The paper examines 54,580 articles published from 12 December 2014 to 15 May 2023 on the right-wing news and current affairs website www.opindia.com through a corpus-assisted discourse-historical approach in three stages. First, it looks at the entire dataset using corpus-based keyword analysis to gauge the relative prominence of four node words Hindu(s) and Muslim(s) in OpIndia’s content. Second, it analyses a down-sampled set of 696 articles and identifies 42 prominent themes shaping the discourse surrounding the nodes. Finally, examining a set of 36 articles further down-sampled and analysing the discursive strategies through the discourse-historical approach demonstrates that OpIndia perpetuates a perniciously polarising discourse demonising Muslims. Also, it reaffirms that the formative rift on which the discourse thrives is – the Hindu nationalist versus secular imaginations of the nation.
BakerP (2006) Using Corpora in Discourse Analysis. Continuum Discourse Series. London and New York: Continuum.
2.
BakerPGabrielatosCKhosraviNikM, et al (2008) A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK Press. Discourse & Society19(3): 273–306.
3.
BakerPGabrielatosCMcEneryT (2013) Discourse Analysis and Media Attitudes: The Representation of Islam in the British press. New York: Cambridge University Press.
4.
BakerPLevonE (2015) Picking the right cherries? A comparison of corpus-based and qualitative analyses of news articles about masculinity. Discourse & Communication9(2): 221–236.
5.
BenardS (2012) Cohesion from conflict: Does intergroup conflict motivate intragroup norm enforcement and support for centralized leadership?Social Psychology Quarterly75(2): 107–130.
6.
BensonJ (2023) Democracy and the epistemic problems of political polarization. American Political Science Review. Epub ahead of print 3 November. DOI: 10.1017/S0003055423001089.
7.
BhatPChadhaK (2020) Anti-media populism: Expressions of media distrust by right-wing media in India. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication13(2): 166–182.
8.
BrezinaV (2016) Collocation networks: Exploring associations in discourse. In: BakerPEgbertJ (eds) Triangulating Methodological Approaches in Corpus Linguistic Research. New York and Abingdon: Routledge, pp.90–107.
9.
BrezinaV (2018) Statistical choices in corpus-based discourse analysis. In: TaylorCMarchiA (eds) Corpus Approaches to Discourse: A Critical Review. Abingdon and New York: Routledge, pp.259–280.
10.
BrezinaVPlattW (2023) #LancsBox X (v2.1.0). Lancaster: Lancaster University. Available at: https://lancsbox.lancs.ac.uk (accessed 6 July 2023).
11.
BrüggemannMMeyerH (2023) When debates break apart: Discursive polarization as a multi-dimensional divergence emerging in and through communication. Communication Theory33(2–3): 132–142.
12.
BrymanA (2012) Social Research Methods, 4th edn.New York: Oxford University Press.
13.
ChadhaKBhatP (2022) Alternative news media and critique of mainstream journalism in India: The case of OpIndia. Digital Journalism10(8): 1283–1301.
14.
DaltonRJ (1987) Generational change in elite political beliefs: The growth of ideological polarization. The Journal of Politics49(4): 976–997.
15.
DasDWhithamMM (2021) Framing the collective “we” and the antagonistic “other” through metacontrast: Intragroup homogenization and intergroup polarization in the Hindu nationalist movement. Sociological Forum36(3): 689–711.
16.
GabrielatosC (2018) Keyness analysis: Nature, metrics and techniques. In: TaylorCMarchiA (eds) Corpus Approaches to Discourse: A Critical Review. Abingdon and New York: Routledge, pp.225–258.
17.
GoldhahnDEckartTQuasthoffU (2012) Building large monolingual dictionaries at the Leipzig Corpora Collection: From 100 to 200 languages. In: CalzolariNChoukriKDeclerckT, et al. (eds) Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’12), Istanbul, Turkey, May 2012, pp.759–765. Paris: European Language Resources Association (ELRA). Available at: http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2012/pdf/327_Paper.pdf (accessed 13 July 2023).
18.
IyengarSSoodGLelkesY (2012) Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly76(3): 405–431.
19.
JaffrelotC (2021) Modi’s India: Hindu Nationalism and the Rise of Ethnic Democracy (trans. SchochC). Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
20.
KakwaniDKunchukuttanAGollaS, et al (2020) IndicNLPSuite: Monolingual corpora, evaluation benchmarks and pre-trained multilingual language models for Indian languages. In: CohnTHeYLiuY (eds) Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2020, Online, November 2020, pp.4948–4961. Stroudsburg: Association for Computational Linguistics. Available at: https://aclanthology.org/2020.findings-emnlp.445 (accessed 13 July 2023).
21.
KilgarriffA (2009) Simple maths for keywords. In: MahlbergMGonzález-DíazVSmithC (eds) Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics Conference (CL2009), Liverpool, UK, 20–23 July 2009. Lancaster: UCREL, Lancaster University. Available at: https://ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/publications/cl2009/171_FullPaper.doc (accessed 13 July 2023).
22.
KubinEvon SikorskiC (2021) The role of (social) media in political polarization: A systematic review. Annals of the International Communication Association45(3): 188–206.
23.
LaymanGCCarseyTMHorowitzJM (2006) Party polarisation in American politics: Characteristics, causes, and consequences. Annual Review of Political Science9: 83–110.
24.
McCartyN (2019) Polarization: What Everyone Needs to Know. New York: Oxford University Press.
25.
McCoyJRahmanTSomerM (2018) Polarization and the global crisis of democracy: Common patterns, dynamics, and pernicious consequences for democratic polities. American Behavioral Scientist62(1): 16–42.
26.
McCoyJSomerM (2019) Toward a theory of pernicious polarization and how it harms democracies: Comparative evidence and possible remedies. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science681(1): 234–271.
27.
PalysT (2008) Purposive sampling. In: GivenLM (ed.) The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc., pp.697–698.
28.
PattonMQ (2014) Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice, 4th edn.Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
29.
RaysonP (2020) Corpus analysis of key words. In: ChapelleCA (ed.) The Concise Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp.320–326.
30.
RichardsonJEWodakR (2009) The impact of visual racism: Visual arguments in political leaflets of Austrian and British far-right parties. Controversia6(2): 45–77.
31.
SahooN (2019) Hindu nationalism and political polarization in India. In: CarothersTO’DonohueA (eds) Democracies Divided: The Global Challenge of Political Polarization. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, pp.93–125.
32.
SinhaS (2021) ‘Strong leaders’, authoritarian populism and Indian developmentalism: The Modi moment in historical context. Geoforum124: 320–333.
33.
SomerMMcCoyJ (2019) Transformations through polarizations and global threats to democracy. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science681(1): 8–22.
34.
TajfelHBilligMGBundyRP, et al (1971) Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology1(2): 149–178.
35.
TyagiASenA (2020) Love-jihad (Muslim sexual seduction) and ched-chad (sexual harassment): Hindu nationalist discourses and the ideal/deviant urban citizen in India. Gender, Place & Culture27(1): 104–125.
36.
van der VeerP (1996) Religious Nationalism: Hindus and Muslims in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
37.
WodakR (2001) The discourse-historical approach. In: WodakRMeyerM (eds) Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage Publications Ltd, pp.63–94.
