Dialogic positioning in Iranian versus Western media coverage of the Iranian nuclear issue

2017 IJRSLL – Volume 6 Issue 4


Ghane, Mohammad Hossein*
Yazd University, Iran (Ghane57@yahoo.com)

Allami, Hamid
Yazd University, Iran (Hamid_allami@yahoo.com)

Mahdavirad, Fatemeh
Yazd University, Iran (Fmahdavirad@yahoo.com)


Working within the appraisal framework (Martin & White, 2005), an attempt has been made to identify the dialogic positioning, by which texts can favor particular value positions while  pretending to be sharing their readers’ views through employment of certain lexical choices, hence stance markers. A set of Iranian and Western journalistic texts have been compared and contrasted to explore the ways Iranian and Western journalists employ such devices in the texts they develop for reporting the negotiations between Iran and 5+1 countries concerning the nuclear energy issues. Holding opposite positions regarding the Iranian nuclear issue, and employing different linguistic devices, both sides seem to have the same tendencies in this regard and made use of the contractively dialogic positioning more than the expansive one. The findings of the research indicate that media are a means in the hands of the powers in order to steer the public mind towards their favorite directions. In other words, events are not represented in the media as they are in reality, but go through journalistic practices.

Keywords: appraisal framework; media; dialogic positioning; stance markers; Iranian nuclear issue


DOI: https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2016.1589

*Corresponding Author