (Mathiesen, 1997) and omnioptic(Jurgenson, 2013; Kelsey and Bennet, 2014) power relations

  23. Summary slide • Traditional approach to CDA adopted for both cases • CDA adapted to incorporate cultural theory (mythology / surveillance) • Newspapers and digital media examined • Now it’s your turn… • Do it yourself (DIY)…

  24. DIY EXERCISE • Critically analyse the stories / cases provided • Fill the toolbox! • Start basic • Learn to develop analytical skills and concepts • Monitor your knowledge of CDA • Your toolbox will start to fill over time • Texts and topics: • Thatcher; Leveson; Immigration; Welfare; • Easyjet and commercial surveillance

  25. Which tools? • Newspapers: • Students usually start with intertextual, interdiscursive, lexical and indexical items? • Digital media: • Context and power • Think about impact on other social media users • Encourage innovative, dynamic approaches • Think macro as well as micro: What do texts/cases say about broader social relations (ideology, economics, national identity, power, gender, class, race, society, etc.).

  26. Dr Darren Kelsey, Lecturer in Journalism and Discourse Studies Newcastle University Darren.Kelsey@ncl.ac.uk www.JDSjournal.net www.criticaldiscoursegroup.net @drkelsinho @KelsraviNik @JDSjournal Please email me with further questionsThank you for your time….

  27. Baines, D. and Kelsey, D. (2013:31) ‘Journalism education after Leveson: Ethics start where regulation ends’ in Ethical Space, 10(1). • Barthes, R. (1993) Mythologies. London: Vintage • Barthes, R. (1972) Mythologies New York: Hill and Wang • Calder, A. (1991) The Myth of the Blitz London: Pimlico • Calder, A. (1999) The People’s War London: Pimlico • Fairclough, N. (1995) Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Essex: Longman • Heartfield, J. (2005) ‘Revisiting the Blitz Spirit: Myths about the Second World War won't help us understand what is happening today’, July 12th [http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/869/] • Kelsey D. (2012) Pound for pound champions: the myth of the Blitz spirit in British newspaper discourses of the City and economy after the 7 July bombings. Critical Discourse Studies 9(3), 285-299. • Kelsey, D. (2014a, in press) The myth of the city trickster: storytelling, bankers and ideology in the Mail Online. Journal of Political Ideologies. • Kelsey, D. and Bennett, L. (2014) Discipline and resistance on social media: Discourse, power and context in the Paul Chambers ‘Twitter Joke Trial’. Discourse, Context & Media. • Kelsey, D. (2014b, in press) Defining the ‘sick society’: Discourses of class and morality in British, right wing newspapers during the 2011 England riots. Journal of Capital and Class. • Manthorpe R. (July 1st 2006) Spirit of the Brits, The Guardian • http://books.guardian.co.uk/departments/history/story/0,,1809895,00.html • Ponting, C. (1990) 1940: Myth and Reality Reading: Cox and Wyman  • Ponting, C. (1994) Churchill London: Sinclair-Stevenson • Reisigl, M. and Wodak, R. (2001) Discourse and discrimination: Rhetorics of racism and antisemitism. London: Routledge. • van Dijk, T. (2001) Discourse, Ideology and Context, Folia Linguistica , Volume 35 (1-2), 11-40. • Wodak, R. et al. (1999) The Discursive Construction of National Identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. References

More Related