T HE METHODOLOGY OF ANALYZING DOCUMENTS

After having outlined the basic concept of documents as actors I now elaborate how to analyze these documents. In doing so I draw from Lindsay Prior's three analytical stages (Prior, 2003, 2008a, 2008b). Altogether I present three different analytical stages that are partly interrelated, partly complementary and consecutive: the constitution of the field, documents in action and the textual content. I build the subsequent analysis according to these three analytical stages. In order to conceptually frame my research and to constitute the discursive field in question I apply the first analytical stage:

constituting the field. The second stage, documents in action, will be applied in order to reveal the identity behind those organizations and entities that published the documents.

Step three finally focuses on the content of the documents and scrutinizes structure and subject. However, as the research questions rather focus on research frame (as in who is included) and the content (as in what is included) and not necessarily so much on the identity of the documents, I also concentrate my analysis on the first and third analytical stage. Nevertheless, in the following I elaborate briefly all three methodological stages.

4.3.1 Constituting the field

In order to enter the field of particular organized actors in which those actors publish documents that express discursive practices regarding labor migrants in Qatar I first need to detect these actors and disclose who in fact participates in the discourse around

35 labor migrants. Only after doing so I am in the position to identify which documents actually serve as appropriate sources of information that require detailed scrutiny. In order to identify the field, I follow Prior’s suggestion to study the context in which were published (Prior, 2003, p. 67), and who they refer to (Prior, 2003, pp. 121-122).

The context in which documents appear needs to be explained as otherwise documents as such can only be reduced to the information they contain (Prior, 2003, p. 67). The context is constituted by social relationships of three different kinds of actors:

documents, human actors and organizations. Therefore, the links between the three types of actors are important to reveal in order to understand what these relationships characterize (Prior, 2008a, p. 829). An analysis of how different parties interpret, recruit or refer to specific documents in action provides answers regarding these relationships (Prior, 2003, p. 67).

After elaborating the situational framework of particular documents it is appropriate to focus on the information that the documents contain. The content, however, can be studied from different perspectives and with various methods that generate diverse results. Here I want to highlight the benefits of studying the references rather than the meaning of words. The fact that a number of references regarding a particular issue in a document exist can be very insightful, especially as references are enumerable with the help of simple content analysis. Displaying how some documents make more references about certain instances than others might reveal important background information about initial intentions (Prior, 2003, pp. 114-115). However, as some authors might use the same references but with different intentions, references should never be considered without the context in which they appear (Prior, 2003, p. 122). Here I have demonstrated how to identify and map the actors that constitute the field. After the context is established one can proceed to the next step in which the actual documents of the actors in question move into the center of inquiry.

4.3.2 Documents in action

The next step includes a focus on the function of documents and their content. As already noted, documents appear as actors only when considered against the background of a network of action in which different types of actors interact with another.

When documents enter these networks, they do so in various forms. Whether the text is presented in a shape of a fictional book, a scientific report or legislation, certain forms affect the reader in different ways (Prior, 2003, p. 103). However, the way a document is perceived by its consumers is based on a relational interaction between actors that

36 define and construct the meaning of a particular type of a document (Prior, 2008b, p.

485). Whether certain parties acknowledge the given text as a serious report conducted by academics or perceive it as a non-scientific column expressing the author's opinion matters. Even though both texts may contain the same content, only the academic text is generally accepted as a “neutral” description of an event while the opinion piece represents more of a subjective perspective. Thus, the format of a document already imposes a certain function to it and shapes the way it is perceived by those who interact with it (Prior, 2003, p. 66).

While the analysis of the format of a document can be revealing, it is furthermore important to consider the way a document is recruited and manipulated by particular stakeholders within a network of action. Actors within an organizational setting tend to form alliances with documents in order to justify actions that follow own interests (Prior, 2003, p. 67). These documents can even be used to create new identities or establish events by intentionally steering the discourse into a direction following the organization's agenda. Therefore, analyzing the format of a document and scrutinizing its function within a network of action in which certain organized actors react to documents explains why particular actions were exercised. However, this does not mean that every document provokes an action. Some organizations might prefer to refrain from actions that are based on the existence of a document as otherwise a reaction would be perceived as disadvantageous for the stakeholder's interest (Prior, 2003, p. 66).

4.3.3. Textual content

As this study primarily includes written documents published by organized entities I mainly focus on words and structure of a document. Beyond that I also consider images, charts and graphs. Here I am especially interested in the arrangements of different parts and who the author intents to address and how the author structures the reader (Prior, 2003, p. 143). Here it is revealing to scrutinize the main ideas and disclose their argumentation, development and attempt of persuasion (Rapley, 2007, p. 117). In order to do so, one needs to question the source of data that supports the argument. What kind of data exist and how reliable and valid are the points that were made on the basis of the existing data? Language and narration style certainly plays a role when doing so. The way the author presents him or herself indicates which relationship the drafter built up to the text and to the reader of the text (Prior, 2003, pp. 142-143).

I have now explained why documents are an important source for scientific research and

37 how this source can be used to generate answers. In the following, I apply the here elaborated ways of dealing with documents to my research. I divide the analyses into two parts. The first part (chapter 4.5) determines the field by extracting important actors that participate in the general discourse. Here I study referenced actors that appear in the context of labor migration and the World Cup 2022. I then proceed with a more thorough analysis of the context of these actors, which generates further knowledge regarding the role of participation in the discourse (chapter 4.6). This stage does not only identify crucial actors; it also indicates who to focus on in order to search for the actual documents that constitute the discourse. Part two of my analysis finally scrutinizes the documents whose authors have been determined in the previous part.

Here I study single documents in depths by focusing on the format, the content and the references.