Abstract
This chapter inaugurates the first part of the empirical terrain of the study and discusses Greek media representations of ‘Islamist terrorism’ and ‘ISIS Terror’ by analyzing Kathimerini’s and Ta Nea’s editorials regarding Islamist terrorist attacks. First, I examine the case of 11 September 2001 (9/11). Second, I focus on an analysis of the representation of terrorist attacks in Madrid and London. I emphasize the social actors involved—‘Islamist terrorists’, Europe and Greece—and examine how representations of the perpetrators and victims of the attacks lead to a dichotomy between ‘Us’ and ‘Them’. Finally, this chapter completes the empirical examination of the ‘Islamist threat’ in the Greek press by providing an analysis of the newspapers’ coverage of the recent Paris attacks and Brussels bombings.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
The mainstream European media used the parallelism to 9/11 to label the terrorist attacks in Madrid. For example, ‘Our September 11th’ (nuestro 11 Septiembre) was the title of the Spanish newspaper El Mundo on 12 March 2004. The same title was adopted by the French newspaper Le Monde (notre 11 Septembre) and by the Greek newspaper Kathimerini (η δική μας 11η Σεπτεμβρίου). Le Monde also used the title: ‘The European September 11th’ (le 11 Septembre de l’Europe) while the English newspaper The Guardian was wondering: ‘Is This Europe’s 9/11?’.
- 3.
The next examples present metaphors that are used in Greek. I decided to transfer them into English, without changing their meaning, and not to translate them, although this kind of metaphor is not used in English.
According to Schaffner (2004) ‘translation is part of the development of discourse and a bridge between various discourses. It is through translation that information is made available to addresses beyond national borders; and it is very frequently the case that reactions in one country to statements that were made in another country are actually reactions to the information as it was provided in translation’ (p. 120). I agree with the above definition of translation. My aim is to translate the metaphors in order to address the representations of the US, Europe, Greece and Islamist terrorists that the Greek media used for English-speaking readers. However, I do not intend to examine the translation of political statements and the differences between the international and Greek media coverage of the events or the recontextualization of the media coverage of the terrorist attacks. Moreover, the absence of these comparisons is another reason why I focus on leader and opinion articles and not on the news coverage of the attacks which is mainly based on the translation of international media networks.
As Baker (2006) notes, the act of translation is deeply embedded in wider social and cultural practices (p. 321). Hence, when the translator proceeds to render a text in a foreign language, s/he fulfills a political and cultural act, as s/he interprets a text for readers with different verbal and cultural behavior (pp. 329–330). I realize that the way I translate some parts of the Greek articles that are cited in this study does not follow Baker’s ‘rules’ of translation. Here, I should clarify that my aim is to show how the Greek media use metaphors in order to establish representations of the ‘Other’ and not to investigate the use of metaphors in the two languages.
- 4.
Here I should clarify that I decided to present small quotes of the articles analyzed as my aim is to analyze rhetorical tropes and argumentation schemes that are linked to the representation of ‘Islam’, the EU and Greece, and to base my analysis on related themes, thus an in-depth analysis does not seem necessary. Moreover, the presentation of small quotes enables me to refer to more examples of editorials in the limited space of the book; in this way I can structure this study more adequately insofar as I can present part of an article and return to the same text again in order to justify my analysis and interpretation and avoid too many references to Greek-internal issues that are mentioned in some editorials but which are not related to my research. Finally, I assume that the presentation and translation of a full article would be more relevant to a Greek language-centred study that is also not the focus of this study.
- 5.
President G. Bush used the terms ‘crusade’ and ‘war on terror’ on his speech on 11 September 2001. He referred to this religious concept that was also quoted in Greek media discourse. The above example from Kathimerini is a characteristic example of recontextualization. See Bush’s speech at: http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010916-2.html.
- 6.
Traditionally the Greek governments are not considered as USA’s allies. In particular, the members of the Socialist party (PASOK), who were governing for almost 20 years after its electoral success in 1981 criticized the ‘imperialistic policies’ of the US, especially during the war in Kosovo in 1999 (Gropas and Triandafyllidou 2009; Triandafyllidou et al. 2010; Tsoukalas 2013). Thus, the alliance between Greece and the US provoked debates in the Greek press.
- 7.
This dichotomy between ‘Us’ the Europeans and ‘Them’ the non-Europeans was indicated by the national mass media of various European countries during the second Gulf war and was intended to minimize the media references to the distinctions among European states regarding the ‘war on terror’ (Triandafyllidou et al. 2009, pp. 219–238).
- 8.
For instance, many newspapers in different countries referred to the debate between the German Foreign Minister, Joschka Fischer, and Donald Rumsfeld (February 2003). See: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/1421634/I-am-not-convinced-Fischer-tells-Rumsfeld.html.
- 9.
Triandafyllidou et al. (2009) emphasize this dichotomy of European axes via the study of different national media coverage of the Gulf War (pp. 219–238) and Richardson (2007) focuses on the propaganda war of the British press, i.e. the way the British press covered the second war in Iraq and governmental references to this war (pp. 178–179).
- 10.
An annual meeting of the leading industrialized states (UK, France, Germany, Italy, USA, Canada, Japan and Russia).
- 11.
Until 9/11, guerrillas and terrorist attacks were considered by the Greek left wing and parts of the Greek media as the people’s reaction to dominant political power. This notion traditionally seems to be a result of the Greek left’s armed struggle against dictatorship (1967–1974) and the parastate (Karkagiannis 2002). Thus, the Greek media initially connected the terrorist attacks in London with British people’s dissent over G8 politics and the ‘war on terror’.
- 12.
I should mention here that the Greek media mainly use the term ‘Islam’, and not ‘Muslims’, when they refer to people of Islamic religion or origin. The term ‘Islam’ is considered more politically correct by Greek journalism.
- 13.
The American President G. W. Bush first used the concept of an ‘invisible enemy’ in his address to the nation after 9/11, for instance:
‘Good morning. This weekend I am engaged in extensive sessions with members of my National Security Council, as we plan a comprehensive assault on terrorism. This will be a different kind of conflict against a different kind of enemy.
This is a conflict without battlefields or beachheads, a conflict with opponents who believe they are invisible. Yet, they are mistaken. They will be exposed, and they will discover what others in the past have learned’ (radio address of the President to the nation, 15 September 2001).
See: http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010915.html.
And: The Cabinet Room, 12 September, 2001, at: http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010912-4.html.
See also Wodak (2009a) for an analysis of Bush’s speech.
Hence, the editor of Ta Nea proceeds to a recontextualization, a transformation of the concept from a political genre to a journalistic one as s/he adopts a characterization that was used by the then American President Bush and dominated the American rhetoric during the Cold War.
- 14.
I decided not to mention the names of the editors who wrote the specific opinion articles as this study is not interested in the names/identities of these journalists.
- 15.
The military concept of ‘asymmetric warfare’ was mainly used by the US authorities during the Cold War in order to describe different Communist states as a threat against the US or a source of terrorism (RAND corporation studies on the concept). In this case, the editor of Kathimerini reintroduces this military/political concept and transmits it in a different historical epoch and genre. Thus, this is another case of recontextualization.
- 16.
Kamikazes were Japanese suicide killers in World War Two. Here, the journalist makes a historical transformation, as he nominates ‘Islamist terrorists’ as kamikazes.
- 17.
According to Levi-Strauss (1972), the basic notion of binary oppositions is that human beings think about and perceive the world by forming a series of basic oppositions, each with a concrete reference, and then relating these oppositions to each other (Kuper 1983, pp. 179–181). Levi-Strauss adopted the approach of binary oppositions from the work of Jakobson and the Prague school of structural linguistics; however, he claimed that it was structural anthropology which rehabilitated them in the vocabulary of the human sciences (ibid.). The fundamental opposition on which the whole work of Levi-Strauss based is that between nature and culture. This binary opposition creates sub-oppositions and explains the logic of exclusion and inclusion in a society and how the system of social relationships works (Levi-Strauss 1972). Some other researchers have though challenged the system of binary oppositions and structural anthropology in general. Their main criticism is that binary oppositions are arbitrary and biased and simplify the complexity which characterizes social structure.
- 18.
- 19.
- 20.
The national elections of 7 March 2004 led to the end of almost twenty-year PASOK’s governance, insofar as the conservative New Democracy won the majority in the Greek Parliament.
- 21.
- 22.
In the case of Madrid bombings the title of Ta Nea on 12 March 2004 was ‘We are all Spaniards’ (Είμαστε όλοι Ισπανοί) and the title of Kathimerini’s leading article after the terrorist attack in London was ‘We are all Europeans’ (Είμαστε όλοι Ευρωπαίοι).
- 23.
References
Baker, M. (2006). Contextualization in Translator and Interpreter: Mediated Events. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(3), 321–337.
Boukala, S., & Dimitrakopoulou, D. (2017). Absurdity and the “Blame Game” Within the Schengen Area: Analyzing Greek (Social) Media Discourses on the Refugee Crisis. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2017.1303560.
Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Fairclough, N. (1995). Media Discourse. London: Arnold.
Fairclough, N. (2006). Language and Globalisation. London: Routledge.
Foucault, M. (2002). The Archaeology of Knowledge. London: Routledge.
Gropas, R., & Triandafyllidou, A. (2009). The State of the Art: Various Paths to Modernity. In ELIAMEP, Greek Case Report. Athens: ELIAMEP.
Kaminaris, S. (1999). Greece and the Middle East. Middle East Review of International Affairs, 3(2), 36–46.
Karim, K. (2002). Making Sense of the ‘Islamic Peril’: Journalism as Cultural Practice. In B. Zelizer & S. Allan (Eds.), Journalism After September 11. London: Routledge.
Karim, K. (2003). Islamic Peril: Media and Global Violence. London: Black rose.
Karkagiannis, A. (2002). Terrorism and the Left Wing. Athens: Polis (in Greek).
KhosraviNik, M. (2015). Discourse, Identity & Legitimacy: Self and Other in Representations of Iran’s Nuclear Programme. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Kontogiorgis, G. (2006). Nation and Modernist Modernity. Athens: Enallaktikes Ekdoseis (in Greek).
Kontogiorgis, G. (2012a). On Nation and Greek Continuity. Thessaloniki: Ianos (in Greek).
Kontogiorgis, G. (2012b). Partitocracy and Dynastic State. Athens: Savvalas (in Greek).
Kuper, A. (1983). Anthropology and Anthropologists: The Modern British School. London: Routledge.
Levi-Strauss, C. (1972). The Savage Mind. London: Weidenfeld Nicolson.
Meadows, B. (2005). Distancing and Showing Solidarity Via Metaphor and Metonymy in Political Discourse. A Critical Study of American Statements on Iraq During the Years 2004–2005. CADAAD, 1(2), 1–17.
Musolff, A. (2006). Metaphor Scenarios in Public Discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 21(1), 23–38.
Panourgia, N. (2009). Dangerous Citizens: The Greek Left and the Terror of the State. New York: Fordham University Press.
Reisigl, M., & Wodak, R. (2001). Discourse and Discrimination: Rhetorics of Racism and Antisemitism. London: Routledge.
Reisigl, M., & Wodak, R. (2009). The Discourse Historical Approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage.
Richardson, J. (2004). (Mis)Representing Islam: The Racism and Rhetoric of British Broadsheet Newspapers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Richardson, J. (2007). Analysing Newspapers: An Approach from Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Richardson, J., & Wodak, R. (2009). Recontextualising Fascist Ideologies of the Past: Right-Wing Discourse on Employment and Nativism in Austria and the United Kingdom. Critical Discourse Studies, 6(4), 251–267.
Said, E. (1991). Imaginative Geography and Its Representations. In E. Said (Ed.), Orientalism. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Said, E. (1997). Covering Islam: How the Media and the Experts Determine How We See the Rest of the World. London: Vintage.
Sandikcioglu, E. (2000). More Metaphorical Warfare in the Gulf: Orientalist Frames in News Coverage. In A. Barcelona (Ed.), Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads: A Cognitive Prospective. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Schaffner, C. (2004). Political Discourse Analysis from the Point of View of Translation Studies. Journal of Language and Politics, 3(1), 117–150.
Semino, E. (2008). Metaphor in Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tekin, B. (2010). Representation and Othering in Discourse: The Construction of Turkey in the EU Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Triandafyllidou, A., Wodak, R., & Krzyzanowski, M. (Eds.). (2009). The European Public Sphere and the Media: Europe in Crisis. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Triandafyllidou, A., Gropas, R., & Kouki, H. (2010). Identity Construction Programmes of the State and the EU: Case Study Phase 1. ELIAMEP Reports. Athens: ELIAMEP.
Tsoukalas, C. (2013). Forms of Continuity and Discontinuity. Athens: Themelio (in Greek).
Van Dijk, T. (2005). War Rhetoric of a Little Ally: Political Implicatures and Aznar’s Legitimatization of the War in Iraq. Journal of Language and Politics, 4(1), 65–91.
Vernardakis, C. (2011). Political Parties, Elections and Party System: The Transformations of Political Representation 1990–2010. Athens: Sakkoulas. (in Greek).
Wodak, R. (2009a). Language and Politics. In J. Culpeper, F. Katamba, P. Kerswill, R. Wodak, & T. McEnery (Eds.), English Language: Description, Variation and Context (pp. 576–593). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wodak, R. (2009b). Prejudice, Racism and Discourse. In A. Pelinka, K. Bischof, & K. Stagner (Eds.), Aspects of Prejudice a Handbook. New York: Cambria Press.
Wodak, R. (2011). The Discourse of Politics in Action: Politics as Usual. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Boukala, S. (2019). Greek Media Discourse About the ‘Islamist Threat’: From ‘Islamist Terrorism’ to ‘ISIS Terror’. In: European Identity and the Representation of Islam in the Mainstream Press. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93314-6_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93314-6_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-93313-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-93314-6
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)