Abstract
Angela Smith and Dr. Michael Higgins explore the media’s use of language to purposely and inadvertently maintain the societal status quo. Smith, a Reader in Language and Culture at the University of Sunderland, United Kingdom, and Higgins, the Director of the Journalism and Creative Writing program at the University of Strathclyde, United Kingdom, use Critical Discourse Analysis to examine how journalistic language reflects and shapes social realities and how it articulates news values. “CDA’s explicitly political agenda seeks to raise awareness of the ideological frameworks that inform language choice, and the construction, representation and positioning of its subjects in discourse.” In other words, they look at how language is used in different media outlets and how these choices reflect political values.
After outlining their method and framework, they divide the rest of the book by media genre: broadcast, magazine, newspaper, sports, and online. In the broadcast section, for example, they talk about language as a means of establishing informality (e.g., anchors referring to each other by first name) and a close broadcaster–audience relationship (e.g. using the pronoun “you” when talking to the viewers). They talk about newspapers’ lack of space necessitating “news headline register”—or the American “headlinese”—which causes headlines to lack the nuance of the articles. Across all outlets, they discuss verb tenses quite a bit, in terms of using present tense to convey a sense of immediacy, while using past-perfect tenses (i.e., had said) to distinguish recently conducted interviews from background information. The book provides a unique application of critical discourse to an analysis of popular media.
“The Language of Journalism” is accessible for seasoned researchers and undergraduate students. The introduction provides clear definitions of terms used in critical analysis for those unfamiliar with them (e.g., discourse, ideology, intertextuality). The introductory chapter could stand alone as a text for introductory students. The chapters also are clearly organized with plenty of subheadings throughout and a labeled conclusion, which, again, could be helpful for students. The book also uses relatively modern media examples, such as references to twenty-four-hour news networks, Twitter, and reality television. They also make good use of journalistic artifacts, including broadcast transcripts, newspaper articles, photos, and magazine pages. Although some of the British media references might not be familiar to some, the book has a clear and simple tone that makes it accessible for readers across countries.
Although useful as an introductory reference, the book has several shortcomings. The authors, themselves, say that the themes cut across genre, so this is probably not the best way to organize this material. A student interested in broadcast journalism who only reads the broadcast section, for example, would miss out on other linguistic discourses that are relevant to them, such as the discussion of participant journalism in the online section. This organization also leads to some repetition. Banter as a linguistic device is discussed in both the broadcast and sports sections, gender stereotypes are discussed in both the newspaper and magazine sections, and assumptions of previous knowledge are discussed in both the magazine and sports sections. The repetition is excessive for such a short book, and theme-based chapters could have solved this problem.
The book also lacks depth in its discussion of journalistic genres. Their superficial overview of journalistic jargon (i.e., headlines, inverted pyramid) signals the authors’ expertise in linguistics, rather than journalism. They focus on the popular press/quality press distinction, which is fairly dated. They also use dated language in discussing the Internet and its potential to take over traditional journalism. Journalism researchers have not used such language in five years. In focusing on these distinctions, they overlook current industry discussions that could have linguistic implications, such as the ethics of moderating online comment boards.
The book is also a missed opportunity to discuss stereotypical language in the media. The authors discuss gendered language, which is important, but they ignore other demographic-based stereotypes, such as those surrounding race, disability, religion, ethnicity, and sexuality. These are all areas in which language can be political, particularly in the media, and the book would have benefited from including such discussions.
Overall, “The Language of Journalism” is a quick overview of linguistic discourses across several media outlets. Its brevity necessarily makes it a bit superficial, but it provides a good resource for communications instructors looking for an overview of current research on the linguistic discourses of the media. It would be a good reading for use in an introductory media and society course, or any other course concerned with critical-cultural analyses of news media. It, thus, provides a useful contribution to our academic field.