Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Despite much research on the media coverage of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), the specific language and ideological underpinnings used in this discourse have received little attention. This study compares the discourse surrounding the GERD construction in Egyptian and Ethiopian news sources to identify variations in word choice and underlying biases. Using critical discourse analysis (CDA), the study analyzes two online English news corpora, totalling over a million words across 2655 articles. The analysis involves identifying statistically salient keywords in each corpus and examining their context through a contrastive collocation analysis. The study investigates the data in light of Fairclough’s three-dimensional framework, which considers the text, discourse practice, and social practice, and applies van Dijk’s concept of the ideological square to explore patterns of self-positive and other-negative representation. The findings reveal distinct patterns of bias in the news coverage from both countries. Egyptian news outlets often frame the GERD project as a source of crisis, depicting Ethiopia as violating international law and exacerbating political tensions. In contrast, Ethiopian news sources tend to portray Egypt as dismissive of Ethiopia’s development rights and as monopolizing the Nile’s resources. These discursive strategies reflect a broader trend of media bias, where lexical choices and framing techniques align with national interests and diplomatic stances.
Ayman Mohamed Elsoufy (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: