This study examines the accountability of assessments in news interview settings on two Arabic networks. It employs a conversation analytic approach, in addition to quantitative analysis to identify the most adopted practices that show participants’ orientation to the accountability of assessments. The data consists of 28 hours of recorded interviews on the Arab television news networks, Aljazeera Al-Arabiya channels. The findings show that interviewers and interviewees adopt different strategies to avoid the accountability of their displayed assessments. Interviewers attribute their assessments either to third parties or to the upshot of interviewees’ answers. Similarly, interviewees introduce accounts before and following their proffered assessments to provide epistemic support to these assessments. Furthermore, interviewers introduce follow-up questions to scrutinize interviewees’ assessments and accounts or seek interviewees’ reaffirmation of these assessments to highlight their accountability.
AbdullahSElareshiM (2015) Building narratives: A study of terrorism framing by Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya TV networks. Arab Media & Society21: 1–14.
2.
AlfahadA (2013) A conversation analysis of aggressiveness and deference in Arabic news interviews. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Leeds, Leeds.
3.
AlfahadA (2015a) Aggressiveness and deference in Arabic broadcast interviews. Journal of Pragmatics88: 58–72.
4.
AlfahadA (2015b) Saudi broadcast interviews: Moving towards aggressiveness. Discourse and Communication9(4): 387–406.
5.
AlfahadA (2016) Professionalism vs. popularity: The shift in ethics of interviewing in arab media. Global Media Journal9(2): 99–113.
6.
Al-MalkiAKauferDIshizakiS, et al. (2012) Arab Women in Arab News. Old Stereotypes and New Media. Doha, Qatar: Bloomsbury Qatar Foundation Publishing.
7.
AntakiC (1994) Explaining and Arguing: The Social Organization of Accounts. London: Sage.
8.
AssadAAldananiAM (2017) Tv news coverage of terrorism phenemenon from the Arab and Western Perspectives from 2011 to 2016. Journal of Media Critiques3(11): 11–20.
9.
AyishMBreslowH (2014) The need for interdisciplinary research of the Arab mass media. Global Media Journal7(2): 57–73.
10.
ClaymanSE (1992) Footing in the achievement of neutrality: The case of news interview discourse. In: DrewPHertitageJ (eds) Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.163–198.
11.
ClaymanSE (2001) Answers and evasions. Language in Society30(3): 403–442.
12.
ClaymanSE (2010) Questions in broadcast journalism. In: FreedAEhrlichS (eds) Why Do You Ask?: The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp.256–278.
13.
ClaymanSE (2016) The nexus of politicians, issue positions, and the sociopolitical landscape. In: RobinsonJ D (ed) Accountability in Social Interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.141–174.
14.
ClaymanSEHeritageJ (2002) The News Interview: Journalists and Public Figures on the Air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15.
CliftR (2016) Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16.
Couper-KuhlenE (2006) Assessing and accounting. In: HoltECliftR (eds) Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, pp.81–119.
17.
DastgeerSGadePJ (2016) Visual framing of Muslim women in the Arab Spring: Prominent, active, and visible. International Communication Gazette78(5): 432–450.
18.
EkströmA (2013) Epistemic positioning and frameworks for participation: Learning to assess objects of craft in teacher education. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction2(4): 277–292.
19.
EkströmM (2015) Political interviews. In: TracyKSandelTIlieC (eds) International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell, pp.1175–1186.
20.
ErikssonG (2011) Follow-up questions in political press conferences. Journal of Pragmatics43(14): 3331–3344.
21.
GoodwinCGoodwinMH (1987) Concurrent operations on talk: Notes on the interactive organization of assesments. Papers in Pragmatics1(1): 1–54.
22.
HeritageJ (1985) Analyzing news interviews: Aspects of the production of talk for an overhearing audience. In van DijkTA (ed.) Handbook of Discourse Analysis. New York, NY: Academic Press, pp.95–119.
23.
HeritageJ (1988) Explanations as accounts: A conversation analytic perspective. In: AntakiC (ed) Analysing Everyday Explanation: A Casebook of Methods. London: Sage, pp.127–144.
24.
HeritageJRaymondG (2005) The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly68(1): 15–38.
25.
HollanderJA (2018) Interactional accountability. In: RismanBJFroyumCScarboroughWJ (eds) The Handbook of the Sociology of Gender. New York, NY: Springer, pp.173–184.
26.
Houtkoop-SteenstraH (1990) Accounting for proposals. Journal of Pragmatics14: 11–124.
27.
HutchbyI (2017) Hybridisation, personalisation and tribuneship in the political interview. Journalism18(1): 101–118.
28.
IsaksenJBrouwerCE (2014) Assessments in outcome evaluation in aphasia therapy: Substantiating the claim. Journal of Interactional Research in Communication Disorders6(1): 71–95.
29.
JacobsenRR (2016) Reformulating the question in US presidential debates: A device for adjusting the question and the subsequent answer to one’s audience. Pragmatics and Society7(3): 391–412.
30.
KimSH (2016) When speakers account for their questions: Ani-prefaced accounts in Korean Conversation. In: RobinsonJD (ed.) Accountability in Social Interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.294–320.
31.
LahlaliEM (2011) Contemporary Arab Broadcast Media. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
LindströmAMondadaL (2009) Assessments in social interaction: Introduction to the special issue. Research on Language & Social Interaction42(4): 299–308.
34.
LindströmJNorrbyCWideC, et al. (2019) Task-completing assessments in service encounters. Research on Language and Social Interaction52(2): 85–103.
35.
MondadaL (2009) The embodied and negotiated production of assessments in instructed actions. Research on Language & Social Interaction24(4): 329–361.
36.
ParryR (2013) Giving reasons for doing something now or at some other time. Research on Language and Social Interaction46: 105–124.
37.
PeräkyläA (1998) Authority and accountability: The delivery of diagnosis in primary health care. Social Psychology Quarterly61: 301–320.
38.
PomerantzAM (1984) Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In: AtkinsonJMHertitageJ (eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.57–101.
39.
RaevaaraL (2011) Accounts at convenience stores: Doing dispreference and small talk. Journal of Pragmatics43(2): 556–571.
40.
RaymondGHeritageJ (2006) The epistemics of social relations: Owning grandchildren. Language in Society35(5): 677–705.
41.
RobinsonJD (2016) Accountability in Social Interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press Oxford.
42.
RomaniukT (2013) Pursuing answers to questions in broadcast journalism. Research on Language and Social Interaction46(2): 144–164.
43.
RughWA (2007) Do national political systems still influence Arab media ?Arab Media and Society2: 1–21.
44.
SakrN (2007a) Approaches to exploring media-politics connections in the Arab world. In: SakrN (ed) Arab Media and Political Renewal: Community, Legitimacy and Public Life. London: I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd, pp.1–12.
45.
SakrN (2007b) Arab Television Today. London: I.B Tauris.
46.
SantosaRBNurkamtoJBaidanN, et al. (2016) Istifham in the stories in Alquran from the perpective of Speech Act Theory. Journal of Arts and Humanities5: 30–39.
47.
ScottMBLymanSM (1968) Accounts. American Sociological Review33: 46–62.
48.
SkovholtKNordenströmEStokoeE (2019) Evaluative conduct in teacher–student supervision: When students assess their own performance. Linguistics and Education50(4): 46–55.
49.
SrebernyA (2000) Television, gender, and democratization in the Middle East. In: ParkMJCurranJ (eds) De-Westernizing Media Studies. New York, NY: Routledge, pp.63–78.
50.
StiversTHayashiM (2010) Transformative answers: One way to resist a questions constraints. Language in Society39(1): 1–25.
51.
WaringHZ (2007) The multi-functionality of accounts in advice giving. Journal of Sociolinguistics11(3): 367–369.
