Discourse as a term generally refers to aspects of conversation or a given text. This relates to the concept of discourse as a form of social practice; the ‘norms’ or ‘knowledge’ within society that are subsequently historically significant. For what was a norm say 50 years ago, is no longer applicable in today’s society…or so we say? Have societal norms changed so drastically over that time? Perhaps it’s more of what society now views as being of greater importance or influence. But who controls the power of what is constituted important?

In this way we need to know how the media acts to reinforce or shape these norms; what effects do media have on the norms of everyday life. For us to properly understand these effects, we need to take a critical standpoint as described in Nigel Fairclough’s assessment ‘Critical Analysis of Media Discourse’. In this article, Farclough draws upon three main aspects in critically analysing ‘media discourse’ or discovering how language is used by the media to represent a certain point of view.

1. Discourse practice: how a text is produced and consumed

2. Text: how the language and form shape each other and hence shape the meaning

3. Socio-cultural practice: how different abstractions of the ‘event’ being described by the media is constitutive of different contexts.

I found this reading very engaging, as it seemed to relate directly to media and everyday life. For example, Fairclough notes how social norms or discourse shapes the way in which we use a given mode of media, he states “properties of socio-cultural practice shape texts, but by way of shaping the nature of the discourse practice- how the text is produced and consumed”. This relates to how new media such as the mobile phone is appropriated into society. Societal etiquette shapes the way in which we use our mobile phone, however not owning or using a mobile phone at all is now somewhat ‘abnormal’; it is contrary to today’s discourse. Similarly, he realises that “a complex dialectic seems to exist between media and the conversational discourse of everyday life”; that is the media is sutured into the normality and ‘care structures’ of our everyday life. This can be seen by example of the phenomenon of reality TV (as we have studied). How social networks are formed and the discourses in those social networks are specific to that media genre.

Fairclough, N. “Critical Analysis of Media Discourse” In Media Discourse London: Arnold, 1995, 53-74