Intertextuality as a Catalyst for Ideology Formation: A Study of Media Discourse Dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article investigates how intertextuality in media discourse works as an ideological catalyst. It explores how discursivity and intertextuality in media discourse permeate all levels of society and shape the social and political ideologies of the readers. Media discourse producers are both politicians and reporters. The article investigates how they use language as a manipulating tool. The article also discovers how intertextuality is created in media discourse by clipping specific linguistic elements of different discourses and then forging them together for effect. Four Pakistani English daily newspapers have been analyzed which were selected through non-probability sampling method. The study is qualitative in nature and spreads over six months that is from March 2013 to August 2013. The tenets of critical discourse analysis (CDA) were employed as the main research tool. For understanding the linguistic aspects, Fairclough’s (1995) idea of texts and genres was used and for interpreting the contextual use of language, Halliday’s ideas of field, tenor and mode were incorporated. The analyses revealed how politicians as well as reporters instill tacit ideas into the minds of their addressees which blur and downplay their thinking pattern and entice them to think and behave the way these discourse producers want them to.
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 | 0.000 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".