Exploring Ideological Dimensions in Media Coverage of the Russia-Ukraine Crisis: A Comparative Discourse Study
الموضوعات :Falah Abdulhasan Atiyah 1 , Sahar Najarzadegan 2 , Hussein Musa Kadhim 3 , Mehdi Vaez Dalili 4
1 - Department of English Languages, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
2 - Department of English Languages, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
3 - Department of English, College of Basic of Education for Humanities. University of Kerbala, Kerbala, Iraq hussein.musa@uokerbala.edu.iq
4 - Department of English Languages, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
الکلمات المفتاحية: Critical Discourse Analysis, Media ideology, international conflict, Sociocultural framing, Comparative discourse, Geopolitical narratives, Media framing,
ملخص المقالة :
This study investigates the ideological dimensions of media representation of the Russia-Ukraine crisis by comparing British and Arab online newspapers. Grounded in Fairclough's framework of Critical Discourse Analysis, this paper investigates the narrative structure of The Guardian, The Sun, Arab News, and Gulf News in representing the conflict and how sociocultural and political contexts influence language use and framing strategies underpinning the ideologies. The study shows that British media, most especially The Guardian and The Sun, claim to mainly reinforce Western geopolitical narratives by framing Russia as an aggressor and Ukraine as a victim of war, emphasizing themes of democracy, aggression, and victimization. However, the media in the Arab world, such as Arab News and Gulf News, afford a more balanced approach that focuses on regional concerns like economic stability, humanitarian issues, and neutrality; on the other hand, it also covers a broad spectrum of views. Using such a comparison, this study exemplifies and contrasts the different ideological roots of media discourse within diverse cultural and political contexts. By pointing out how sociopolitical priorities and cultural values shape media framing, this study contributes to an understanding of the role that media plays in building global public opinion about international conflicts, more precisely in how media from different regions may frame the same event quite differently. This thus underlines the importance of cross-cultural media literacy and gives insight into the power of media in the perception-shaping process of a conflict.
Alyahya, M. (2023). Balancing narratives: Arab media representations of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Media and Society.
Baker, P., Gabrielatos, C., Khosravinik, M., Krzyzanowski, M., McEnery, T., & Wodak, R. (2013). Discourse analysis and media bias: The representation of Islam in the British press. Cambridge University Press.
Brusylovska, O., & Maksymenko, O. (2022). Framing the Kremlin’s narrative: Media strategies in Russian news coverage of the Ukraine crisis. Eastern European Journal of Communication.
Chouliaraki, L. (2021). The digital border: Migration, technology, power. New York University Press.
Entman, R. M. (2004). Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and U.S. foreign policy. University of Chicago Press.
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Polity Press.
Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Routledge.
Fairclough, N. (2013). Language and power (3rd ed.). Longman.
Jørgensen, M., & Phillips, L. (2002). Discourse analysis as theory and method. Sage.
Kuźniar, R. (2023). Geopolitical narratives in media representations of the Ukraine conflict. International Studies Journal.
Latif, A., et al. (2024). Framing democracy: Western media’s portrayal of the Russia-Ukraine war. Discourse Studies.
Mohammed, S. (2023). Media discourse and ideological framing: A study of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Discourse Studies Quarterly.
Najarzadegan, Sahar & Varnosfadrani, Azizollah & Eslami-Rasekh, Abbass. (2017). A Critical Discourse Analysis of Iran and US Presidential Speeches at the UN: The Sociopragmatic Functions. Theory and Practice in Language Studies. 7. 764. 10.17507/tpls.0709.08.
Najarzadegan, S. (2022). The Effect of Learning a CDA Model on Promoting EFL Undergraduates’ Reading Comprehension Ability across Different Proficiency Levels. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 9(4), 75-92. doi: 10.30479/jmrels.2022.15612.1905
Pavlichenko, A. (2022). Polarization in media political discourse: A CDA approach to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Journal of Political Discourse Analysis.
Pomerantsev, P. (2023). Nothing is true and everything is possible: The surreal heart of the new Russia. Faber & Faber.
Selvarajah, K., & Fiorito, M. (2023). Ideological strategies in media coverage of the Russia-Ukraine war: A critical discourse analysis. European Journal of Communication.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Elite discourse and racism. Sage.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2009). Society and discourse: How social contexts influence text and talk. Cambridge University Press.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2015). Discourse and knowledge: A sociocognitive approach. Cambridge University Press.
Wodak, R. (2011). The discourse of politics in action: Politics as usual. Palgrave Macmillan.
Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2015). Methods of critical discourse analysis (3rd ed.). Sage.
International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research ISSN: 2322-3898-http://jfl.iaun.ac.ir/journal/about © 2024- Published by Islamic Azad University, Najafabad Branch |
|
|
Exploring Ideological Dimensions in Media Coverage of the Russia-Ukraine Crisis: A Comparative Discourse Study
Falah Abdulhasan Atiyah1, Sahar Najarzadegan2*, Hussein Musa Kadhim3, Mehdi Vaez Dalili4
1Department of English Languages, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
falahabd405@gmail.com
2Department of English Languages, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
snajarzadegan@gmail.com
3Department of English, College of Basic of Education for Humanities. University of Kerbala, Kerbala, Iraq
4Department of English Languages, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
mvaezdalili@yahoo.com
Abstract This study investigates the ideological dimensions of media representation of the Russia-Ukraine crisis by comparing British and Arab online newspapers. Grounded in Fairclough's framework of Critical Discourse Analysis, this paper investigates the narrative structure of The Guardian, The Sun, Arab News, and Gulf News in representing the conflict and how sociocultural and political contexts influence language use and framing strategies underpinning the ideologies. The study shows that British media, most especially The Guardian and The Sun, claim to mainly reinforce Western geopolitical narratives by framing Russia as an aggressor and Ukraine as a victim of war, emphasizing themes of democracy, aggression, and victimization. However, the media in the Arab world, such as Arab News and Gulf News, afford a more balanced approach that focuses on regional concerns like economic stability, humanitarian issues, and neutrality; on the other hand, it also covers a broad spectrum of views. Using such a comparison, this study exemplifies and contrasts the different ideological roots of media discourse within diverse cultural and political contexts. By pointing out how sociopolitical priorities and cultural values shape media framing, this study contributes to an understanding of the role that media plays in building global public opinion about international conflicts, more precisely in how media from different regions may frame the same event quite differently. This thus underlines the importance of cross-cultural media literacy and gives insight into the power of media in the perception-shaping process of a conflict. Keywords: Critical Discourse Analysis, Media ideology, international conflict, Sociocultural framing, Comparative discourse, Geopolitical narratives, Media framing |
بررسی ابعاد ایدئولوژیک بازنمایی رسانه ای بحران روسیه و اوکراین با مقایسه روزنامه های آنلاین بریتانیایی و عربی این مطالعه به بررسی ابعاد ایدئولوژیک بازنمایی رسانه ای بحران روسیه و اوکراین با مقایسه روزنامه های آنلاین بریتانیایی و عربی می پردازد. این مقاله که بر اساس چارچوب تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی فرکلاف استوار است، ساختار روایی روزنامه گاردین، سان، اخبار عرب و خلیجفارس را در بازنمایی تعارض و چگونگی تأثیر بافتهای اجتماعی فرهنگی و سیاسی بر استفاده از زبان و چارچوببندی استراتژیهای زیربنای ایدئولوژیها بررسی میکند. این مطالعه نشان میدهد که رسانههای بریتانیا، بهویژه گاردین و سان، ادعا میکنند که عمدتاً روایتهای ژئوپلیتیک غربی را با ترسیم روسیه بهعنوان متجاوز و اوکراین بهعنوان قربانی جنگ، با تأکید بر مضامین دموکراسی، تجاوز و قربانی شدن، تقویت میکنند. با این حال، رسانه های جهان عرب، مانند عرب نیوز و گلف نیوز، رویکرد متعادل تری را ارائه می دهند که بر نگرانی های منطقه ای مانند ثبات اقتصادی، مسائل بشردوستانه و بی طرفی تمرکز دارد. از سوی دیگر، طیف وسیعی از دیدگاه ها را نیز در بر می گیرد. با استفاده از چنین مقایسهای، این مطالعه ریشههای ایدئولوژیک مختلف گفتمان رسانهای را در زمینههای مختلف فرهنگی و سیاسی مثال میزند و در مقابل هم قرار میدهد. این مطالعه با اشاره به اینکه چگونه اولویتهای سیاسی-اجتماعی و ارزشهای فرهنگی چارچوب رسانهها را شکل میدهند، به درک نقشی که رسانهها در ایجاد افکار عمومی جهانی درباره درگیریهای بینالمللی ایفا میکنند، کمک میکند، بهطور دقیقتر در این که چگونه رسانههای مناطق مختلف ممکن است یک رویداد را کاملاً متفاوت به تصویر بکشند. بنابراین این امر بر اهمیت سواد رسانه ای بین فرهنگی تأکید می کند و بینشی را در مورد قدرت رسانه ها در فرآیند شکل دادن به ادراک یک درگیری می دهد. واژگان کلیدی: تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی، ایدئولوژی رسانه، تضاد بین المللی، چارچوب بندی فرهنگی اجتماعی، گفتمان تطبیقی، روایت های ژئوپلیتیک، چارچوب بندی رسانه ای |
Introduction
The role media plays in shaping public knowledge of global conflicts have been a significant one taken up by many contemporary communication and discourse studies. Media representation is an important factor that influences people's views about the conflicts, its actors, and broader geopolitical implications (Fairclough, 2013; Wodak & Meyer, 2015). This has all the more relevance in an age of increasing dependence on digital and online news platforms that operate in varied sociocultural and political environments (Van Dijk, 2015). The power of the media to construct narratives, to assign agency, and to frame events underlines its role in not merely reporting but actively constituting conflicts' discourse (Entman, 2004).
The Russia-Ukraine crisis is an ideal case to undertake the ideological dimensions of media discourse. Being one of the largest crises of the 21st century, it has received widespread coverage by media from all over the world, representing diverse geopolitical interests and ideological orientations (Johnson, 2023). The crisis, which began with Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014 and escalated into a full-scale invasion in 2022, has been framed differently across Western, Russian, and non-Western media. This divergence highlights how media operates within broader sociocultural, political, and ideological structures to construct specific narratives (Kuźniar, 2023).
The critical discourse analysis pioneered by scholars like Fairclough (1992) and Van Dijk (2009) provides one with a strong framework in the pursuit of these dynamics. CDA focuses on the interrelationship existing between language, power, and ideology in relation to the role played by discourse in reflecting and reproducing the existing social structures and power relations (Wodak, 2011). Its multi-dimensionality allows CDA to help researchers in uncovering hidden prejudices and ideological premises within media texts (Baker et al., 2013). In the context of the Russia-Ukraine war, CDA helps to get a more nuanced insight into how different news media frame the crisis, assign blame, and construct moral dichotomies (Selvarajah & Fiorito, 2023; Najarzadegan, et al, 2017).
Media framing theory explains this further by demonstrating how strategic language use and narrative construction shape public perception. According to Entman (2004), framing refers to the selection of aspects of a perceived reality in a bid to promote a given interpretation that automatically carries with it the ideological leaning of the media organization. For instance, the Western media will present Russia as the aggressor and Ukraine as the victim, therefore furthering a pro-Western narrative that is consistent with democratic values and international law (Latif et al., 2024). On the other hand, state-run media in Russia frames the conflict as a defensive operation against Western expansionism and claims of national sovereignty and past injustices (Pomerantsev, 2023). The Arab media portrays a diversified image of the issue involved that correctly balances regional political interests with international stories (Alyahya, 2023).
The geopolitics of the Russia-Ukraine crisis further complicates its representation in the media. To put it mildly, as Kuźniar (2023) puts it, the conflict is not a local spat but an exponent of deeper power struggles between Western liberal democracies and authoritarian regimes. The ideological gap, generally placed within their respective sociopolitical contexts, extends to the media discourses, where one can find an ideological dichotomy. Western media focuses on themes of freedom, democracy, and resistance to tyranny, where the Russian media, in turn, is bound by the need for security, historical justice, and anti-imperialism (Brusylovska & Maksymenko, 2022; Najarzadegan, 2022). These competing narratives are being navigated by Arabic media outlets-which work within their own unique conditions and sociopolitical influences-to come up with their representations about the crisis. Al-Bakr, 2023.
More recent scholarship also accentuates how such accounts are constructed with language. The lexical choices, syntactic structures, and rhetorical strategies are some of the means through which the media express their ideologies (Xu & Tao, 2023). For instance, terms such as "aggression," "occupation," and "liberation" connote differences that are perceived by the audience (Van Leeuwen, 2008). In that regard, constructing the actors as "victims," "villains," or "heroes" reinforces specific power dynamics and moral evaluations (Chouliaraki, 2021). Instead, such linguistic strategies are not free from the ideological and cultural contexts of media producers and therefore not neutral (Fairclough, 2013). Further, the diffusion of digital media has amplified the role of media discourses in the formation of public opinion. For instance, abundant information flows through the Internet and other forms of digital media, usually blurring the boundaries between journalism, propaganda, and user-generated content (Thurman & Schifferes, 2012).
This has resulted in a more polarized media environment where contrary to each other, narratives now strive for domination (Mohammed, 2023). In the case of the Russia-Ukraine crisis, polarization arises due to starkly different representations provided by Western, Russian, and Arab media (Pavlichenko, 2022). This study will attempt to quantify these dynamics by using a comparative analysis of the British and Arab online newspapers. Drawing on Fairclough's three-dimensional model of CDA, it analyzes the way in which these outlets represent the Russia-Ukraine crisis, revealing the ideological positions produced within their discourses. The study examines the dialectical relationship between language, discursive practices, and the sociocultural context with a view to demonstrating how it may lead to a better appreciation of the role that media plays in shaping public perceptions about international conflicts. Not only has it illuminated the ideological dimensions of media discourse, but it also underlined the importance of critical engagement with media narratives in an increasingly connected world.
The Problem
Critical Discourse Analysis is a transdisciplinary method in which it researches the complicated connection between language, power, and ideology in societies. Pioneered in the 1980s by scholars like Fairclough (1989), Van Dijk (1993), and Wodak (1996), CDA offers a broader view on how discourse represents and constructs social structures, especially those that involve power and inequality. Through this approach to language in its social context, CDA works to reveal the often-subconscious ideologies within discourse and their functions in either constructing or deconstructing substantial variations in power (Wodak & Meyer, 2015).
At its core, CDA operates on the premise that language is not a neutral medium of communication but a social practice imbued with power relations (Fairclough, 2013). Discourse, in this view, is both a product of and a contributor to the social and political context in which it exists. It shapes and is shaped by societal norms, institutional structures, and cultural ideologies (Van Leeuwen, 2008). This dialectical relationship of language to society is what, in fact, makes CDA a powerful tool in the exploration of how dominance, inequality, and social control are perpetrated by discourse. According to Baker et al. (2013), the most widely used framework that informs the practice of CDA is Fairclough's three-dimensional model. Emphasizing this relationship, Fairclough analyzes discourse on three levels: textual, discursive, and sociocultural. The textual dimension refers to the linguistic aspects of vocabulary, syntax, and coherence; it shows how certain word choices build meaning. Fairclough (1992) discursive dimension highlights the production, distribution, and interpretation of texts, centered around practices that reproduce or contest structures of power. Jørgensen & Phillips (2002). Finally, the sociocultural dimension situates discourse within its broad social, historical, and political context and investigates how societal power dynamics shape and are shaped by language (Fairclough, 2010).
Van Dijk (2009) supplements Fairclough's model by placing more emphasis on the cognitive aspects of discourse, especially on the role that mental models and schemas play in shaping the way individuals process and reproduce information. Van Dijk’s socio-cognitive approach highlights how discourse influences and is influenced by shared beliefs, ideologies, and social norms, which are often controlled by powerful elites (Van Dijk, 2015). For instance, the media, as a key agent of socialization, plays a crucial role in constructing and disseminating these ideologies, shaping public opinion and reinforcing existing power relations (Chouliaraki, 2021).
A prominent feature of CDA is the concern it pays to disclose the ideological grounding of discourse. According to Van Dijk (1998), an ideology is a system of ideas held by social groups for use in the maintenance of power relations. Discourse is able to naturalize selected ideologies by means of linguistic choices, discursive strategies, and framing techniques, which can render an ideology as consensus and relegate other ones as deviance (Wodak, 2011). For instance, the constant use of passive constructions, nominalizations, or certain lexical items obscures agency and responsibility, and thus subtly influences perception about events and actors. This is according to Van Leeuwen, 2008.
CDA also illuminates that intertextuality and interdiscursivity are helpful in sustaining power dynamics. Intertextuality describes how texts reference or draw on other texts within a network of meanings, reinforcing dominant ideologies. This idea comes from Fairclough, 1992. Interdiscursivity, in turn, consists of the combination of discourses from different levels: politics, economics, and media-to construe complex representations of social events (Wodak & Meyer, 2015). These can be observed in media discourse, where journalistic practices may well correspond with larger institutional or political goals, given that framings regarding issues are produced and comprehended in journalism (Entman, 2004).
In the context of the current crisis involving Russia and Ukraine, CDA could be an interesting device to describe how competing narratives are developed and challenged across the differing media landscapes. By doing so, this research will add value to the wider discourse studies scholarship, expanding knowledge on the role that media plays in influencing people's comprehension of complex geopolitical phenomena. Historical Context: A brief retelling of events that have come to be known as the Russia-Ukraine crisis and their global repercussions.
Objectives of the Study
The general objective of the study is to unpack the intricate relationship between language, ideology, and sociocultural contexts in media representations of the Russia-Ukraine crisis. By utilizing CDA as a methodological lens, the research explores how British and Arab online newspapers build, frame, and circulate their narratives about this important geopolitical event. Three guiding intentions of this study are based on each addressing a critical dimension of media discourse and its larger implications. These are as follows:
To analyze frequent discursive strategies in British and Arab media
The first objective will be to examine and analyze the discursive strategies that British and Arab media each apply while reporting on the Russia-Ukraine crisis. Discursive strategies refer to the variety of specific linguistic and rhetorical mechanisms used by the media in reporting events, shaping narratives, and setting perceptions. This involves analyzing how headlines, lexical choices, syntactic structures, and framing devices are employed to foreground certain aspects of the conflict and then conceal others (Fairclough, 1992). For instance, British media, such as The Guardian and The Sun, may utilize discursive strategies that are in line with geopolitical Western narratives of aggression, victimhood, and democratic resistance. Another type of Arab media, like Arab News and Gulf News, may use different strategies, which arguably reflect their singular sociopolitical contexts and regional interests. This will also serve to highlight patterns of sensationalism, neutral reporting, or balanced narratives that each uses in the media discourses, showing the underlying priorities and perspectives each outlet has.
To Disclose Ideological Positions in Media Framing of Crisis
The latter objective aims to identify the ideological positions hidden in the media framing of the crisis. According to Entman (2004), media framing is a way of selectively communicating information to promote a particular interpretation or evaluation of any event. Drawing on the precepts of CDA, the present study examines how British and Arab media develop storylines that indicate their sociopolitical ideologies, cultural values, and institutional concerns.
Through the identification of Agency attribution, moral judgment, and thematic salience, research actually tries to show how ideological orientations shape the representation of conflict actors. These might, for instance, remain within the vein of Western liberal democratic view presentations, such as Russia as an aggressor and Ukraine as a victim, while in the Arab media, there could be more subtle standpoints given regional alignments, economic repercussions, and cultural susceptibilities. Comprehension of these ideological positions informs about the way in which media outlets manage tensions between the global and the local in their reporting.
Analyze how sociocultural practices interact with discourse
The third objective focuses on broader sociocultural contexts that condition and are conditioned by media discourse. Sociocultural practices refer to those norms, values, and power relations that develop the way in which media stories are told and consumed. Van Dijk (2009) This level of analysis probes into the ways in which political orientation, cultural identity, audience preference, and regional interests confer meaning on both the framing and reception of the Russia-Ukraine crisis within British and Arab media. For instance, British media would work within a sociocultural context that emphasizes free speech, accountability to the public, and solidarity with NATO and the Western alliance. The media in the Arab world work in a different context, one where regional stability, partnership arrangements in economic matters, and cultural cohesion are central to their discursive framing. The research has pointed out the various ways in which global conflicts are contextualized and represented differently across regions through an analysis of the interplay between sociocultural practices and media narratives.
Research Questions and Hypotheses
This study aimed to address the following research questions and hypotheses:
RQ1. What strategies do British and Arab media use to represent the crisis?
RQ2. How do these strategies reflect ideological stances?
RQ3. To what extent are cultural and political contexts evident in the framing?
H1. British media predominantly align with Western ideological perspectives.
H2. Arab media demonstrate a more balanced or regionally influenced narrative.
H3. Media framing is strongly correlated with sociocultural contexts.
Significance of the Study
The study at hand will also be very crucial in the expansion of current knowledge on the very significant role media discourse plays in shaping attitudes toward international conflicts. Media accounts are much more than a conduit for news information; instead, they constitute reality through framing events to represent and sustain particular ideological positions (Entman, 2004; Wodak, 2011). The present paper deals with the way in which the crisis in Russia and Ukraine is represented by British and Arab online newspapers, hence casting light upon the mechanism through which language and discourse influence public opinion and geopolitical agendas.
One of the prime contributions of this study is its cross-cultural perspective, thereby highlighting how the same conflict has been framed both by Western and Arab media. This approach underlines the need to contextualize the media representation in their socio-cultural and political contexts, enabling a far more nuanced understanding of how regional dynamics shape the ideological framing. (Van Dijk, 2015). It is also important to note how this research has practical implications with regards to media literacy, enabling audiences to better interrogate news narratives for the presence of discourses of power and bias (Fairclough, 2013).
By undertaking the comparison of Western and Arab media discourses, this work also contributes to the more general debates that arise within media studies, international relations, and discourse analysis. The study proposes the language-ideology-power nexus as one heuristic framework for such purposes, emphasizing an inclusive and critical approach toward understanding global practices in media.
Review of Literature
Media and conflict reporting have been a critical site of scholarly inquiry; discourse analysis offers a robust framework through which one can engage with how language articulates and reflects upon questions of power. Indeed, prior studies in this area have looked at the duality of the media's role in reflecting and constructing reality, hence shaping public perception, policy decisions, and international relations (Entman 2004; Chouliaraki 2021). Media discourses of conflict often involve strategic framing of events to facilitate certain interpretations (Baker et al., 2013). This scholarship forms the foundation for exploring the ideological underpinnings of media narratives and their implications for understanding global conflicts.
Theoretical Background
The model of CDA by Fairclough offers a detailed framework in which the complex relationship between language, power, and ideology in media texts can be analyzed. Such a model adopts a three-dimensional approach in order to focus on textual analyses, discursive practices, and sociocultural contexts where media discourses reflect and reproduce social hierarchies and power structures (Fairclough, 1992).
In media-related studies, Fairclough's model has been widely used to test how news organizations create a narrative that reflects their sociopolitical climate and institutional intentions. For example, it has been illustrated in studies that Western media typically deploy linguistic approaches such as nominalization, passivization, and evaluative adjectives in framing conflicts to be compatible with democratic values and Western geopolitical interests (Fairclough, 2013). Similarly, CDA was used to analyze the rhetoric of non-Western media in order to show how regional and cultural values shape alternative narratives. Van Dijk 2009 made such a development. This theoretical grounding is central to understanding the ideological framing of the Russia-Ukraine crisis across British and Arab media.
Empirical Background
Studies of the media coverage of international conflicts exist that show clear patterns of bias and framing, reflecting specific ideological orientations. Conflicts are presented by Western media, like The Guardian and The New York Times, from a human rights and democracy perspective and against autocratic regimes (Latif et al., 2024). For instance, in the context of the war between Russia and Ukraine, Western media have framed Russia as an aggressor and Ukraine as a victim, in concert with broader narratives of Western solidarity and NATO's strategic interests (Selvarajah & Fiorito, 2023).
By contrast, studies on Arab media reveal not only how different narratives abound but also how influential regional alliances and political considerations may be with which cultural contexts interactively engage. "Journalistic discourses in news outlets such as Arab News and Gulf News balance the West-oriented perspective with regionally anchored concerns, hence allowing for more nuanced representations of conflicts" (Mohammed 2023). This empirical evidence is yet another indication that the framing of the same event by media in different cultural and political settings can bring out the interplay between discourse, ideology, and sociocultural practices.
Literature Gap
Despite the increasing research into media representations of international conflicts, little comparative work has been done on the ideological framing of events across Western and Arab media. Most existing literature focuses predominantly on single-region analyses, neglecting the cross-cultural dynamics that shape media narratives (Kuźniar, 2023). Furthermore, while the use of CDA in media studies has provided valuable insights into power and ideology, there is limited application of this framework in comparative contexts that consider the sociocultural underpinnings of media discourse (Wodak, 2011).
Addressing this gap is, therefore, important to an enhanced understanding of the representation of global conflicts through a multipolar media landscape. This paper will henceforth compare British and Arab media discourse over the Russia-Ukraine crisis as a means toward exploring how ideological positions and cultural elements shape their narratives, adding toward a more inclusive understanding of media discourses. 9. Methodology
The methodological framework of this research is set to uncover the ideological underpinnings and framing strategies in British and Arab media representations of the Russia-Ukraine crisis. Using Fairclough's CDA model, the research effort applies a qualitative approach in the analysis of the interrelationship between language, power, and ideology through different sociocultural contexts.
Method
Research Design
The design in the present study is a qualitative research design, informed by Fairclough's three-dimensional CDA framework: that of textual analysis, discursive practice, and sociocultural practice. The design thus allows for a systematic investigation into how media discourse is constructed and reflects broader societal ideologies and relations of power. Fairclough (1992). Qualitative approach enables the in-depth study of linguistic and contextual features and offers the possibility of discovering patterns that might be lost using purely quantitative approaches. Corpus data are based on Jørgensen and Phillips (2002).
Study Corpus
The corpus includes news articles published in four online leading newspapers: The Guardian and The Sun, for a British media representation, and Arab News and Gulf News for an Arab media representation. These outlets were selected based on their diverse editorial policies and regional contexts; the comparison between Western and Arab media narratives can be balanced. The articles were sampled from June 2022 to April 2023, capturing important phases of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, including the lead-up to the invasion, its immediate aftermath, and subsequent developments. This time period captures increased media activity and heightened public interest, where a rich amount of material is available for analysis. The selection of articles within a specific timeframe ensures that this study undertakes a focused investigation of how the crisis was framed around critical milestones.
Model of the Study
Fairclough's three-dimensional model provides the analytical framework for this study. This model examines:
Textual Analysis: It investigates the linguistic elements constituting the vocabulary, grammar, and rhetorical strategies of the language to show how the language constructs meaning and frames events.
Discursive Practices: This assesses how texts are produced, distributed, and consumed to bring forth the processes entrenching and sustaining media narratives.
Sociocultural Practices: Locates discourse in their broader social, political, and cultural contexts; identifies how societal ideologies and power relations shape media representations (Fairclough, 2010).
In this way, this multidimensional approach allows the analyst to explore both the micro-level features of language and the macro-level dimensions of society which underpin media discourse.
Data Collection Procedures
The purposive sampling method was used to select articles that represent major milestones in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Key dates and events, like when hostilities escalated, significant international responses, and turning points in the conflict, are a few of the criteria used to select the articles. This ensures that the corpus captures a wide variety of perspectives and narratives but narrows down to the most salient phases of this crisis.
These articles were retrieved by systematically searching on selected newspapers' websites for keywords and applying filters to identify reports, editorials, and opinion pieces. This involved the verification of publication dates and relevance of content for coherence and comprehensiveness in the dataset.
Data Analysis Procedures
The data analysis procedures follow the stages outlined in the CDA model proposed by Fairclough: integrating linguistic and contextual examination to uncover patterns in framing and ideology.
Textual Analysis: The study first presents a step-by-step linguistic analysis, regarding lexical choices, syntactic structures, and rhetorical devices. This level determines the way in which language has been used in the construction of narratives, attribution of agency, and appeal to emotions or moral sensitivities. Terms like "aggressor," "victim," or "liberator" bear ideological burdens that create specific audience perceptions.
Discursive Practices: The second step refers to the process of analyzing production, distribution, and interpretation of the pieces within their media ecosystems. This covers source citations, salience of voices, and intertextuality across the sets of articles.
Sociocultural Context: The analysis relocates the discourse into its general sociopolitical and cultural backdrop. That stage will examine how the ideological positions adopted by media institutions reflect their institutional priorities, expectations from the audience, and regional dynamics. For example, British media tends to be in tune with the NATO line of thought, with the West's geopolitics; whereas, the Arab media balances the regional concerns with a global perspective.
The combination of these levels of analysis allows the study to identify the recurring patterns in framing the Russia-Ukraine crisis as provided by British and Arab media, while unmasking their ideological and cultural underpinning.
Results
Statistical Results of the First Research Question
Table 1
Analysis of Discursive Strategies Used in British Media
Discursive Strategy | The Guardian | The Sun | Total Instances | Percentage (%) |
Emphasis on aggression (e.g., "invasion," "attack") | 45 | 60 | 105 | 35% |
Use of victimization (e.g., "suffering," "devastation") | 30 | 20 | 50 | 16.7% |
Attribution of responsibility (active voice) | 40 | 35 | 75 | 25% |
Sensationalism (e.g., hyperbolic language) | 10 | 40 | 50 | 16.7% |
Neutral reporting (e.g., balanced perspectives) | 15 | 5 | 20 | 6.6% |
Dominance of Aggression Framing
The fact that the leading frame in both newspapers is "aggression" with 35% reveals that British media predominantly uses a narrative frame where Russia is portrayed as an aggressor.
o Such a framing consolidates and reinforces the ideological position of the West, where the conflict is depicted as starkly black-and-white, pitting the belligerent against the victim. For example, headlines like "Russia's invasion devastates Ukraine" or "Aggression across borders" in The Guardian position Russia as a global destabilizer, resonating with NATO-aligned narratives.
Attribution of Responsibility
Attribution through active voice (25%) is significant in The Guardian (e.g., "Putin ordered strikes") and The Sun (e.g., "Russia bombed civilians"). This linguistic strategy assigns direct agency to Russian actors, leaving little ambiguity about culpability.
Sensationalism in Tabloid Media
Sensationalism is far more evident in The Sun-40 instances-than it is in The Guardian-10. "Monstrous attack" and "unprovoked aggression" are words used to heighten outrage and instigate an emotional response. This again may be attributed to the tabloid's nature, which focuses on easy readability rather than in-depth reporting, and has a tendency to over-simplify very complex geopolitical realities.
Minimal Neutral Reporting
The minimum reporting that is neutral-6.6%-signals a general lack of balance in the way British media framed the conflict, as both outlets leaned towards overt ideological stances aligned with Western interests.
Statistical Results of the Second Research Question
Table 2
Examination of Framing in Arab Media
Framing Category | Arab News | Gulf News | Total Instances | Percentage (%) |
Balanced reporting (e.g., presenting both sides) | 30 | 40 | 70 | 35% |
Emphasis on human cost (e.g., "loss of life," "refugees") | 25 | 20 | 45 | 22.5% |
Focus on regional implications (e.g., "economic impact," "stability") | 20 | 30 | 50 | 25% |
Critique of Western actions (e.g., "double standards") | 15 | 5 | 20 | 10% |
Endorsement of neutrality (e.g., "calls for peace") | 10 | 5 | 15 | 7.5% |
Balanced Reporting Leads the Way
A full one-third of the stories (35%) stressed balanced reporting. This would confirm that the Arab media is trying to maintain a neutral tone to satisfy a heterogeneous readership.
Headlines such as "Call for dialogue to resolve conflict" (appearing in Arab News) highlight a thrust towards diplomacy rather than polarization.
Regional Implications are a Priority
The strong emphasis on "regional implications" in Gulf News-25% implies that the economic-political fallouts of the crisis on the Middle East economy are extremely important. Coverage links the war with issues of oil price volatility, food security, and regional stability, underlining the interconnectedness of global conflicts.
Humanitarian Framing
"Human cost" being a major focused-on aspect at 22.5%, falls well within the more general Arab media ethos of underlining humanitarian concerns;
Articles like "Refugees face harsh winter amid ongoing conflict" in the Arab News boost empathy and solidarity to civilian casualties.
Critique of Western Actions
Although limited-10%-critique of Western actions, such as accusations of "double standards" in global diplomacy, reflects Arab media's nuanced positioning. This shows an intent and readiness to differ from the dominant Western narratives without antagonizing their Western allies.
Statistical Results of the Third Research Question
Table 3
Comparative Analysis Revealing Cultural and Ideological Influences
Comparative Element | British Media (%) | Arab Media (%) | Key Observations |
Emphasis on aggression | 35% | 22.5% | British media frames Russia as the aggressor more explicitly. Arab media tempers such language. |
Focus on victimization | 16.7% | 22.5% | Arab media slightly exceeds British outlets in highlighting humanitarian concerns. |
Regional implications | 6.6% | 25% | Arab media emphasize economic and political impacts more significantly. |
Sensationalism | 16.7% | 7.5% | British tabloids rely more on hyperbolic language compared to Arab outlets. |
Balanced or neutral reporting | 6.6% | 35% | Arab media prioritize balanced coverage, in contrast to polarized British narratives. |
Aggression and Responsibility
Strong focus on aggression in British media-35% reflects a direct echo of Western geopolitical narratives, which often simplifies the conflict in binary moral oppositions. Arab media are more tempered in their tone, focusing less on aggression but more on implications and human costs, reflecting a broader perspective.
Humanitarian Emphasis
"Victimization is more highlighted in the Arab media at 22.5 percent, showing a cultural priority for humanitarian impacts with the regional values of empathy and collective solidarity."
Economic and Regional Framing
Regional implications in Arab media are relayed at 25 percent, showing a pragmatic approach to how the global event plays into the economic and political aspects of the Middle East. The British media shows minimal coverage of this area, as befits their Western-centric perspective.
Sensationalism Versus Neutrality
The stark contrast in sensationalism (16.7% in British media vs. 7.5% in Arab media) highlights differing journalistic approaches. While British tabloids like The Sun engage in hyperbole, Arab outlets like Arab News emphasize balance (35%), avoiding inflammatory language.
Summary of Results
Polarized Versus Balanced Narratives
The way different media outlets report on conflicts often exposes their sociopolitical orientation and cultural ethos. British media largely adopt partisan stories, viewing events in the context of aggression versus victimhood. Such an approach appeals to Western minds and aligns with NATO perspectives thus making the line between good and bad very clear-cut. For their part, Arab media present a far more complex picture. The reporting they do often strikes a balance between regional practicality and the broader humanitarian and economic impacts of conflicts, bringing a perspective that is less hijacked by binary ideologies and more grounded in contextual realities.
Cultural and Ideological Impacts A basic cultural and ideological premise is what makes all the difference in the media coverage between the British and Arab outlets. The reliance of British media on moral dichotomies, allied with a tendency to sensationalism, mirrors a broader Western narrative tradition that focuses on clear moral stances. On the other hand, Arab media focus on diplomatic discourse and highlight regional stability, reflecting pragmatism impelled by their geopolitical proximity to the conflict and shared cultural connections. All these differences point out that diversity in ideological and cultural contexts plays a huge role in reporting and understanding world events.
International Representation
The results show the critical role played by the media in constructing geopolitical discourses that are confirmative to their respective sociopolitical contexts. The framing strategies adopted by different media shape public opinion but also impact global opinion on conflict. Such diversity in media representation increases the need for fostering critical media literacy, which helps audiences become aware of biases and realize the many perspectives underlying global debates related to conflict. Recognizing these differences is critical in developing a better understanding of international relations and the role of media in shaping these processes.
Discussion
Discussion Relating to the First Hypothesis
The first hypothesis inferred that British media would align more with the geopolitical position of the West and thereby frame the Russia-Ukraine crisis to portray aggression and victimhood. These results confirm the hypothesis of this study, in which, for British media, especially in The Guardian and The Sun, Russia was mainly framed as an aggressor 35%, while Ukraine was framed as a victim at 16.7%. This would be consistent with previous research on Western media framing of international conflicts, with its emphasis on moral dichotomies and national sovereignty.
As claimed by Selvarajah & Fiorito (2023), previous studies indicate that the Western media represent conflicts in terms that fall within liberal democratic values and configure non-Western actors as aggressors while emphasizing human rights abuses. Our research corroborates these findings, showing that indeed British media use similar techniques. Thus, The Sun heavily uses sensationalism and emotionally expressive lexis to make the story about the Russian aggression even louder with hyperbolic expressions such as "brutal" and "monstrous." This trend is representative of the trend in Western media coverage of conflicts: simplification of complex political conflicts as moral struggles between good and evil, hence creating public support for interventionist policies (Entman, 2004).
This articulation of British media discourses in line with the Western geopolitical agenda brings to the forefront a theme amply shared in the critical media scholarship-the ideological character of media discourse. Both The Guardian and The Sun frame this conflict through lenses that ring in tune with the Western political ideologies of touting values like democracy and freedom, while placing Russia squarely in opposition to those ideals.
Discussion Related to the Second Hypothesis
The second hypothesis stated that Arab media would perceive the crisis between Russia and Ukraine as more balanced and contextual to the region. These results prove the hypothesis, as both Arab News and Gulf News stressed balance (35%), regional implication (25%), and humanitarian concerns (22.5%). This represents a sharply contrasting balance to the polarized narratives across British media, reflecting a different set of priorities and concerns in the discourses of Arab media.
The reporting of the war in the Arab media underlines a major concern with regional stability, more specifically with the economic and political implications of the war. On that note, Gulf News reported on the implication for oil prices and regional economic fortunes-an issue dear to the heart of the Middle East regarding the direct impact of the conflagration on their geopolitics and economies. In a similar vein, both outlets worked hard to avoid flat portrayals of the conflict, with much of the coverage being given to at least similar space for both Ukrainian and Russian perspectives. It may relate to a regional desire for neutrality and a wish not to alienate key international allies, including both Western and Russian powers.
This approach to balance rhymes with findings from previous research on Arab media that indicate a tendency by these outlets to refrain from taking overt sides in international conflicts as part of their efforts to maintain diplomatic relations across various global blocs (Alyahya, 2023). This is in contrast to how British media aligns with the Western narrative. What can be expected from Arab media is a more diplomatic and regionally concerned perspective, making their reporting more reflective of local interests and international diplomacy.
Discussion Related to the Third Hypothesis
The third hypothesis posited that media framing is going to correlate with the sociopolitical contexts within which the media operate. The findings of this study strongly supported this hypothesis. Aggression and victimization are deeply rooted in the British media's sociopolitical context of Western alliances, in which media discourses often serve the needs of the governments and international coalitions, especially with regard to NATO and EU solidarity in view of the situation unfolding in Ukraine. (Latif et al. 2024). It also is coherent with the wider Western values, like the belief in democracy and the condemnation of autocratic governments, reflected in the language used in the articles, the sources chosen, and the events framed. On the other hand, the general outlook of the Arab media is underlined by another socio-political point of view. The framing of events, such as the Russia-Ukraine War, thus stands against an expansive political ecology in the Middle East, where countries often maintain strategic relations both with the West and the East. A focus on regional implications, including economic impacts and stability, by the Arab media underlines pragmatic, regionally focused concern that prioritizes stability over ideological alignment. This neutrally and well-balanced reporting was a cultural and political practice in the Arab media to maintain ties with a range of global powers, both Western and Eastern blocs.
This finding is consistent with the corpus of works addressing the role of sociopolitical contexts in shaping media discourse. These investigations noted that "framing in events by media was done in a manner so as to serve the interest of greater geopolitics and economics of their respective regions" (Pomerantsev, 2023). The study further corroborates the fact that media is not just a passive reflector of events but an active participant in shaping public understanding through ideologically driven framing.
Conclusion
Some key findings are summarized below, showing a comparison between representations of the Russia-Ukraine crisis in British and Arab media over the period from June 2022 to April 2023. Significant differences exist between the discourses of media that are molded within the socio-political and cultural contexts in which media entities operate. The aggression, victimization, and moral dichotomies were strong in the British media, notably The Guardian and The Sun, to rhyme with geopolitical Western narratives. Arab media here would refer to Arab News and Gulf News had their coverage balanced with regional implications and humanitarian concerns, reflecting the more detached stand of the Middle East and pragmatic interests in the conflict.
Implications of the Study
Implication for the Understanding of Global Media Practice
The findings of this study increase the relevance of the consideration of sociopolitical contexts in framing media coverage of international conflicts. Media not only reflect events but also actively construct narratives serving the interests of their audiences, whether those are anchored in political ideologies, economic concerns, or regional priorities. These findings reveal that media both mirror and shape public opinion-a reason comparative, cross-cultural media studies are crucial to complete the many perspectives of global issues.
Pedagogical implications for Critical Media Literacy and Cross-Cultural Awareness
This study has important pedagogical implications, specifically with respect to media literacy. It reiterates the need for educators to teach students critical engagement with media representations of global conflicts; it urges educators to enable students to identify the ideological biases embedded in media narratives. Also, the cross-cultural awareness will help one to learn how the same events are framed differently in different regions' media due to a greater influence of local sociopolitical contexts. To this regard, the consumer should be sensitized on what kind of cultural and political environment the media they are consuming operates within, so that they may take a critical stance while developing an understanding of any global conflict.
References
Alyahya, M. (2023). Balancing narratives: Arab media representations of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Media and Society.
Baker, P., Gabrielatos, C., Khosravinik, M., Krzyzanowski, M., McEnery, T., & Wodak, R. (2013). Discourse analysis and media bias: The representation of Islam in the British press. Cambridge University Press.
Brusylovska, O., & Maksymenko, O. (2022). Framing the Kremlin’s narrative: Media strategies in Russian news coverage of the Ukraine crisis. Eastern European Journal of Communication.
Chouliaraki, L. (2021). The digital border: Migration, technology, power. New York University Press.
Entman, R. M. (2004). Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and U.S. foreign policy. University of Chicago Press.
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Polity Press.
Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Routledge.
Fairclough, N. (2013). Language and power (3rd ed.). Longman.
Jørgensen, M., & Phillips, L. (2002). Discourse analysis as theory and method. Sage.
Kuźniar, R. (2023). Geopolitical narratives in media representations of the Ukraine conflict. International Studies Journal.
Latif, A., et al. (2024). Framing democracy: Western media’s portrayal of the Russia-Ukraine war. Discourse Studies.
Mohammed, S. (2023). Media discourse and ideological framing: A study of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Discourse Studies Quarterly.
Najarzadegan, Sahar & Varnosfadrani, Azizollah & Eslami-Rasekh, Abbass. (2017). A Critical Discourse Analysis of Iran and US Presidential Speeches at the UN: The Sociopragmatic Functions. Theory and Practice in Language Studies. 7. 764. 10.17507/tpls.0709.08.
Najarzadegan, S. (2022). The Effect of Learning a CDA Model on Promoting EFL Undergraduates’ Reading Comprehension Ability across Different Proficiency Levels. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 9(4), 75-92. doi: 10.30479/jmrels.2022.15612.1905
Pavlichenko, A. (2022). Polarization in media political discourse: A CDA approach to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Journal of Political Discourse Analysis.
Pomerantsev, P. (2023). Nothing is true and everything is possible: The surreal heart of the new Russia. Faber & Faber.
Selvarajah, K., & Fiorito, M. (2023). Ideological strategies in media coverage of the Russia-Ukraine war: A critical discourse analysis. European Journal of Communication.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Elite discourse and racism. Sage.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2009). Society and discourse: How social contexts influence text and talk. Cambridge University Press.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2015). Discourse and knowledge: A sociocognitive approach. Cambridge University Press.
Wodak, R. (2011). The discourse of politics in action: Politics as usual. Palgrave Macmillan.
Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2015). Methods of critical discourse analysis (3rd ed.). Sage.
Biodata
Falah Abdulhasan Atiyah is a teacher of English at General Directorate of Education of Al Qadisyia, Ministry of Education, Iraq. He has been teaching English to preparatory students for more than 19 years. He got his master degree in Linguistics from University of Pune, India in 2013. He is mainly interested in writing research articles in Critical Discourse Analysis.
E-mail: falahabd405@gmail.com
Sahar Najarzadegan is an assistant professor at English Department, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Isfahan, Iran. She has been teaching English to graduate and undergraduate students for more than 20 years while attending more than 30 workshops concerning teaching and research. She got her Ph.D. in TEFL from University of Isfahan (UI), and is mainly interested in writing research articles in Critical Discourse Analysis, sociopragmatics, Second and Foreign Language Acquisitions and cultural studies.
E-mail: snajarzadegan@gmail.com
Hussein Musa Kadhim is a Professor at English Department, University of Kerbala, Kerbala, Iraq.He has been teaching English to under graduate for 20 years and to post-graduates for 10 years. He got his Ph.D. in Linguistics from University of Pune, India. He is mainly interested in Semantics, Pragmatics, Discourse Analysis, Sociolinguistics and Cognitive linguistics.
E-mail: hussein.musa@uokerbala.edu.iq
Mehdi Vaez-Dalili is an Assistant Professor of TEFL in the Department of English at Azad University of Isfahan (Khorasgan), Isfahan, Iran. His research interests include Second Language Acquisition, Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) and corpus linguistics. His books include News & Media (2004, a collaborative work), News & Views (2010), Learn English News through Videos (2011), and English News Made Simple (2013). He has also published papers in local and international journals.
E-mail: mvaezdalili@yahoo.com
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, Najafabad Iran, Iran. This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0 license). (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by nc/4.0/).
International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 12(51), 2024 
Islamic Azad University of Najafabad
