Deciphering Ideological Representations in Editorials of Two U.S. Quality Newspapers

The United States federal government entered a shutdown due to the ideological dispute between Democrats and Republicans from October 1 through 16, 2013. This paper attempts to elucidate ideological representations through a thorough analysis of editorials in two elite newspapers, the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. In particular, we examined how an in-group and an out-group were formed, and how the formation was reinforced in terms of in-group homogeneity and out-group exclusion, by means of linguistic features such as naming choices, the so-called editorial we, and lexical selections, following van Dijk's (1998) ideological square. The results are as follows: (i) the Wall Street Journal emphasized “their” bad properties more aggressively than the New York Times, while the New York Times emphasized both “their” bad qualities and “our” good qualities in a more moderate way than the Wall Street Journal; (ii) the two strategies of emphasis and mitigation enabled both newspapers to reinforce in-group homogeneity and out-group exclusion: The Wall Street Journal openly framed Republicans as the in-group and Democrats as the out-group, whereas the New York Times posited Americans and Democrats as the in-group, in relation to Republicans. (191)