Abstract
Past literature on the “protest paradigm” has acknowledged that power plays a role in negative media coverage toward protests, but lacks research that specifically analyzes the mechanisms by which power is exerted through discourse. This paper argues that the protest paradigm theory would benefit from a deeper examination of the power relations between media discourse and other institutional discourses. As a case study, a comparative critical discourse analysis of university statements and news coverage about the 2024 Pro-Palestine student protests was conducted to examine how both discourses evolved in relation to each other over time. Findings reveal that universities had more negative mentions about the protests than the media did, and most of the invalidating news coverage found reflected the institutions’ attempts at invalidating the protests. It suggests that comparative discourse analysis can trace how the dialogic relationship consisting of the media’s multivoicedness and institutions’ strategic discourse enables the protest paradigm.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.