Data collection

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

96

Internet for visual devices, through which bloggers maximise the (un)willing consent of readers, visitors and other bloggers.

We have also assumed that the motive behind such practice might not be unconnected with either the need to maintain ideological stance, perpetuate status quo of power, position, wealth, resources, etc. or it could be a way to maintain hegemony and ideologies of the ruling class through the Internet opportunity that guarantees free speech.

Based on these reasons, therefore, it is necessary that ideology forms part of the proposed triangular framework for the current study.

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

97

Ideological analysis therefore will involve examining what ideologies are typically associated with such position, so as to defend or legitimise that position by discourse. If

„dominance‟ is associated with a position, for instance, ideological discourse analysis may serve to question or challenge such relationship of dominance in the discourse.

To carry out effective ideological analysis in discourse, the analyst is expected to identify what discourse production processes are involved in expressing positions, which, van Dijk opines, is situated in the social interaction itself. From this situated social interaction, expressions that may be intended or interpreted as signaling social relations like dominance, politeness, solidarity, assistance and so on, would be instantiated, as in the case for pronouns as markers of dominance or politeness.

Van Dijk argues further that cognition or mental models allow for many personal experiences and opinions, which also combine with context constraints, to influence or reproduce discourse. These are exercised in six descriptive ways: self-identity descriptions; activity descriptions; goal descriptions; norm and value descriptions;

position and relation descriptions and resource descriptions. Let us take a brief look at how these factors determine, influence or control discourse structures.

Self-identity description: According to van Dijk (1995: 147), identity answers the questions who are we, where do we come from, what are our properties, values and potentials, and why are we different from others (pronouns pointing to self is emphasised). With these questions answered, then, self-identity descriptions will now include some boundary statements that define our relationship with others; including those who could be admitted into our territory; the criteria for admission, who may immigrate, etc. Van Dijk also observes that self-identity descriptions will generally be

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

98

positive for those who are self - or other-defined because of their more or less permanent, inherent or attributed characteristics, such as those of gender, race, ethnicity, age, religion, language or origin. The group whose identity is threatened, insecure or marginalised (e.g. women, minorities, immigrants, etc) usually reproduce these kinds of identity descriptions in their discourses.

Activity description: Activity description is typical of groups who are identified by what they do. In other words, professionals or activists in their professorial, medical, journalistic, legal or environmental obligations have their ideologies focused on the

„good‟ things members do, and continue to emphasise these in their discourses. For instance, teachers would emphasise literacy or eradication of illiteracy while journalists may claim they fight ignorance through awareness.

Goal description: As in activity description, ideological discourse of groups focuses on the „good‟ goals of their activities. Perhaps, this is the more reason why people like journalists describe themselves as „watchdog of society‟; teachers as „builders of a nation‟; environmentalists as „saviours of environment „; professors as „educating the young‟ and so on. Van Dijk (1995a) opines that such goal descriptions are, by definition, ideological, and not necessarily factual. In other words, they are just the ways members see themselves or want to be seen or evaluated.

Norm and value description: Ideological discourse expresses actions and meanings that involve values and norms, including what is good or bad, just or unjust, legitimate or illegitimate, right or wrong, and what actions and goals trying to respect or realise. For instance, professors and journalists may emphasise their special focus on truth, factuality and reliability in their accounts of the facts. Minorities and women may

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

99

emphasise equality, justice or egalitarianism; corporate managers cherish a liberalised market or free economy, etc.

Position and relation description: Van Dijk(1995a) notices that groups define their identities, activities and goals in relation to other groups. For instance, professors are defined with respect to students, journalists defined with respect to the public or their news agencies, anti-racists defined with respect to racists, feminists defined with respect to chauvinist men, etc. In these types of descriptions, we may expect emphasis on group relations, conflict or negative other presentation.

Resource description: Access to general or specific resources may be the focus of group description. For instance, the minority may emphasise unequal access to valuable social resources like position, respects, jobs, housing, income, equal pay or opportunity and so on. Some social groups are primarily defined in terms of their access or non-access to resources as in “the rich and the poor”; “the literate and the unlettered”;

the “ruler and the ruled”; “the elite”; “the less privileged”; “the homeless”; “the unemployed” and so on.

The above descriptions, therefore, present the analyst with a focus, as the analyst will be concerned with investigating ideological tendencies in all the discourse participants. The discourse analyst is expected to make explicit those implied, taken-for-granted meanings in discourse. In the same way, discursive structures and strategies involved in ideologically based descriptions may be the means through which ideologies reproduce discourses.

Van Dijk (1995: 154) identifies some ways (which can also be called strategies) in which discourse structures enact ideologies. These include: negative lexicalisation,

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

100

hyperbole, compassion move, negative comparison, generalisation, concretisation, alliteration, warning, norm and value violation, presupposition and so on. We expect the critical analytical paradigm, which is also part of the triangular framework proposed in this study, to expose all these in the structures of discourse identifiable in our data. Below are some of the ideologies existent in the world. However, not all of them are utilised in the analysis of the data, as some have been delimited in the study because of their non-relevance to the Middle East discourse, which is the focus in this study.