Negotiating the middle: the construction of CAFTA-DR through discourse in the United States and Costa Rica

This dissertation explores the ways in which the broader ideological positions of neoliberalism and “socialism for the 21st century” pressure the discourse of CAFTA-DR in the U.S. and Costa Rica. Through a frame analysis of mainstream newspapers “of record,” The New York Times in the U.S. and La Nación in Costa Rica, along with independent and campaign discourse in Costa Rica, substantial reflection, negotiation, and rejection of the discourses of neoliberalism and “socialism for the 21st century” was found. The discourse of the Times largely reflected the discourse of neoliberalism, and La Nación largely echoed the NY Times’ framing. The Costa Rican discourse was more nuanced than the Times, illustrating the effect of both national cultural, and broader ideological pressures from below. Reflections of neoliberal discourse were found in La Nación’s and the “yes” campaign’s framing of CAFTA-DR, as both sources constructed the agreement as progress and advancement, and good for Costa Rican consumers. Negotiation of neoliberal and “socialism for the 21st century” discourses was also detected, with La Nación and the “yes” campaign negotiating a middle position by muting the strong individual rhetoric of neoliberalism and instead using more popular imagery of the “people” and “families.” The discourse of “socialism for the 21st century” was also rejected, as the social movement in the street was constructed negatively, framed as social disorder and tied to notorious, foreign “communist” actors such as Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro. The independent media and the “no” campaign framing of CAFTA-DR through calls to, and images of, the social movement in the streets, reflected the more popular discourse of solidarity and participation that is encapsulated by “socialism for the 21st century.” Both oppositional sources, however, balanced this reflection with a negotiated position that incorporated institutional resolution of CAFTA-DR (through the referendum, the legislature, etc…) and called for “free” trade with the United States. Despite this negotiation, evidence of a rejection of the strong neoliberal discourse of individualism was seen, as a main argument against CAFTA-DR was that it would benefit only a few, transnational and local capitalists.Ph.D.Includes bibliographical referencesby Kristin A. Comefor

The Propaganda Model and Intersectionality: Integrating Separate Paradigms

International audienceThe world is currently witnessing a revitalisation of the right and of authoritarian political tendencies. Right-wing forces across the globe have been able to push misogynist, homophobic and xenophobic discourses into the mainstream of politics and media. Whilst these developments have been fuelled by the neoliberal economic programmes unrolled since the 1970s, sexism and racism have always been anchored within the structures of real existing capitalism. This suggests, then, that many of the societal issues we are encountering today are rooted in structural disadvantage and oppression pertaining not only to economics and class but also to gender, race and ethnicity. Yet, approaches in Communication Studies and Cultural Studies have often engaged in separate interrogations of media misrepresentations in relation to either class and economics, or gender and/or race. On the other hand, intersectional scholarship has long highlighted how these societal spheres are interconnected and should thus be researched simultaneously. The Herman-Chomsky Propaganda Model constitutes the leading analytical tool to theorize and investigate media bias. The following contributions will conceptualize and illustrate how the PM relates to intersectional scholarship and societal structures. This will be done on the basis of theoretical elaborations and empirical case studies as well as broader discussions of the politics within the disciplines of Communications Studies and Cultural Studies. It will be demonstrated that the PM can be used to unveil interlocking media biases and misrepresentations deriving from parallel societal discriminations including classism, sexism and racism