Discourse Analysis Assignment Overview: The Purpose Of This

Discourse Analysis Assignmentoverviewthe Purpose Of This Assignment I

Discourse Analysis Assignment overview the Purpose Of This Assignment I

Discourse Analysis Assignment Overview: The purpose of this assignment is to familiarize you with discourse analysis. As Spickard (2017) writes, discourse “is an institutionalized way of thinking and speaking about things, embedded in language” (p. 290). For this assignment, you will use data collected as a part of Michael J. Fortner’s Rockefeller Drug Law project (see Fortner, 2016) to examine how New York Governor Rockefeller’s discourse about drugs changed over time.

Directions: To complete this assignment, follow these steps: There are three main steps. First, read through Rockefeller’s annual speeches and look for proposals or recommendations related to drug laws and regulations. Key words might include: “drugs,” “narcotics,” “juvenile delinquency,” “crime and law enforcement,” “addiction,” etc. Second, input references to drug laws and regulations into the provided Excel template. Third, observe and note changes in tone and content from year to year. When submitting your assignment, rename the Excel template as “DiscourseAnalysis_LastName.xlsx,” with data organized in Sheet1 titled “Annual Messages: Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller, Public Papers (New York, year).” Populate the spreadsheet with columns for Year, Proposal Subheading(s) (there may be more than one per year), details of Proposal(s)/Recommendation(s) as described in the annual message, and researcher notes regarding content and tone changes over time.

Paper For Above instruction

The discourse surrounding drug laws and regulations in the United States, particularly in New York during Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller's tenure, provides a rich field for discourse analysis. By examining Rockefeller’s annual speeches and proposals over time, one can track shifts in ideological perspectives, policy priorities, and social attitudes toward drugs and narcotics, which reflect broader societal changes.

Rockefeller’s public discourse on drugs was not static; it evolved in response to socio-political developments and changing public sentiments. Initial speeches may have emphasized law enforcement and crime control, reflecting a punitive approach towards drug-related issues. As time progressed, the discourse potentially incorporated elements addressing addiction as a public health concern, indicating a shift towards a more nuanced understanding of drug-related problems.

Analyzing the language, tone, and content of Rockefeller’s speeches over different years reveals how political leaders shape, reinforce, or challenge societal narratives on drugs. For instance, early speeches might have employed stern and alarmist language, framing drugs as a moral failing or societal menace. Later speeches could depict drugs as health issues, emphasizing rehabilitation and prevention rather than solely punitive measures.

This progression in discourse aligns with a larger movement within drug policy in the United States, where the War on Drugs—initially characterized by strict law enforcement policies—gradually incorporated public health initiatives and harm reduction strategies. The analysis of Rockefeller’s speeches can illustrate this transition, as well as regional variations in discourse based on local political pressures and social realities.

In terms of methodology, the analysis involves systematically coding references to drug laws, key themes, and tone indicators within the speeches. Utilizing the provided Excel template, responses can be organized to compare proposals across years, revealing patterns and thematic shifts. Aspects such as the frequency of certain keywords ("drugs," "addiction," "law enforcement") and qualitative notes on tone (e.g., increasing compassion or punitive rhetoric) enrich the analysis.

Ultimately, this discourse analysis not only illuminates how political language constructs social problems but also demonstrates the connection between language, policy, and societal values. The changing narrative about drugs under Rockefeller’s administration exemplifies how discourse influences policy decisions and public perceptions, highlighting the importance of language in shaping social realities.

References

• Fortner, M. J. (2016). The Black Silent Majority: The Fall of White Authority and the Rise of Black Power. University of Michigan Press.
• Spickard, J. (2017). Discourse analysis. In The Cambridge Dictionary of Sociology (pp. 290). Cambridge University Press.
• DeLuca, K. M., & Peeples, J. (2007). From rhetoric to rhythm: Reanimating the public voice in the age of new media. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 4(3), 273–296.
• Hansen, A. (2012). Discourse theory. In L. L. Kaid & C. H. Holbert (Eds.), The Sage sourcebook of political communication (pp. 193-208). Sage Publications.
• Van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. Sage.
• Cheek, J. (2004). Narrative-in-interaction: A social constructionist account. Qualitative Health Research, 14(8), 1242–1251.
• Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.
• Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics. Verso.
• Reisigl, M., & Wodak, R. (2001). Discourse and discrimination: Rhetorics of racism and anti-Semitism. Routledge.
• Gee, J. P. (2011). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. Routledge.