Amanda Rose Lanham Potts Bachelor of Arts, Master of Applied Linguistics At arm's length: Methods of investigating constructions of the 'other' in American disaster and disease reporting Lancaster University, Department of Linguistics and English Language Submitted fo r PhD by Research, December 2013 ProQuest Number: 11003805 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a com plete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 11003805 Published by ProQuest LLC(2018). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C ode Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 This thesis was submitted in fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy [Linguistics]. This work has not been submitted for any other degree or award at this or any other university or educational establishment. This thesis is the result of my own independent work and investigation. Other sources are acknowledged by explicit references, and a list of these is appended. The views expressed are my own. Amanda Potts At arm's length: Methods of investigating constructions of the 'other' in American disaster and disease reporting Amanda Rose Lanham Potts, Bachelor of Arts, Master of Applied Linguistics Thesis submitted for PhD by Research, December 2013 Department of Linguistics and English Language, Lancaster University Abstract This thesis is a corpus-based critical discourse analysis of social actor construal in media discourse of major American press publications, 1981-2009. Analysis is based upon two custom-collected corpora: a 36,736,679-word corpus of reporting on Hurricane Katrina, spanning approximately one year of coverage; and a 161,144,924-word corpus of AIDS/HIV reporting, published over the course of nearly three decades. I detail common attribution, argumentation, and predication strategies associated with the most frequent nomination strategies in both corpora, as well as investigating construal via topoi and metaphorical representation of actors and actions. Matched analyses are performed over the course of the thesis, enabling me to: a) uncover common characteristics of discourses of moral panic and risk society in both Katrina and AIDS/HIV reporting, and b) refine a generalizable method of analysing high- frequency items in large corpora varying in word count, diachrony, and topicality. To this end, I propose a reproducible method of downsampling results called proportional semantic collocation, by which a researcher might quantitatively determine salient categories of semantic preference for a given search term, and use these indicators for close, qualitative analysis. In close analyses of my corpora, shared discursive strategies and representation patterns characterised both people affected by Katrina and people with AIDS. These included: nearly total lack of agency; the construal of threat to the in-group, e.g. through the topos of numbers; and highly frequent association with additional othered groups (or 'deviancy doubling'). An additional pattern noted throughout the thesis has been identified as 'social sequestering', or a segregation of certain othered groups into risk or moral panic categories, typified by discourses creating distance or dissuading reader identification with these groups. In this way, major American newspaper publications are found to perpetuate an us/them dichotomy, encouraging social distance to protect the majority group from social panic. Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Paul Baker, who is my steadiest supporter and greatest role model. He is a wonderful mentor who has showed me how to express myself through research, demonstrating that it is possible to be both passionate and impartial. Many of the opportunities that I have been given are owed directly to Paul's recommendation and reputation, and I feel certain that I have thrived under his supervision in a way that I could not have done working with anyone else. I also owe a debt of gratitude to two people who made the methods used here possible. Without the excellent corpus analysis tools and technical support provided by Andrew Hardie and Paul Rayson, I might still be wrangling my corpora these three years on. I appreciate their talent, their dedication to their craft, and their patience in lending so much assistance to so many bourgeoning corpus linguists, myself included. The Department of Linguistics and English Language at Lancaster University has been an ideal environment in which to grow as a researcher, and I was fortunate to be surrounded by so many imminent and gracious academics during my degree. I would particularly like to express my appreciation to Jonathan Culpeper, Mick Short, Greg Myers, and Veronika Roller, who have all kindly dedicated time to help me to become a better teacher and, in turn, made me a better learner. I would also like to thank my examiners, Gerlinde Mautner, Elena Semino, and Rosamund Moon, who inspired me throughout the process of writing this thesis, and whose comments have greatly refined the final product. Receiving feedback and encouragement from these brilliant women is a memory that I will always treasure. Finally, I express my appreciation to the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences at Lancaster University for the award of a research scholarship which enabled me to undertake this degree, and for their travel fund, which helped me to present and receive feedback on earlier iterations of this work. I have never felt so fully supported; this work is the product of an idyllic university, a generous faculty, a vibrant department, an inspiring staff, and an understanding partner, family, and circle of friends. I am so lucky. Contents Chapter 1: Introduction ..................................................................................................................1 1.1 Orientation ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Research Questions .................................................................................................................. 2 1.3 Key terms.................................................................................................................................. 3 1.3.1 Discourse ......................................................................................................................... 3 1.3.2 Ideology ...........................................................................................................................4 1.3.3 Media/Press....................................................................................................................4 1.3.4 Identity ............................................................................................................................ 5 1.3.5 Race................................................................................................................................. 6 1.3.6 Social class .......................................................................................................................6 1.3.7 Sexuality ..........................................................................................................................7 1.4 Hurricane Katrina .................................................................................................................... 7 1.4.1 The 'catastrophic' event .................................................................................................7 1.4.2 Social Profile: New Orleans before and after Katrina ...................................................8 1.4.3 The role of the media ................................................................................................... 10 1.4.4 Towards a critical analysis of Hurricane Katrina .......................................................11 1.5 HIV/AIDS................................................................................................................................ 12 1.5.1 A brief overview of HIV ................................................................................................ 12 1.5.2 Social impact ................................................................................................................. 14 1.5.3 Social stigma ................................................................................................................. 15 1.6 Rationale for study ................................................................................................................. 17 1.7 Structure of thesis...................................................................................................................19 1.8 Summary................................................................................................................................. 19 Chapter 2: Overview of theory and literature ......................................................................... 20 2.1 Media Discourse .....................................................................................................................20 2.1.1 The Socialized Selection of News ................................................................................21