THE ANALYSIS OF NEWS MEDIA DISCOURSE AROUND INTRACTABLE INTERGROUP CONFLICT
https://doi.org/10.18384/2310-7235-2022-1-69-80
Abstract
Aim. To analyze the ways of constructing the image of an intractable intergroup conflict in the news discourse of Russian and Ukrainian media. The article presents the results of an empirical study of the intractable conflict image in the discourse of Russian and Ukrainian media. The literature data on approaches to the study of intractable conflicts are analyzed. The constructionist paradigm for the study of intractable conflicts is also described in detail. The necessity of analyzing media discourse as setting the context of public discussion around a conflict situation is substantiated. Methodology. The sample consisted of 42 articles from Russian and Ukrainian printed and online publications related to the conflict and was selected according to the popularity criterion. Critical discourse analysis was used as the main research method. The procedure of discourse analysis was carried out according to the procedural plan proposed by D.A. Khoroshilov. Results. It has been found that the news media discourse of both countries uses a well-established rhetorical repertoire, expressed in “labels” that set a stereotyped description of the conflict parties in the “aggressors-defenders” dichotomy. Attribution of the parties’ actions is characterized by the attribution of internal causes of actions to the “aggressor” side and external causes of actions to the “victim of aggression” side. The news media discourse of the Russian media is characterized by the gradual disappearance of alternative interpretations and the formation of a single, internally consistent position on the conflict, whereas in Ukrainian it was present from the very outset. Research implications. The obtained results contribute to the field of research of intractable intergroup conflict and confirm the importance of using the qualitative methodology for the study of conflict situations.
About the Author
Anna M. Potanina
Psychological Institute of the Russian Academy of Education
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Богомолова Н. Н. Социальная психология массовой коммуникации. М.: Аспект Пресс, 2010. 191 с.
2. Бусыгина Н. П. «Дискурсивный поворот» в психологических исследованиях сознания // Консультативная психология и психотерапия. 2010. № 1. С. 55-82.
3. Голынчик Е. О. Коллективные переживания трудноразрешимых социальных конфликтов // Коллективные переживания социальных проблем / под ред. Т. Г. Стефаненко, С. А. Липатова. М.: Смысл, 2015. С. 117-149.
4. Голынчик Е. О. Этос трудноразрешимого межэтнического конфликта: исследовательские подходы и перспективы изучения // Вестник РУДН. Серия: Психология и педагогика. 2020. Т. 17. № 1. С. 29-50. DOI: 10.22363/2313-1683-2020-17-1-29-50
5. Голынчик Е. О. Преимущества использования качественных методов в современных исследованиях восприятия конфликта // Социальная психология и общество. 2018. Т. 9. № 3. С. 53-61. DOI: 10.17759/sps.2018090306
6. Дейк Т. Дискурс и власть: репрезентация доминирования в языке и коммуникации / пер. с англ. Е. А. Кожемякина. М.: Либроком, 2014. 344 с.
7. Матисон Д. Медиа-дискурс. Анализ медиа-текстов / пер. с англ. О. В. Гритчиной. Харьков: Гуманитарный центр, 2013. 264 с.
8. Мельникова О. Т., Хорошилов Д. А. Развитие исследований коммуникаций в социальных контекстах отечественной психологии // Коммуникации. Медиа. Дизайн. 2018. Т. 3. № 2. С. 45-64.
9. Потанина А. М. Образ трудноразрешимого межгруппового конфликта в российских СМИ // Человеческий капитал. 2018. № 7 (115). С. 93-104. DOI: 10.25629/HC.2018.07.09
10. Потанина А. М., Стефаненко Т. Г. Направления изучения трудноразрешимого конфликта // Инновационные ресурсы социальной психологии: теории, методы, практики : сборник научных работ / под ред. С. А. Липатова, О. В. Соловьёвой, Т. Г. Стефаненко. М.: Издательство Московского университета, 2017. С. 137-143.
11. Стефаненко Т. Г. Этнопсихология. М.: Аспект Пресс, 2014. 352 c.
12. Ariyanto A., Hornsey C., Gallois M. Group Allegiances and Perceptions of Media Bias: Taking Into Account Both the Perceiver and the Source // Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. 2007. Vol. 10 (2). P. 266-279. DOI: 10.1177/1368430207074733
13. Augoustinos M., Walker I., Donaghue N. Social cognition. London: Sage Publishing, 2006. 157 p.
14. Bar-Tal D., Halperin E., Sharvit K. Ethos of Conflict: The Concept and Its Measurement. Peace and Conflict // Journal of Peace Psychology. 2012. Vol. 18. № 1. P. 40-61. DOI: 10.1037/a0026860
15. Bar-Tal D.Intractable conflicts: Sociopsychological foundations and dynamics [Электронный ресурс] // American Behavioral Scientist. 2013. Vol. 50. № 11. URL: https://journals.sagepub.com (дата обращения: 21.12.2021).
16. Baden C., Tenenboim-Weinblatt K. The search for common ground in conflict news research: Comparing the coverage of six current conflicts in domestic and international media over time // Media, War & Conflict. 2018. Vol. 11 (1). № 1. P. 22-45. DOI: 10.1177/1750635217702071
17. Cohrs J. Ch., Ulug Ö. M., Stahel L. Ethos of Conflict and Beyond: Differentiating Social Representations of Conflict // Social Psychology of Intractable Conflict. Celebrating the Legacy of Daniel Bar-Tal / ed. E. Halperin, K. Sharvit. 2015. № 2. Vol. 36. P. 33-45. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-17861-5_3
18. Coleman P. T.Intractable conflict // The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice / ed. P. T. Coleman, M. Deutsch, E. C. Marcus. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2014. 1264 p.
19. Fisher R. J.Intergroup conflict // The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice / ed. P.T. Coleman, M. Deutsch, E.C. Marcus. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2014. 1264 p.
20. Fisher R. J., Coleman P. T. The Fractal Nature of Intractable Conflict: Implications for Sustainable Transformation // Overcoming Intractable Conflicts: New Approaches to Constructive Transformations. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2019. P. 333-351.
21. Hameiri B., Nabet E., Bar-Tal D. Halperin Paradoxical Thinking as a Conflict-Resolution Intervention: Comparison to Alternative Interventions and Examination of Psychological Mechanisms // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2018. Vol. 44 (1). P. 122-139. DOI: 10.1177/0146167217736048
22. Halperin E., Pliskin R. Emotions and Emotion Regulation in Intractable Conflict: Studying Emotional Processes within a Unique Context // Advances in Political Psychology. 2015. Vol. 36. № 1. P. 119-150. DOI: 10.1111/pops.12236
23. Halperin E., Levy A.Intractable Conflicts // The Sage Encyclopedia of Political Behavior. UK. Sage, 2017. P. 406-408.
24. Hasan-Aslih S., Netzer L., van Zomeren M. When we want them to fear us: The motivation to influence outgroup emotions in collective action // Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. 2019. Vol. 22 (5). P. 724-745. DOI: 10.1177/1368430218769744
25. Louis W. R.Intergroup Positioning and Power // Global conflict resolution through positioning analysis / ed. F. M. Moghaddam, R. Harre, N. Lee. Switzerland: Springer Science: Business Media, 2008. P. 21-41.
26. Moghaddam F. M., Harre R., Lee N. Positioning and Conflict: An Introduction // Global conflict resolution through positioning analysis / ed. F. M. Moghaddam, R. Harre, N. Lee. Switzerland: Springer Science: Business Media, LLC, 2008. P. 3-21.
27. Potter J. Discourse analysis and constructionist approaches: theoretical background // Handbook of qualitative research methods for psychology and the social sciences. Leicester: BPS Blackwell, 1996. P. 125-140.
28. Uluр Ö. M., Lickel B., Leidner B. How do conflict narratives shape conflict- and peace-related outcomes among majority group members? The role of competitive victimhood in intractable conflicts // Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. 2021. Vol. 24 (5). P. 797-814. DOI: 10.1177/1368430220915771
29. Varshney A. Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life: Hindus and Muslims in India. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003. 400 p.
30. Wohl M. J. A., Porat R., Halperin E. Unfreezing cognitions during an intractable conflict: Does an external incentive for negotiating peace and (low levels of) collective angst increase information seeking? // British Journal of Social Psychology. 2016. Vol. 55. P. 65-87. DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12121
Review
Views:
154
Email this article 