CDA Tools Applied to the Text - Essay Example

Critical Dis Analysis Table of Contents I. Introduction 3 II. CDA Tools Applied to the Chosen Text 3 A. Genre 3 B. Framing 4 C. Foregrounding 5D. Omission 6 E. Discursive Differences 7 F. Intertextuality 7 G. Presupposition 8 H. Insinuation 9 III. Conclusion 9 1References 11 I. Introduction This paper uses the prescribed CDA tools for the analysis of a piece of news. The prescribed tools are employed to analyze the relevant aspects of the news text, from genre to framing, foregrounding, omission, discursive references, intertextuality, presupposition, and insinuation. The chosen text reports on the Greens prescriptions to circumvent the collection of metadata in people’s online and telecommunications messages, in the context of legislation enacted for the purpose (News Limited 2015). II. CDA Tools Applied to the Chosen Text A. Genre The genre is news, and the qualifier is that this is a piece of breaking news. As a piece of news, there is an emphasis on making it appear that this is an objective piece of reporting, sans any political leanings or agenda in terms of social relevance, political or economic relevance. While the title says the prescription is being made by the Greens party, in truth the first paragraph of the article relates the prescription not by the Greens party but by a Greens Senator in Senator Scott Ludlam. Out of the first five paragraphs of the news story, the first three are about the thoughts and words of Senator Ludlam, and out of the fifteen paragraphs that make up the news story, all but four are about the prescriptions of the Senator, while the rest give a background about legislation on retaining such metadata that is pending in the Senate and is currently being debated upon. The news reports that the Senate is leaning towards more intensive metadata retention for longer periods of time. The news article ends with a set of bullet points that summarize how one can avoid their data being retained, from Senator Ludlam. As straightforward news, there is an attempt to make it appear that the facts are the point of the news article, and there is no place for any opinion in it. All of the ideas and thoughts are properly attributed, and those attributions are mainly made to the Greens Senator (News Limited 2015). B. Framing Here the framing is that of a struggle or a battle between the Greens and the rest of the Senate, or between those who are in favor of metadata retention, and those who are against the metadata retention. In terms of Foucault, this framing is in terms of presenting the metadata retention as the point of contention, as a way to present the emergence of a particular kind of solution to a problem related to national security maybe, and to the prevention and arrest of crimes within society. The framing is in terms of polarizing the Senate into two sides, with the side of the Greens implied in their public prescriptions on skirting the metadata retention rules altogether. They are seen as the mavericks and outsiders openly trying to circumvent the proposed law on metadata retention and render that law sterile. The Greens party moreover is doing the prescribing out in the open, in mainstream news, and with the use of a prominent Greens politician as spokesperson and endorser in Senator Ludlam. The framing is further reinforced right in the beginning, where the photo is shown not of Senator Ludlam or a representative of the Greens party, but that of Malcolm Turnbull, and to caption that picture the news article cites his opposition to curb the extent of data retention prescriptions and applications to serious crimes only. This prominent placement of the picture of a popular figure pushing for more extensive metadata retention rather squarely pits the words of Senator Ludlam and the Greens party against the words of those who wish to pass the data retention laws in their extensive form (News Limited 2015; Motion and Leitch 2007). C. Foregrounding The Greens party, Senator Ludlam and their prescriptions to undermine the laws on data retention are highlighted in this news article, and the words of Senator Ludlam in particular are given prominent attention in the first three paragraphs of the news article. Because of the nature of the writing of the news story, where the most important information is placed at the beginning of the news story, it is clear here that these pieces of information are at the core of the news story and what makes it important (News Limited 2015). The placement of the news story in the category of breaking news further gives emphasis to what the Greens party has to say about the metadata retention legislation pending, and the prominent inclusion of the word Greens at the very beginning of the headline makes it clear that this is about the position of the Greens party relative to the piece of legislation that is currently being debated on. There is a minority portion of the news article devoted to putting the words and prescriptions of the Greens party and the Senator’s opinions in the context of a raging debate, and this only serves to highlight and to put into the foreground what the position of the Greens party is on this issue. At the same time, what is put in the background, and given as little mention as possible, is the position of the parties that are for data retention, and here the passing mention of Turnbull in the caption to his picture at the top of the news story is the context in which this rebellious prescription by the Greens party is being made. What is also left in the background are aspects of the debate relating to the positive impact of data retention, why there is a need to retain data for legitimate activities such as government using such metadata to prevent terrorist plots and to go after criminals (Calperin 2015; Tingle 2015). D. Omission There are many things that are being omitted in this news article, and one of those relate to the recent developments with regard to the passage of the bill on metadata. While the focus is on the prescriptions on metadata avoidance, what is not being mentioned is the scope of the proposed metadata retention in detail, the full mechanisms of the retention, why this is being done, who is in charge, what the technical aspects of the retention are, and the like. A scan of the news articles and commentaries on this subject tells us that Senator Ludlam’s prescriptions are not unique or hard to get to, given that the telecommunications and online infrastructures for accessing data, communications and applications are vast and very complex, allowing for many kinds of loopholes and workarounds that essentially defang the new laws already, even without the prescriptions of the Greens party. In this sense what is being omitted too are general prescriptions for skirting the metadata surveillance, through the use of widely-available technologies from social media, and through the use of service providers who operate outside of Australia. The Senator did mention that, but what is omitted from the article is how widely known and pervasive that practice of relying on service providers outside Australian borders is. It turns out it is widely known, and it is almost common knowledge that the news laws are somewhat weak and can be easily sidestepped via common technological aids (News Limited 2015; Bowman 2015). E. Discursive Differences The style all throughout the article is formal and factual, and even the format suggests adherence to conventional formats and styles in news reporting in print, with no outward embellishments save for that picture of Turnbull seriously answering questions in a media interview. The piece is very brief and to the point, consisting of very short paragraphs, and the emphasis is on precisely quoting Senator Ludlam and the agenda of the Greens party that is implied in those words. The agenda is to subvert the metadata gathering process altogether through technological workarounds such as the use of foreign service providers, social media communication, and virtual private networks. The title is also brief and factual, done in a formal style, and with an emphasis on attributing the prescribed actions to the Greens. At the very beginning too, the position of the Green party is presented in a formal style, with the way the debate on the subject matter is introduced in terms of how the new laws violate privacy rights. The use of these concepts in those serious tones reinforces the formal language and the overall formal and carefully worded style of the entire news story. F. Intertextuality One can say that references to technologies that are commonplace but are nevertheless not part of the usual discussions of political news can constitute instance of vertical intertextuality, and that such use requires the reader to switch between reading modes that require technological understanding and reading modes that require looking into the political and social nuances of what the Senator was saying when he prescribed those technological workarounds to metadata collection for Australians. On the one hand there are the technological workarounds, and on the other there are the larger social and political contexts of the prescriptions, that include looking at where the Green party is in the power hierarchy in Australian politics, where the positions of mainstream political parties are with regard to mass surveillance and the use of private information to secure the peace, and where society is in general relative to the positions of the Greens and their more mainstream colleagues in the Senate. On the other hand, elements of horizontal intertextuality are also apparent in the way the news story made allusions to the position of Turnbull and his colleagues, and gives a flavor to the discussions by introducing horizontal contexts such as privacy rights and the political bipartisan atmosphere surrounding the support that has been generated for legislation in favor of metadata collection. The use of horizontal intertextual contexts imparts an atmosphere of being an insider to the political culture in Australia by the news organization, and provides deep and adequate contexts to the outward technical nature of the advice on how to go around the metadata laws through technological fixes (News Limited 2015). G. Presupposition The news article makes several presuppositions, chief among them that the reading public is aware of and is conversational and proficient in the technologies that are mentioned. This means not just an adequate grasp of social media messaging tools like Facebook and Twitter messaging, but also of more complex technological tools like virtual private networks. The article also presupposes some basic understanding of the political landscape of Australia, where the Greens are relative to the power structure in Australia, and what their present prescriptions imply with regard to the power struggle in the Australian Senate. An insider is presupposed to understand the Greens’ minority and marginal power in Australian politics, and read into the news this aspect of the pronouncements as that of a marginal power trying to shake up the mainstream by prescribing unconventional and anti-establishment moves to thwart data collection initiatives made law (News Limited 2015; Cameron 2001). H. Insinuation The insinuation from the pronouncement of the Senator is that the mainstream forces are bent on violating the privacy rights of ordinary Australians, and that therefore the proper conduct is to try and go around the laws in order to safeguard those privacy laws. The insinuation too is that going with local Australian businesses is bad for privacy rights, and that one is better off going with foreign companies when it comes to getting online messaging services in comparison to local ones (News Limited 2015). III. Conclusion The preceding analysis brings out many hidden aspects of the texts that relate to the power structure in Australian politics, what the new laws on metadata collection imply for privacy rights in Australia, what the limits of data collection and surveillance are, and the complex and shifting technological contexts of discussions on political and civil rights, privacy rights, and political power play in Australia. The presentation of the news too, outwardly formal and devoid of bias, shows the selection of a perspective that implies addressing an audience of insiders in Australian politics, playing up the anti-establishment role of the Greens that can only be fully grasped by someone in the know about where the Greens stand in the power structure of Australia and what the pronouncements mean in that context (News Limited 2015). 1 References Bowman, C. (2015). Australia’s New Mandatory Data Retention Law. The National Law Review. [online]. Available at: http://www.natlawreview.com/article/australia-s-new-mandatory-data-retention-law [accessed 4/16/2015]. Calperin, E. (2015). Data Retention Law Passes in Australia, but the Fight Isn’t Over. Electronic Frontier Foundation. [online]. Available at: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/04/data-retention-law-passes-australia-fight-isnt-over [accessed 4/16/2015]. Cameron, D. (2001). Identity, difference, and power locating social relations in spoken discourse. Working with spoken discourse. London: Sage Publications. Motion, J. and Leitch, S. (2007). A toolbox for public relations: The oeuvre of Michel Foucault. Elsevier Science Direct/ Public Relations Review 33. News Limited (2015). Greens offer tips to avoid metadata. news.com.au. [online]. Available at: http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/metadata-laws-go-before-senate/story-e6frfku9-1227275709751 [accessed 4/16/2015]. Tingle, L. (2015). How to get around the metadata laws and leak- to me. Financial Review. [online]. Available at: http://www.afr.com/news/politics/how-to-get-around-the-metadata-laws-and-leak--to-me-20150325-1m74io [accessed 4/16/2015]. Read More