Editing Critical discourse analysis (section)

==Methodology==
CDA is an application of [[discourse analysis]]; it is generally agreed that methods from discourse studies, the humanities and social sciences may be used in CDA research. This is on the condition that it is able to adequately and relevantly produce insights into the way discourse reproduces (or resists) social and political inequality, power abuse or domination.<ref>Fairclough, Norman, Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language. Harlow: Longman</ref><ref>Fairclough, Norman, Language and globalization. Oxon: Routledge</ref> Examples of power being used by mainstream media have been identified in the work of Stephen Teo in Australia where he found numerous examples of racism in crime reports of Vietnamese youth. He describes the use of headlines used to control the opinions of readers to see and read about crime using what David Altheide calls fear discourse. CDA does not limit its analysis to specific structures of text or talk, but systematically relates these to structures of the [[Political sociology|sociopolitical]] context. This was further examined by Pamela D Schulz in her book linking Media reporting of Courts in Australia and in western democracies. Her book "Courts and Judges on Trial: Analysing and Managing Discourses of Disapproval" showed a strong connection between political manipulation of media to encourage "tougher sentencing" while at the same time refraining from changing legislation to ensure that it happens.<ref>{{cite book |last1=SCHULZ |first1=PAMELA D |title=Courts and Judges on Trial: Analysing and Managing the Discourse of Disapproval |date=2010 |publisher=LIT VERLAG |location=BERLIN LONDON |isbn=978-3-643-10621-6 |pages=290 |edition=1ST}}</ref> CDA has been used to examine rhetoric in political speech acts, and any forms of speech that may be used to manipulate the impression given to the audience.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Roffee |first=JA |year=2016 |title=Rhetoric, Aboriginal Australians and the Northern Territory intervention: A socio-legal investigation into pre-legislative argumentation |journal=International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy |volume=5|issue=1|pages=131–147 |doi=10.5204/ijcjsd.v5i1.285|doi-access=free }}</ref> However, there have been flaws noted with CDA. For example, it has been said that it is simultaneously too broad to distinctly identify manipulations within the rhetoric, yet is also not powerful enough to appropriately find all that researchers set out to establish.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Roffee |first=JA |year=2014 |title=Synthetic Necessary Truth Behind New Labour's Criminalisation of Incest|journal=Social and Legal Studies|volume=23 |issue=1|pages=113–130 |doi=10.1177/0964663913502068|s2cid=145292798 }}</ref>

Norman Fairclough discussed the term CDA in his book ''Language and Power.'' Fairclough introduced the concepts that are now viewed as vital in CDA such as "discourse, power, ideology, social practice and common sense."<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last1=Guo|first1=Fang|last2=Liu|first2=Ke|date=2016-05-17|title=A Review on Critical Discourse Analysis|journal=Theory and Practice in Language Studies|volume=6|issue=5|pages=1076–1084|doi=10.17507/tpls.0605.23|issn=1799-2591|doi-access=free}}</ref> He argues that language should be analyzed as a social practice through the lens of discourse in both speaking and writing.

Fairclough developed a three-dimensional framework for studying discourse, where the aim is to map three separate forms of analysis onto one another: analysis of (spoken or written) language texts, analysis of discourse practice (processes of text production, distribution and consumption) and analysis of discursive events as instances of socio-cultural practice.<ref name="Fairclough1" /><ref>{{Cite book |title=Language and Power |last=Fairclough |first=Norman |publisher=Longman |year=2001 |isbn=978-0-582-41483-9 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/languagepower00fair }}</ref> Particularly, he combines micro, meso and macro-level interpretation. At the micro-level, the analyst considers various aspects of textual/linguistic analysis, for example syntactic analysis, use of metaphor and rhetorical devices.{{Clarify|date=February 2011}} The meso-level or "level of discursive practice" involves studying issues of production and consumption, for instance, which institution produced a text, who is the target audience, etc. At the macro-level, the analyst is concerned with [[Intertextuality|intertextual]] and interdiscursive elements and tries to take into account the broad, societal currents that are affecting the text being studied.<ref>{{Cite journal |title=Narrative and Discursive Organizational Studies To Text or Context? Endotextual, Exotextual, and Multi-textual Approaches to Narrative and Discursive Organizational Studies |journal=Organization Studies |volume= 27|issue=8 |page=1091 |author1=David Barry |author2=Brigid Carroll |author2-link=Brigid Carroll |author3=Hans Hansen |date=4 May 2006|doi=10.1177/0170840606064568|s2cid=144525452 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |title=Varieties of discourse: On the study of organizations through discourse analysis|last=[[Alvesson, Mats]], Dan Karreman |journal=Human Relations |volume=53|issue=9|pages= 1125–1149 |year=2000 |doi=10.1177/0018726700539002|s2cid=145782636 }}</ref>

[[Teun A. van Dijk]]'s approach to critical discourse analysis combines cognitive theories with linguistic and social theories. Van Dijk uses cognition as the middle layer of a three-layer approach consisting of discourse, cognitive and society. By integrating a cognitive approach, researchers are better able to understand how larger social phenomenon are reinforced through popular, everyday discourse. Critics of this practice point out that his approach focuses on the reproduction of ideologies rather than the transformation.<ref name=":12">{{Cite journal|last=Lin|first=Angel|date=March 2014|title=Critical Discourse Analysis in Applied Linguistics: A Methodological Review|journal=Annual Review of Applied Linguistics|volume=34|pages=213–232|doi=10.1017/S0267190514000087|s2cid=145590995 |issn=0267-1905}}</ref>

[[Ruth Wodak]] has developed a framework based on the systemic collection of sample texts on a topic to better understand the interrelationship of discourses that exist within the field. This framework allows for the discussion and analysis of ideologies involved in a set of discourses. The macro level of analysis is helpful in understanding how macro-structures of inequality persist through discursive processes across multiple sites and texts.<ref name=":12"/>