Abstract

The role of the media as the "watchdog of democracy" is hindered at times of war when mainstream newspapers support government decisions and military actions. Disagreement is expressed without breaking away from consensus, by using opposing rhetorical moves such as an appeal to both the deliberative and the epideictic modes and to emotion as well as to the reasonableness of the audience. Such moves sustain the alleged "balance of reasons" and thus help to preserve the newspaper's ethos.