Investigating the Backstage of Newswriting with Process Analysis

  • Daniel Perrin
Part of the Global Transformations in Media and Communication Research book series (GTMCR)


What product-oriented approaches conceptualize as journalistic stance in news items is, from a process perspective, the result of newswriting: a complex and emergent interplay of situated production, reproduction and recontextualization activities (Catenaccio et al., 2011; Van Hout, Pander Maat and De Preter, 2011; Perrin, 2013) with individuals’ psychobiographies, social settings such as newsrooms, and contextual resources such as ‘glocalization’ (Khondker, 2004). In this first section of the chapter, I address stance from such a process perspective, as stanc-ing. The rest of the chapter then draws on the case of stance vs. stancing to explain and contextualize Progression Analysis, a multi-method approach to newswriting that is informed by Applied Linguistics (AL).


Mixed Method Research Writing Process Apply Linguistics Critical Discourse Analysis Text Production 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Archer, M. S. (2000) Being Human: The Problem of Agency (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bednarek, M. and Caple, H. (2014) ‘Why do news values matter? Towards a new methodological framework for analysing news discourse in Critical Discourse Analysis and beyond.’ Discourse & Society 25(2), 135–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bell, A. (1991) The Language of News Media (Oxford: Blackwell).Google Scholar
  4. Bell, A. (2001) ‘Back in style: Reworking audience design’ in P. Eckert and J. R. Rickford (eds), Style and Sociolinguistic Variation (pp. 139–169) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  5. Biber, D. (2004) ‘Historical patterns for the grammatical marking of stance: A cross-register comparison.’ Journal of Historical Pragmatics 5(1), 107–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. (1994) ‘On reporting reporting: The representation of speech in factual and factional narratives’ in M. Coulthard (ed.), Advances in Written Text Analysis (pp. 295–309) (London: Routledge).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Camps, J. (2003) ‘Concurrent and retrospective verbal reports as tools to better understand the role of attention in second language tasks.’ International Journal of Applied Linguistics 13(2), 201–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Catenaccio, P., Cotter, C., Desmedt, M., Garzone, G., Jacobs, G., Lams, L. and Van Praet, E. (2011) ‘Position paper: Towards a linguistics of news production.’ Journal of Pragmatics 43(7), 1843–1852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clayman, S. E. and Reisner, A. (1998) ‘Gatekeeping in action: Editorial conferences and assessments of newsworthiness.’ American Sociological Review 2(63), 178–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Degenhardt, M. (2006) ‘CAMTASIA and CATMOVIE: Two digital tools for observing, documenting and analysing writing processes of university students’ in L. Van Waes, M. Leijten and C. M. Neuwirth (eds), Writing and Digital Media (pp. 180–186) (Amsterdam: Elsevier).Google Scholar
  11. Denzin, N. K. (1978) The Research Act, 2nd edn (New York: Mc Graw-Hill).Google Scholar
  12. Economou, D. (2008) ‘Evaluation in news images: Comparative studies of the detention of refugees’ in P. R. R. White and E. A. Thomson (eds), Communicating Conflict: Multilingual Case Studies of the News Media (pp. 253–280) (London: Continuum).Google Scholar
  13. Ehrensberger-Dow, M. and Perrin, D. (2009) ‘Capturing translation processes to access metalinguistic awareness.’ Across Languages and Cultures 10(2), 275–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ehrensberger-Dow, M. and Perrin, D. (2013) ‘Applying a newswriting research approach to translation.’ Target 25(1), 77–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ericsson, K. A. and Simon, H. A. (1993) Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data, rev. edn (Cambridge: MIT Press).Google Scholar
  16. Fang, I. (1991) Writing Style Differences in Newspaper, Radio and Television News (Minnesota: Center for Interdisciplinary Studies of Writing, University of Minnesota).Google Scholar
  17. Feilzer, M. Y. (2010) ‘Doing mixed methods research pragmatically: Implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research paradigm.’ Journal of Mixed Methods Research 4(1), 6–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Flick, U. (2004) Triangulation (Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Flinn, J. Z. (1987) ‘Case studies of revision aided by keystroke recording and replaying software.’ Computers and Composition 5(1), 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gnach, A., Wiesner, E., Bertschi-Kaufmann, A. and Perrin, D. (2007) ‘Children’s writing processes when using computers: Insights based on combining analyses of product and process.’ Research in Comparative and International Education, 2(1): 13–28.Google Scholar
  21. Goffman, E. (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (New York: Anchor).Google Scholar
  22. Gravengaard, G. (2012) ‘The metaphors journalists live by: Journalists’ conceptualisation of newswork.’ Journalism 2012(13), 1064–1082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Grésillon, A. and Perrin, D. (2014) ‘Methodology: From speaking about writing to tracking text production’ in D. Perrin and E.-M. Jakobs (eds), Handbook of Writing and Text Production, Vol. 10 (pp. 79–111) (New York: De Gruyter).Google Scholar
  24. Hansen, G. (2006) ‘Retrospection methods in translator training and translation research.’ Journal of Specialised Translation (5): 2–40.Google Scholar
  25. Häusermann, J. (2007) ‘Zugespieltes Material: Der O-Ton und seine Interpretation’ in H. Maye, C. Reiber and N. Wegmann (eds), Original / Ton. Zur Mediengeschichte des O-Tons (pp. 25–50) (Konstanz: UVK).Google Scholar
  26. Huan, C. (2015) Journalistic Stance in Chinese and Australian Hard News. PhD Thesis (Macquarie University, Sydney).Google Scholar
  27. Jessner, U. (2009) ‘A DST-model of multilingualism and the role of metalinguistic awareness.’ Modern Language Journal 92(2): 270–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Johnson, R. B. and Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004) ‘Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come.’ Educational Researcher 33(7), 14–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Khondker, H. H. (2004) ‘Glocalization as globalization: Evolution of a sociological concept.’ Bangladesh e-Journal of Sociology 1(2), 12–20.Google Scholar
  30. Klemm, M. (2000) Zuschauerkommunikation. Formen und Funktionen der alltäglichen kommunikativen Fernsehaneignung (Frankfurt am Main et al.: Lang).Google Scholar
  31. Koller, V. (2004) ‘Businesswomen and war metaphors: “Possessive, jealous and pugnacious”?’ Journal of Sociolinguistics 4(1), 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kuhn, T. S. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
  33. Kuhn, T. S. (1996) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 3rd edn (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lams, L. (2011) ‘Newspapers’ narratives based on wire stories: Facsimiles of input?’ Journal of Pragmatics 43(7), 1853–1864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Levin, T. and Wagner, T. (2006) ‘In their own words: Understanding student conceptions of writing through their spontaneous metaphors in the science classroom.’ Instructional Science 34(3), 227–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Levy, C. M., Marek, J. P. and Lea, J. (1996) ‘Concurrent and retrospective protocols in writing research’ in G. Rijlaarsdam, H. Van den Bergh and M. Couzijn (eds), Theories, Models and Methodology in Writing Research (pp. 542–556) (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press).Google Scholar
  37. Lindgren, E. and Sullivan, K. (2006) ‘Analysing online revision’ in K. Sullivan and E. Lindgren (eds), Computer Keystroke Logging and Writing: Methods and Applications (pp. 157–188) (Amsterdam: Elsevier).Google Scholar
  38. Luginbühl, M., Baumberger, T., Schwab, K. and Burger, H. (2002) Medientexte zwischen Autor und Publikum. Intertextualität in Presse, Radio und Fernsehen (Zürich: Seismo).Google Scholar
  39. Lundell, Å. K. (2010) ‘The before and after of a political interview on TV. Observations of off-camera interactions between journalists and politicians.’ Journalism 11(2), 167–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mey, J. L. (2005) ‘Discourse and metadiscourse.’ Journal of Pragmatics 37(9), 1323–1324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Moschonas, S. and Spitzmüller, J. (2007) Metalinguistic discourse in and about the media. On some recent trends of Greek and German prescriptivism. Paper presented at the 2nd Language in the Media Conference: Language ideologies and media discourse. Texts, practices, policies, Leeds.Google Scholar
  42. Ó Riain, S. (2009) ‘Extending the ethnographic case study’ in D. Byrne and C. C. Ragin (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Case-based Methods (pp. 289–306) (London: Sage).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Perrin, D. (2003) ‘Progression analysis (PA): Investigating writing strategies at the workplace.’ Journal of Pragmatics 35(6), 907–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Perrin, D. (2011a) Medienlinguistik, 2nd edn (Konstanz: UVK).Google Scholar
  45. Perrin, D. (2011b) ‘“There are two different stories to tell”: Collaborative text-picture production strategies of TV journalists.’ Journal of Pragmatics 43(7), 1865–1875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Perrin, D. (2012) ‘Transdisciplinary action research: Bringing together communication and media researchers and practitioners.’ Journal of Applied Journalism and Media Studies 1(1), 3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Perrin, D. (2013) The Linguistics of Newswriting (Amsterdam, New York et al.: John Benjamins).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Perrin, D. (2015) ‘Realism, social cohesion, and media policy making: The case of Swiss public broadcasting.’ European Journal of Applied Linguistics 2(1), 111–133.Google Scholar
  49. Peterson, M. A. (2001) ‘Getting to the story: Unwriteable discourse and interpretive practice in American journalism.’ Anthropological Quarterly 74(4), 201–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Philo, G. (2007) ‘Can discourse analysis successfully explain the content of media and journalistic practice?’ Journalism Studies 8(2), 175–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pogner, K.-H. (1999) ‘Discourse community, culture and interaction: On writing by consulting engineers’ in F. Bargiela-Chiappini and C. Nickerson (eds), Writing Business: Genres, media and discourses (pp. 101–127) (Harlow: Longman).Google Scholar
  52. Pogner, K.-H. (2012) ‘A social perspective on writing in the workplace: Communities of Discourse (DC) and Communities of Practice (CoP)’ in A. Rothkegel and S. Ruda (eds), Communication on andvia Technology (pp. 83–107) (Berlin et al.: De Gruyter Mouton).Google Scholar
  53. Pounds, G. (2012) ‘Multimodal expression of authorial affect in a British television news programme.’ Discourse, Context & Media 1(2–3), 68–81.Google Scholar
  54. Quandt, T. (2008) ‘News tuning and content management: An observation study of old and new routines in German online newsrooms’ in C. Paterson andGoogle Scholar
  55. D. Domingo (eds), Making Online News: The Ethnography of New Media Production (pp. 77–97) (New York: Peter Lang).Google Scholar
  56. Richardson, J. E. (2007) Analysing Newspapers: An Approach from Critical Discourse Analysis (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan).Google Scholar
  57. Robinson, S. (2009) ‘A chronicle of chaos: Tracking the news story of hurricane Katrina from The Times-Picayune to its website.’ Journalism 10(4), 431–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sanders, T. and Van Wijk, C. (1996) ‘Text analysis as a research tool: How hierarchical text structure contributes to the understanding of conceptual processes in writing’ in C. M. Levy and S. Ransdell (eds), The Science of Writing: Theories, Methods, Individual Differences and Applications (pp. 251–270) (Mahwah: Erlbaum).Google Scholar
  59. Schultz, I. (2007) ‘The journalistic gut feeling.’ Journalism Practice 1(2), 190–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sealey, A. and Carter, B. (2004) Applied Linguistics as Social Science (London et al.: Continuum).Google Scholar
  61. Silva, M. L. (2012) ‘Camtasia in the classroom: Student attitudes and preferences for video commentary or Microsoft Word comments during the revision process.’ Computers and Composition 29(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sleurs, K., Jacobs, G. and Van Waes, L. (2003) ‘Constructing press releases, constructing quotations: A case study.’ Journal of Sociolinguistics 7(2), 135–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Smagorinsky, P. (2001) ‘Rethinking protocol analysis from a cultural perspective.’ Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 21, 233–245.Google Scholar
  64. Spelman Miller, K. (2006) ‘Keystroke logging: An introduction’ in K. Sullivan and E. Lindgren (eds), Computer Keystroke Logging and Writing: Methods and Applications (pp. 1–9) (Amsterdam: Elsevier).Google Scholar
  65. Spilka, R. (ed.) (1993) Writing in the Workplace: New Research Perspectives (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press).Google Scholar
  66. Van Dijk, T. A. (1988) News Analysis: Case Studies of International and National News in the Press (Hillsdale/London: Erlbaum).Google Scholar
  67. Van Hout, T. and Jacobs, G. (2008) ‘News production theory and practice: Fieldwork notes on power, interaction and agency.’ Pragmatics 18(1), 59–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Van Hout, T. and Macgilchrist, F. (2010) ‘Framing the news: An ethnographic view of business newswriting.’ Text & Talk 30(2), 169–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Van Hout, T., Pander Maat, H. and De Preter, W. (2011) ‘Writing from news sources: The case of Apple TV.’ Journal of Pragmatics 43(7), 1876–1889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Werlen, I. (2000) ‘“Zum Schluss das Wetter”: Struktur und Variation von Wetterberichten im Rundfunk’ in J. Niederhauser and S. Szlek (eds), Sprachsplitter und Sprachspiele (pp. 155–170) (Bern: Lang).Google Scholar
  71. White, P. R. R. (2012) ‘Exploring the axiological workings of “reporter voice” news stories: Attribution and attitudinal positioning.’ Discourse, Context & Media 1(2–3), 57–67.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Daniel Perrin 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel Perrin

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations