Suchergebnisse

peer-reviewed ; The continued rise of socio-economic inequality over the past decades with its connected political outcomes such as the Brexit vote in the UK, and the election of Donald Trump are currently a matter of intense debate both in academia and in journalism. One significant sign of the heightened interest was the surprise popularity of Thomas Piketty's Capital in the twenty-first Century. The book reached the top of the bestseller lists and was described as a 'media sensation', with Piketty himself as a 'rock star economist'. This paper, drawing from a major international and cross-disciplinary study, investigates the print media treatment in four European countries of economic policy proposals presented in Capital. Applying social semiotic and critical discourse analysis, we specifically focus on articles which are in disagreement with these proposals and identify five categories of counterarguments used against Piketty: authorisation, moralisation, rationalisation, portrayal of victimhood and inevitability. Providing textual and linguistic examples we demonstrate how the use of linguistic resources normalises and conventionalises ideology-laden discourses of economic means (taxation) and effects, reinforcing particular views of social relations and class as common sense and therewith upholding and perpetuating power relations and inequalities.

The continued rise of socio-economic inequality over the past decades with its connected political outcomes such as the Brexit vote in the UK, and the election of Donald Trump are currently a matter of intense debate both in academia and in journalism. One significant sign of the heightened interest was the surprise popularity of Thomas Piketty's Capital in the twenty-first Century. The book reached the top of the bestseller lists and was described as a "media Sensation", with Piketty himself as a "rock star Economist". This paper, drawing from a major international and cross-disciplinary study, investigates the print media treatment in four European countries of economic policy proposals presented in Capital. Applying social semiotic and critical discourse analysis, we specifically focus on articles which are in disagreement with these proposals and identify five categories of counterarguments used against Piketty: authorisation, moralisation, rationalisation, portrayal of victimhood and inevitability. Providing textual and linguistic examples we demonstrate how the use of linguistic resources normalises and conventionalises ideology-laden discourses of economic means (taxation) and effects, reinforcing particular views of social relations and class as common sense and therewith upholding and perpetuating power relations and inequalities.

n/a ; Please see http://hdl.handle.net/10344/7675 for the more recent version of this paper ; .The continuous rise of socio-economic inequality over the past decades with its connected political outcomes such as the Brexit vote in the UK, and the election of Donald Trump are currently a matter of intense debate both in academia and in journalism. A significant sign of the heightened interest was the surprise popularity of Thomas Piketty's Capital in the 21st Century. The book reached the top of the bestseller lists and was described as a 'media sensation' and Piketty himself as a 'rock star economist'. This paper, drawing from a major international and cross-disciplinary study, investigates the print media treatment in four European countries of economic policy proposals presented in Capital. Applying social semiotic and critical discourse analysis, we specifically focus on articles which are in disagreement with these proposals and identify five categories of counterarguments used against Piketty: authorisation, moralisation, rationalisation, portrayal of victimhood and inevitability. Providing textual and linguistic examples we demonstrate how the use of linguistic resources normalises and conventionalises ideology-laden discourses of economic means (taxation) and effects, reinforcing particular views of social relations and class as common sense and therewith upholding and perpetuating power relations and inequalities. ; PUBLISHED ; peer-reviewed

"Closely examining how the news media reports economic and financial matters, this book equips students with solid methodological skills for reading and interpreting the news alongside a toolkit for best practice as an economic journalist. How to Read Economic News combines theory and practice to explore the discourse surrounding economics in the mass media and how this specialised form of reporting can be improved. Beginning by introducing major concepts such as financialised economic reporting, media amnesia and loss of trust, the book goes on to help students to interpret, understand and analyse existing news discourse and to identify subtle biases in news reports stemming from hegemonic belief systems. The final section puts this analytical knowledge into practice, providing students with methods for the critical production of news and covering such skills as identifying newsworthiness, story sourcing, achieving clarity, and using complex datasets in news stories. This is a key text for students and academics in the fields of financial journalism and critical discourse analysis who wish to approach the subject with a critical eye."

In 2010, as part of the Troika intervention into Ireland, the then government agreed to the imposition of domestic water charges and the creation of a centralized water company. The imposition of charges for domestic water, which was until then universally available, met spontaneous militant action, including mass protests and the blockading of districts to prevent meter installation. The campaigns were quickly dubbed "violent" and accused of being "infiltrated" by "dissidents" and other "sinister" elements, while minor acts of disobedience, such as pickets and sit-down protests, were recast as violent. In response, water activists used social media networks to disseminate opposition and as a critical media literacy tool. This article offers a comparative analysis of legacy print media and activist-driven social media coverage of a politically important court case involving water activists as an example of how the hybrid media system operates in a political conflict.

peer-reviewed ; In 2010, as part of the Troika intervention into Ireland, the then government agreed to the imposition of domestic water charges and the creation of a centralized water company. The imposition of charges for domestic water, which was until then universally available, met spontaneous militant action, including mass protests and the blockading of districts to prevent meter installation. The campaigns were quickly dubbed "violent" and accused of being "infiltrated" by "dissidents" and other "sinister" elements, while minor acts of disobedience, such as pickets and sit-down protests, were recast as violent. In response, water activists used social media networks to disseminate opposition and as a critical media literacy tool. This article offers a comparative analysis of legacy print media and activist-driven social media coverage of a politically important court case involving water activists as an example of how the hybrid media system operates in a political conflict.

The relationship between Social Media and Legacy Media has been of much interest to scholars. This paper investigates an interesting, contentious and politicised court case where the heretofore monopoly of professional journalism, court reporting, was challenged by citizen journalists. The case concerned a 2014 sit down protest in Jobstown, Tallaght, a working-class suburb of Dublin, where a sitting Minister Joan Burton TD, was blocked in her car for several hours by local protesters. A number of protesters, many months after the incident, were arrested and charged with false imprisonment.