



{"id":5749,"date":"2015-12-01T14:03:22","date_gmt":"2015-12-01T14:03:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/media.am\/linguistic-tricks-that-envelop-the-constitution\/"},"modified":"2015-12-01T14:03:22","modified_gmt":"2015-12-01T14:03:22","slug":"linguistic-tricks-that-envelop-the-constitution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/media.am\/en\/critique\/2015\/12\/01\/5749\/","title":{"rendered":"Linguistic Tricks that Envelop the Constitution"},"content":{"rendered":"<blockquote>\n<p>This is a trick that reinforces a desirable result and doesn&#8217;t present the reality. If you say &#8220;new Constitution,&#8221; seemingly you reinforce that it has received this status. But it is still a draft<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>The December 6 referendum on amendments to the country&#8217;s constitution is at the massive campaign stage. The media is exerting efforts to present the draft Constitution beneath a more attractive and balanced light<\/p>\n<p>Numerous articles and reportages are published to say &#8220;Yes&#8221; or &#8220;No&#8221; to the draft Constitution and ensure public engagement in the referendum.<\/p>\n<p>The media mentions are monitored from the perspective of providing airtime to both those in favor and those against. Attempts are made also to analyze the content of news stories.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>The issue is that by saying &#8220;comprehensive coverage,&#8221; often attention is not paid to the media delivery of each side. After all, what&#8217;s important is not only what is said (&#8220;yes&#8221; or &#8220;no&#8221;), but also how and in what context it is said.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>For instance, Socioscope, which <a href=\"http:\/\/socioscope.am\/%D5%BD%D5%A1%D5%B0%D5%B4%D5%A1%D5%B6%D5%A1%D5%A4%D6%80%D5%A1%D5%AF%D5%A1%D5%B6-%D6%83%D5%B8%D6%83%D5%B8%D5%AD%D5%B8%D6%82%D5%A9%D5%B5%D5%B8%D6%82%D5%B6%D5%B6%D5%A5%D6%80%D5%AB-%D5%B6%D5%A5%D6%80-2\/\">surveyed<\/a> [AM] online media, concluded that &#8220;the work of online media does not ensure the audience&#8217;s full awareness, and many manipulative mechanisms are present,&#8221; which don&#8217;t allow reality to be presented objectively.<\/p>\n<p>It would be helpful for local Armenians to be acquainted with a few manipulative tricks that are more striking and noteworthy.<\/p>\n<p>It should be remembered that presenting that which is desired as fact and repeating this thought many times leaves the audience with the impression that desire has the power of fact.<\/p>\n<p>For example, it&#8217;s one thing when &#8220;changes&#8221; (or &#8220;amendments&#8221;) is said, and a completely different thing when the word &#8220;reform&#8221; is used. The use of the latter already indicates a certain treatment and assessment. The root of &#8220;good&#8221; [which is in the word &#8220;reform&#8221; in Armenian] cannot be perceived as neutral and is instinctively associated with the adversary of &#8220;bad&#8221;. Subconsciously the audience strives for reforms, since good is preferred over bad. Whereas amendments actually can be both positive and negative. And objectivity falls in the middle.<\/p>\n<p>In general, analyzing the language of the media is very interesting, since it&#8217;s through linguistic constructions that tricks that pursue a clear purpose but are concealed under a veil of objectivity operate.<\/p>\n<p>Constitutional changes are now at the draft stage and are only a proposal, but many news outlets speaking of the referendum omit the word &#8220;draft&#8221; and with that guide the audience, creating the illusion that the changes are already a reality.<\/p>\n<p>If the changes are a draft, this should be emphasized, so the audience differentiates it from the Constitution&#8217;s actual status.<\/p>\n<p>But often in Armenian media one can come across not &#8220;current Constitution&#8221; and &#8220;draft constitutional amendments,&#8221; but the more simplified and manipulative &#8220;old Constitution&#8221; and &#8220;new Constitution&#8221; formulations. In this case too (as in the case of good and bad), the emotional element begins to operate, since &#8220;new&#8221; contrasts with &#8220;old&#8221; and prompts the new to be chosen, since in this context new is synonymous with positive.<\/p>\n<p>The host of the Public TV of Armenia&#8217;s news program goes even further, saying that citizens must decide <a href=\"http:\/\/www.1tv.am\/hy\/live\/?category=metric&amp;schedule=24920\">why to say<\/a> [AM] &#8220;Yes&#8221; and why &#8220;No&#8221; to the Constitution (at 10:04 mins).<\/p>\n<p>Basically, it turns out that if you say &#8220;No,&#8221; then you don&#8217;t want a Constitution.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>If the RA Constitution is current, why is it said that it&#8217;s old, past, or previous? That it&#8217;s already changed its status. It&#8217;s obvious that if you ask the authors of articles and reportages, they will say there&#8217;s nothing wrong with that. That they didn&#8217;t do this intentionally.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>While to viewers and readers it might seem that they&#8217;re reading a regular news story, but through the choice of words, those in the media want to create the illusion of a clear position for them.<\/p>\n<p>This is a trick that reinforces a desirable result and doesn&#8217;t present the reality. If you say &#8220;new Constitution,&#8221; seemingly you reinforce that it has received this status. But it is still a draft.<\/p>\n<p>This is worth remembering. At least until the referendum to change the Constitution&#8217;s status.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Nune Hakhverdyan<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This is a trick that reinforces a desirable result and doesn&#8217;t present the reality. If you say &#8220;new Constitution,&#8221; seemingly you reinforce that it has received this status. But it is still a draft The December 6 referendum on amendments to the country&#8217;s constitution is at the massive campaign stage. The media is exerting efforts<a class=\"moretag\" href=\"https:\/\/media.am\/en\/critique\/2015\/12\/01\/5749\/\"> Read the full article&#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":5747,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5749","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-critique","author_posts-nune-hakhverdyan"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/media.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5749","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/media.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/media.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/media.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/media.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5749"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/media.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5749\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/media.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5747"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/media.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5749"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/media.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5749"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/media.am\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5749"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}