Abstract
In this work, journalistic rhetoric is analyzed in 30 science news for the general public, published on sites of magazines specialized in scientific journalism - Ciencia Hoje, Galileu and Scientific America Brazil - in order to verify how the senses of objectivity and impartiality are constructed discursively in these texts. We use as theoretical apparatus the Appraisal System proposed by Martin and White (2005), emphasizing the Engagement Subsystem. The results indicate the predominance of the dialogic expansion through modalizations and quotes and reports. However, the exclusivity of the voice of the scientist who conducted the research spread for non-specialized audiences, as the only source for the evaluation of the scientific phenomena reported, overturns the objectivity and the impartiality in these texts. We observed, therefore, a contradiction concerning the role of the science popularization in society. In the news analyzed, the journalist assumes the role of mere informant (MOTTAROTH; LOVATO, 2011), restricting the process of science popularization to a translation and oversimplification of the scientific discoveries (HILGARTNER, 1990).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
