THE NEWSPAPER AS INSTANCE OF COMPLEX ENUNCIATION: THE SUPERENUNCIATOR

ABSTRACT:

This article aims at understanding the newspaper as instance of complex enunciation (MAINGUENEAU, 2008) by analyzing the various enunciative agents engaged in the construction of enunciations displayed on the pages of a newspaper and in the construction of an informative journalistic genre. These agents efface their particular enunciative marks to give rise to an enunciator who, in spite of its collective constitution, presents itself in the singular (the newspaper), therefore, it builds its own ethos and, eventually, becomes a superenunciator. The article also proposes the existence of enunciative marks that refer to such superenunciator, that are presently called superenunciator marks. The present study investigates such manifestations in the guidelines of the Brazilian newspaper Folha de S. Paulo.

KEYWORDS:
Maingueneau; Newspaper; Ethos ; Instance of complex enunciation; Superenunciator

RESUMO:

Esse artigo busca compreender o jornal como uma instância de enunciação complexa (MAINGUENEAU, 2008), a partir da análise dos diversos agentes enunciativos que participam da construção dos enunciados presentes em suas páginas e da construção do gênero jornalístico informativo. Esses agentes apagam as suas marcas enunciativas particulares para poder fazer emergir um enunciador que, apesar da constituição coletiva, se apresenta como singular (o jornal), construindo assim o seu próprio ethos, vindo a ser um superenunciador. Propõe, ainda, a existência de marcas enunciativas que remetem a esse superenunciador, denominadas aqui de marcas superenunciativas. Para tanto, analisou-se essa manifestação no jornal Folha de S.Paulo, como também o seu manual de redação e estilo.

PALAVRAS-CHAVE:
Maingueneau; Jornal; Ethos ; Instância de enunciação complexa; Superenunciador

Introduction

There are not many formulations by Dominique Maingueneau on instances of complex enunciation, a concept that appears for the first time, in Portuguese, in the fifth part of his article The notion of hyperenunciator [A noção de hiperenunciador], in Cenas da Enunciação (MAINGUENEAU, 2008).

The present article aims at understanding the newspaper as an instance of complex enunciation, in which the different enunciative agents come together as a single superenunciator who, in its turn, assumes the discursive responsibility for the enunciation.

Additional notions are presented throughout the article which were formulated by Maingueneau and are essential to understand the construction of such instance of complex enunciation assumed by the newspaper. First, a short overview of Maingueneau's formulations on instances of complex enunciation is proposed to clarify that concept.

The following section approaches the production of enunciations in informative journalistic genres¹ along with its respective enunciative agents in order to reinforce the understanding of the print newspaper as an instance of complex enunciation.

The analysis in the article focuses on a set of news from the Brazilian newspaper Folha de S. Paulo² to describe the newspaper based on the formulations on instances of complex enunciation. This will allow the proposition of enunciative marks belonging to enunciations in informative journalistic genres that refer to the enunciator, rather, to the newspaper as superenunciator.

The article aims to articulate a notion proposed by Dominique Maingueneau and attempts at understanding it through the analysis of a print newspaper as the corpus of the present research to allow reflections for researchers on media and on the discourses conveyed be the media and to affirm that newspapers should be conceived discursively as super-enunciator.

What is an instance of complex enunciation?

Dominique Maingueneau³ has written little about instances of complex enunciation. As a matter of fact, when the expression was used, it was not as the focus of a discussion, but cited in the last section of a text that focused on the notion of hyperenunciator. The author himself points to the early development of the concept by claiming that:

The issue of the hyperenunciator is inscribed in a more comprehensive perspective, which has not been object of any approach in discourse analysis, that are the instances of enunciation which, in the absence of a better word, for comfort's sake, could be called “complex”. As a general rule, theories of enunciation deal with two types of validating instances: individual and generic or generalizing (commonly represented by the subject of the doxa). In semantics and in philosophy of language, on the contrary, following the immemorial debates on nominalism and realism, much more sophisticated ontologies are developed: what forms of existence must be attributed to entities such as “France”, “the regiment”, “youth”, “the bourgeoise”, “the public opinion”, etc. Discourse analysts, in their turn, approach the issue by considering the diversity of effective discursive practices. (MAINGUENEAU, 2008, p.109-110, our translation).⁴

The need for formulations on instances of complex enunciations derives from the existence of texts that are object of a collective elaboration and from the relation that can be established between cooperating subjects and the way in which the final product thinks its own production (MAINGUENEAU, 2008). Maingueneau cites as example the case of publicity texts, that are responsibility of an individualized interlocutor, the brand, whose anthropomorphic properties are well known. However, it is common knowledge that publicity texts are produced by an agency whose signature is extremely discreet or even inexistent.

Maingueneau also cites the many speech genres that come from instruments (such as the UN, unions, sport associations, etc.) in which “[…] the text attributed to an institutional enunciator, is the result of negotiations between different actors whose names feature in the document.” (MAINGUENEAU, 2008, p.110, our translation)⁵.

Concerning the press, which is the focus of this article, Maingueneau notes that its regimen of authority is far from simple: “[…] each piece has its singular author, but the instance that is the newspaper transcends this multiplicity that finds the means to incarnate in the newsroom and its director.” (MAINGUENEAU, 2008, p.110-111, our translation)⁶. Therefore, he continues, it is possible to identify a specific tone in newspapers that can reflect a given political perspective, either more progressive or conservative, etc.

Maingueneau notes the difficulty in classifying instances of complex enunciation. He goes as far as mentioning possible taxonomies, such as metaenunciator (the newspaper in relation to each signed article it conveys), in opposition to an interenunciator (the result of a negotiation of several points of view etc.). He also raises the issue of the particularities of a negotiation between convergent points of view and of a negotiation that leads to a compromise between divergent points of view (as exemplified by the political motions written by representatives of distinct political parts). He signals the need for understanding whether these instances are a group with ideological purposes that must take a stand in a given field or a group with practical purposes that aims at making an instrument work etc. He adds:

The labels can always be multiplied to distinguish the several types of figures (metaenunciator, multienunciator, plurienunciator, superenunciator, etc.), however, it is necessary to promptly solve the issue of knowing whether it is possible or not to select basic categories that, combined, would allow to explain the diversity of attested speech genres. If such categories did not exist, it would be necessary to renounce to all terminology of global reach. (MAINGUENEAU, 2008, p.111, our translation)⁷.

The scope of the present article does not allow us to solve the issue raised by Maingueneau of selecting basic categories to sustain the global reach of the terminology. Our objective is to understand the print newspaper as an instance of complex enunciation, which, due to how the production of enunciations works, allows the emergence of a superenunciator. Although the superenunciator is individualized discursively, they are the result of a negotiation – non-horizontal as it is hierarchical – between several enunciative agents.

Describing print newspapers as superenunciators, in the following sections, is justified by the fact that in the production of informative journalistic genres, the enunciative marks that refer to the subjects of enunciation (consequently, marking their subjectivity) are effaced to enable the emergence of an institutional subject that enunciates – the newspaper – that is, discursively, the guarantor and the responsible for the enunciation and its social legitimization.

In short, it is possible to pursue a broad understanding of instances of complex enunciation as instances of production of enunciations whose workings depend on the negotiation⁸ or on the intervention of several enunciative agents and whose final enunciation is not attributed to these agents in isolation, but to a transcendent enunciative instance, personified discursively, and that becomes its guarantor and social legitimator.

Maingueneau, as stated earlier, first named the newspaper a meta-enunciator in relation to the signed texts it conveys. Because the articles in a newspaper still have their respective marks, the newspaper should only present itself, discursively, as enunciator of the enunciations of others – hence, the designation meta-enunciator. Newspapers, then, are considered a support through which several enunciations of marked and distinct authorships are made to circulate without establishing a relation of authorship with them.

Nonetheless, what is analyzed presently is not exactly the dynamic as explained by the French researcher, rather, it is the articulation of a single enunciator that becomes discursively responsible for the set of journalistic enunciations in the print newspaper, a set that derives from the intervention of several enunciative agents whose authorships are neither at display nor made explicit. It is this enunciator that is presently named superenunciator and onto which – as the article intends to demonstrate – the authorship befalls. This does not concern the newspaper as a whole – including the signed opinion articles, cartoons, etc. (taken as whole, it would be the case of a meta-enunciator by Maingueneau's definition), but every enunciative product for which the Newsroom (journalists, editors, designers, photographers, redactors, etc.) is responsible, the enunciations they produce.

The production of news and its enunciative agents

The Newsroom of great print newspapers is composed of several professionals organized according to clear labor division as well as hierarchical jobs and task distribution. Aside from a mere management issue, it is from such complex organization that the final product of a newspaper is derived, that is, the news as they are presented to consumers.

Clóvis Rossi (1988),⁹ a Brazilian journalist, introduces some of the mechanisms in the production of news, which he calls “filters”. Examples of these “filters” are the copy desk (an old designation for the work that is nowadays closer to that of the news editor), as the first in charge of writing the final text of a news from the information provided by reporters or news agencies, guided by the stylistic standards of each newspaper.

According to the Brazilian journalist, the editor of a section is responsible for new interventions, which correspond to the perspective of a given story and/or news, its size in the composition of the page – the relevance, the suggestion or even the writing of the title or the text details that compose the layout of each newspaper. The guidelines for A Folha de S. Paulo claim that “[…] headline, subtitle and lead¹⁰ that are attractive and strong are constant concerns for the editor.” (FOLHA DE S. PAULO, 2010, p.36, our translation).¹¹

Rossi also mentions the role of filter of the instance superior to editor:

Above the editors, there is the Newsroom's summit, which influences decisively on the whole process from the agenda to the final editing. The key person in the summit is the executive editor, the soul and heart of a newspaper […]. In addition to the general supervision of the whole news, the executive editor decides on the “looks” of the paper, that is, the first page. (ROSSI, 1988, p.44, our translation).¹²

The roles of photographer, designer, photography editor and the director of art are also noteworthy. Brait (2008) claims that print newspapers have a dimension with expressive characteristics that differ from oral discourses as well as from written or from purely visual ones. According to the researcher, both verbal and visual language are activated to cause interpenetration and consequently joint action: “[…] this can be seen in the organization of sections and pages, in the diversity of types and sizes of fonts, in many combinations involving text-photo, photo-subtitle, text-illustration.” (BRAIT, 2008, p.84, our translation)¹³.

This articulation is denominated the verbal-visual dimension of the page of a newspaper, once the production of meaning is neither anchored in a text sequence nor in a single photograph or image: meaning is produced in the articulation of these elements. “These elements, along with several others, characterize discursive and text strategies that, constructed and constituted throughout the history of the print newspaper, force the analyst to think of certain issues of meaning also from these particularities.” (BRAIT, 2008, p.84, our translation).¹⁴

A set of news, then, is the product of the enunciative-discursive intervention of several agents that is presented as a discursively cohesive unit, including its verbal-visual dimension. Therefore, placing the authorship of a news article onto the journalist who signed it – we highlight our focus on the genre print news – becomes a simplification, since it fails to consider the real process in its entire textual-discursive elaboration as well as the verbal-visual dimension of the concrete enunciation.

Maingueneau, in a new and revised edition of Analyser les textes de communication (2012), claims that “[…] all the attention must be brought onto the distinction between the producer(s) of a text, that is, the individuals who elaborate it, and the author, that is, the instance who is presented as responsible for it.” (MAINGUENEAU, 2012, p.150, original highlights, our translation)¹⁵. Therefore, he signals to the need of a better understanding of the issue of authorship when investigating the speech genre conveyed by the press, given the intervention of several enunciative agents, as already stated.

The new edition also brings in The responsible for the text, a development concerning the French researcher's definitions of meta-enunciator, inter-enunciator and arch-enunciator. Nonetheless, Maingueneau claims to simply introduce a few terms amidst a plurality of possible cases of authorship.

Concerning the meta-enunciator, for example, Maingueneau argues that it is established through the relation between the author of an article and the newspaper as an instance of superior level. The newspaper is the meta-enunciator because it allows the combination of articles that are complementary in a whole. Maingueneau also claims that it is the meta-enunciator that can receive a specific ethos, which is not shared equally among the various articles in the newspaper: the crosswords and the weather report have fewer marks of authorship than the editorial. Furthermore, Maingueneau reminds us that ethos is not a mere product of verbal language: it is also manifested through layout, photograph selection, colors, etc. (MAINGUENEAU, 2012).

Assuming that the meta-enunciator is established in the relation between several texts by different authors and a superior instance, that is the newspaper, the superenunciator, as proposed in this article, emerges from the effacement of interferences by enunciative agents in favor of a more comprehensive enunciative instance that is also more influent in its discursive sphere. Hence, the superenunciator is not established in a relation, but it emerges constitutively from the print news enunciation, and is comprehended as the guarantor, who is discursively responsible for the enunciations produced by various enunciative agents. This superenunciator has privileged circulation in their social sphere (the journalistic sphere).

The effacement of enunciative agents and the rising of the superenunciator

The concept of meta-enunciator, albeit satisfactory to understand the newspaper as support for several enunciations by different authors even if that support achieves a certain degree of discursive cohesion that manifests its own ethos, it does not embrace a nuclear particularity of the press that is the enunciative process of enunciations for which the newspaper itself is responsible, in other words, the enunciative product of the Newsroom. This shows the pertinence of naming that instance of enunciation as complex – the Newsroom as superenunciator rather than a meta-enunciator.

One of the characteristics of informative journalistic genres is the orientation toward apparent objectivity: in spite of assuming the impossibility of ideal objectivity because language is not transparent and all journalistic production go through subjective filters, the informative journalistic genres are grounded on the effect of objectivity that provides them with social legitimation.

This tension between the impossibility of objectivity and the intent of objectiveness is displayed in the description provided by the guidelines of Folha de S.Paulo in the entry objectivity:

There is no objectiveness in journalism. In choosing a subject, writing a text then editing it, journalists make decisions that are mostly subjective, influenced by their personal positions, habits and emotions.

Nonetheless, that does not exempt them from the obligation of being as objective as possible. In order to report a fact faithfully and to reproduce form, circumstances and repercussions, journalists must face facts from a distant and cold perspective, which does not mean apathy or disinterest. Consulting colleagues and researching similar facts from the past are procedures that enrich a possible objectivity. (FOLHA DE S.PAULO, 2010, p.46-47, our translation).¹⁶

The Brazilian researcher, Barros Filho (2001) argues that, albeit objectivity is impossible, it is possible to create an apparent objectivity with consequences that affect the entire informative system. Creating the apparent objectivity is the foundation of style in informative journalistic genres: “the apparent objectivity is characteristic of informative texts, by their structure, lexicon, limits as well their position among other media products” (BARROS FILHO, 2001, p.69, our translation).¹⁷

In the guidelines cited above, in which objectivity is impossible, it is also said that “[…] pursuing journalistic objectivity and critical distance are essential to ensure lucidity concerning the fact and its concrete developments.” (FOLHA DE S.PAULO, 2010, p.22, our translation).¹⁸ These statements show that, although impossible, journalistic objectivity is a value to be pursued for good professional practice and which is present in the guidelines of journalistic activity.

How is that apparent objectivity built? According to Grillo (2004), who also analyzed the guidelines of Folha de S.Paulo, the objective journalistic style is primarily built upon the prohibition of the following linguistic features: “[…] first person singular, certain adjectives and adverbs, the choice of certain verbs to introduce statements.” (GRILLO, 2004, p.87, our translation). In the guidelines for Folha de S.Paulo, the section standards and style focuses precisely on the orthographic standards and the several restrictions, in terms of style, especially of verbal forms of appreciation that could compromise objectivity.

The effacement of subjective marks that explicitly denounce a certain discursive position of appreciation on behalf of the journalist/newspaper is part of the strategy of informative journalistic genres to present themselves as objective, impartial, non-partisan, etc. It also builds the effect of transparency through which the “[…] facts are laid out in front of the reader in order to camouflage the instance of journalistic production, which is legitimized by its transparency toward the facts.” (GRILLO, 2004, p.235, our translation).¹⁹

In the enunciations for which the Newsroom is responsible, that fit the informative journalistic genres, there is the attempt to efface marks of enunciative agents (who are several, as stated earlier) through lexical standardization, syntactical prescription and verbal-visual composition (the visual design of a certain platform, for instance). In such cases, even if the journalist signs the article or the photographer is credited, such information does not turn them into authors (with their respective discursive responsibility) of the news enunciations in their verbal-visual entirety.

According to Maingueneau's perspective introduced in the beginning of the present article, those signatures would be closer to presenting the producers of a text/photograph (even though in the case of newspapers that would not be entirely true due to the editing) than their authors, because the latter are not presented nor comprehended by the readers as the instance responsible for the enunciations. Enunciations, then, are taken as belonging to the instance of complex enunciation that is the newspaper and under its responsibility, hence the symptom manifested in common expressions like “Folha de S.Paulo said that…”, “O Globo denounced yesterday…”, “Veja Magazine claims that…”. This is the aspect on which one must focus to understand the newspaper as a superenunciator and not just a meta-enunciator, as signaled by Maingueneau.

In order to further develop the current characterization, it is necessary to distinguish two types of enunciations that compose print newspapers: the ones produced by the instance of complex enunciation, which is the newspaper; and the ones produced by enunciative agents outside that instance. In other words, enunciations produced by the “Newsroom” and the ones not produced by the “Newsroom”.

That distinction is not limited to the features of the producer of a certain enunciation. Regarding the print newspaper, it also implicates the distinction of the enunciative responsibility given the enunciation that was produced. An opinion article, a cartoon, a chronicle, a column, etc. have clear authorship and, consequently, the responsibility attributed to the ones who signed it – they are authored, according to Maingueneau. The enunciations belonging to informative journalistic genres (news, reports, notes, stories, etc.) are products of interventions by various enunciative agents and, even when a text is signed by the journalist or a photographer is credited, their discursive responsibility is placed onto the newspaper, because that is how the enunciation is presented and how it circulates outside the journalistic sphere.

Maingueneau claims that “[…] authorship, in fact, is not definitely bound to a text, it depends greatly on the way in which the text circulates and is re-employed.” (MAINGUENEAU, 2012, p.152, our translation).²⁰ It is precisely due to the difference in perception of the enunciative responsibility that the newspaper is designated as superenunciator: while an article signed by a columnist has the enunciative responsibility and the credibility in its respective discursive sphere granted to the columnist (for example: John Doe said in his column that…), enunciations belonging to informative journalistic genres, however, have their responsibility and credibility attributed to the newspaper in the sphere of reception, in spite of any signature (the paper said that…). The signature, then, is nothing but journalistic vanity.²¹

Maingueneau identifies aspects of that dynamic:

In a newspaper, certain texts are not signed, others are signed with initials, other are signed by full names. There is a certain gradient in the fact that the text belongs, either way, to that superior instance of the newspaper. (MAINGUENEAU, 2012, p.151, our translation).²²

It is noteworthy that the effacement of the marks of the enunciative agents who produce an enunciation belonging to informative journalistic genres, in addition to producing the apparent objectivity or the genre's effect of transparency, act in the construction of an enunciator that transcends all these individualized enunciators. Such transcendence implicates the position of enunciator. It is no longer journalist X who signs the piece, or designer Y who composed the verbal-visual layout of the page, or editor Z who wrote the headline or highlighted certain verbal passages who is enunciating. Indeed, the newspaper becomes the enunciator and assumes discursive responsibility, thus becoming “the instance that is presented as responsible [for the enunciations]”²³ (MAINGUENEAU, 2012, p.152, our translation). Such is the description of the instance of complex enunciation that is the newspaper as a superenunciator.

Why, then, super rather than meta?

The newspaper, in that dynamic, reaches the status of superenunciator because the enunciation produced by that instance of complex enunciation, whose authorship is attributed to the newspaper, earns credibility in the sphere of circulation, which could not be achieved by the enunciative agents who produced that same enunciation in isolation, outside that same instance.

Naturally that credibility is not a prerogative of any print newspaper, or an intrinsic feature. It is bound to the status of the newspaper in society; the ones that have it are called quality press.²⁴

The superenunciator newspaper is also constituted by the process of effacement of some of the marks of subjectivity of enunciative agents involved in the production of news stories through standardized lexicon common to all the newspaper to allow the perception of an organic whole. Enunciative-discursive strategies are employed to build the effect of objectivity, impartiality, balance and non-partisanship. The opinion/subjective enunciations are presented separately and are clearly marked, thus creating the informative/objective ones by opposition. The superenunciator newspaper establishes, by these means and through such forms, the enunciative position of that which enunciates the truth,²⁵ by claiming and presenting itself as exempt.²⁶

The superenunciator's enunciation aims at presenting itself discursively to its sphere of circulation, through the enunciative-discursive strategies that were mentioned, dressed with impartiality and imbued with “the journalistic mission” of pursuing the “common wellfare”, whereas the discourse by any other enunciative agent (the other side²⁷ offered to a defendant, the position of a government or a party, a social/cultural/socioeconomic group) is seen and proposed as interested discourse (because, ultimately, it reflects the interests of a particular enunciative agent).

Folha de S.Paulo and superenunciative marks

The analysis of a set of news published in Folha de S.Paulo is presented at the end of this article to demonstrate the effacement of enunciative agents involved in the production and in the making of a superenunciative mark that reinforces the superenunciator built by the print paper.

The main story was published on 4^th December 2010, in the “Daily Affairs” [Cotidiano] section, page C4. The story occupies the upper half of the page as seen in the reproduction displayed below.

Titled “Police Officer forbidden of using backpack in checkpoints” ²⁸ [PM é proibido de usar mochila em blitz], the news reports that according to a decision by the General Command of the Military Police in Rio de Janeiro [Comando-Geral da Polícia Militar do Rio de Janeiro], police officers would no longer be allowed to carry backpacks during incursions in the set of communities known as “Complexo do Alemão”. The news refers to reports of abuse, theft and intimidation by the police officers that were published by the same newspaper in the week the story was published. That summarizes the facts in the article.

This set of news, which includes a large photograph, is composed of the first story and two shorter stories directly below. The set occupies two thirds of the page, and four names were marked as enunciative agents: the journalists Fabia Prates, Diana Brito and Cirilo Júnior, as well as the photographer Joel Silva (upper right corner of the photograph). The information in the last third of the page, an obituary, is not included in the analysis because it is not an informative journalistic genre.

The four enunciative agents are not the exclusive producers of that enunciation: as explained before, the final enunciations must be comprehended as the result of interventions by other agents: editors, photography director, designer, copydesk, the author of the graphic layout, etc. whose work is also important in the production of meaning.

Figure 1
Copy of page C4 in the section Daily Affairs [Cotidiano 4/12/2010]

In the main story, the name of the newspaper is written in bold four times:

• Folha published this week a series of reports by residents […] (first line, fifth paragraph);

• Questioned by Folha, the PR for the Military Police said that […] (first line, seventh paragraph)

• A police officer told Folha that in the first days of the operation […] (first line, eighth paragraph)

• The Military Police denies it, but Folha investigated that the ban on backpacks […] (first line, ninth paragraph).²⁹

The story titled “Police arrested 118 since the beginning of the attacks” brings the name of the paper written in bold in the seventh line of the fourth paragraph: “Folha registered during that time the deaths of at least 51 people […]”.³⁰

As evident in these manifestations, using the name of the paper in bold works as a synecdoche for the journalist because the part (the enunciating journalist) is taken by the whole (the superenunciator Folha de S.Paulo). Except for the first example, in which the reference is directly related to the newspaper (Folha published…), using this mark makes the rubric appear as an animated being because it questions, hears and investigates.

It is interesting to read the entry for the rubric in the Standards of the paper:

Folha – is the form used by Folha de S. Paulo to address itself. Use the term with moderation, in bold and beginning with capital letters. The bold type is dismissed for titles, subtitles and Editor's Notes. The name of the paper should only be written in full for transcribing texts of others such as letters or full texts. Then, the bold type and the abbreviation S. without space before Paulo: Folha de S. Paulo. (FOLHA DE S.PAULO, 2010, p.71-72, original emphasis).³¹

The first line in the definition shows a slight contradiction since an explanatory text on how to use the rubric Folha should claim that the enunciative mark (superenunciative, as I shall claim below) ought to be used by the enunciative agents when referring to the newspaper for which they work. However, the explanation of the rubric contains its very use because it assumes that these enunciative agents are enunciative agents in themselves, but the newspaper: “the form used by Folha de S. Paulo to address itself”.

Why assuming such formulation as superenunciative mark? Because using it strengthens the construction of the instance of superior enunciation that is the newspaper. Consequently, it effaces the marks of several enunciative agents who participated in the production of the enunciation at the same time it builds a corporality to that instance, thus reinforcing its nature as author and guarantor of what is said, and turning itself into the superenunciator, that guarantees a privileged circulation for the enunciation in the social sphere. Hence, the unbalance pointed in the last section of the article is established. The impersonal, transcendent character of that enunciative mark (that effaces any relation to the enunciative agents involved in the construction of the enunciation) is constitutive of the instance of complex enunciation that is the newspaper as superenunciator and should be comprehended as superenunciative mark.

Conclusion

Understanding the instance of complex enunciation, that is the newspaper as superenunciator, is important for discourse analysts who investigate print media products, once their constitution as such is an intrinsic part of the production of enunciations and as significant as their reception in their discursive sphere.

The newspaper as communication vehicle cannot, as the article tried to demonstrate, be taken as a simple meta-enunciator that is constituted in the relation between enunciations by the various enunciative agents in a newspaper. Presenting several opinion articles, cartoons, editorials – who have clear authorship – as well as enunciations of informative journalistic genres would implicate understanding the paper as a mere support, even if that relation results in a discursive image of the paper, a particular ethos. This is insufficient to understand and analyze the discursive position of a print paper in its discursive sphere.

It is absolutely necessary, for analytical purposes, an initial division of enunciations in a print newspaper: 1) the ones produced by the Newsroom; and 2) the ones produced by agents outside the Newsroom and/or enunciatively marked as different. The enunciations in the former category are divided into 1.1) informative journalistic genres; and 1.2) other genres (editorial, opinion pieces, obituary, reviews, etc.).

If the analysis focuses, first, on the newspaper, without any distinction toward the production of each enunciation, it is the case of a meta-enunciator as defined by Maingueneau. However, that approach is little productive for analyzing discursive positions, since it frequently happens that in a team of columnists, for example, there are divergent opinions to ensure the image of the paper as non-partisan, exempt, etc. Notwithstanding, if the analysis focuses on enunciations by the Newsroom that are informative journalistic genres, approaching the paper as meta-enunciator becomes insufficient because it limits the influence of the genre in the very process of enunciation and it ignores the effects of meaning produced by the enunciative strategies and by the genre itself. Those enunciative strategies are due to interventions of enunciative agents belonging to the instance of complex enunciation that is the newspaper. On the other hand, they efface marks from those interventions and build a new enunciative image that assumes discursive responsibility and establishes, through generic prescriptions, a privileged enunciative position in its sphere of enunciation. Such privileged position could not be assumed by any of the enunciative agents in isolation, indeed, the position is guaranteed by the discursive personification of that superior instance in the articulation of the newspaper's superenunciator.

The different perceptions of enunciative responsibility make insufficient the designation of the paper as meta-enunciator: this is not the case of degrees of authorship (MAINGUENEAU, 2007), but different constructions of enunciative-discursive positions that originate in the very production of enunciations in informative journalistic genres. Hence, the different circulation of enunciations in their discursive sphere.

It is necessary for discourse analysts, then, to comprehend newspaper's enunciative processes and the consequent circulation in their respective discursive spheres. This requires considering that the instance of complex enunciation that is the newspaper is not limited to a complex enunciative space where enunciations belonging to different authors establish relations to one another – as the notion of meta-enunciator leads to believe. The newspaper itself, as contemporary industry with staff and an extremely severe hierarchy, as expected, and holding several points of view and interests of its own, also work (through the Newsroom) as instance of complex enunciation that produces its own enunciations (spheres of production), which assume privileged circulation in society (sphere of circulation) as well as privileged positions to form the public opinion (reception sphere).

In that discursive privilege, so to speak, lies the influence of the newspaper. Such privilege is the result of specific enunciative-discursive practices that constitute the journalistic informative genres. The newspaper is not limited to a mediator of perspectives, an enunciator of enunciators (meta), however, its scenography and its ethos make it seem so purposely – because it is part of the quality press’ own discursive strategy to show itself as plural, impartial, non-partisan and objective.

The newspaper is an instance of complex enunciation which aims at informing and influencing, showing and hiding, complementing and criticizing, which can only be achieved through enunciative-discursive strategies, showing itself as an enunciative instance discursively “exempt” and guided by “the pursuit of truth”. The newspaper builds to itself a privileged enunciative-discursive position, it claims itself as upholder of social credibility, establishes itself as superenunciator – as it not only presents several enunciations but also enunciates from a privileged position in the respective sphere of circulation that is the public opinion.

This particular form of enunciating must be the focus of discourse analysts who investigate the press or media discourses, to ensure the pertinence of comprehending that particular form of enunciating as product of an instance of complex enunciation that builds a superenunciator.

• 1
  The characteristics of informative journalistic genres can be found in Vianna (2014).
• 2
  Italics will be employed in this article on the titles of cited works, press vehicles, notions, concepts and as they appear in the citations originally. Quotation marks are used for direct quotations or modalization.
• 3
  Citations of Maingueneau's are based on the Brazilian Portuguese translations available, as referenced at the end of the paper, given the unavailability of translations into English of these works. One exception is Maingueneau (2012), in which case the French edition was used as reference. All translations of citations in this paper are followed by a footnote to the base text.
• 4
  Original: Essa problemática do hiperenunciador se inscreve numa perspectiva mais ampla, que ainda não foi objeto de um tratamento de conjunto na análise do discurso, a das instâncias de enunciação que, na ausência de melhor, poder-se-ia dizer por simples comodidade “complexas”. Em regra geral, as teorias da enunciação lidam essencialmente com dois tipos de instâncias validantes: individuais e genéricas ou generalizantes (representadas comumente pelo sujeito universal da doxa. Na semântica e na filosofia da linguagem, ao contrário, na linha de pensamento do imemorial debate entre nominalismo e realismo, desenvolvendo-se ontologias muito mais sofisticadas: que modo de existência deve-se conferir a entidades como “a França”, “o regimento”, “os jovens”, “a burguesia”, “a opinião pública” etc. Os analistas do discurso, por seu lado, abordam essa questão levando em conta a diversidade das práticas discursivas efetivas. (MAINGUENEAU, 2008, p.109-110).
• 5
  Original: “[…] o texto, atribuído a um enunciador institucional, resulta de uma negociação entre diferentes atores cujo nome figura no document.” (MAINGUENEAU, 2008, p.110).
• 6
  Original: “[…] cada artigo tem um autor singular, mas a instância que é o jornal transcende essa multiplicidade que encontra o meio de se encarnar no comitê de redação e em seu director.” (MAINGUENEAU, 2008, p.110-111).
• 7
  Original: Podem-se sempre multiplicar os rótulos para distinguir esses variados casos de figura (metaenunciador, multienunciador, plurienunciador, superenunciador etc.), mas de pronto seria necessário resolver o problema de saber se é possível ou não selecionar categorias de base que, combinando-se, permitiriam explicar a diversidade dos gêneros de discurso atestados. Se tais categorias não existissem, seria necessário renunciar a toda terminologia de alcance global. (MAINGUENEAU, 2008, p.111).
• 8
  The entry by Catherine Kerbrat-Orecchioni for the dictionary of discourse analysis organized by Charaudeau and Maingueneau (2008, p.345-346) defines “negotiation”: conversational negotiations designate any interactional process more or less localized that is likely to appear in the instant a disagreement is established between interlocutors, concerning one feature or another of the interaction itself, in order to suppress said disagreement. These negotiations are found in all sorts of contexts in regard to all types of objects – among which, the ingredients that constitute the very theme of the conversation and that are somehow negotiable: the “script” of the exchange, the taking of turns, the subjects, the signs that are employed, the semantic and pragmatic value of the exchange, the opinions, the ending of the exchange, the mutual identities, the interpersonal relations, etc. The notion of negotiation is fundamental for analyzing conversations, which are conceived as collective constructions that assume the establishment among the interlocutors of a number of agreements regarding the rules of the “language play” in which they find themselves. However, these agreements are not always established at once. It is due to a ceaseless interactive bricolage that participants eventually build together a somewhat coherent “text”, once the mechanism of conversations rely on imprecise rules and fluctuating norms. This imprecision of rules makes negotiating necessary, but it could also be said that: “[…] this imprecision is necessary to allow for negotiations, that is, an adaptation that abides by the other and by the particularities of their cognitive and affective universe – to allow for, in a single word, intersubjectivity” (KERBRAT-ORECCHIONI apud CHARAUDEAU; MAINGUENEAU, 2008, p.346, our translation). Original: “[…] esta imprecisão é necessária para permitir as negociações, isto é, a adaptação tateante ao outro e às particularidades de seu universo cognitivo e afetivo – para permitir, em uma palavra, a intersubjetividade.” (KERBRAT-ORECCHIONI apud CHARAUDEAU; MAINGUENEAU, 2008, p.346).
• 9
  The work of journalists has suffered significant transformations since the publication of the work cited here, due to new technologies as well as by organizational rearrangements. However, the hierarchical structure of the Newsroom has been kept practically unaltered in regard to its functions as exposed in the citations. A detailed discussion on the issue is found in Rodrigues (2013).
• 10
  Lead is the concentration of relevant information in the first paragraph of a news article basically stating who did what, how, where, when and why.
• 11
  Original: “[…] título, subtítulos e lides atraentes e fortes são preocupações permanentes do editor.” (FOLHA DE S.PAULO, 2010, p.36).
• 12
  Original: “Acima dos editores há a cúpula da Redação, que influi decisivamente em todo o processo, desde a pauta até a edição final. O homem-chave, na cúpula, é o secretário de Redação, espécie de alma e coração de um jornal […]. Além da supervisão geral de todo o noticiário, o secretário decide a “cara” do jornal, ou seja, a primeira página.” (ROSSI, 1988, p.44).
• 13
  Original: “[…] isso pode ser constatado na organização dos cadernos e das páginas, na diversidade de tipos e tamanhos das letras utilizadas, nas mais diferentes combinatórias envolvendo texto-foto, foto-legenda, texto-ilustração.” (BRAIT, 2008, p.84).
• 14
  Original: “Esses elementos, somados a vários outros, caracterizam estratégias discursivas e textuais que, construídas e constituídas ao longo da história do jornal impresso, obrigam o analista a pensar em determinadas questões de significação também a partir dessas particularidades.” (BRAIT, 2008, p.84).
• 15
  Original: “[…] Il faut déjà donner tout son poids à la distinction qui a été faite entre le ou les producteur(s) d´un texte, c´est-à-dire les individus qui l´ont élaboré, et l´auteur, c´est-à-dire l´instance qui est présenté comme son responsible.” (MAINGUENEAU, 2012, p.150, original highlights).
• 16
  Original: “Não existe objetividade em jornalismo. Ao escolher um assunto, redigir um texto e editá-lo, o jornalista toma decisões em larga medida subjetivas, influenciadas por suas posições pessoais, hábitos e emoções. Isso não o exime, porém, da obrigação de ser o mais objetivo possível.
  Para relatar um fato com fidelidade, reproduzir a forma, as circunstâncias e as repercussões, o jornalista precisa encarar o fato com distanciamento e frieza, o que não significa apatia nem desinteresse. Consultar outros jornalistas e pesquisar fatos análogos ocorridos no passado são procedimentos que ampliam a objetividade possível.” (FOLHA DE S.PAULO, 2010, p.46-47).
• 17
  Original: “[…] a objetividade aparente é característica do texto informativo, por sua estrutura, seu léxico, seus limites e também sua posição entre os demais produtos da mídia.” (BARROS FILHO, 2001, p.69).
• 18
  Original: “[…] a busca da objetividade jornalística e o distanciamento crítico são fundamentais para garantir a lucidez quanto ao fato e seus desdobramentos concretos.” (FOLHA DE S.PAULO, 2010, p.22).
• 19
  Original: “[…] os fatos são colocados diante do leitor, de forma a camuflar a instância de produção jornalística que se legitima por sua transparência em relação aos fatos.” (GRILLO, 2004, p.235).
• 20
  Original: “L´auctorialité, en effet, n´est pas attachée de manière définitive à un texte, elle dépend largement de la manière dont le texte circule et est réemployé.” (MAINGUENEAU, 2012, p.152).
• 21
  The legal implications of the journalist signature are not open to debate; we chose to focus on the form in which enunciations are discursively comprehended by the sphere of reception in which they circulate.
• 22
  Original: “Dans um journal certains textes ne sont pas signés, d´autres sont signés par des initiales, d´autre par um nom complet. Une telle gradation repouse sur le fait que de toute façon le texte fait partie de cette instance auctoriale supérieure, le journal.” (MAINGUENEAU, 2012, p.151).
• 23
  Original: “[…] l´instance qui est présentée comme son responsable.” (MAINGUENEAU, 2012, p.152).
• 24
  The term quality press is commonly used to designate large communication enterprises that are socially recognized as relevant in their approach to information, differently from sensationalist, popular media or even part of the yellow press: “[…] these adjectives were a way of naming competing products in the mediatic field at the time. Calling a product ‘dirty’ or ‘yellow’ is imposing and legitimating a representation of the ideal press.” (BARROS FILHO, 2001, p.24, our translation). The time mentioned by the researcher is the end of the 19^th century, when the journalistic field was establishing itself and during which emerged the conflict between these two poles of journalistic enunciative production. It is noteworthy that the consolidation of a paper as quality press involves adjusting enunciations, given the responsibility for their production, to the informative journalistic genres that are oriented by objectivity, impartiality and relevance of their agenda.
  Original: “[…] esses adjetivos eram uma forma de designar produtos concorrentes no campo mediático da época. Designar um produto como ‘sujo’ ou ‘marrom’ é impor e legitimar uma representação do jornal ideal.” (BARROS FILHO, 2001, p.24).
• 25
  Journalists know they do not enunciate the truth and, currently, the very existence of truth is openly questioned; however, an effect of truth is built as the cornerstone of journalistic credibility and the origin of the superenunciator's discursive force. A detailed discussion of this matter is present in Vianna (2011).
• 26
  The opposite perspective is found in Magalhães (2010, 2014) for whom the tension does not lie in objectivity/subjectivity in journalism, but in the process of objectivation and subjectivation in journalistic practice. The author claims that “Demonstrating a concept of objectivation that is defined not by the opposition to subjectivation, but for the combination of both processes, through journalistic practice, points to the operational productivity of this professional ethical cornerstone. This is so because, if the notion of objectivation as effacement of subjectivation relies on the ingenuity toward the phenomenon of language and raises dilemmas and conflicts in the journalistic sphere, the notion of objectivation as a form of subjective articulation expands the horizon of possibilities toward the responsible act in these same tasks.” (MAGALHÃES, 2014, p.114).
• 27
  Rubric employed by Folha de S. Paulo as space destined to the presence of the contradictory (the word of the defendant, for example) in news enunciations.
• 28
  As this section of the article focuses on pointing superenunciative marks, the verbal-visual composition of the news is not analyzed, even if it is part of the meaning production of print newspapers.
• 29
  Original: A Folha publicou nesta semana diversos relatos de moradores […]; Questionada pela Folha, a assessoria de imprensa da Polícia Militar disse (…); Um policial disse à Folha que nos primeiros dias da operação […]; A Polícia Militar nega, mas a Folha apurou que a proibição do uso de mochilas […] (FOLHA DE S.PAULO, 2010, p.71-72).
• 30
  Original: “A Folha registrou no período ao menos 51 pessoas mortas […]” (FOLHA DE S.PAULO, 2010, p.71-72).
• 31
  Original: “Folha - é a forma como a Folha de S.Paulo se refere a ela mesma. Use o termo com moderação, sempre em negrito e começando com letra maiúscula. Em títulos, legendas e Notas da Redação não use o negrito. O nome do jornal só deve ser grafado por extenso na transcrição de textos de terceiros, como cartas ou íntegras. Nesse caso, mantenha o negrito e a abreviatura S. sem espaço antes de Paulo: Folha de S.Paulo.” (FOLHA DE S.PAULO, 2010, p.71-72).

Acknowledgments

CNPq (grant 141469/2012-9) e CAPES PDSE (grant 6079-13-0).

REFERÊNCIAS

• BARROS FILHO, C de. Ética na comunicação São Paulo: Moderna. 2001.
• BRAIT, B. Ironia em perspectiva polifônica 2. ed. Campinas: Unicamp, 2008.
• CHARAUDEAU, P.; MAINGUENEAU, D. Dicionário de Análise de Discurso Trad. Fabiana Komesu (coord.) São Paulo: Contexto, 2008.
• FOLHA DE S. PAULO. Manual de Redação 15.ed. São Paulo: Publifolha, 2010.
• GRILLO, S. A produção do real em gêneros do jornal impresso São Paulo: Humanitas, 2004.
• MAGALHÃES, A. S. Uma escuta dialógica para conflitos contemporâneos na imprensa. In: BRAIT, B.; MAGALHÃES, A. S. (org.). Dialogismo: teoria e(m) prática. São Paulo: Terracota, 2014. p.93-115.
• MAGALHÃES, A. S. Subjetivação, jornalismo e ética: uma abordagem dialógica. 2010. 275f. Tese (Doutorado em Linguística Aplicada e Estudos da Linguagem) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2010.
• MAINGUENEAU, D. Analyser les textes de communication. Nouvelle éd. revue et aug. Paris: Armand Colin, 2012.
• MAINGUENEAU, D. Cenas da enunciação Org. M. Cecília P. de Souza-e-Silva e Sírio Possenti. São Paulo: Parábola, 2008.
• MAINGUENEAU, D. Analyser les textes de communication 2.ed. Paris: Armand Colin, 2007.
• PM é proibido de usar mochila em blitz. Folha de S. Paulo, São Paulo, C4, 04 dez. 2010. Cotidiano.
• RODRIGUES, M. G. O “repórter Shiva”? práticas discursivas e atividade de trabalho do jornalismo em tempo de mudanças. Tese (Doutorado em Linguística Aplicada e Estudos da Linguagem) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2013.
• ROSSI, C. O que é jornalismo 8.ed. São Saulo: Brasiliense, 1988.
• VIANNA, R. O gênero jornalístico informativo na perspectiva do Círculo de Bakhtin. In: BRAIT, B.; MAGALHÃES, A. S. (org.). Dialogismo: teoria e(m) prática. São Paulo: Terracota, 2014. p.54-74.
• VIANNA, R. Jornalismo, ironia e “informação” 2011. 220f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Linguística Aplicada e Estudos da Linguagem) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2011.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  09 Nov 2020
• Date of issue
  2020

History

• Received
  16 Aug 2018
• Accepted
  30 Jan 2019