Metajournalistic Discourse and Reporting Policies on White Nationalism

In 2016 and 2017, several newsrooms presented guidelines for using the term “alt-right” in the wake of events such as the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia (USA) and the US presidential campaign of Donald Trump. This study analyzed metajournalistic discourse regarding the use of the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of communication inquiry Jg. 48; H. 3; S. 429 - 449
Hauptverfasser: Perreault, Gregory, Meltzer, Kimberly
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.07.2024
SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
Schlagworte:
Discourse
Discourse analysis
Journalism
Journalists
Nationalism
Newsrooms
Organizations
Policies
Presidential elections
Right wing politics
United States > US
coverage of hate groups
coverage of hate speech
reporting policies
metajournalistic discourse
journalists as interpretive communities
ISSN:0196-8599, 1552-4612
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In 2016 and 2017, several newsrooms presented guidelines for using the term “alt-right” in the wake of events such as the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia (USA) and the US presidential campaign of Donald Trump. This study analyzed metajournalistic discourse regarding the use of the term “alt-right” including internal newsroom policies and updates to newsroom manuals and externally published public discourse. The analysis tracks how news organizations and academic and trade journalism associations participated in discourse about the use of “alt-right,” and their peers’ policies around use of the term. The study finds that discourse shifted from requiring contextualization of the term in the first wave to requiring journalists to define the term or not use it at all in the second wave that began with the Charlottesville rally. Journalism organizations acknowledged, at times endorsed, and used each other's statements in developing their own understandings as an interpretive community and a community of practice.
Bibliographie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:0196-8599
1552-4612
DOI:10.1177/01968599211072452