Patterns of schematic structure and strategic features in newspaper editorials: A comparative study of American and Malaysian editorials

Abstract

To carry a message through effectively to the public, newspaper editors need to employ the generic pattern of editorials as a rule of thumb. Yet few studies have investigated the schematic structure and persuasive style of editorials. Hence, this study aims to compare the generic characteristics in 240 editorials of The New York Times (NYT, n = 120) and New Straits Times (NST, n = 120). To realize the objectives, the corpus was subjected to a content analysis based on a composite framework drawn from the data and previous models. The findings revealed that American and Malaysian editorials share a similar schematic structure at the move level including four obligatory moves. However, at the step level, evidence of disparity of the style of writing was apparent. The data obtained could be used as informed input in the English for Specific Purposes (ESP) classroom, so that English as a Secondary Language (ESL)/English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students’ awareness on the conventional structures in editorial writing could be heightened.

Keywords

Contrastive analysis genre analysis newspaper editorial schematic structure

Introduction

The communicative expectation of a discourse community has been a catalyst for the establishment of distinct canonical structures in varied discourses. According to Henry and Roseberry (2001), ‘the term genre is thought of as sociolinguistic activity through which members of a discourse community achieve their communicative goals’ (p. 153). In the same vein, an editorial in a newspaper is a genre which targets the general public as its discourse community. It plays an influential role as it presents the official position of the newspaper on a topic that is considered to be of particular societal importance.

Due to its powerful role in the public sphere, the manner of sequencing the arguments plays a pivotal role in defending opinions against a background of conflicting viewpoints (Van Dijk, 1992). The editors use purposeful structuring and sequencing of their arguments through various moves and steps to achieve the communicative purpose of persuasion. In fact, editorial writing is inherently a persuasive endeavor, and to carry the message through effectively to the public, the editors’ awareness of the generic prototypical pattern and rhetorical moves employed in editorial writings is essential.

Reviewing previous studies on the structure of editorials revealed that there are various models for analyzing, but their focus was mainly on the move levels of the editorials. Gunesekera (1989) was the first scholar who, in a cross-cultural context, analyzed the generic structure of 30 English newspaper editorials from Sri Lanka (Daily News), India (The Hindu) and Singapore (The Strait Times). The results indicated that the structure of editorials comprised Title, Preparatory comment, Main topic (Examples/past events), Analysis and Directives. At the micro level, it was found that the common linguistic features in editorials were the following: the use of subjective, judgmental adjectives and adverbs; examples, comparisons, predictions, comments and criticisms in question format or interrogative syntax; suppositions and pronouns. Although Gunesekera (1989) provided the linguistic elements in editorials, he does not clarify the use of these features in the different components of the structure (move) of the editorials. Moreover, Gunesekera (1989) only identified a linear structure of editorials which did not include the analysis of the function of the moves and steps.

Apart from Gunesekera’s (1989) study, Bhatia (1993), following Swales’ (1990) move analysis approach, found that editorials normally follow a formal schema which includes four rhetorical moves such as presenting the case, discussing the alternatives, reaching a verdict and recommending action. However, similar to Gunesekera’s (1989) study, Bhatia’s (1993) framework was also at the move level and this does not provide an in-depth analysis out of the communicative structures and functions of editorials.

In addition, Ansary and Babaii (2005) also investigated the distinctive rhetorical elements of English editorials. They found four obligatory elements (Run-on Headline, Addressing an Issue, Argumentation and Articulating a Position) in the editorials and also three optional elements (Providing Background Information, Initiation of Argumentation and Closure of Argumentation). Their results also revealed that there is ‘statistically’ no significant difference between editorials written by American and Persian editors, in the use of the generic structural elements.

Following the same theoretical framework as Ansary and Babaii (2009), Fartusi (2012) was the only scholar who attempted to establish the rhetorical pattern in the Malaysian editorials. However, he only analyzed one English editorial and he further revised Ansary and Babaii’s (2005) framework to include two more new optional elements: Concluding Remarks and Articulating a Solution. Such a small study would not render its results generalizable.

Another study which is deemed worthy of review is by So (2005), who found that editorials were composed of Issue, Argument and Conclusion. He also found that under argument, it could be sub-categorized into several steps such as evaluation, contextualization and explanation. Under conclusion, he included the step recommendation. However, her classification for the schematic structure of editorials is still general.

In contrast, Katajamaki and Koskela (2006), who used Van Dijk’s (1993) framework to analyze the rhetorical structure of editorials in 22 English, Swedish and Finnish business newspapers, found that editorials were classified into only three main sections which are introductory section, the intermediate section and the coda section. However, in the intermediate section, they further classified it into the reason, evidence or example section and the solution section. Even though the collected texts were representative of three different countries and in three languages, the material revealed little variation in terms of generic structure.

Like Katajamaki and Koskela’s (2006) findings, Bolivar (1994) discovered that The Guardian editorials had three moves. He calls them Situation, Development and Recommendation (SDR). These triads consist of Lead, Follow and Valuate (LFV). Using Bolivar’s (1994) triad model, Bonyadi (2010) made a comparative study on the schematic structure of 40 editorials of the Tehran Times (TT) and The New York Times (NYT). He classified editorials into Introduction, which consisted of two distinctive sub-sections or Moves, namely, Orientation (OR) and Criticism, The Body section and The Ending section. However, text movements of Introduction–Body–Conclusion may not each consist of three triads, SDR, as Bolivar (1994) contends. In addition, some of the triads do not have a strict structure like LFV and may only have one of them. Therefore, it could be that Bolivar’s model is too restrictive and does not have enough flexibility for variation.

In a more current study, Masroor (2013) attempted to uncover the argumentative techniques of editorials that are employed across cultures (Pakistan and Malaysia). She found that Dawn is more authoritative, judgmental and critical in nature, while the New Straits Times (NST) seemed less authoritative. Interestingly, she also found that the NST used a more convincing strategy in accomplishing their persuasive role. Besides the stance of the editorials, Masroor (2013) found the editorials to have three moves, and different from previous studies, she found the moves to include steps. For instance, Move 1 ‘Defining the issue’ has steps such as S1 stating the issue, S2 making claim, S3 identifying initiating event and S4 elaborating the issue. Move 2 ‘Validating the claim’, on the other hand, has only two steps. They are S1 contextualizing the claim and S2 assessing the claim. Finally, Move 3 ‘Taking a stance’ has five steps: S1expressing an opinion, S2 giving suggestion, S3 urging the action, S4 making future prediction and S5 passing a judgment. Although her model was one of the more comprehensive ones among all the various models discussed, the model was not used in the study because it was not able to cover all the communicative functions present in the data of this study.

Based on the review above, it can be concluded that the classification and terminologies of the moves and steps in editorials are not water-tight. Nevertheless, one significant discovery that emerged from these studies is that the editorial like any other genre, has a structure which an editor needs to adhere to in order to write a persuasive editorial. Furthermore, in those few studies the analyses have been at the move level and very few studies examined the schematic structure of editorials at the step level as an essential strategy for achieving the communicative purpose of each move. Additionally, editorials attract a wide readership but have been given only limited attention in applied language studies, especially in terms of investigating the generic structure of editorials and in terms of examining their key stylistic features. Therefore, the current study attempts to conduct a contrastive analysis on American and Malaysian editorials based on an elaborated framework on moves and steps, and to provide a more detailed framework.

Dimensions and notions of analyzing discourse structure

Discourse studies has often been considered a discipline of rhetoric since antiquity. Rhetoric is related to how ‘good’ a public speaking or writing, for instance in parliament, in court or in literature, has been presented. Nowadays, the ‘new’ rhetoric is entered in the discipline of humanities and overlaps with discourse studies (Van Dijk, 1985). In order to avoid collapsing rhetoric with discourse studies in general, rhetoric is defined as the sub-discipline of discourse studies focusing on the use of special ‘rhetorical’ structures of text and talk, such as metaphors, comparisons, irony, hyperboles, euphemisms, and so forth (Van Dijk, 1980).

Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) provides a general way to describe the relations among clauses in a text. Thus, RST is a useful framework for relating the meanings of conjunctions or the grammar of clause combining (Mann and Thompson, 1988). Moreover, RST provides a framework for investigating Relational Propositions, which are unstated but inferred propositions that arise from the text structure in the process of interpreting texts. Since the coherence of a text depends in part on these Relational Propositions, RST has been useful in the study of text coherence (Mann and Thompson, 1988). Therefore, using rhetoric structure for this study is confusing, because analyzing the structure of editorials has nothing to do with rhetoric but only with conventional global schemas of discourse.

The schemas of discourse are the structures of text and talk that are far beyond the grammatical characterization of discourse, while stylistics and rhetoric are traditionally closely related to literature and grammar. These schematic structures are called ‘superstructures’, because they are abstract form-schemas that globally organize discourse across sentence boundaries. Superstructure is a notion that was introduced by Van Dijk (1980) to adjust this unrelated use of notions in discourse studies, the notion not used for anything else in discourse structures. Topics are usually organized by an abstract schema (superstructure), consisting of conventional categories that specify what the overall function is of the topics of the text (Van Dijk, 1980). Hence, superstructure is the schematic form that organizes the global meaning of a text. It is assumed that such a superstructure consists of functional categories which need rules for ordering them. These rules of ordering and combination of functional categories bring about the notion of conventional schemata which also require that these categories and rules be socioculturally accepted, learned, used, commented upon, and so on by (most) adult language users of a speech community (Van Dijk, 1980).

Besides superstructure, in many genres like argumentation, a major subfield of discourse studies (Van Eemeren et al., 1996), ‘canonical’ structure is the notion that is used to indicate the conventional and more or less fixed ‘forms’ or ‘formats’ of a genre. Moreover, much work on professional genres deals with such ‘schematic’ structures and conventional formats of text and talk (Bhatia, 1993; Swales, 2004). Therefore, the aim of this article is to identify the schematic structure and conventional format of the editorials in a cross-cultural context, not its rhetorical structure.

Method

Data collection

To support the research objective, data were randomly collected using an online number generator. In total, 240 editorials from NYT and the NST were collected respectively. The data were culled from the electronic archives of the NYT (i.e. www.nytimes.com) and the NST (i.e. www.nst.com.my) websites. While the NST publishes only one editorial daily, NYT has several editorials; hence, the first editorial on each day was selected by considering the most important issue of that day. Then, among all of the selected NYT and NST editorials, 120 articles of each newspaper were randomized. They were collected purposively among only published editorials of NYT and the NST over a period of 12 months from January to December of 2013. This was to avoid the possibility of evolution in the style of writing of the editorial genre diachronically (Gillaerts and Van de Velde, 2010).

Background of the newspapers

NYT is one of the largest and oldest American daily local metropolitan newspapers. It was founded and has continuously been published in New York City since 18 September 1851. NYT covers general news about various issues in society and does not devote itself to specific issues such as business and the economy as does The Wall Street Journal. Wells and King (1994) once stated that ‘The New York Times has an international news gathering ability and extensive international/foreign affairs coverage’ (p. 654). Moreover, NYT’s strength is due to its editorial excellence (The New York Times Company, 2008). It was established in 1851 as a penny paper that avoided sensationalism and reported the news in a restrained and impartial fashion.

The NST is the oldest English-language newspaper published in Malaysia. The paper was originally founded as The Straits Times and covered all of what was then British Malaya and Singapore. However, the departure of Singapore from the Federation in 1965 gave existence to a new and separate paper published in Malaysia, the NST, while publication of The Straits Times continues in Singapore. Today the NST is a mainstream and influential newspaper and not only addresses issues pertaining to the government and corporate sectors, but is also the choice of a growing audience of 429,000 readers. The NST is considered a right-wing, pro-government newspaper (Pang, 2006). Intervention of the government in the NST via the sending of a caution or withdrawal of a license is not unusual as for other media in Malaysia (Manan, 2001).

Analytical framework

In order to have a reliable discourse analysis, developing a framework based on previous research, which is adapted to the data of the current study, is essential (Krippendorff, 2004). Therefore, to determine a reliable framework that is adaptable to the data, a pilot study was conducted on 60 editorials using the framework of Bhatia (1993), Van Dijk (1993) and Ansary and Babaii (2005). These frameworks were further refined, and adjusted according to the evolving data of the study. Besides some common moves in most previous studies, the findings of the pilot study revealed that some steps found in the current study were not considered in the previous frameworks. In order to have a comprehensive framework that would be able to tease out the rhetorical moves and steps in the data, some additional steps were included in the revised framework. For instance, mentioning initiating event, elaborating issue and presenting standpoint were added as steps in Move 2, while reasoning, contextualizing argumentation and comparing and contrasting were added to the third move. Besides these, expressing expectation and expressing prediction were added to the last move of the framework for this study.

To have a more robust methodology in the study, an inter-rater reliability analysis of the framework by a PhD of English Language rater was conducted. Where there was any discrepancy in the analysis, a consensus was reached between the rater and the researchers. Furthermore, in order to increase the reliability of the analysis, an interview with an editor of the NST was conducted and the components of editorial structure were confirmed by him. Table 1 demonstrates the composite framework for analyzing the schema of the editorial genre.

Table 1.

Composite framework of moves and steps of editorials.

Moves	Steps
M1: Headline	–
M2: Presenting the case/problem	S1: Addressing issue/problem
	S2: Elaborating issue
	S3: Mentioning initiating event
	S4: Providing background information
	S5: Presenting standpoint
M3: Justifying or refuting events	S1: Explaining
	S2: Contextualizing argumentation
	S3: Reasoning
	S4: Expressing solution
	S5: Comparing and contrasting
M4: Articulating a position	S1: Expressing opinion
	S2: Evaluating
	S3: Raising suggestion
	S4: Expressing prediction
	S5: Expressing expectation

Data analysis procedure

One important step in the analysis is the segmenting of texts into moves and steps. The frequency of each move and step was then calculated for each article to identify the obligatory and optional moves and steps in each newspaper. According to Kanoksilapatham (2005), a unit (move and step) is considered obligatory if its frequency exceeds 60% of the data. Conversely, if a move occurs in less than 60% of the data the move is optional. Additionally, there were some moves and steps that recurred in a cyclical pattern within a section of text (Swales, 2004). Typically, each appearance of the moves or steps which had reoccurred within a text was considered as a separate occurrence. Also, to determine the density of each move and step, a sentence-based approach (Dudley-Evans, 1994) of calculating the number of different steps of each move was conducted.

Identifying the moves in the editorials was made easier by considering their communicative purpose, context and linguistic cues. Key words, phrases and linguistic cues closely related to the move categories helped to code the units (Connor and Mauranen, 1999). Bhatia (1993) was a pioneer in identifying the linguistic cues of moves; however, it was very brief as was only at the level of moves.

Results

The data of the study revealed that the generic structure of editorials at the higher level is constructed with four obligatory moves which are headline, presenting the case, justifying or refuting the events and articulating the position. They occurred in 100% of the corpus and this indicated that these moves are essential for accomplishing the communicative purpose of the editorials. This finding affirms Bhatia’s (1999) notion that editorials have a ‘generic integrity’ (p. 22). At the lower level, these four moves consist of 15 steps with various frequencies that help to achieve the purpose of their related moves (Table 2).

Table 2.

Obligatory and optional moves and steps in the NYT and NST editorials.

M&S	NYT (%)	NST (%)	M&S	NYT (%)	NST (%)
M1	100	100	M3S3	36.6	30.83
M2	100	100	M3S4	4.16	10.83
M2S1	100	100	M3S5	5	23.33
M2S2	60	69.16	M4	100	100
M2S3	36	9.1	M4S1	65	65
M2S4	25	19.16	M4S2	63.33	50.83
M2S5	80	50	M4S3	71.66	54.16
M3	100	100	M4S4	50	29.16
M3S1	91.66	86.66	M4S5	10.83	9.16
M3S2	72.5	42.5

NYT: The New York Times; NST: New Straits Times.

As shown in Table 2, addressing issue, elaborating issue, explaining and expressing opinion are obligatory steps in both NYT and the NST. However, presenting standpoint, contextualizing argumentation, evaluating and raising suggestion are obligatory in NYT, but they are optional in the NST. In a similar trend, both NYT and the NST demonstrated that the other nine steps (mentioning initiating event, providing background information, reasoning, expressing solution, comparing and contrasting, expressing prediction and expressing expectation) are optional steps. The difference in the frequency of occurrence at the step level is more obvious when considering their density (how often a particular step reoccurs) in the editorials. This finding is in line with Bhatia’s (1993) argument that cultural conventions do not have a significant effect on the structure of a genre at the move level, but they do influence the strategies (steps) taken within a move.

Density and functions of moves and steps

In this section a comparison of the density and function of each individual move and their accompanying steps in the editorials of the NST and NYT are discussed in detail.

M1: Headline

Headlines are very helpful for readers to get the meaning of the text as they juxtapose the most important parts of the issue in a summary style, using punchy and short phrases. Different scholars have various perceptions of the function of headlines. For instance, Bell (1991) and Hudson and Rowlands (2007) stated that Headlines in editorials perform two different functions: (1) catching the attention of the audience and (2) summarizing the event or providing information to the reader. The data revealed that mostly reflected in the NYT editorial headlines summarize the event of the editorial. An example is shown below:

Attacks on Muslims in Myanmar. (NYT, 30 May 2013)

In contrast, Ifantidou (2009) found that newspaper headlines have only one function, which is an ‘attention-getting rather than information-providing device since headlines do not accurately represent the articles they introduce’ (p. 97). This function of headlines is displayed in the NST editorials. For instance, in Example 2, ‘worsening’ and ‘misery’ are negatively inscribed lexis which would catch the attention of the reader. The NST editor has not given clear information on what the misery is about. This disparity (informative vs attention-grabber headline) of the NYT and NST editorials is similar to the results yielded in Chana and Tangkiengsirisin’s (2012) study, which found that American headlines are informative, while Iranian and Thai are attention-grabbing.

Worsening their misery. (NST, 23 May 2013)

Furthermore, the findings of this study also discovered the use of more adjectives in the Headlines of NYT (16.66%) than NST (5%) editorials. Possibly, it indicates that the NYT editorials are more authoritative and obvious in expressing their stance as they use more adjectives from the beginning. This notion is also confirmed by Bonyadi and Samuel (2013), who stated that newspaper Headlines not only introduce the topic of the editorials, but also present the subjective attitude of the writer toward the topic. Example 3 illustrates this idea:

An imperfect immigration bill survives. (NYT, 21 May 2013)

In addition, the analysis of the editorials of NYT and the NST indicates that the NYT editorials provided 63.33% non-verbal headlines, for example ‘next steps with Iran’, ‘Death and servitude in Qatar’. In contrast, the NST editorials preferred verbal headlines (51.66%), such as ‘Rationing housing’ and ‘Evaluating manifestos’. In addition, in the editorials of both NYT (65.9%) and the NST (88.7%), mostly the verbs in the verbal headlines are non-finite. Non-finite verbs, in order to avoid presenting the tense, use different strategies such as taking a ‘to-infinitive’, an ‘-ed’ form or an ‘-ing’ form (Quirk et al., 1985).

The most frequent structure among non-finite verbs is -ing that covers 84.78% of the NST and 55.17% of the NYT Headlines like ‘Criminalizing children at school’ (NYT) and ‘Rationing housing’ (NST). Moreover, the use of the past participle without an auxiliary (O’Donnell and Todd, 1992) is another technique employed by the editors of NYT (17.24%) and the NST (15.21%) to have non-finite verbs, as in ‘A defence secretary blocked by politics’ (NYT) and ‘Licenced to be on the road’ (NST). In addition, ‘using to + infinitive’ is another editorial strategy to avoid presenting tense in verbal headlines of both NYT (24.13%) and the NST (13.04%), like ‘A chance to do better on Greece’ (NYT) and ‘A federal prod to lower college costs’ (NYT). Finally, the least occurring structure in Headlines of both NYT (3.44%) and the NST (6.52%) is using imperatives (Bell, 1991), such as ‘Hire maids at minimum wage’ (NST) and ‘Keep the women’s rights bill intact’ (NYT).

On the other hand, in some cases, in line with the findings of O’Donnell and Todd (1992), this study revealed the use of finite verbs in the verbal headlines of NYT (34.09%) and the NST (11.29%). Finite verbs do not express past or future time, while they only use the simple present form to indicate contemporary time reference (O’Donnell and Todd, 1992), for example ‘A governor battles against ruinous tax cuts’ (NYT) and ‘Repatriating has benefits’ (NST).

M2: Presenting the case/problem

Presenting the case expresses the existent issue or problem about which the editor argues his/her position. This move intends to provide sufficient support through facts and background information to make their arguments plausible and reasonable.

As illustrated in Table 3, the most frequent steps in Move 2 in both the NYT and NST editorials are addressing issue and elaborating issue. Although addressing issue is present in 100% (see Table 2) of the editorials in both NYT and the NST, it covers more sentences and steps in the NST (9.22%) than in NYT (5.85%). Hence, possibly the NST editorials are more informative. Next, the higher density of M2S2 elaborating issue in the NST (13.93%) than in the NYT (7.58%) editorials also indicates that the NST attempts to be more informative. Similarly, Bonyadi (2010) found that Introduction in the TT was more factual than in NYT when stating information. In contrast, the density of the three other steps of Move 2, Mentioning initiating event (NYT = 2.20%, NST = 0.63%), Providing background information (NYT = 3.02%, NST = 1.84%) and Presenting standpoint (NYT = 7.15%, NST = 4.7%), in the NYT editorials is higher than in the NST. This is in line with the findings of Chana and Tangkiengsirisin (2012), who found that NYT as an international news-providing center uses more events as background in editorial texts than local newspapers.

Table 3.

Density of steps of Move 2 in the NYT and NST editorials.

Move	Steps	NYTN = 2083		NSTN = 2060
Move	Steps	No. sentence	Percentage	No. sentence	Percentage
M2: Presenting the case	M2S1: Addressing issue/problem	122	5.85	190	9.22
	M2S2: Elaborating issue	158	7.58	287	13.93
	M2S3: Mentioning initiating event	46	2.20	13	0.63
	M2S4: Providing background information	63	3.02	38	1.84
	M2S5: Presenting standpoint	149	7.15	97	4.7

NYT: The New York Times; NST: New Straits Times.

M2S1: Addressing issue/problem

Addressing issue presents the case raised in the editorial very briefly and makes the readers aware of what the editor is going to argue. Evoking lexis is the most dominant signal of Addressing issue in the editorials of both NYT (33.33%) and the NST (50%) (e.g. Air pollution, Gun mayhem, Bankruptcy protection, Abuses, Haiti’s cholera epidemic, Gangsterism). In these examples the words do not exactly and clearly express the word issue, but their negative connotation is to a large extent induced by the reader’s interpretation of it (Flowerdew, 2008). An example of evoking lexis is shown below:

4. Air pollution has reached appalling levels in China, the world’s biggest carbon emitter. (NYT, 7 November 2013)

In contrast, inscribed lexis is less dominant in both NYT (23.33%) and the NST (15.83%). Different from evoking lexis, inscribed lexis are intrinsically evaluative (Flowerdew, 2008). For instance, ‘issue’, ‘challenge’, ‘problem’, ‘trouble’ and ‘woe’ intrinsically reveal the existence of a particular issue raised in the article, as illustrated in the example below:

5. Contextually written of thirsty sailors lost at sea, the words would become relevant if the forecasted Selangor water woes come to pass in a few years’ time. As it is, many Selangor residents have been hit by water shortages (M2S1). (NST, 2 February 2013)

Furthermore, it is found that there is a difference in the NYT and NST’s combination of their use of M2S1 and M2S5. The editorials in NYT in 16.6% of the articles tried to convey their standpoint about an issue, along with Addressing issue (see Example 6). Conversely, the NST prefers to purely state the issue or the problem, and only in one article (0.83%) does this overlap occur:

6. The news that the Central Intelligence Agency has been spending lavishly in Afghanistan (M2S1) should come as no surprise (M2S5). (NYT, 30 April 2013)

M2S2: Elaborating issue

The second step of Move 2, Elaborating issue. refers to the presentation of detailed information about the issue to provide the readers with their required knowledge for understanding the event. Providing adequate information in a way elevates the status of the editorials as an informed and well-placed authority to discuss the issue at hand. The findings indicate that in the editorials of both NYT (56.94%) and the NST (63.85%), describing the issue based on facts is the most dominant strategy of Elaborating issue, as shown in the following example:

7. TODAY is the start of the 15th sub-regional Ministerial Steering Committee (MSC) meeting attended by the environment ministers from five Asean nations: Malaysia, Brunei, Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand (M2S1). An agenda of the highest priority, especially for Malaysia and Singapore, is a solution to the annual haze problem, which has become urgent because this year witnessed the worst-ever air pollution resulting from the fires in Sumatra. (NST, 31 July 2013)

The provision of statistics is another strategy used by NYT (38.88%) and the NST (19.27) for elaborating issues. It gives reliable and convincing information to the readers, as shown in the following example:

8. Some 650,000 Syrians are now registered as refugees by the United Nations or awaiting registration, an increase of almost 100,000 in the past month alone. That includes about 155,000 in Turkey , 148,000 in Lebanon, 142,000 in Jordan, 73,000 in Iraq and 14,000 in Egypt . Thousands more are not registered. The total could reach one million this year. (NYT, 20 January 2013)

Although the frequency of occurrence is small (NYT 4.16% and NST 16.86%), another strategy employed to elaborate issue is the use of examples. An example is shown below:

9. In the last three weeks , in Penang alone , five shooting incidents occurred , several of them fatal. In April, a senior Customs official was shot dead on his way to work. The case is yet to be solved. More recently, the head of an anti-crime watchdog group was shot in Seremban. He is fighting for his life. The latest incident involved the first chief executive officer of AmBank, who was gunned down in Kuala Lumpur in broad daylight, killing him and injuring his wife. (NST, 31 July 2013)

M2S3: Mentioning initiating event

According to Lamb (1985), after choosing a topic that is current and interesting editors would hang it on a news peg to make the story timely or newsworthy. Mentioning initiating event is a step where the news peg is expressed and connects the editorial to the here and now by briefly reporting the news that has prompted the editorial. This step, by referring to specific events, situations, published articles, specific TV shows, conference and speech, provides related information for the writing of the editorial. At the same time it also provides an appropriate context for the editorial to be written:

10. ONE of the interesting things to have come out of the two videos that have gone viral on YouTube recently , showing the domestic abuse of two women by their husband and former boyfriend respectively. (NST, 17 August 2013)

M2S4: Providing background information

This mostly provides information about the matters related to the issue that date back to the past, such as a specific place, event or situation or facts about someone or some events. Mostly editors use past tense verbs and particular dates and years that show the event dates back to previous happenings in history. According to Chana and Tangkiengsirisin (2012), international newspapers provide news to a wider variety of audience who perhaps do not follow a localized news situation as often as readers of local newspapers. Thus, providing background information is more necessary for the NYT than NST editorials, so that the relevant context is provided for the readers:

11. Stationing police in schools, while common today, was virtually unknown during the 1970s. Things began to change with the surge of juvenile crime during the ’80s , followed by an overreaction among school officials. Then came the 1999 Columbine High School shooting outside Denver, which prompted a surge in financing for specially trained police. In the mid- 1970s , police patrolled about 1 percent of schools. By 2008 , the figure was 40 percent. (NYT, 18 April 2013)

M2S5: Presenting standpoint

This step very briefly presents the writer’s claim with respect to the presented issue from the beginning. This move is also found in Bonyadi’s (2010) study and it is indicated under the first move ‘Introduction’. This step not only provides a summary of the news events, but also involves declarative and evaluative stances of the editor. The following example clarifies the use of presenting standpoint which has been presented through the use of adjectives like ‘serious’, ‘worthy’, ‘poisoned’ and ‘heavy’ in the NYT editorial:

12. The bipartisan immigration bill that passed the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday has many serious hurdles ahead. It is the most serious and worthy attempt to fix immigration in a generation, but it cannot help reflecting the poisoned politics of today, with its heavy tilt toward needless border enforcement and a deficiency in equal rights. (NYT, 21 May 2013)

M3: Justifying or refuting events

This move is a form of progression from M2 to M4 and therefore tends to be argumentative. It uses language to justify or refute an event or standpoint, with the aim of securing readers’ endorsement.

The findings, as shown in Table 4, indicate that ‘Contextualizing argumentation’ is the only step in Move 3 that has higher density in NYT (9.93%) compared to the NST (6.16%). One plausible reason as to why NYT has a higher frequency of occurrence of this step could be that being an outstanding international newspaper, which serves a worldwide readership, NYT has a great influence on the masses and elite. So, to achieve this goal successfully, it provides its readers with adequate evidence. In contrast, the other steps like Explaining (24.27%), Reasoning (3.59%), Expressing solution (2.47%) and Comparing and contrasting (3.15%) have a higher density in the NST editorials, while they are 21.07%, 2.83%, 0.38% and 0.33%, respectively, in the NYT editorials.

Table 4.

Density of steps of Move 3 in the NYT and NST editorials.

Move	Step	NYTN = 2083		NSTN = 2060
Move	Step	No. sentences	Percentage	No. sentences	Percentage
M3: Justifying or refuting events	M3S1: Explaining	439	21.07	500	24.27
	M3S2: Contextualizing argumentation	207	9.93	127	6.16
	M3S3: Reasoning	59	2.83	74	3.59
	M3S4: Expressing solution	8	0.38	51	2.47
	M3S5: Comparing and contrasting	7	0.33	65	3.15

NYT: The New York Times; NST: New Straits Times.

M3S1: Explaining

The analysis of data reveals that editors in some cases explain or argue the introduced plan, program or system regarding the issue in detail. In expressing the plans or programs (Example 13), the writer attempts to use some additional conjunctions or phrases that lead the attention of the reader to some more points or analyses of condition (e.g. ‘also’, ‘so’, ‘in addition’, ‘under the plan’, ‘to support the notion’):

13. Albany lawmakers have long resisted allowing the use of public matching funds for small donations. Among their complaints is that this would be a waste of taxpayer money. What they mean is that they greatly prefer big chunks of tainted money from powerful special interests to public funds augmenting smaller donations from ordinary citizens. Left unsaid is that most deep-pocketed donors cost the taxpayer dearly. They do so by demanding special treatment – enacting this law, undoing that one – in ways that benefit them, not all of us. More to the point , Albany’s lawmakers fear that public financing of campaigns will encourage real challengers to run against them. (NYT, 22 November 2013)

Moreover, M3S1 attempts to present the argument and contradictory opinions regarding the addressed issue which is signaled by the use of conjunctions (e.g. ‘But’, ‘whether’, ‘although’, ‘while’, ‘however’ and ‘nevertheless’) and verbs and nouns (e.g. ‘dispute’, ‘argument’, ‘argued’, ‘ratified’ and ‘opposed’). These signals are identified in the following example:

14. What any of these false charges has to do with the work of immigration agents – which is to enforce the immigration laws as written – is beyond us. The argument against reform now is an argument for the failed status quo, where 11 million people live outside the law. (NYT, 21 May 2013)

In addition, M3S1 attempts to analyze and present various aspects and levels of the stated issue and to express differing viewpoints with specifics of the event. It is realized by ordinal numbers and words that show the existence of different aspects like ‘several sectors’, ‘another front of’, ‘some . . . others’, ‘for their part’ and ‘both two sides’:

15. In the last decade, state-sponsored panels have found serious shortcomings in the way mentally ill citizens are treated. One investigation found pervasive patterns of neglect in privately run residences; a second panel discovered that many people confined to these adult ‘homes’ did not belong there. (NYT, 24 July 2013)

Finally, M3S1 explains the advantages and disadvantages of some actions taken that assist the editor to strengthen the condition for accepting or rejecting a particular action or behavior as shown below:

16. Students who exercise have lower body fat , greater muscular strength , and better cardiovascular and mental health . While admitting that the studies are limited, a panel of experts assembled by the institute says that ‘a growing body of evidence’ suggests children who are more active are better able to focus their attention , are quicker to perform simple tasks , and have better working memories and problem solving skills than less-active children. They also perform better on standardized academic tests. Academic performance is influenced by factors like parental involvement and socioeconomic status, but the panel reported that active children tended to have stronger performance , especially in reading and mathematics . It believes that the benefits of exercise during the school day outweigh the benefits from increasing class time. (NYT, 24 May 2013)

M3S2: Contextualizing argumentation

M3S2 elevates the credibility of the argumentation through providing facts and evidence. These facts and evidence are considered as bases for arguments to increase their factuality and thus persuasiveness. The supportive evidence in the data of this study is expressed in a number of forms, including attribution, statistics, examples and results of findings, which are in line with the study by Huber and Snider (2006).

According to the findings, the NYT editorials resort to more attribution (56.52%), while in the NST editorials making examples occurs most often (42.51%). On the other hand, attribution as the most dominant strategy in the NYT editorials is used in two different forms: direct speech that is the dominant style of attribution in the NYT (52.99%) editorials, and indirect speech which is more frequent in the NST (74.19%). The use of direct speech often results in the foregrounding of the utterances it relates to. It is because direct speech gives the reader the impression that he/she is reading the characters’ voices directly. However, indirect speech is less vivid and less immediate than the direct style of expressing statement (Semino and Short, 2004). Therefore it is revealed that the NYT editor had a tendency to point to stronger evidence in his/her argumentation. The use of direct and indirect speech is illustrated in the following examples:

17. During a 2009 hearing, Federal District Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle told government lawyers she was ‘appalled’ at the situation. ‘I don’t know why in the world the only thing that the government can see here is Algeria’, she said . ‘I think it’s our duty to try to do something about these people down there and not just say, O.K., go to where you came from’. (NYT, 6 December 2013)

18. Malaysia, according to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak , is desirous of fostering a win-win relationship with Singapore. (NST, 20 February 2013)

M3S3: Reasoning

Reasoning is linked to the reasons of the editor for accepting or refuting an action or statement, and persuades the reader to align with the argument. The findings reveal that because is the most dominant word in the editorials of both NYT (47.45%) and the NST (47.29%) to show their Reasoning. However, other linguistic elements such as for, since, as, due to, attributed to and expressions that include the word reason, such as ‘it is for this reason’, ‘the reason for the change is’, are also identified as cues for recognizing M3S3:

19. Since there are no reliable analyses to identify wronged borrowers there is no clear way to apportion the $3.3 billion among 3.8 million borrowers covered by the settlement. (NYT, 8 January 2013)

Furthermore, the findings reveal that 32.42% of Reasoning in the NST editorials occurs in combination with various steps of M4 ‘Articulating position’, while this combination in NYT (20.32%) is less frequent. This dissimilarity in the use of different Reasoning strategies perhaps lies in the assumption that the NYT editorials show their authority by stating their stance in M4 without Reasoning. Conversely, the NST editor attempts to justify his/her logic for expressing its stance and convince the readers that the newspaper’s Opinion and Evaluation are credible and that the Suggestions are useful and worthy for society consumption. This combination of steps is illustrated in the following examples:

20. This disingenuous approach to politics is putting the populace in harm’s way. Piped clean water is a human right (M4S1) because it is essential for good public hygiene and health, a fact denied only in banana republics. (NST, 23 May 2013)

In Example 20, the NST editor expresses his/her Reasoning by the use of because to justify its opinion about the use of water as a human right. In the following example, Reasoning assists the NYT editorial to support its Evaluating and stance:

21. The outcome of these efforts is unclear. What is clear is that they are not only unproductive but unnecessary (M4S2) because Congress could, at any point in the future, order tougher sanctions if any deal falls apart. (NYT, 9 December 2013)

Finally, the combination of Reasoning with Raising suggestion in order to persuade readers to follow the direction of the newspaper is illustrated in the following example:

22. When residents are faced with lift problems they should be provided with a fast action complaints channel (M4S3) because, as manifest from the recent accident, the consequences are dire when flaws are ignored. (M3S3) (NST, 20 July 2013)

M3S4: Expressing solution

This step presents the solutions that have been proposed or applied by the authorities to solve the issue raised in society. Furthermore, it explains each Solution and their applicability or how much these solutions have been useful in dealing with the problem. It is realized by the use of some specific words that signal the solutions like ‘this shortcoming is made up by’, ‘proposals’ and ‘proposed’, which are inscribed lexis of solution, and some others such as those shown in the following example:

23. The report’s 46 wide-ranging recommendations include stopping the bulk collection and storage of phone data, reforming the structure and processes of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, installing a civil liberties advocate to argue against the government’s position in that court, and introducing stricter oversight of the agency’s actions across the board. (NYT, 21 December 2013)

M3S5: Comparing and contrasting

The function of M3S5 is to compare and contrast different situations, people, behaviors and policies regarding the addressed issue. Such communicative purposes are realized in the text by the use of particular linguistic elements like comparative adjectives, comparative conjunctions and prepositions such as fewer, faster, much higher, more firmly, comparable, compared with, comparing and unlike. Moreover, the findings revealed that the editorial of NYT (0.33%) rarely used Comparing and contrasting. Even in these few cases, NYT mostly compared the United States with itself, as shown in Example 24:

24. There are considerably fewer homeless people on New York’s streets than there were a decade ago (M3S5). But there are more than 52,000 people in homeless shelters, including about 22,000 children – both record highs. (NYT, 13 December 2013)

On the other hand, the NST, as the official newspaper of the government, frequently compares Malaysia with other countries and attempts to showcase Malaysia as having social, economic and political standing that is better than other countries. This is illustrated in the following example:

25. Unlike China , for example, Malaysia does not impose restrictions on search engines such as Google and others. (NST, 14 June 2013)

Furthermore, even in some cases where there are limitations or weaknesses, in using the step Comparing and contrasting the NST editor tries to justify the problem so that the issue raised will be more acceptable to the readers:

26. On their part, the police have said they need a substantial increase in manpower and equipment upgrade comparable to what is used in the West to beef up their strength. They cite that in New York City, the ratio of police to population is 1:35. Here, in Malaysia, every police personnel serves several hundred citizens. And, from the police’s request for more up-to-date equipment, it can be inferred that this country’s police force is not on a par with their counterparts elsewhere. (NST, 2 August 2013)

M4: Articulating position

That is where the voice of the newspaper concerning the introduced issue is articulated with the use of some explicit persuasive strategies. It specifies the angle from which the writer considers the case and attempts to sway the public to his point of view. As shown in Table 5, both the NYT (7.05%) and the NST (7.23%) editorials have quite similar density for Move 4 ‘Expressing opinion’.

Table 5.

Density of steps of Move 4 in the NYT and NST editorials.

Move	Step	NYTN = 2083		NSTN = 2060
Move	Step	No. sentences	Percentage	No. sentences	Percentage
M4: Articulating a position	M4S1: Expressing opinion	147	7.05	149	7.23
	M4S2: Evaluating	205	9.84	140	6.07
	M4S3: Raising suggestion	210	10.08	144	6.99
	M4S4: Expressing prediction	129	6.19	53	2.57
	M4S5: Expressing expectation	14	0.67	12	0.58

NYT: The New York Times; NST: New Straits Times.

Except for Expressing opinion, the findings reveal that all the other steps of Move 4 are used more frequently by the NYT editors than by the NST editors. Possibly, seeing itself as a newspaper that has a global standing, the density of evaluating in NYT (9.84%) is higher than in the NST (6.07%) editorials. Similarly, the NYT editorials have devoted 10.08% of all steps to Raising suggestion, while the frequency in the NST is only 6.99%. These findings correspond with those of Bonyadi’s (2010) study, which showed that Directives was the dominant rhetorical strategy in the NYT editorials compared to the TT. Similarly, the disparity of the editorials of NYT (6.19%) and the NST (2.57%) in Expressing prediction of future is obvious. Again it demonstrates the directness and explicitness of the editorials of NYT when compared to the NST. However, the density of M4S5 is very low with a slight difference in the two newspapers (i.e. 0.67% in NYT and 0.58% in the NST).

M4S1: Expressing opinion

This step expresses the editor’s point of view regarding the addressed issue, and its consequences. It involves merely the presentation of the newspaper’s feeling or belief about the situation, person or events, which have been explained in the previous moves. It mostly occurs in structures like ‘It + is +adj. + that . . .’ or ‘subject + is + adj’ (e.g. ‘It is important that’, ‘that is hard to square’, ‘such tough talk is not surprising’). The editor, by stating his/her opinion, attempts to convince the reader to see an event in the same way as the writer (see the following sentence):

27. And, indeed, for a multicultural nation, as Indonesia is, it is certainly important for politics to be representative and inclusive. (NST, 17 January 2013)

M4S2: Evaluating

The analysis of this study revealed that editorials, in order to have a considerable influence on their readers, tend to have a more decisive and critical view toward the issue. This critical view occurs in the form of Evaluating in a more conclusive and decisive style of writing that indicates the writer’s authority. This is done by using specific verbs or nouns that evoke the feeling of approval or disapproval of the action done like failed, failure, rubbished or no justification. An example is shown below:

28. The government’s two-pronged approach – of taking financial literacy to primary schoolchildren by 2015, and the Employee Provident Fund’s plan to provide retirement and financial advice to contributors next year so that Malaysians would lead ‘financially efficient lifestyles’ – is overdue. Besides taking on too much debt and not being able to pay them off, many Malaysians do not have a retirement plan. This failure to plan and manage money results in people living unfulfilling, insecure lives, and in extreme cases, end with murder suicides. (NST, 19 September 2013)

In addition, adverbs that define the quality of a particular verb, action or decision are also indicators of the evaluating step. For instance, ‘take matters of safety lightly ’, ‘ correctly referred’, ‘do not directly address’. Moreover, sometimes there is an adverbial or adjectival phrase that follows a clause including the action done regarding the issue and conveys the writer’s judgment (e.g. ‘State laws to protect homeowners are weak ’, ‘an internal study on the matter is a good start ’).

M4S3: Raising suggestion

Position could be articulated by directing the audience to perform or not to perform an action, or behave in a particular way. Directives are the most common and bold linguistic elements that editors use to determine their required actions to be done in future. According to Lock (1996), the force of Raising suggestion to tackle the issue could be low by the use of could, may, might, required, medium by the use of should, ought to or high and strong by using must, have to, will, shall, need, imperatives needs. Examples of the use of such expressions are shown below:

29. Those who really want to keep guns out of the wrong hands will have to stand up and prove it. (NYT, 24 May 2013)

30. Meanwhile, the police – uniformed and intelligence – should be ever present, everywhere. A uniform walking around is a deterrent to the petty criminal, but organized crime needs the presence of the plainclothes, undercover agent working the vice grapevine. (NST, 31 July 2013)

Furthermore, the findings, as illustrated in Example 31, reveal that editors have used ‘if’ in combination with obligatory modals. It is done to decrease the force of suggestion and also save the editor’s face regarding the presented recommendation:

31. If the water companies are lax then the government in Shah Alam must put its foot down instead of dilly-dallying over the re-nationalising issue and putting the spanner into the central government’s already approved plans. (NST, 23 May 2013)

M4S4: Expressing prediction

This step acts as a kind of prediction statement about what would happen as the possible positive or negative consequences of the action taken or situation in the present regarding the raised issue. Therefore, Expressing prediction sets the case to forecast the future and manipulate the upcoming actions or behaviors by the use of linguistic elements that refer to the future. Modal verbs that show the future time, such as will, would, could (that show possibility in future), as well as adverbials of future time, like next decades, foreseeable future, over the coming two to three years, are useful for identifying this particular step. The findings reveal that ‘will’ is the most dominant modal in the editorials of both NYT (47.28%) and the NST (66.04%). Possibly, it is because ‘will’ shows a high certainty of definiteness regarding the possibility of the occurrence of the event in future (Peng, 2001) and consequently persuades readers more strongly:

32. Moving up the global value chain will take Malaysian companies from lower tier suppliers to Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) to almost being an OEM themselves. (NST, 13 July 2013)

In addition, as shown in Example 33, the editors use if clause before expressing their prediction about the future to show the editor’s tentativeness regarding the claims about the future. Similarly, Bonyadi (2010) also found making prediction through the use of if conditional clause.

33. If they manage to depose the Ms. Yingluck’s government, the supporters of Pheu Thai will likely take to the streets as they did in 2010. (NYT, 23 December 2013)

M4S5: Expressing expectation

This expresses the expectation and the hope of the newspaper for some better situation regarding the issue in the future. By applying this strategy, the editor tries to express an optimistic outcome of the issue and thus provide some element of hope for the readers. The most obvious linguistic cue for recognizing this step is words such as ‘hope’ and ‘expectation’:

34. Other studies involving roughly 70 patients each are being conducted at Stanford, Duke University and the University of Pittsburgh, all financed by the National Institute of Mental Health. Those results are expected to be published next year . (NYT, 23 November 2013)

Discussion

The analysis of data has revealed a prototypical generic structure of editorials although sourced from two different cultures and contexts. These findings have confirmed Bhatia’s (1993) postulation that editorials are ‘universally conventionalized’ (p. 68) due to their similar conventional structure at the macro move level. However, the analyses have shown that there are differences between the newspapers with regard to the frequency of steps affected by the contextual factors. Cultural differences could influence the strategies (steps) that assist the achievement of the purpose of moves (Bhatia, 1993). Overall, it could be considered that the NST editorials have a more informative and permissive style and less confrontational approach in writing. In contrast, the NYT editorials are more authoritative, evaluative and mostly tend to embrace a more explicit style of expressing their stance.

NYT as an international newspaper sees itself as having a bigger role in providing the same world events and influencing world opinion (O’Donnell and Todd, 1992). So, to discharge its responsibilities more effectively, it attempts to cover various events happening in different countries that are interesting to its worldwide readership. Therefore, the NYT editor shows a tendency to provide Headlines that are elaborated, so that readers will not have difficulty in understanding the topics of the editorials. Conversely, in this study the NST devotes 86.66% of its editorials to local issues which, indicates that its audience is mostly local or governmental authorities and elites. Therefore, readers’ familiarity with the issues motivates the NST editorials to opt for more attention-grabbing Headlines (Chana and Tangkiengsirisin, 2012).

Similarly, Providing background information and ensuring that the readers understand clearly the context and background of the issue is a crucial role of editors whose articles are read by global readers. However, the other crucial informative steps like Elaborating issue and Explaining were preferred by the NST editorials to provide readers with comprehensive information from different aspects. This was done through a more analytical approach and with the provision of statistics and examples. It could be said that the stance employed is rather oblique as the strategy allows the facts to speak for themselves as a method of convincing the readers.

Furthermore, the claim of Stef and Yuen (2014) and Pang (2006) regarding the pro-government policy of the NST is realized in the more frequent use of Expressing solutions and Comparing and contrasting in the NST editorials than by its American counterpart. However, the NYT editorials not comparing the United States with any other countries in the world is possibly reflective of the political and economic position of the United States.

The NYT editorial is more authoritative, evaluative and mostly tends to embrace a more explicit style of expressing its stance. This is attributed to the American tradition of freedom and independence in journalism (O’Donnell and Todd, 1992). Such freedom accorded to editors has been announced by NYT (1996) that America’s journalistic beliefs in reporting is without fear or favor. Hence, such claims in the policy of journalism give freedom, high confidence and courage to the media in the United States to pass judgment, criticize politicians and endorse or reject their functions. In contrast, the NST, being part of the government machinery (Stef and Yuen, 2014), has the lowest frequency when it comes to passing judgments and evaluation and directing readers. It is possible that the politeness of Malaysian editors is attributed to the NST editorial’s less frequent use of suggestion.

Additionally, serving a country composed of people with various ethnicities, cultures, religions and political orientations is another reason for the NST editorials’ hesitation in directing such a multicultural society in one particular direction. Furthermore, government intervention is another reason for the NST to take a less authoritative stance in its editorials, while American newspapers are being controlled by a small number of media magnates (O’Donnell and Todd, 1992).

To conclude, this study has illustrated that each newspaper adopts its own style in the context of perceived needs and role undertaken in being the voice and conscience of society. The style of a newspaper is often moderated by cultural nuances that inevitably influence the manipulation of the move patterns and the connected steps. What is more important is the gathering of empirical data through linguistic manifestations that illustrate conscious choices and orientation in composing the editorials, and the constraints and contexts under which they are written.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia (grant no: KPT.B.600-18/3 JILID 4).

Author biographies

Sahar Zarza has a PhD of English Language from Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM). She has publications in The Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Lambert Academic Publishing and Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities. Her area of interest is discourse analysis.

Helen Tan is an academic staff member in the Department of English, UPM. She has many years of teaching experience, having taught at both the secondary and tertiary levels of education. Her research interest is in applied linguistics, particularly in the areas of writing and corpus linguistics.

References

Ansary

Babaii

(2005) The generic integrity of newspaper editorials: A systemic functional perspective. RELC Journal 36(3): 271–295.

Ansary

Babaii

(2009) A cross-cultural analysis of English newspaper editorials: A systemic-functional view of text for contrastive rhetoric research. RELC Journal 40(2): 211–249.

Bell

(1991) The Language of News Media. Oxford; Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

Bhatia

(1993) Analyzing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London and New York: Longman.

Bhatia

(1999) Integrating products, processes, purposes and participants in professional writing. In: Candlin

Hyland

(eds) Writing: Texts, Processes and Practices. London: Longman Group, pp. 21–39.

Bolivar

(1994) The structure of newspaper editorials. In: Coulthard

(ed.) Advances in Written Text Analysis. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 276–294.

Bonyadi

(2010) The rhetorical properties of the schematic structures of newspaper editorials: A comparative study of English and Persian editorials. Discourse & Communication 4(4): 323–342.

Bonyadi

Samuel

(2013) Headlines in newspaper editorials: A contrastive study. SAGE Open 3(2): 1–10.

Chana

Tangkiengsirisin

(2012) Comparative rhetoric of the discourse structure of news stories between news articles published in Thailand and in the U.S.A. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network 5: 97–109.

10.

Connor

Mauranen

(1999) Linguistic analysis of grant proposals: European Union research grants. English for Specific Purposes 18: 47–62.

11.

Dudley-Evans

(1994) Genre analysis: An approach for text analysis for ESP. In: Coulthard

(ed.) Advances in Written Text Analysis. London: Routledge.

12.

Fartusi

(2012) A rhetorical analysis of a daily editorial: ‘Wishing Iraq well’. Advances in Asian Social Science 1(2): 197–204.

13.

Flowerdew

(2008) Corpus linguistics for academic literacies mediated through discussion activities. In: Belcher

Hirvela

(eds) The Oral-Literate Connection: Perspectives on L2 Speaking, Writing and Other Media Interactions. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, pp. 268–287.

14.

Gillaerts

Van de Velde

(2010) Interactional metadiscourse in research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9: 128–139.

15.

Gunesekera

(1989) Discourse genres in English newspapers of Singapore, South India and Sri Lanka. PhD Dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

16.

Henry

Roseberry

(2001) A narrow-angled corpus analysis of moves and strategies of the genre: ‘Letter of application’. English for Specific Purposes 20: 153–167.

17.

Huber

Snider

(2006) Influencing through Argument (updated edn). New York: International Debate Education Association.

18.

Hudson

Rowlands

(2007) The Broadcast Journalism Handbook. London: Pearson Longman.

19.

Ifantidou

(2009) Newspaper headlines and relevance: Ad hoc concepts in ad hoc contexts. Journal of Pragmatics 41: 699–720.

20.

Kanoksilapatham

(2005) Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles. English for Specific Purposes 24: 269–292.

21.

Katajamaki

Koskela

(2006) The rhetorical structure of editorials in English, Swedish and Finnish business newspapers. In: Teoksessa Actas del V Congreso International AELFE [Proceedings of the 5th International Aelfe Conference], Zaragoza, Spain, 14–16 September 2006. pp. 215–219. Zaragoza: Prensas Universitarias de Zaragoza.

22.

Krippendorff

(2004) Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human Communication Research 30(3): 411–433.

23.

Lamb

(1985) Descriptive process. LACUS Forum 11: 5–20.

24.

Lock

(1996) Functional English Grammar: An Introduction for Second Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

25.

Manan

(2001) Re-reading the media: A stylistic analysis of Malaysian media coverage of Anwar and the Reformasi movement. Asia Pacific Media Educator 11: 34–54.

26.

Mann

Thompson

(1988) Rhetorical structure theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization. Text 8(3): 243–281.

27.

Masroor

(2013) Argumentative strategies of newspaper editorials in English across cultures. Asian ESP Journal 9(3): 35–72.

28.

O’Donnell

Todd

(1992) Variety in Contemporary English. London: Routledge.

29.

Pang

(2006) Managing news in a managed media: Mediating the message in Malaysiakini.com. Asia Pacific Media Educator 17(7): 71–95.

30.

Peng

(2001) A Contrastive Analysis of English and Chinese Discourse. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.

31.

Quirk

Greenbaum

Leech

. (1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.

32.

Semino

Short

(2004) Corpus Stylistics. London: Routledge.

33.

(2005) From analysis to pedagogic applications: Using newspaper genres to write school genres. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 4: 67–82.

34.

Stef

Yuen

(2014) The refugee swap deal in Malaysian online news reports: Ideology and representation. GEMA Online: Journal of Language Studies 14(2): 93–108.

35.

Swales

(1990) Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

36.

Swales

(2004) Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.

37.

The New York Times (NYT) (1996) Opinion: Without fear or favor. The New York Times, 19 August. Available at: www.nytimes.com/1996/08/19/opinion/without-fear-or-favor.html (accessed 20 April 2014).

38.

The New York Times Company ( 2008) Ethics in journalism. Available at: http://www.nytco.com/wp-content/uploads/NYT_Ethical_Journalism_0904-1.pdf (accessed 12 October 2008).

39.

Van Dijk

(1980) Macrostructures: An Interdisciplinary Study of Global Structures in Discourse, Interaction, and Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

40.

Van Dijk

(1985) Handbook of Discourse Analysis, 4 vols. London; Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

41.

Van Dijk

(1992) Racism and argumentation: ‘Race riot’ rhetoric in tabloid editorials. In: Van Emeren

(ed.) Argumentation Illuminated. Dordrecht: Foris, pp. 242–259.

42.

Van Dijk

(1993) Elite Discourse and Racism. SAGE Series on Race and Ethnic Relations, vol. 6. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

43.

Van Eemeren

Grootendorst

Henkemans

(1996) Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory: A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

44.

Wells

King

(1994) Prestige newspaper coverage of foreign affairs in the 1990 congressional campaign. Journalism Quarterly 71: 652–664.