The depoliticization of law in the news: BBC reporting on US use of extraterritorial or ‘long-arm’ law against China

IF 1.5 2区 文学 Q2 COMMUNICATION Critical Discourse Studies Pub Date : 2022-08-11 DOI:10.1080/17405904.2022.2102519
Le Cheng, Xiaobin Zhu, D. Machin
{"title":"The depoliticization of law in the news: BBC reporting on US use of extraterritorial or ‘long-arm’ law against China","authors":"Le Cheng, Xiaobin Zhu, D. Machin","doi":"10.1080/17405904.2022.2102519","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this paper we explore how a public national media outlet, the British BBC, represents an international legal case which has a highly political nature. The case is US versus Huawei/Meng Wanzhou, which took place between 2018 and 2021. Accusations were that the Chinese technology company committed fraud, leading the global HSBC bank to breach US sanctions against Iran. The charges were made by the US using what is called an ‘extraterritorial law’, which, while rejected as law by governments around the world, is policed by US economic powers and control over international finance. Using Critical Discourse Analysis we show that, while the BBC presents much detail of legal process, the actual nature of the law the US uses to bring criminal charges against international companies and banks, is neither considered nor questioned. Our interest is how such a law, which has a huge influence over global trade and politics, is presented to the public in this particular case. We contribute to the position that the nature of laws, how they are used and known, must always be understood within the prevailing discourses of the moment.","PeriodicalId":46948,"journal":{"name":"Critical Discourse Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Discourse Studies","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2022.2102519","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT In this paper we explore how a public national media outlet, the British BBC, represents an international legal case which has a highly political nature. The case is US versus Huawei/Meng Wanzhou, which took place between 2018 and 2021. Accusations were that the Chinese technology company committed fraud, leading the global HSBC bank to breach US sanctions against Iran. The charges were made by the US using what is called an ‘extraterritorial law’, which, while rejected as law by governments around the world, is policed by US economic powers and control over international finance. Using Critical Discourse Analysis we show that, while the BBC presents much detail of legal process, the actual nature of the law the US uses to bring criminal charges against international companies and banks, is neither considered nor questioned. Our interest is how such a law, which has a huge influence over global trade and politics, is presented to the public in this particular case. We contribute to the position that the nature of laws, how they are used and known, must always be understood within the prevailing discourses of the moment.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新闻中法律的去政治化:BBC报道了美国对中国使用治外法权或“长臂法”
在本文中,我们探讨了一个公共的国家媒体机构,英国广播公司,如何代表一个具有高度政治性的国际法律案件。该案是美国与华为/ b孟晚舟之间的诉讼,发生在2018年至2021年之间。这家中国科技公司被指控犯有欺诈行为,导致全球汇丰银行(HSBC)违反了美国对伊朗的制裁。这些指控是美国利用所谓的“治外法权”提出的,尽管世界各国政府都拒绝将其作为法律,但它是由美国的经济力量和对国际金融的控制来监管的。通过批判性话语分析,我们发现,尽管BBC详细介绍了法律程序,但美国用来对跨国公司和银行提起刑事指控的法律的实际性质既没有得到考虑,也没有受到质疑。我们感兴趣的是,这样一部对全球贸易和政治产生巨大影响的法律,如何在这个特殊案件中呈现给公众。我们支持这样一种观点,即法律的本质,它们是如何被使用和被认识的,必须始终在当前流行的话语中被理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
6.70%
发文量
47
期刊最新文献
‘Can women have it all?’ Transitions in media representations of Jacinda Ardern’s leadership and identity by a global newsroom Why and when should we (not) distinguish between academic and therapeutic discourses on the past? A response to Burnett et al.’s ‘Indigenous resurgence, collective “reminding”, and insidious binaries’ Preserving choice: weaving femininity and autonomy through egg freezing discourse on Xiaohongshu Indigenous resurgence, collective ‘reminding’, and insidious binaries: a response to Verbuyst’s ‘settler colonialism and therapeutic discourses on the past’ The rise of large language models: challenges for Critical Discourse Studies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1