An Investigation of Discourse Related to Gaza Strip in pro-Palestine and pro-Israel Media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the main functions of language is to allow its users to represent reality and information. We could argue that representation of reality might be influenced and, on some occasions, manipulated reversely by the personal interests and perspectives of interpreters involved and there will always be competition among groups over what is to be taken as the correct, appropriate, or preferred representation. Drawing on the two groups of news reports from the two leading Iranian and American newspapers which have been reported to have different views towards the Gaza crisis, this study aims at investigating the discourse related to Gaza Strip in pro-Israel and pro-Palestine media. The data were analysed following Hallidayan Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL). The results of Independent Samples t-test did not show significant differences in the frequency and use of the six process types. However, each group of news reports represented the crisis differently and assigned different roles to the parties involved in the crisis. One possible explanation is that these ways of representation of the issues in the Gaza Strip on the parts of the news reporters could be influenced by their ideologies and the dominant views of the sociopolitical context in which the discourse has been produced. The present study is another testimony that brings to light the importance of the notion of context in composition courses.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".