Human Rights Violation Reporting in Amhara Mass Media Agency: A Critical Discourse Analysis

Abstract

Inspired by Critical Theory and Human Rights Journalism as a conceptual dimension, this study aims to examine the media discourse genres produced from the larger set of language use on how and with what purpose in mind, Amhara Mass Media Agency (AMMA) reporters were reporting human rights violations enacted in Ethiopian institutions. Particularly, it explored the discursive strategies reporters deployed to achieve their communicative goals, examined the representation of human rights violations actors and their actions, and unveiled underlying ideologies of the media or reporters which led them to categorize the actors. To achieve these objectives, the study critically examined news and program texts produced by Amhara Television and Bekur Newspaper. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) was employed as the analytical framework of the study. The finding revealed that five discursive strategies (slanted and/or vague headlines, negative/positive labeling, evidentially, victimization, hyperbolism, and depersonalization) were mainly used to construct polarity as well as social inequality in the texts. Besides, analysis of macrostructure, local meanings, and collocation in the reports of human rights violations indicated that there was ideological positioning which was in favor of actors who belong to the Amhara ethnic group and disrespect the role of others. There was bias in reporting as the reporters aligned themselves towards favoring their in-group while emphasizing the misdeeds of out-groups, such as TPLF and OLF.