Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia

World Association for Triple Helix and Future Strategy Studies (세계트리플헬릭스미래전략학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

How the New York Times Portrayed the 2010 Brazil-Turkey-Iran Nuclear Deal: A Critical Discourse Analysis

  • Published : 2015.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper examines the New York Times' reaction to the 2010 Brazil-Turkey-Iran (BTI) nuclear deal, the very last diplomatic effort before the imposition of international sanctions track over the following years. The New York Times' (NYT) coverage of the deal is examined using the Critical Discourse Analytic (CDA) approach formulated by Teun van Dijk. The results show a strong bias against the BTI deal throughout the NYT's news coverage. The overarching theme in cover-age of the deal is the imputation of malignant intentions on the part of both Iran ("to kill time to further its nuclear weapons program") and Brazil and Turkey ("to advance their own business dealings with Iran and gaining international recognition"). Also, non-relevant information is used to imply a threat of Iranian development of nuclear weapons. Moreover, the NYT leaves almost totally "unsaid" that president Obama had asked Brazilian and Turkish leaders to go to Tehran and get this deal. Therefore, the NYT basically echoed, and legitimized, discursive practices of the U.S. government on the deal.

Keywords

References

  1. Blake, Aaron (2014). Ranking the media from liberal to conservative, based on their audience, 21. October. in: Washington Post, Online: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/10/21/lets-rank-the-media-from-liberal-to-conservative-based-on-their-audiences/ (May 8, 2015).
  2. Crail, Peter. (2009). Response to LEU Fuel Deal Unclear. November. in: Arms Control Association, online: http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2009_11/Iran (April 29, 2014).
  3. Dreyfuss, Robert (2010). US Slams Turkey, Brazil over Iran. 28 May. In: The Nation, online: http://www.thenation.com/blog/us-slams-turkey-brazil-over-iran# (April 29, 2014).
  4. Fairclough, Norman (1993). Critical Discourse Analysis and the Marketisation of Public Dis-course: The Universities, in: Discourse & Society, 4, 2, pp. 133-168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002002
  5. Financial Times (2010). Clinton attacks Turkey-Brazil deal with Iran, 18 May. Online: http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/58caa4b4-62a4-11df-b1d1-00144feab49a,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F58caa4b4-62a4-11df-b1d1-00144feab49a.html%3Fsiteedition%3Dintl&siteedition=intl&_i_referer=#axzz30DIHgBw8 (April 29, 2014).
  6. Izadi, Foad and Hakimeh Saghaye-Biria (2007), A Discourse Analysis of Elite American News-paper Editorials: The Case of Iran's Nuclear Program, in: Journal of Communication In-quiry, 31, 2, pp. 140-165.
  7. Jones, Jason (2010). Controlling the discourse: Interviews with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in: Critical Discourse Studies, 7, 2, pp. 127-141. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405901003675448
  8. Kamalipour, Yahya (1995). The U.S. Media and the Middle East: Image and Perception. West-port, Conn: Greenwood Press.
  9. Leverett, Flynt, and Hillary Mann Leverett (2010), President Obama should be honest about the Iran-Turkey-Brazil nuclear deal, 27 May. In: The race for Iran, online: http://www.raceforiran.com/president-obama-should-be-honest-about-the-iran-turkey-brazil-nuclear-deal (October 19 2014).
  10. New York Times (2010), Brazil's Iran diplomacy worries U.S. officials, 15 May.
  11. New York Times (2010), Brazil and Turkey say a nuclear deal with Iran is near, 17 May.
  12. New York Times (2010), U.S. is skeptical on Iranian deal for nuclear fuel, 18 May.
  13. New York Times (2010), U.S. strikes deal on new penalties by U.N. for Iran. 19a May.
  14. New York Times (2010), Iran, the deal and the Council, 19b May.
  15. New York Times (2010), Iran deal seen as spot on Brazilian leader's legacy, 25 May.
  16. New York Times (2010), As ugly as it gets, 26 May.
  17. New York Times (2010), Iran and Russia quarrel over Moscow's support for new sanctions. 27 May.
  18. Obama, Barack (2009). President Barack Obama's Inaugural Address. January. Online: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/inaugural-address (April 29 2014).
  19. Parsi, Trita (2010a). The-Turkey-Brazil-Iran deal: Can Washington take 'yes' for an answer? 17 May. In: Foreign Policy, online: http://mideastafrica.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/05/17/the_turkey_brazil_iran_deal_can_washington_take_yes_for_an_answer (April 29 2014).
  20. Parsi, Trita (2010b). Analysis: Iran's Nuke Deal Irritates Washington. 18 May. In: ABCNews, online: http://abcnews.go.com/International/analysis-irans-nuclear-deal-turkey-brazil/story?id=10681106 (April 29 2014).
  21. Phillips, Louise and Marianne Jorgensen (2002). Discourse analysis as theory and method. London: Sage.
  22. Safdari, Cyrus (2014). The false conventional wisdom about the Iran nuclear talks. 27 February. In: Iran Affairs. Online: http://www.iranaffairs.com/iran_affairs/2014/02/the-false-conventional-wisdom-about-the-iran-nuclear-talks.html (October 19 2014).
  23. Said, Edward (1978). Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books.
  24. Said, Edward (1997). Covering Islam: How the media and the experts determine how we see the rest of the world. New York: Vintage Books.
  25. Today's Zaman (2010). Brazil reveals Obama letter in spat over Iran nuclear deal. May. Online: http://www.todayszaman.com/news-211443-brazil-reveals-obama-letter-in-spat-over-iran-nuclear-deal.html (April 29 2014).
  26. Van Dijk, Teun (1991). Media contents: The interdisciplinary study of news as discourse, in: Klaus Bruhn-Jensen and Nick Jankowksi (eds.), A Handbook of Qualitative Methodologies for Mass Communication Research. London: Routledge, pp. 108-120
  27. Van Dijk, Teun (2001). Critical discourse analysis, in: Deborah Tannen, Deborah Schiffrin and Heidi E. Hamilton (eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 352-371.

Cited by

  1. Otherising Iran in American political discourse: case study of a post-JCPOA senate hearing on Iran sanctions pp.1360-2241, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2018.1513786