September 11, 2001 presented the world with events that challenged its conception of reality and called into question current ideologies. In order to make sense of the attacks, people turned to the media for information and interpretation. My interest lies in the media’s role in shaping ideologies as a result of the events of September 11, 2001. I focus on the newspaper editorial because it, in particular, functions not only to report the news but also to interpret the news for the reader. My analysis is centred on the first reaction to the events in five ‘core’ editorials drawn, respectively, from an American, British, South African, Zimbabwean and Kenyan newspaper. The specific focus, in each case, is the representation and evaluation of social actors, the events themselves and the schematic structure of the editorial. I adopt a critical perspective through the use of Critical Discourse Analysis, supported by Systemic Functional Grammar and APPRAISAL. This perspective involves three inter-connected stages of analysis: a Description of the formal discourse properties of each editorial; an Interpretation of the prevailing situational context; and an Explanation of the sociohistorical context in each case. Language, being a form of social practice, is a means by which power relations in society are reproduced or contested (Janks 1997). By analysing the editorials’ discourse I identify whose interests are being served and how each text positions a reader’s attitudes and opinions. My analysis reveals the fact that the editorials distinguish between “us” and “them” groups for the purposes of advancing and confirming in-group ideologies and agendas. This is achieved in each case through comparing the paper’s ideology with the opposing ideology, which is presented as deviant and unsupportive of the in-group. My analysis of the African editorials, in particular, further reveals the exploitation of this division for the purposes of promoting and interpreting local political and social issues. Examination of the processes and conditions surrounding the production of the editorials shows how they are significantly influenced and constrained by the ideologies of both the writer and newspaper owner as well as by the situational context within which they were written. My analysis of the schematic structure of the editorials, in line with Bolivar (1994), reveals consistent use of three-part structures by which editorial opinions are evaluated. In concluding I provide suggestions, based on my research, for how critical language awareness can inform media education at high school level in South Africa. I argue that students should be equipped with tools, such as those I employed, to critically analyse and uncover how language is used to promote ideologies in the editorial of newspapers.

No description available.

The paper explores the impact of the September 11 events on the U.S. politics of homeland security, examines the consequences of the after-9-11 measures taken up by the U.S. Government for international trade, and evaluates the role of these measures in contemporary world.

Rhetorical frames are used to support political agendas, define problems, diagnose causes, make policy judgments, and suggest solutions. Following the attacks on September 11, 2001, politicians and media pundits used Islamophobia as a fear-mongering tactic to justify public policy formation. The purpose of this study was to analyze public discourse on Islamic terrorism in arguments advocating government surveillance, restrictive immigration policies, and other erosions of U.S. constitutional protections of its citizens. This study drew on the postmodern theories of Lakoff, Lyotard, and Said to critically examine U.S. political discourse on Islam and terrorism. Three conceptual rhetorical frames were examined: Clash of Civilizations, Endangered Constitutional Protections, and Islamophobia. The key research question asked how U.S. politicians and high-profile national news commentators used biased rhetoric to frame discussions of Islam and terrorism. This qualitative study used content analysis of 44 news reports of crimes that framed these incidents as Islam-inspired terrorism. Study findings suggested that defenders of the USA PATRIOT Act used a Clash of Civilizations frame that pitted Western freedom proponents against radical Muslim fanatics in struggles for social change. U.S. policy makers and news commentators described Islamic inspired terrorism as anti-American vengeance, Jihadism, and/or anti-Semitism to control national debates and information flow. Implications of these findings suggest that an alternative Islamophobic framing can be deployed to make biases explicit, quell anxieties of and about stigmatized groups, raise the self-esteem of the vilified minorities, and decrease the risk of terrorism.

No description available.

This study uses individual media dependency (IMD) to examine student dependency on the media before and during the attacks of September 11. A content analysis of media journals kept by a group of university students during the week of September 11 confirmed the existence of the IMD relationship, a finding that adds to the methodological breadth of IMD research. Goal scope, which is composed of the understanding, orientation, and play goals narrowed to the goal of social understanding on September 11 only to expand outwards to pre-September 11 levels by the end of that week. The theory postulates goal scope to be comprehensive, but student-identified reasons for seeking out the media during the week of September 11 were not fully explained by goal scope. Dependence on news mediated sources followed the pattern of goal scope with students articulating a tremendous dependence during the attacks, only to be followed with a sharp decline in time spent with news media by the end of the week. Contrary to hypothesis 4, referent scope did not narrow at all during that week. However, the media diaries revealed television was the referent of choice among students for information about the attacks. Time spent with television followed the patterns of goal scope and dependence on news mediated sources—a sharp increase in time spent with television was followed by a comparable decline in time spent. Student reflection papers were analyzed to understand why students returned so quickly to former media consumption patterns. Weariness with the reports and images surrounding the attacks, disappointment with the lack of new information, and the obligations of being a student were among the reasons given in the reflection papers. Despite the quick return to pre-attack levels of media consumption, students wrote that the media presentations of the attacks had broad cognitive, affective, and behavioral effects.

No description available.

<p>This dissertation interrogates the ways in which the ethical rhetoric following September 11th, 2001 (particularly that of the administration of U.S. President George Bush) and contemporary globalization (which Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri have called "Empire") implicate one other, as well as the ways in which these interlinked discourses are currently shaping the post-9/11 global "ethical climate" and its universalized human subject. Drawing upon Jacques Derrida's concept of "hauntology" which he introduces in Specters of Marx (1994), the main argument of the thesis is that the dominant post-9/11 ethical rhetoric is a specter of Empire, such that it is both a symptom of and a particularly influential force-of-law shaping the "Spirit" of contemporary globalization/Empire. The thesis claims that in their shared universalism, neo-Hegelian remainders of idealism, and theocratic impulses to contain and ethicopolitically manage the entire world, globalization/Empire and its most serious recent symptoms-Bush's post-9/11 ethical rhetoric and the global war on terror--contain suicidal auto-deconstructive tendencies that threaten to destroy themselves from within in spite of their utopic visions of themselves. Finally, the dissertation investigates some of the key spectral remainders of "9/11" and contemporary ethical thought which contradict and/or corroborate the dominant post-9/11 discourse of Empire and its universalized ethico-political human subject.</p> / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

This research explored how Arab American couples found the strength and resilience that empowered them to overcome the terrorist attacks of September 11th and the aftereffects that followed. Utilizing a family resiliency model grounded in systems theory and social constructionism, I interviewed 18 Arab American couples from the New York and New Jersey areas. I applied a phenomenological method of inquiry to gather the experiences of Arab American couples in order to understand the protective processes of resilience. Couples reported fear and caution because of incidents of threats and violence against Arabs in the United States. Some couples described incidents against them. Couples accessed a variety of resources to survive the aftereffect. These included coping skills developed during previous experiences of terror, American community support, determination, and religion. There were four major conclusions: resilient marriages, larger systems, process of identity, and religion: unify and identity. I discussed these conclusions in the context of the conceptual framework and made clinical and theoretical implications. / Ph. D.

No