Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ideological Dichotomy in the Arab Newspapers Coverage: The Case of the 2017 Riyadh Summit

  • Published:
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The 2017 Riyadh Summit is one of the events that various media outlets densely covered. Drawing upon Van Dijk [53] Ideological Square, this study aims at identifying the in-group and out-group in ten pro-government Arab newspapers and investigating the discursive sub-strategies that were utilized in the representation of “us” and “them.” The findings reveal that most of the Arab newspapers tended to utilize a bundle of negative other-representation discursive sub-strategies to establish a dichotomy between “us” and “them” and thus, construct “us” either directly or indirectly. It was found that negative lexicalization, distancing, and vagueness were the most frequently employed discursive sub-strategies in negative other-representation, while national self-glorification was the most frequently used discursive sub-strategies in positive self-representation. The study concludes by recommending other researchers to explore the same topic but in broadcast media, taking into account the prosodic aspects as well as the discourse itself.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
Table 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Adegoju, Adeyemi. 2005. A Stylistic Study of the Speeches of Some Key Actors of The ‘June 12’crisis in Nigeria (1993–1998), University of Ibadan.

  2. Ahmadian, Moussa, and Elham Farahani. 2014. A Critical Discourse Analysis of The Los Angeles Times and Tehran Times on the Representation of Iran’s Nuclear Program. Theory and Practice in Language Studies 4.

  3. Amin, Hussein. 2002. Freedom as a value in Arab media: Perceptions and attitudes among journalists. Political Communication 19: 125–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baker, Paul. 2010. Sociolinguistics and corpus linguistics. Edinburgh:Edinburgh University Press.

  5. BBC News. 2009. Country Profile: Saudi Arabia, Country Profile: Saudi Arabia.

  6. Bell, Allan. 1991. The language of news media. Oxford:Blackwell.

  7. Breheny, Richard. 2003. On the dynamic turn in the study of meaning and interpretation. In Meaning: The dynamic turn, ed. P. Jaroslav, 69–89. Dordrecht: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Brown, R., and A. Gilman. 1960. The Pronouns of Power and Solidarit. In Style in Language, ed. T. Sobeok, 53–276. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chilton, Paul A., and Christina Schäffner. 2002. Politics as text and talk: analytic approaches to political discourse. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub. Co.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. Chughati, A. 2017. US-Saudi relations: A timeline.

  11. Culpeper, Jonathan. 1996. Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of pragmatics 25: 349 – 67.

  12. De Landtsheer, Christil, and Ofer Feldman. 2000. Beyond public speech and symbols: Explorations in the rhetoric of politicians and the media. Westport:Praeger Publisher.

  13. Dryer, Matthew S. 1996. Focus, pragmatic presupposition, and activated propositions. Journal of pragmatics 26: 475–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Duszak, Anna. 2002. Us and others: Social identities across languages, discourses and cultures. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Ezeifeka, C. 2010. Power Relations and Linguistic Repression in Print Media, Political and Gender Discourses: the Nigerian Experience. Unpublished Ph.D Dissertation, Nnamdi Azikiwe University Awka., Nnamdi Azikiwe University Awka.

  16. Fairclough, Norman. 1995. Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language. New York; London:Longman.

  17. Fairclough, Norman. 2001. Language and power. New York; Harlow, Eng:Longman.

  18. Fairclough, Norman. 2009. A dialectical-relational approach to critical discourse analysis in social research. In Methods of critical discourse analysis, ed. Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 162 – 87.

  19. Fishman, Joshua A. 1999. Language and ethnic identity. New York: Oxford University.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Fowler, Roger. 2013. Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Haider, Ahmad S. 2016. A corpus-assisted critical discourse analysis of the Arab uprisings: evidence from the Libyan case. University of Canterbury.

  22. Haider, Ahmad S, Saleh Al-Salman, and S. Linda Al-Abbas. 2021. Courtroom Strong Remarks: A Case Study of the Impact Statements from Survivors and Victims’ Families of the Christchurch Mosque Attacks. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law-Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-021-09872-4.

  23. Haider, Ahmad S, and Riyad F Hussein. 2020. Analysing headlines as a way of downsizing news corpora: Evidence from an Arabic–English comparable corpus of newspaper articles. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 35: 826–844. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqz074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hoey, Michael. 1991. Patterns of lexis in text. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Johnstone, Barbara. 1991. Repetition in Arabic discourse: Paradigms, syntagms, and the ecology of language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  26. Joseph, John E. 2006. Language and politics. Edinburgh Edinburgh University Press.

  27. Kandil, Magdi Ahmed. 2009. The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict in American, Arab, and British Media: Corpus-Based Critical Discourse Analysis. Georgia State University.

  28. Karapetjana, I. N. D. R. A. 2011. Pronominal choice in political interviews. Baltic Journal of English Language Literature & Culture 1: 36–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kessar, Sara, Ghaleb Rabab’Ah, Wafa Al-Khadra, and J Hamdan Hady. 2021. The Representation of the Algerian Hirak Protest Movement in the International Media: France 24 and Al-Jazeera. Cogent Social Sciences 7: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2021.1930646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kuo, Sai-Hua, and Mari Nakamura. 2005. Translation or transformation? A case study of language and ideology in the Taiwanese press. Discourse & Society 16: 393–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lahlali, M. 2011. The Arab Spring and the discourse of desperation: shifting from an authoritarian discourse into a “democratic” one. Journal of Arab Media & Society 13.

  32. Li, Juan. 2009. Intertextuality and national identity: discourse of national conflicts in daily newspapers in the United States and China. Discourse & Society 20: 85–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. McGregor, Sue LT. 2003. “Critical discourse analysis: A primer.” In Kappa Omicron Nu FORUM, 15 – 1.

  34. Miller, David. 2002. Promotion and power. In The media: an introduction, eds. Adam Briggs, and Paul Cobley, 41–52. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Muhammed, Munthir, Manhal, and Mohammed Sami Flaifel. 2015. A Critical Discourse Analysis of the 2012 American Presidential Election Debates. Journal of the College of Languages Mağallaẗ kulliyyaẗ al-luġāt: 1–26.

  36. Naar, I. 2015. Analysts: Gulf-Egypt Ties Likely to Survive Turbulence., Aljazeera.

  37. Pennycook, Alastair, and N Candlin Christopher. 2017. The cultural politics of English as an international language. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  38. Proctor, Katarzyna, I., and Lily, and Wen Su. 2011. The 1st person plural in political discourse—American politicians in interviews and in a debate. Journal of pragmatics 43: 3251–3266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Rashidi, Nasser, and Marzieh Souzandehfar. 2010. A critical discourse analysis of the debates between republicans and democrats over the continuation of war in Iraq. The Journal of Linguistic Intercultural Education 3: 55. https://doi.org/10.29302/jolie.2010.3.4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Reah, Danuta. 2002. The language of newspapers. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Rugh, William A. 2004. Arab mass media: Newspapers, radio, and television in Arab politics. Westport, CT: Greenwood publishing group.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Saed, Hadeel A. 2019. The Representation of Women in Arab Media: Evidence from Jordan’s News Agency (PETRA) in 2017. International Journal of Linguistics 11: 209–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Skarżyńska, Krystyna. 2002. We and they in Polish political discourse. In Us: Social identities across languages, discourses cultures, ed. A. Duszak, 249 – 64: Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Talbot, Steven. 2008. ‘Us’ and ‘Them’: Terrorism, conflict and (O) ther discursive formations. Sociological Research Online 13: 15–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. The Guardian. 2015. Egypt’s attacks on press freedom unprecedented. says watchdog.

  46. Törnberg, Anton, and Petter Törnberg. 2016. Muslims in social media discourse: Combining topic modeling and critical discourse analysis. Discourse Context & Media 13: 132–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Van Dijk, Teun A. 1991. Racism and the Press. London:Routledge.

  48. Van Dijk, Teun A. 1993. Elite discourse and racism. Sage Publications:Newbury Park, CA.

  49. Van Dijk, Teun A. 1995. Discourse semantics and ideology. Discourse & Society 6: 243–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Van Dijk, Teun A. 1996. Power and the news media. In Political communication and action, eds. D. Paletz, and C. Vinson, 9–36. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Van Dijk, Teun A. 1997. What is political discourse analysis. Belgian journal of linguistics 11: 11–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Van Dijk, Teun A. 1998. Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Van Dijk, Teun A. 2006. Politics, ideology, and discourse. In Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, ed. Keith Brown, 728 – 40: Oxford; New York: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Van Dijk, Teun A. 2009. Critical discourse studies: A sociocognitive approach. In Methods of critical discourse analysis, ed. Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 62–86.

  55. Wallace, Aurora. 2005. Newspapers and the making of modern America. New Hampshire:Greenwood press.

  56. Wilson, John. 1990. Politically speaking: The pragmatic analysis of political language. Oxford: B. Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Wirth-Koliba, Victoria. 2016. The Diverse and Dynamic World of’Us’ and’Them’in Political Discourse. Critical approaches to discourse analysis across disciplines 8: 23–37.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Wodak, Ruth. 2001. Turning the tables: Antisemitic discourse in post-war Austria. In Discourse Studies, eds. A. Teun, and Van Dijk, 350–375. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Wodak, Ruth. 2009. What CDA is about – a summary of its history, important concepts and its developments. In Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, eds. Ruth Wodak, and Michael Meyer, London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Wodak, Ruth, and Michael Meyer. 2009. Methods of critical discourse analysis. London; Los Angeles:SAGE.

  61. Yule, George. 2020. The study of language. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

    Shahd Dibas

  2. The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan

    Ghaleb Rabab’ah

  3. Applied Science Private University, Amman, Jordan

    Ahmad S Haider

  4. University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE

    Ghaleb Rabab’ah

Authors
  1. Shahd Dibas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ghaleb Rabab’ah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ahmad S Haider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ghaleb Rabab’ah.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dibas, S., Rabab’ah, G. & Haider, A.S. Ideological Dichotomy in the Arab Newspapers Coverage: The Case of the 2017 Riyadh Summit. Int J Semiot Law 36, 1239–1257 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-022-09914-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-022-09914-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation