PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: The aim of this study is to, in the Swedish media debate, explore the discursive constructions of challenges in human rights and freedoms following the national spatial strategy for health and survival during the COVID-19 pandemic.
UNASSIGNED: The study, inspired by a critical discourse analytic approach, focused particularly on the issues addressed, subject positions, relations and rhetoric. Seventeen opinion articles published in Swedish national newspapers December 2019 - February 2022 were analysed.
UNASSIGNED: The main contents were threats to democracy, threats to the freedom and rights of specific groups, and threats to the debate itself. Contents were expressed through three discourse dichotomies: contribution vs interjection, documented vs alarmistic, and active on the stage vs commenting from the balcony.
UNASSIGNED: Striking about the results is the absence of dialogue, the one-way communication, and the absent politicians. It seems that the analysed debate on the challenges of the Swedish COVID-19 pandemic strategy, based on its impact on overall freedoms and rights, has not been the focus of decision-makers during the pandemic. They have neither addressed the threats highlighted in the articles, nor contributed to the discourse. This is worrying for the long-term maintenance and development of a healthy democracy.
UNASSIGNED: The study, inspired by a critical discourse analytic approach, focused particularly on the issues addressed, subject positions, relations and rhetoric. Seventeen opinion articles published in Swedish national newspapers December 2019 - February 2022 were analysed.
UNASSIGNED: The main contents were threats to democracy, threats to the freedom and rights of specific groups, and threats to the debate itself. Contents were expressed through three discourse dichotomies: contribution vs interjection, documented vs alarmistic, and active on the stage vs commenting from the balcony.
UNASSIGNED: Striking about the results is the absence of dialogue, the one-way communication, and the absent politicians. It seems that the analysed debate on the challenges of the Swedish COVID-19 pandemic strategy, based on its impact on overall freedoms and rights, has not been the focus of decision-makers during the pandemic. They have neither addressed the threats highlighted in the articles, nor contributed to the discourse. This is worrying for the long-term maintenance and development of a healthy democracy.
摘要：
■这项研究的目的是，在瑞典媒体的辩论中，探索在COVID-19大流行期间，根据国家健康和生存空间战略，对人权和自由挑战的话语建构。
■这项研究，受到批判性的话语分析方法的启发，特别关注解决的问题，主题位置,关系和修辞。分析了2019年12月至2022年2月在瑞典国家报纸上发表的17篇评论文章。
■主要内容是对民主的威胁，对特定群体的自由和权利的威胁，以及对辩论本身的威胁。内容通过三个话语二分法表达：贡献与感叹词，有记录的与悲观的，在舞台上活跃，在阳台上发表评论。
■引人注目的结果是没有对话，单向通信，缺席的政治家。似乎对瑞典COVID-19大流行战略挑战的分析辩论，基于其对整体自由和权利的影响，在大流行期间，决策者并不是重点。他们都没有解决文章中强调的威胁，也没有对演讲做出贡献。这对健康民主的长期维护和发展令人担忧。
■这项研究，受到批判性的话语分析方法的启发，特别关注解决的问题，主题位置,关系和修辞。分析了2019年12月至2022年2月在瑞典国家报纸上发表的17篇评论文章。
■主要内容是对民主的威胁，对特定群体的自由和权利的威胁，以及对辩论本身的威胁。内容通过三个话语二分法表达：贡献与感叹词，有记录的与悲观的，在舞台上活跃，在阳台上发表评论。
■引人注目的结果是没有对话，单向通信，缺席的政治家。似乎对瑞典COVID-19大流行战略挑战的分析辩论，基于其对整体自由和权利的影响，在大流行期间，决策者并不是重点。他们都没有解决文章中强调的威胁，也没有对演讲做出贡献。这对健康民主的长期维护和发展令人担忧。
