Abstract
This study analyzed how two popular newspapers, The LA Times and The Sacramento Bee, discursively constructed stances on the controversy over California’s Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum by employing critical discourse analysis. The analysis revealed that the newspapers sought to uphold the historical status of African, Latino, Asian, and Native Americans in the new curriculum by legitimizing perspectives of the State Board of Education in California and its supporters. Additionally, the newspapers legitimized pro-Israel perspectives on the Israeli and Palestine conflict by foregrounding the voices of the Jewish Caucus despite divergent voices within the Jewish community. This study concluded that the construction of stances in the two newspapers should be perceived as discursively constituting a reality where the opinions of both the newspapers and the selected racial/ethnic groups were normalized. This indicated the newspapers’ discursive involvement in the politics of ethnic studies curriculum development and underscored their potential symbolic power over their readership.
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.
