<p>Anne Charlotte Leffler, Victoria Benedictsson and Frida Stéenhoff were all part of the Modern Breakthrough in Swedish literature. By utilizing Jürgen Habermas theoretical works on communicative action, and Nancy Fraser’s supplementary reading of his theory, this essay makes clear that the authors’ struggle for an understanding and a rethinking of social norms in their plays <em>Skådespelerskan </em>(1873), <em>Romeos Julia </em>(1888) and <em>Lejonets unge </em>(1896) can be read as a contribution to the public debate. Dialogue has a key function for female authors during the Modern Breakthrough. Women and mens’ possibilities to take part in conversation and argument as equals, requires the professional woman’s transgression and access to the privileges of both public (State) administration – “system”, and world of everyday life – “lifeworld”. As oppositional authors, Leffler, Benedictsson and Stéenhoff took advantage of the literary public domain, in this case the theatre. The theatre as public sphere had a more effective capacity to affect its audience than fiction. The plays were written and staged in a cultural period that, compared with the present one, in a greater sense influenced public opinion. The theatre was a powerful part of the public debate, and this debate involved parties from both on-stage and off-stage positions.</p><p>At the theatre Leffler, Benedictsson and Stéenhoff turned the private into politics. Their powerful contribution to the public debate were directed specifically towards the bourgeois audience. They carried on a controversy concerning the notion of the bourgeois family by showing scenarios that raised objection to its idealistic point of view. The bourgeois living room was exposed on stage. Conflicts related to the private sphere were brought up as a theme in a public sphere and by so means were incorporated into the public debate, which at that time was dominated by men. The plays mirrored the audience and the authors’ strategies were based upon the remodeling power inherent in conversation and argumentation. Thereby, the audience were confronted with an alternated reflection of themselves. This reflection should be read as a problematic representation of the writing of history. The alternate mirroring brought in itself forward an argument that emphasized why a new reflection was necessary.</p><p><em>Skådespelerskan</em>, <em>Romeos Julia </em>and <em>Lejonets unge</em> examine female artists in a bourgeois environment. Through the artist the structures that maintain bourgeois ideals are exposed and questioned, but first and foremost the artist show that communicative action between men and women was insufficient. The androcentric order did not acknowledge women and men as equals, in accordance with that, the possibility of conversation, in the sense of Habermas, came to nothing. Under such circumstances an understanding between men and women could not be reached. Love within the institution of marriage also suffered since it could not be founded in acknowledgement as long as the structure maintained. Saga and Adil, the main characters in <em>Lejonets unge</em>, personify, on the other hand, Stéenhoffs ideas of what is being needed to change the androcentric structure. They are citizens of the future.</p><p>My focus is on human action (in an Aristotelian sense) in the plays, the way characters stage themselves and bring the plot forward, shed light upon their possibilities and limitations in proportion to each other as men and women. My analysis thereby contrasts with the greater part of earlier research. I give prominence to the connection between psychological conflict and social position/role. In <em>Skådespelerskan</em>, <em>Romeos Julia</em> and <em>Lejonets unge</em> all of the characters’ psychological conflicts are based in gender issues, the consequences of being a man or woman in the 18th century, rather than explicit existential matters.</p>

Anne Charlotte Leffler, Victoria Benedictsson and Frida Stéenhoff were all part of the Modern Breakthrough in Swedish literature. By utilizing Jürgen Habermas theoretical works on communicative action, and Nancy Fraser’s supplementary reading of his theory, this essay makes clear that the authors’ struggle for an understanding and a rethinking of social norms in their plays Skådespelerskan (1873), Romeos Julia (1888) and Lejonets unge (1896) can be read as a contribution to the public debate. Dialogue has a key function for female authors during the Modern Breakthrough. Women and mens’ possibilities to take part in conversation and argument as equals, requires the professional woman’s transgression and access to the privileges of both public (State) administration – “system”, and world of everyday life – “lifeworld”. As oppositional authors, Leffler, Benedictsson and Stéenhoff took advantage of the literary public domain, in this case the theatre. The theatre as public sphere had a more effective capacity to affect its audience than fiction. The plays were written and staged in a cultural period that, compared with the present one, in a greater sense influenced public opinion. The theatre was a powerful part of the public debate, and this debate involved parties from both on-stage and off-stage positions. At the theatre Leffler, Benedictsson and Stéenhoff turned the private into politics. Their powerful contribution to the public debate were directed specifically towards the bourgeois audience. They carried on a controversy concerning the notion of the bourgeois family by showing scenarios that raised objection to its idealistic point of view. The bourgeois living room was exposed on stage. Conflicts related to the private sphere were brought up as a theme in a public sphere and by so means were incorporated into the public debate, which at that time was dominated by men. The plays mirrored the audience and the authors’ strategies were based upon the remodeling power inherent in conversation and argumentation. Thereby, the audience were confronted with an alternated reflection of themselves. This reflection should be read as a problematic representation of the writing of history. The alternate mirroring brought in itself forward an argument that emphasized why a new reflection was necessary. Skådespelerskan, Romeos Julia and Lejonets unge examine female artists in a bourgeois environment. Through the artist the structures that maintain bourgeois ideals are exposed and questioned, but first and foremost the artist show that communicative action between men and women was insufficient. The androcentric order did not acknowledge women and men as equals, in accordance with that, the possibility of conversation, in the sense of Habermas, came to nothing. Under such circumstances an understanding between men and women could not be reached. Love within the institution of marriage also suffered since it could not be founded in acknowledgement as long as the structure maintained. Saga and Adil, the main characters in Lejonets unge, personify, on the other hand, Stéenhoffs ideas of what is being needed to change the androcentric structure. They are citizens of the future. My focus is on human action (in an Aristotelian sense) in the plays, the way characters stage themselves and bring the plot forward, shed light upon their possibilities and limitations in proportion to each other as men and women. My analysis thereby contrasts with the greater part of earlier research. I give prominence to the connection between psychological conflict and social position/role. In Skådespelerskan, Romeos Julia and Lejonets unge all of the characters’ psychological conflicts are based in gender issues, the consequences of being a man or woman in the 18th century, rather than explicit existential matters.

Syftet med denna uppsats har varit att presentera och analysera argumentationen i debatten för och emot vargens rätt till existens i Värmland mellan åren 1965 och 1990. För att besvara forskningsfrågorna i uppsatsen har kvalitativ argumentationsanalytisk metod använts. Denna har applicerats på materialet som har utgjorts av ledare och insändare ifrån de värmländska lokaltidningarna Nya Wermlands-Tidningen och Värmlands Folkblad. Målet har i nästa steg också varit att belysa eventuella motsättningar mellan de som är i direktkontakt med vargen, den så kallade landsortsbefolkningen (periferi), och de som inte bor i områden där vargen uppehåller sig, den så kallade tätortsbefolkningen (centrum). Följande frågor har ställts för att uppnå syftet: (1) Vilka argument läggs fram i Nya Wermlands-Tidningen och Värmlands Folkblad i vargfrågan mellan åren 1965 och 1990? (2) Hur ser beviskraften i argumenten ut? (3) Hur speglar vargdebatten konflikten mellan landsorts- och tätortsbefolkningen i Värmland? Metoden argumentationsanalys går ut på att studera och analysera argumentationer i en text vilket i denna uppsats utgjorts av insändare och ledare. Med hjälp av argumentationsanalys har kritisk analys kunnat hjälpa till att illustrera en strukturerad och tydlig bild av textinnehållet. Argumenten har skisserats upp efter en delvis egen modell där varje arguments hållbarhet och relevans bedömts, i syfte att få fram en sammanlagd beviskraft. Jürgen Habermas idé och tankar om den borgerliga offentligheten har utgjort den teoretiska utgångspunkten. Denna har framförallt använts i ett diskursivt analytiskt ändamål. Den borgerliga offentligheten är det forum som allmänheten använder sig av för att debattera och uttrycka sina åsikter. Habermas ser att det moderna samhället förlorat mycket av den borgerliga offentlighetens beståndsdelar då den övertagits av kommersiella intressen. Denna uppsats har emellertid visat en god återupplivande för den borgerliga offentligheten, åtminstone i den studerade lokalpressen. Den högljudda debatten har gjorts möjlig tack vare en öppenhet från tidningsredaktionerna att presentera alla argument, för och emot, höga som låga, för att vargdebatten skall innefatta många dimensioner och synsätt. Bakgrunden i denna uppsats beskriver vargens historia i Sverige, framförallt i Värmland. Från att vargen varit talrik under 1600- till 1800-talet drevs den allt längre norrut för att mer eller mindre utrotas. Bakgrunden till dess utrotning har varit en kombination av sjukdomar, inavel men framförallt renägande samers avskjutning. Bakgrunden lyfter också fram de omdiskuterade Naturvårdsprojektet "Projekt Varg" som grundades i syfte att freda en svensk vargstam. Bakgrunden fungerar i denna uppsats som ett svar för de argument som läggs fram i resultatet. Med hjälp av solid bakgrundsfakta kan hållbarheten i argumenten lättare bedömas. 48 Den tidigare forskningen innefattar en rad skiljda forskningsarbeten. Först presenteras två undersökningar om inställningen till vargen. Dessa visar hur svenskar i allmänhet blivit allt mer positiva till vargen. Därefter presenteras bakgrunden till det så kallade "Varghatet" som i regel grundar sig på myter, sagor men också det faktum att vargen emellanåt angriper tamboskap. Efterföljande tema härrör konflikten mellan centrum och periferi där renägande samers och värmlänningars misstro till auktoriteter och myndigheter beskrivs. Därpå följer en presentation av tidigare forskning om vargen i massmedia. De uppsatser som där presenteras har i regel ett journalistiskt intresse och är skrivna utifrån medialt synsätt. Uppsatserna ger en god bild av vad som presenterats i massmedia om just vargen, men förklarar mycket lite om bakgrundsorsakerna till vad och varför vissa artiklar presenteras. Resultatet och analysen åskådliggör att argumenten skiljer sig mellan insändare och beroende på vilket syfte insändarskribenterna har haft. Emellertid skiljer sig inte argumenten särskilt mycket över tid. Vargdebatten kan summeras med att den präglats av argument kring fakta om vargen som biologisk och social varelse. Fakta som ibland underbyggs med både sanningar och osanningar, personliga påhopp, hotelser, tillskrivning av åsikter mellan parterna och hårda ordväxlingar mellan de som påstår sig känna vargen kontra de som "bara" vill ventilera åsikter i vargfrågan. Beviskraften i argumenten är mycket varierande. I regel täcker de texter som propagerar för vargen en högre beviskraft då relevansen i de argumenten är betydligt högre än i de texter som propagerar emot vargen. Denna uppsats har starkt kunnat belysa konflikten mellan centrum och periferi på ett tydligt sätt, detta främst med hjälp av den lättöverskådliga metoden. Detta är den största behållningen av uppsatsen. Vi kan se att vargfrågan ofta får stå tillbaka för en debatt om glesbygdsproblematik, oförmågan från myndigheter samt tätortsbor att förstå och uppmärksamma glesbygdens utsatta situation. De flesta insändare som vill bevara vargen har kommit ifrån människor där vargen inte förekommer och vice versa. / The purpose of this essay is to show and analyze the argumentation in the debate concerning the wolf’s claim for existence in the county of Värmland, between the years of 1965 to 1990. To answer the research questions, a method known as argumentation analysis are to be used and applied on leaders and letter to editors commencing the local papers Nya Wermlands-Tidningen and Värmlands Folkblad. The purpose in next step is to elucidate contradictions between the ones who are in direct contact with the wolf, the provincial habitants (the periphery) and the ones who live in districts where the wolf are not an element of the nearby area, the conurbation habitants (the center). The result has shown that the arguments differs depending on the period of time, between writers of the letters to the editor and depending on the purpose of the these texts. The debate of the wolf have contained arguments packed with facts about the wolf (both sociologically and biologically), pounces, threats, attributing the other part opinions, and coarse arguing between the ones who claims to recognize the wolf in opposition to the ones who simply confirm their own position in the debate. The evidential value also differs a lot. Accustomed writers such as journalists and the ones who demonstrate objective and sober arguments do have a higher value of evidence. Texts of those who are pro-wolf often illustrate further relevant arguments in appose to the anti-wolf part. This essay has in many ways illustrated the conflict between provincial habitants and authorities but most of all has this paper penetrated the conflict between provincial habitants and conurbation habitants. The conurbation habitants are often pro-wolf and lives in urban societies such as Karlstad while the provincial habitants place themselves as the anti-wolf part and regularly lives in sparsely populated area such as the surroundings of Torsby or Sysslebäck. The debate often puts the wolf aside and becomes a quarrel regarding to the provincial areas vulnerable situation. The wolf is sometime a substantially symbol for authority and the conurbation habitants way of overlook the sparsely populated areas of northern Värmland.

Abstract: During the past decade, media researchers have intensified the study of media scandals and the role of journalism as an institution that holds social actors responsible for malfeasance and wrongdoings. On a micro level of analysis, the main attention has beendirected towards the journalistic interview and its use to promote the impression of guilt and journalistic neutrality. However, such studies have not been able to address the editing dimension of TV journalism that transforms conversation to another type of communicativepractice – that of communication through TV-flows composed of speech sequences, pictures,and sounds. This doctoral thesis develops a theoretical framework for analysis of the functions of editing inthe process of guilt attribution by journalistic TV-flows – e.g. investigative TV reporting. The purpose is also to contribute to an understanding of the relationship between the communicative competences of viewers and the contextualization of speech acts through the composition of TV-flows. The developed perspective consists of three parts: 1) A division of viewers’ reception of TV-flows in two types of interpersonal relations (to a speaker and to the composer) that involves six levels of cognitive activities. This division is based on the Habermasian notion of communicative rationality; 2) An intent-model, that lists communicative intentions expressed by the composer when speech sequences are merged and pictures are inserted; 3) A guilt-model, that encompasses guilt as a mental structure of ontologically separated elements (e.g. deed,intention, norm) and the associative relations that the viewer uses to create a meaningful whole– a fabula of guilt. The conveyed analysis of three cases of investigative reporting illustrates how the developed framework can be applied in the study of guilt attribution. The analyses also describe several compositional strategies by which the viewer is encouraged to make certain meaning, evaluate, and judge. The strategies concern the following areas: promotion of certain understanding of speech, promotion of certain evaluation of the validity claims, and promotion of certain understanding of the speaker’s intentions. Also strategies of positioning of the reporter in constructed discourses, that enhance the impression of her performances and argumentation, are explored. Furthermore, the composer’s strategies for masking intentions to interfere with the speech acts, by increasing intent ambiguity, are described. The guilt-model is used to understand the workings of the TV-flow on an overreaching level of meaning (the fabula level). Here, the analysis explains the interplay between portrayed intentions and acts, and the different ways in which condemning norms can be activated and highlighted. Furthermore, the model explores the possible employment of categorization in theprocess of guilt attribution (e.g. when properties of an individual are transferred to a group). In sum, this thesis contributes to a new way of understanding the reception of current affairs programs and TV journalism, as relation building between composer and viewer, by means of contextualization of speech acts.

This thesis discusses how to enhance the public discussion of moral and political questions. Enhancing public ‘deliberation’ is desirable since it provides citizens with influence, it enables coming to an understanding, and it ensures legitimacy. The concept of ethico-political judgment, with its two conditions, is elaborated on as an ideal that suggests how we should deliberate. In order to understand how we actually deliberate, an empirical inquiry into the public discourse on prenatal diagnosis and screening in the Netherlands and Sweden is conducted. On the basis of Kant’s ethics and his theory of the faculty of judgment, the two conditions for public deliberation are developed. These conditions are the giving of and asking for normative reasons as well as aiming at impartiality of judgment. Normative reasons are prescriptive, universal, and internal and these are related to Kant’s ethics. Impartiality is related to Kant’s ‘enlarged thought’, to think from the standpoint of others, as well as Kant’s practical philosophy. We need to think from the standpoints of others in order to consider whether or not the principle of our action applies to all. Four thematic foci in the public discourse on prenatal diagnosis are investigated – the unborn life, attitudes toward the disabled, implications of new choices, and the limits of medicine. The conclusion is that – if we wish to enhance public deliberation on the basis of the two conditions of ethico-political judgment – we should deal with both interpretive differences over universal principles (such as respect for autonomy and human dignity) and varying representations of ‘the other’ (such as the fetus, disabled persons, mothers-to-be, and future parents). / I denna avhandling diskuteras hur offentlig diskussion kring moraliska och politiska frågor kan intensifieras. Att intensifiera offentlig diskussion är önskvärt för att ge medborgare inflytande, för att främja förståelse och för att skapa legitimitet. Begreppet etisk-politisk bedömning utvecklas som ett ideal för hur vi bör diskutera. För att undersöka hur vi faktiskt diskuterar görs en empirisk undersökning av det offentliga samtalet om fosterdiagnostik i Nederländerna och Sverige. Med utgångspunkt i Kants etik och hans teori om omdömesförmågan utvecklas två villkor för offentlig diskussion. Dessa villkor är att ge och efterfråga normativa skäl och att sträva efter opartiskhet av omdömesförmågan. Normativa skäl är preskriptiva, universella och interna. Begreppet utvecklas utifrån Kants etik. Opartiskhet baseras på Kants ’utvidgade tänkande’: att tänka utifrån andras perspektiv. Denna idé relateras till Kants praktiska filosofi. Det ’utvidgade tänkandet’ innebär att vi tar ställning till om principen som vi väljer för en handling gäller alla. Fyra teman i det offentliga samtalet om fosterdiagnostik analyseras – det ofödda livet, attityder gentemot handikappade, implikationer av nya val och den medicinska praktikens gränser. Slutsatsen är att om vi önskar intensifiera offentlig diskussion med utgångspunkt i de två villkor som utvecklas, bör vi ta itu med tolkningsskillnader när det gäller universella principer (som respekt för autonomi och människovärde) samt olika representationer av ’den andra’ (som fostret, handikappade, gravida kvinnor och blivande föräldrar).

[pt] A presente Tese busca problematizar algumas das relações entre a racionalidade e as práticas argumentativas características do ensino superior brasileiro, principalmente no contexto da pós-graduação. Para este intento, a investigação da teoria do filósofo alemão Jurgen Habermas tornou-se fundamental, principalmente a análise das regras do discurso. Estas regras foram consideradas, neste trabalho, como elementos norteadores da racionalidade comunicativa e discursiva. Um dos focos centrais da Tese foi discutir os problemas relativos à implementação fática das ideias habermasianas. Com este intuito, tornou-se necessário aprofundar a investigação sobre o conceito de comunicação sistematicamente distorcida e articular outras observações, provenientes de patamares teóricos distintos: da psicologia cognitiva, a teoria sobre protótipos; da psicologia social destacou-se a noção de estereótipos; da psicologia genética piagetiana, o conceito de esquemas; da reflexão hermenêutica, o círculo hermenêutico. Ao final, reflexões gerais sobre a argumentação procuram evidenciar as implicações deste estudo para processos educacionais do ensino superior. / [en] This thesis aims to discuss some of the relationships between rationality and argumentative practices characteristic of Brazilian higher education, especially in the context of graduate studies. For this purpose, the investigation of the theories of the German philosopher Jurgen Habermas is crucial, especially his analysis of the rules of discourse. These rules were considered in this work as the guiding elements of communicative and discursive rationality. A central focus of the thesis is to discuss issues related to the implementation of Habermas s ideas. For this purpose, it became necessary to investigate the concept of systematically distorted communication and articulate other observations from different theoretical perspectives: the theory of prototypes in cognitive psychology; the notion of stereotypes in social psychology; the concept of schemas in Piaget s genetic psychology; and the hermeneutic circle in hermeneutics. The thesis concludes with general reflections on argumentation intended to clarify the implications of this study for educational processes in higher education.

Le point de départ des travaux entrepris est la définition lefortienne de la démocratie par opposition au totalitarisme. Le totalitarisme est l’institution d’une société organique, une et homogène, dans laquelle aucune division sociale, aucun désaccord avec l’idéologie véhiculée par le parti ne sont possibles. La spécificité de la démocratie, a contrario, est de s’enrichir de la désintrication du pouvoir, du droit, et du savoir. Les citoyens, dotés de droits fondamentaux, sont juges de la légitimité du pouvoir établi. Leurs désaccords ainsi que l’antagonisme entre les classes sociales nourrissent l’exercice d’un commun litigieux. De là, une question fondamentale : une telle définition de la démocratie est-elle historiquement datée, ou continue-t-elle d’être pertinente aujourd’hui ? Doit-on encore concevoir la démocratie, pour la rendre authentique, par le conflit civil érigé en principe politique, ou faut-il l’envisager de manière consensualiste au lendemain de son opposition avec le totalitarisme ? Claude Lefort s’inspirait de Machiavel pour dépasser les limites du marxisme et repenser la démocratie par la valorisation du conflit civil, indissociable de la figure de l’imaginaire social. La thèse ici soutenue adopte différemment une perspective néo-machiavélienne. Elle revient à proposer un espace public dissensuel à partir du modèle machiavélien de l’entente dans le conflit, par confrontation avec l’espace public habermassien et d’autres conceptions du tort et du conflit dans les démocraties contemporaines. Comment concevoir aujourd’hui les figures du conflit civil et de l’imaginaire social, en s’inspirant paradoxalement de Machiavel pour interroger la démocratie ? / The starting point of the present work is the Lefortian definition of democracy as opposed to totalitarism. Totalitarism is the institution of an organic society, one and homogeneous, where no social division, no disagreement with the party’s ideology are possible. On the contrary democracy’s specificity consists in enriching itself with the disentanglement of power, law and knowledge. Citizens, endowed with fundamental rights can judge of the legitimacy of the power in place. Their disagreements as well as the antagonism between social classes fuel the dispute about common good.Hence a fundamental question: is such a definition of democracy historically dated or is it still relevant today? To make it authentic should democracy be seen through civil conflict made into a political principle or should it be viewed in a consensualist way just after its opposition to totalitarism? Claude Lefort drew from Machiavelli to go beyond the limits of Marxism and rethink democracy by giving more importance to civil conflict as an integral part of the theme of social imaginary. The present dissertation adopts in a different way a neo-Machiavellian perspective. It amounts to proposing a dissensual public space on the Machiavellian model of understanding within conflict by confronting it with the Habermassian public space and with other conceptions of wrong and conflict in contemporary democracies.Today how can the themes of civil conflict and social imaginary be viewed – paradoxically drawing from Machiavelli- to question democracy?

Recent years have brought the private and non-profit sectors closer together in terms of cross-sectional collaborations. As businesses have become more involved in communities, initiatives such as employee volunteering (EV)—where employees are encouraged to volunteer by their employers—are becoming more popular and are receiving more scholarly attention. However, the question still remains as to whether the main reasons behind cooperation are related to strategy: does interaction and communication in EV mirror a more ideal- or strategic approach? As EV programmes (EVPs) bring together actors with different world-views and perspectives, much can be learned from studying their interaction. The present study examined the nature of communication in EV and whether this communication reflects a strategic (based on self-interest) or ideal (corresponding to Habermas’s ideal speech situation and stakeholder dialogue) approach. In addition, the study looked at factors that, according to participants, facilitate improved communication and understanding in EV. The findings indicate that communication in EVPs largely reflected the strategic approach. However, the ideal approach is still apparent in some situations and can successfully be used given the right conditions--for example, in situations of long-term collaboration with increased experience when participants invest time, resources and motivation in building relationships. Time and honesty was also important factors. However, a range of barriers made collaboration more difficult. Pursuit of strategic short-term solutions and shortage of resources and time may hinder important dialogue and understanding.

當代德國社會學理論家 Jurgen Habermas在其「溝通行動理論」一書中，檢視西方社 會的理化過程，發現在現代社會中，因為系統力量的不當膨賬而導致生活世界之溝通 脈絡受操縱媒介控制，因而扭曲了語意的面貌，並且產生「生活世界殖民化」的病態 現象。他認為要扭轉此一病態發展，唯有寄望於溝通行動的開展。 本篇論文主要將針對 Habermas 在「溝通行動理論」下卷中，對 Mead 、Durkheim 、 Parsons 等人的討論進行再詮釋，試圖由其中了解生活世界與系統之關係、溝通理性 理性與功能主意理性之區別。並且討論溝通行動之三方面：社會化、社會整合及文化 再製，藉以了解溝通行動之動態過程，最後建構－由個人（自我）到社會的分析架構 以明瞭 Habermas溝通行動理論的貢獻及其限制。

This study is a contribution to the limited knowledge of how different types of media content (about Muslims and extremism) posted and shared on Facebook might influence corresponding user comments. Through analyzing the discourse of user comments this study aims to identify how comments might reflect certain characteristics of Islamophobia, and to which themes in Facebook posts commentators relate to the most. The linguistic analysis is guided by the use of critical discourse analysis. For the purpose of this study, three different types of articles/video and the corresponding comments are analyzed. Two of the articles/video that I will analyze are from unreliable media sources, and one of the articles is from a credible media source. The linguistic analysis showed that the majority of commentators expressed that they believe the claims made in the articles/video about Muslims and extremism are true. The discourse analysis further showed, the majority of articles/video and the majority of the analyzed corresponding comments reflected the [in the study] defined characteristics of Islamophobia. My findings confirmed similar studies done in the past.