Representations of childcare in the Australian print media: An exploratory corpus-assisted discourse analysis

Marianne Fenech*, David P. Wilkins

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    11 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    While an increasing body of Australian and international research has explored the relationship between media and education, few studies have examined this relationship in the context of early childhood education. This paper contributes to this research gap by reporting on a corpus-assisted discourse analysis of how childcare is represented in 801 newspaper texts from six Australian newspapers. As a foundational paper of a broader study investigating public and political influences on parents’ childcare choices, the paper details the use and utility of corpus linguistic tools for exploring the discourse construction of childcare in a large corpus of media texts. It also highlights the value of analysing media corpora via media ownership, focusing on the two dominant Australian media organisations, Fairfax and News Corp. Analyses reveal similarities but also key differences in the representation of childcare in Fairfax and News Corp newspapers. In Australia, print media still sets the daily media agenda and reflects the dominant discourse constructions surrounding major public issues. Accordingly, the beliefs, practices and decision-making of current and potential parent users of formal childcare may be differentially influenced depending not just on their (direct or indirect) access to print media, but by the format (tabloid or broadsheet) and thus ownership (Fairfax or News Corp).

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)161-190
    Number of pages30
    JournalAustralian Educational Researcher
    Volume44
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2017

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Representations of childcare in the Australian print media: An exploratory corpus-assisted discourse analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this