Discursive Constructions of Power in Selected Nigerian Media Reports of Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) Strikes

Abstract

Power, dominance, and control are not exclusive and are always constructed, exercised, and sustained through overt acts/mechanisms of coercion. The subtle yet manipulative subtexts of language in discourse are, at times, more effective vehicles (modes) utilized by more powerful groups to build and ratify institutional dominance over less powerful ones. Based on the foregoing, this study examines discursive constructions of power in ASUU strike discourses between the FGN and ASUU, as reported in major Nigerian newspapers – The Punch, Vanguard, and The Nation – as well as on other credible media platforms. The research sought to unearth, among other things, the various discursive structures deployed in discourses by the parties for the ventilation of dominance and demonstration of resistance, as well as the group ideologies that underlie such language choices. The qualitative research approach and content analysis, based on a purposive sampling of discourse texts in the newspapers and other media sources, were adopted for the study. Twenty-two discourse texts from 2001-2009, 2013, and 2020 ASUU strikes were analyzed based on the analytical tools found within Van Dijk's (2001) Socio-cognitive model of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). Van Dijk's Socio-cognitive frame, over and above other models of CDA, contains a checklist of actual discursive cum ideological instruments of dominance and resistance relevant to this study. Our analysis revealed, among other things, that the FGN consistently focused on and deployed ideological strategies which tended toward legitimizing its control over ASUU, winning positive public perception, sympathy, and support for itself and away from the Union (a less powerful group). This was achieved through various forms of discursive propaganda and appeals to patriotism, ventilated through ideological instruments such as number games, vagueness, apparent empathy, and blame transfer, as well as through the FGN's strategically-more-pronounced media visibility. ASUU, on the other hand, instinctively and perpetually struggled, through the use of appropriate discursive mechanisms too, to detach from itself the government-ascribed negative public image. These ideological wrangling, incidentally, delayed and even stalled the resolution of the FGN/ASUU conflicts in each case. The study thus recommends, among other things, focusing on language that is truthful in public discourse instead of advancing a specific group's ideology over the public interest.