Suchergebnisse

This paper explores the changes in the media discourse on granting and revoking Bosnian citizenship of foreigners in the most read Bosnian, Croatian, and Serbian quality daily newspapers from the end of the Bosnian war in 1995 until the Commission for the Revision of Decisions on Naturalization of Foreign Citizens finished its work in 2007. Critical discourse analysis of news articles shows that all newspapers recontextualised the discourse on granting and revoking citizenship from a nationalistic war discourse to a "war on terrorism" discourse, joining the anti-terrorism global discursive community. Serbian and Croatian newspapers have not only colonised the "war on terrorism" vocabulary and discourse of difference but they have also appropriated a specific local discourse to the more global "war on terrorism" discourse and have represented military actions against the Muslims in the Bosnian war "as our war on terrorism". A Bosnian daily newspaper similarly represented the Commission's activities as the "Bosnian war on terrorism".

The aim of this article is twofold: to integrate an analysis of discourse processes into Fairclough's textually orientated critical discourse analysis, and to show the usefulness of this approach in demonstrating the encroachment of public relations on news production in Slovenia. Interpractice analysis – which identifies cases where text production and interpretation processes overtly use practices outside the convention – was used to identify so-called 'public relations news reports' and uncover the elements of public relations practice used in journalism. The analysis of interdiscursivity revealed how hybrid practice, through textual devices (i.e. topics, perspective, choice of sources, genre and lexis), incorporates discursive elements of public relations into news report discourse. These include using the representatives of an organization as the main source, partiality and a one-sided (favourable) evaluation of the characteristics/activities of the subject discussed; none of which are in the interest of the audience, but in the interest of the powerful elite that the news covers.

The periodic reforms of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) are announced each time by a strategic document in the form of a Communication by the European Commission (EC). The content of the last Communication differs from previous ones, which raises the questions of what frames the EC has employed with respect to its CAP reforms and how these frames have been modified over the past 26 years (from 1991 to 2017) in order to legitimise the preservation of the CAP. This paper tries to fill the gap in the research of frames in the main strategic documents on the CAP by employing comparative historical framing analysis. The results show consistent use of five frames: the policy mechanism frame, farmers' economic frame, foreign trade frame, budgetary frame, and the societal concerns frame. While they have all remained in use, most have been changed significantly over the years. Throughout the analysed period, the farmers' economic frame has retained its primacy and continuity, demonstrating the power of the farmers' lobbies and conservative member states. If in the initial Communications the environment was barely present within the societal concerns frame, it has gained importance in the recent Communications, in addition to other general societal issues, such as climate change, food security and quality, health, digitalisation, innovation, and even migration. By marginalising the policy mechanism frame and replacing it with the implementation model and increasingly emphasising the societal concerns frame with social justifications of the CAP, the EC is trying to legitimise the CAP after 2021.

AbstractIn this article, we apply discourse analysis to the European Commission's Communications on reforms of the European Union's Common agricultural policy (CAP). The results of the historical discourse analysis of the European Commission's strategy documents in the form of Communications on the CAP from 1991 to 2017 showed that the discourse was a hybrid, modified according to the specific political economic context and the European Commission's need to justify the CAP reforms. In the first two Communications of 1991 and 1997, the neomercantilist and neoliberal discourses dominated to justify the reduction of market price support. In the Communications of the 2000s the neoliberal and multifunctionality discourse dominated to justify further CAP reforms based on decoupling and liberalisation of support. In the last Communication from 2017 the multifunctionality discourse in populist form prevailed to find the new societal argumentation for maintaining the policy.

In 2006, the international community started to finalize the political status of Kosovo, the Serbian province, inhabited mostly by the Muslim Albanian majority. At the end of October 2006, a referendum was held in Serbia, where a new constitution was passed that claims Kosovo as an integral part of Serbia. What has taken place in the so-called "last media battle for Kosovo"? This article investigates discourses of the two most popular Serbian newspapers and their coverage of the October 2006 events. The analysis of recontextualization shows that the newspapers continuously reproduce the dominant Serbian nationalism that focuses on a myth of a Greater Serbia. With an appropriation of different discourses, the dominant Serbian nationalism becomes legitimized and justified. In particular, the newspapers reproduce distinctive religious discourses from the political past, and furthermore, they borrow so-called European, "war on terrorism" and "crime" discourses from the international mainstream public spheres and appropriate them to the contemporary Serbian political context. Generally, the newspapers reappropriate different discourses by framing the Serbs as the victims of their own local "perpetrators," the Kosovo Albanians.

The former Yugoslav wars of 1990s have proven to be one of the most violent and aggressive military conflicts after the 2nd World War in Europe. One of the wars in the former Yugoslav region took place between Croats and Bosnian Muslims (1992-1994). The causes for war and war itself are still being denied by the majority of Croats despite evidence from Croatian historians and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in The Hague. Because the media have played a crucial role in the construction of the ethnic "Other" (the enemy), we've interviewed Croatian journalists to understand how they understand, explain and justify the war crimes committed in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The study shows that Croatian journalists appropriated "war on terrorism", "Iraqi war", "European" and "neo-liberal" discourses according to their own socio-historical framework to justify a particular ideology (in this case, the nationalistic ideology of a "Greater Croatia") and a particular practice (the war crimes against the Bosnian Muslims).