Leon Barkho’s research while affiliated with University of Sharjah and other places

The aim of this article is to use one central assumption of Wittgenstein’s philosophy – language games – to review some important aspects of communication and language issues that typically have arisen in the aftermath of the wars in Ukraine and Gaza. I draw specifically on a critical inquiry of purposefully selected samples of discursive and linguistic practices accompanying the war in Ukraine and the occupation of its territory by Russia, and the war in Gaza and the occupation of Palestinian territories by Israel. References will also be made to the types of language games used by mainstream western media to categorize other wars and occupations discursively and socially, such as those of Iraq, Yemen and Afghanistan. I argue that the use of language is crucial for the understanding and representation of these wars and occupations, and a cause of failure in intercultural interaction. The central argument is as follows: While language games have different senses and not all people attach the same meaning to them, in case of conflict and controversy, those with power attach additional or different interpretations to them in a way they think is reasonable to change or at least rearrange their meanings. According to Wittgenstein’s deliberations of language games, the meaning of each of the various linguistic utterances, like words, sentences or symbols, is defined in terms of its setting and use. To unravel how and why certain linguistic practices are reinforced, and others are thwarted, the article supplements Wittgenstein’s deliberations of language with Hollihan and Baaskes’ definition of rhetorical source credibility, Thomas Hobbes’ ‘Leviathan discourse’ and Foucault’s notion of discourse and power.

This chapter serves as a general introduction to the Handbook of Applied Journalism: Theory and Practice. It shows that the attempt to conceptualize and understand journalism is not without challenges. First, there are diverse disciplines and paradigms all striving to operationalize the practice of journalism. Second, there is a clash of perspectives among journalism scholars about journalism both as a concept and as practice. The volume is an attempt to shed light on how journalism is conceptualized and understood as practice. Conceptual underpinnings are reviewed and discussed, but the scope of the volume focuses on understanding the practice of journalism and how it works in different regions and cultures. Thus, the handbook’s four parts attempt to explain how journalism is conceptualized and understood as practice. Part One titled Conceptual Foundations elaborates on notions defining journalism and journalism practice, drawing on journalism theories and the world of professionals. Titled Journalism Scholarship and Journalism Practice, Part Two takes off from the previous conceptual foundations to explore possible bridges to cross the chasm between theory and practice and then provide a host of rules, samples, and practices of how to do so. Part Three, titled Regions and Cultures, spans different continents and covers the culture and practice of journalism in 15 different countries. In Part Four, titled The Practitioner World, journalism practitioners present their own experiences of journalism as practice and the relevance of journalism as scholarship to their profession.

This introduction chapter presents Part Two titled Journalism Scholarship and Journalism Practice. The content, comprising seven separate chapters, explores how best to bridge the chasm between journalism as theory and journalism as practice. The part elaborates on the debate about the conceptualization of journalism as a profession and the features that make it distinct from other professions. It starts with a survey of journalism practice literature in major scholarly journals. It offers an overview of an effective toolkit designed to assist journalists to provide more informed coverage of Muslims and Islam. It discusses the repercussions of emotional labor on journalism as a profession. Other topics touched upon include how to build bridges linking theory to practice, the design of a theoretical framework for journalism educators, and a speculative research outline on how to identify some priorities for a practical and theoretical investigation of journalism.

This chapter is an introduction to Part Three of the volume titled Regions and Cultures. This part presents an overview of journalistic practices in diverse nations, regions and cultures. Its twelve chapters span over fifteen countries, highlighting the notion of journalism practice, cultures and regions. Readers will notice that its emphasis tilts towards the Global South which occupies a prominent position in the discussions. The content brings to light current journalism practices in countries in the Middle East, North Africa, Africa, South America and Southeast Asia. The Western world, albeit much less conspicuous, is represented only in a few studies.

This chapter serves as an introduction to the handbook’s Part One titled Conceptual Foundations. It wades into issues of journalism as a discipline. It provides five perspectives which together form the basis on which the other three parts are built. It includes five chapters whose content dwells on a variety of concepts and theories as well as related journalism practices, with presentations on how theories can help improve practice. The content of this part covers the following topics: a review of foundational contemporary literature, the role of algorithmic news, news, and environmental education, normative values journalists subscribe to globally, and a theoretical framework to unravel news.

This introduction chapter presents Part Four titled The Practitioner World. It is the last part of the handbook. Its content discusses how digitization and media convergence have significantly transformed the practice of journalism. It shows the impact of digital technology on journalism practice. It observes the changes taking place in news production processes, the increasing pressure on journalists to acquire digital skills and the growing need for the adoption of new business models for traditional media. The content of this part is solely written by practitioners who tell how reporters struggle to practice journalism and the wide implications of current journalistic practices for the industry, journalism scholarship and journalism education. The essays delve into the world of journalism practice, emphasizing diverse national contexts and their influence on the practice of journalism within different cultures and regions.

This chapter linguistically and discursively examines how and why Trump’s utterances, Tweets and sayings have become a source of a gaping chasm in American society despite his leaving the White House almost three years ago. It relates to the lessons we can learn from pragmatist thinkers and their rejection of binary divisions of cultures and societies in a world snared by clashes of mindsets and mentalities which analysis shows, can easily fall prey to one-sided, discriminatory discourse. It first provides a synopsis of pragmatism as a philosophy and the role of language in critical inquiry, laying down the conceptual framework for a critical analysis of US mainstream media’s overabundant interest in and coverage of what they initially termed “claims,” then “falsehoods” and finally outright “lies” of Donald Trump. Thereafter, it presents a short survey of data, which essentially comprises US mainstream media’s compilation of compendiums of Trump’s “lies” and the method they pursued in fact-checking them. This method has done little to change beliefs or perceptions, while it concludes that. Trump’s concept has worked well to create confusion about what constitutes truth in this polarized and deeply divided country.

This chapter merges three previous studies in an attempt to arrive at how to construct the social reality of politically and economically powerful partisan elites like Donald Trump. The chapter expands and updates the discussions in the three studies, first by presenting empirical evidence of the influence partisan discourse may have on its adherents once they ascend the power ladder, second by listing the discursive hallmarks of both partisan language and Trump’s discourse, and third by comparing and paralleling their linguistic traits. The study shows that the major discursive hallmarks of partisan language mirror Trump’s discourse, albeit his use of disparate discursive tactics and threads.

This chapter attempts to unpack Donald Trump, centering on the type of “language games” he employed to create the forms of life that helped him drive his message home. The chapter starts with a synopsis on the conceptual underpinnings of “language games” and the forms of life they may represent. The theoretical framework leans heavily on Ludwig Wittgenstein as a language philosopher and to a lesser extent on Saussure as a linguist. It first draws on the writings of both scientists and their views of how language relates to concepts and forms of life, and how concepts and forms of life can be shaped by language. Second, the chapter develops a toolkit that includes the instruments necessary to operationalize Wittgenstein’s language games plus a few major notions on which Saussure builds his linguistics. The toolkit is used to investigate selective samples from data, comprising 5276 false things Donald Trump made as U.S. president. The chapter finds that Trump employs language games in diversified ways to influence social life. For him they are instruments, or tools to name, to promise, to circumvent, to blame, among other roles. For Trump, language is merely an instrument which he uses to perform certain discursive and social functions.

This chapter examines differing media accounts of Donald Trump and his lies, falsehoods, misinformation, scandals and missteps. It examines four types of media reporting and scholarship on Trump, categorized by ideology (1) mostly liberal, (2) consistently liberal, (3) mixed, (4) most conservative, (5) consistently conservative. The chapter demonstrates that analysis of Trump concerned in some respects but differed sharply in others. The analysis underscores the increasing partisan polarization of the news media and explores how Trump's presidency also saw the emergence of misinformation or disinformation as a concerning new reality. This insight needs to be preserved and improved upon, not cast aside and passed over.