The accountability of assessments in news interviews

Abstract

This study examines the accountability of assessments in news interview settings on two Arabic networks. It employs a conversation analytic approach, in addition to quantitative analysis to identify the most adopted practices that show participants’ orientation to the accountability of assessments. The data consists of 28 hours of recorded interviews on the Arab television news networks, Aljazeera Al-Arabiya channels. The findings show that interviewers and interviewees adopt different strategies to avoid the accountability of their displayed assessments. Interviewers attribute their assessments either to third parties or to the upshot of interviewees’ answers. Similarly, interviewees introduce accounts before and following their proffered assessments to provide epistemic support to these assessments. Furthermore, interviewers introduce follow-up questions to scrutinize interviewees’ assessments and accounts or seek interviewees’ reaffirmation of these assessments to highlight their accountability.

Race and racism - ‘They attacked you just like that’: racial epistemics in making claims about racism.

“…Razdan's uptake of this account shows that Amusa's account fits with the expectations of demonstrating racism as is seen in the incomplete but upgraded assessment by Razdan (Alroumi & Lahlali, 2022;Lindström & Mondada, 2009): 'That's a very it's a very' (line 9).…”