Search published articles


Showing 2 results for Critical Discourse Analysis

Yaser Bagheri,
Volume 25, Issue 96 (3-2025)
Abstract

Introduction: Over the past two decades in Iran, the articulation of concepts related to social welfare has led to a reduction in the concept of social protection. This specific understanding of social protection has created a discursive barrier to comprehending changes in the international discourse on social protection. The main issue addressed in this research is understanding the nature and reasons behind the dominance of this particular interpretation of social protection.
Method: This study employs a qualitative research method, utilizing Fairclough's critical discourse analysis as the central technique for data analysis. The research is divided into two main sections. In the first section, written and oral interviews are used to understand the dominance of the prevailing discourse. In the discourse analysis section, document collection, interviews with key individuals, and qualitative content analysis are utilized.
Findings: The established discourse in Iran is examined through Fairclough’s four stages (2012). The first stage focuses on the conceptual misinterpretation of "social protection," equating it with social assistance. Subsequently, the hidden barriers to addressing this issue are identified, and the roles of the Comprehensive Social Welfare System Law and publications by pension funds are discussed. The third stage examines the factors contributing to the functionality of this discourse for social regulation. Finally, efforts to change the discourse are considered.
Discussion: This approach has resulted in insurance organizations being excluded from the conceptual realm of social protection and the disregard of important emerging international social protection discourse over the past two decades. This study aims to identify the regulatory factors of the dominant discourse in the welfare domain, paving the way for a transition from it.

Saeid Gholami, Atoosa Modiri, Ali Tayebi,
Volume 25, Issue 97 (7-2025)
Abstract

Introduction:  This study examines how Iranian media shape the discourse of the Right to the City, questioning whether they function as tools for public awareness or instruments of social control. Recognizing the growing role of media in urban governance, the study applies Norman Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to explore how official media, independent platforms, and civil society activists construct competing narratives around urban rights and citizen participation.
Method: Using Fairclough’s three-level CDA framework—textual, discursive, and social context analysis—the study analyzes 182 media texts from 2001 to 2021. These texts, drawn from state-controlled and independent outlets, were purposefully selected to reflect  divergent approaches to urban discourse. The analysis focuses on language use, ideological framing, and the broader political context shaping representations of urban rights.
Findings: The results show a clear division between media types. Official outlets emphasize “public order” and “social stability,” framing urban protests as threats and reinforcing a security-oriented narrative. In contrast, independent media and civil society use justice-based language—e.g., “social justice,” “citizen participation”—to promote inclusive governance. Digital platforms further amplify these alternative voices, providing space for public dialogue and activism.
Discussion: Media discourse on urban rights in Iran reflects broader power dynamics. State media reproduce hegemonic narratives aligned with government policy, while independent platforms act as counter-hegemonic agents promoting civic engagement. The study emphasizes the transformative role of digital media and calls for policy reforms, media pluralism, and stronger citizen participation to support equitable urban development.


Page 1 from 1     

© 2025 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Social Welfare Quarterly

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb