Aakhus, M. (2002). The design of forums for online public deliberation and the consequences for argumentation. The Kentucky Journal of Communication, 21(2), 139–149.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aakhus, M. (2007). Conversations for Reflection: Augmenting transitions and transformations in expertise. In R. Day & C. McInerney (Eds.), Rethinking KM: From knowledge management to knowledge processes. Amsterdam: Kluwer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aakhus, M. (2015). Design. In K. Tracy (Ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. New York: Wiley. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aakhus, M., & Lewiński, M. (2011). Argument analysis in large-scale deliberation. In E. Feteris, B. Garssen, & A. F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.), Keeping in touch with Pragma-Dialectics (pp. 165–183). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aakhus, M., & Lewiński, M. (2015). Toward Polylogical Analysis of Argumentation: Disagreement Space In The Public Controversy About Fracking. 8th International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA) Conference, Amsterdam.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aakhus, M., & Vasilyeva, L. (2008). Managing disagreement space in multiparty deliberation. In F. H. van Eemeren & B. Garssen (Eds.), Controversy and confrontation: Relating controversy analysis with argumentation theory (pp. 197–214). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Agliati, M. (2003). La storia del “Corriere del Ticino”. Muzzano: Edizioni San Giorgio.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aikin, S. F., & Casey, J. (2011). Straw Men, Weak Men, and Hollow Men. Argumentation, 25(1), 87–105. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aristotle. (1954). Rhetoric. In W. Rhys Roberts (Ed.). Mineola: Dover Publications.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aristotle. (1960). Posterior Analytics. Topica. H. Treddenick & H.N. Fowler (Eds.). Cambridge/London: Harvard University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baker, M. (1998). The Function of Argumentation Dialogue in Cooperative Problem-Solving. Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Argumentation.
Baker, M. (2009). Argumentative Interactions and the Social Construction of Knowledge. In N. Muller Mirza & A. -N. Perret-Clermont (Eds.), Argumentation and Education: Theoretical Foundations and Practices (pp. 127–144). Dordrecht: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). The problem of speech genres.. In C. Emerson & M. Holquist (Eds.), Speech genres and other late essays. Austin: University of Texas.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bakhtin, M. M. (2006). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Balbi, G., Fari, S., Richeri, G., & Calvo, S. (2014). Network Neutrality. Switzerland’s role in the genesis of the Telegraph Union, 1855–1875. Bern: Peter Lang. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bantz, C. R., McCorkle, S., & Baade, R. C. (1981). The news factory. In W. G. C. & D. B. H. (Eds.), Mass communication review yearbook (pp. 336–390). Beverly Hills: Sage.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baumtrog, M. D. (2015). Delineating the reasonable and rational for humans. 8th International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA) Conference, Amsterdam.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Baumtrog, M. D. (2017). Reasoning and arguing, dialectically and dialogically, among individual and multiple participants. Argumentation.
.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Becker, L., & Vlad, T. (2009). News Organisations and Routines In K. Wahl-Jorgensen & T. Hanitsch (Eds.), Handbook of Journalism Studies (pp. 42–56). New York/ London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bednarek, M. (2006). Evaluation in Media Discourse. Analysis of a Newspaper Corpus. London/ New York: Continuum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bednarek, M., & Caple, H. (2012a). ‘Value added’: Language, image and news values. Discourse, Context & Media, 1(2–3), 103–113. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bednarek, M., & Caple, H. (2012b). News Discourse. London/ New York: Continuum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bednarek, M., & Caple, H. (2014). Why do news values matter? Towards a new methodological framework for analysing news discourse in Critical Discourse Analysis and beyond. Discourse & Society, 25(2), 135–158. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bell, A. (1991). The Language of News Media. Oxford: Blackwell.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bell, A. (1998). The discourse structure of news stories. In A. Bell & P. Garrett (Eds.), Approaches to Media Discourse (pp. 64–103). Oxford: Blackwell.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bell, A., & Garrett, P. (1998). Approaches to Media Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Billig, M. (1996). Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bitzer, L. F. (1959). Aristotleʹs Enthymeme Revisited. The Quarterly Journal of Speech 45, 399–408. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Blair, A. J. (1998). The Limits of the Dialogue Model of Argument. Argumentation, 12, 325–339. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bonfadelli, H., Meier, W. A., & Schanne, M. (1998). Öffentlicher Rundfunk und Kultur. Die SRG zwischen gesellschaftlichem Auftrag und wirtschaftlichem Kalkül. Zürich: IPMZ – Institut für Publizistikwissenschaft und Medienforschung der Universität Zürich.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Breed, W. (1955). Social Control in the Newsroom: A Functional Analysis. Social Forces, 33(4), 326–335. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bromley, M., Tumber, H., & Zelizer, B. (2001). Journalism education. Journalism, 2(3), 251–254. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brown, R. M. (1979). The gatekeeper reassessed: a return to Lewin. Journalism Quarterly, 56, 595–601. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bruxelles, S., & Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2004). Coalitions in polylogues. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(1), 75–113. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Burger, M. (2011). Une caractérisation praxéologique du désaccord polémique: ce quʹinformer dans les médias veut dire. Semen, 31, 61–60.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Burger, M., & Amossy, R. (Eds.). (2011). Polémiques médiatiques et journalistiques. Le discours polémique en question(s).![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Burger, M., Micheli, R., & Jacquin, J. (2011). La parole politique en confrontation dans les médias. Bruxelles: De Boeck.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Catenaccio, P., Cotter, C., De Smedt, M., Garzone, G., Jacobs, G., Macgilchrist, F., … Van Praet, E. (2011). Towards a linguistics of news production. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(7), 1843–1852. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Christopher Guerra, S. (2008). Themen, Thesen und Argumente zur Position des italienischen in der viersprachigen Schweiz. Studies in Communication Sciences, 8(1), 67–91.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cicero, M. T. (2003). Topica. In T. Reinhardt (Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clayman, S. E. (1988). Displaying Neutrality in Television News Interviews. Social Problems, 35(4), 474–492. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clayman, S. E. (2008). Talk in interaction as a locus for media studies. In M. Burger (Ed.), L’ analyse linguistique des discours des médias: théories, méthodes en enjeux. Entre sciences du langage et sciences de la communication et des médias (pp. 83–109). Québec: Nota Bene.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clayman, S. E., & Heritage, J. (2002a). The news interview. Journalists and public figures on the air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clayman, S. E., & Heritage, J. (2002b). Questioning Presidents: Journalistic Deference and Adversarialness in the Press Conferences of U.S. Presidents Eisenhower and Reagan. Journal of Communication, 52(4), 749–775. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clayman, S. E., & Reisner, A. (1998). Gatekeeping in action: editorial conferences and assessments of newsworthiness. American Sociological Review, 63(2), 178–199. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Conboy, M. (2007). The language of the news. London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cotter, C. (2001). Discourse and media. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. E. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 416–436). Oxford et al.: Blackwell.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cotter, C. (2010). News Talk. Investigating the Language of Journalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dascal, M., van Eemeren, F. H., Rigotti, E., Stati, S., & Rocci, A. (2005). Editors’ Introduction: Dialogue, Argument, Controversy. Studies in Communication Sciences, Argumentation in Dialogic Interaction, 1–20.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Desmond, R. W. (1937). The press and world affairs. New York/ London: D. Appleton-Century Company.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fairclough, N., & Fairclough, I. (2012b). Political Discourse Analysis: A Method for Advanced Students. London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Filimon, A. I. (2011). Argumentative valences of the key-phrase ‘value creation’ in corporate reporting.
7th International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA) Conference
, Amsterdam.
Fishman, M. (1980). Manufacturing the news. Austin: University of Texas.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fowler, R. (1991). Language in the news. London/New York: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Galtung, J., & Holmboe Ruge, M. (1965). The Structure of Foreign News. Journal of Peace Research, 2(1), 64–91. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gans, H. J. (1979). Deciding Whatʹs News – a study of CBS evening news, NBC nightly news, Newsweek and Time. London: Constable.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Garfinkel, H. (1984). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gauthier, G. (2002). L’argumentation éditoriale. Le cas des quotidiens Québécois. Studies in Communication Sciences, 2(2), 21–46.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gauthier, G. (2005). A realist point of view on news journalism. Journalism Studies, 6(1), 51–60. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gerotto, S. (2011). Svizzera. Bologna: Il Mulino.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gieber, W. (1956). Across the Desk: A Study of 16 Telegraph Editors. Journalism Quarterly, 33, 423–432. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gieber, W. (1964). News is what newspapermen make it. In L. A. W. Dexter, D. Manning (Eds.), People, society and mass communication. New York: Free Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gnach, A. (2013). Produktion von Fernsehnachrichten. Unterschiede zwischen der deutsch- und französischsprachigen Schweiz. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goodnight, G. T. (1982). The personal, technical, and public spheres of argument. A speculative inquiry into the art of public deliberation. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 18, 214–227.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goodnight, G. T. (2012). The personal, technical, and public spheres of argument. A speculative inquiry into the art of public deliberation Argumentation & Advocacy, 48, 198–210.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goodwin, J. (1998). Froms of authority and the real ad verecundiam. Argumentation, 12, 267–280. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gravengaard, G., & Rimestad, L. (2012). Elimination of Ideas and Professional Socialisation. Journalism Practice, 6(4), 465–481. / ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gravengaard, G., & Rimestad, L. (2014). Socializing Journalist Trainees in the Newsroom. On How to Capture the Intangible Parts of the Process. Nordicom Review, 35, 81–95.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gravengaard, G., & Rimestad, L. (2015). “Is this a good news story?” Developing professional competence in the newsroom. Nordicom Review.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Greco Morasso, S. (2012). Contextual frames and their argumentative implications: A case study in media argumentation. Discourse Studies, 14(2), 197–216. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Greco Morasso, S., & Morasso, C. (2014). Argumentation from expert opinion in science journalism: The case of Eureka’s Fight Club. In S. Oswald & T. Herman (Eds.), Rhetoric and Cognition. Bern: Peter Lang.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Greco, S. (2003). When presupposing becomes dangerous. How the procedure of presuppositional accommodation can be exploited in manipulative discourses. Studies in Communication Sciences, 3(2), 217–234.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Greco, S. (2016). Using Argumentative Tools to Understand Inner Dialogue. Argumentation. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Grice, P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole& J. L. Morgan et al. (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts (Vol. 41–58).![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Grossen, M., & Orvig, A. S. (2011). Third partiesʹ voices in a therapeutic interview. Text & Talk – An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse & Communication Studies, 31(1), 53–76. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hall, S. (1973). The determinations of news photographs. In S. Cohen & J. Young (Eds.), The Manufacture of News: Deviance, Social Problems and the Mass Media (pp. 176–190). London: Constable.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). Introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hallin, D., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing Media Systems. Three Models of Media and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Harcup, T. (2009). Journalism: Principles and Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Harcup, T., & OʹNeill, D. (2001). What Is News? Galtung and Ruge revisited. Journalism Studies, 2(2), 261–280. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Harrison, J. (2000). Terrestrial TV news in Britain. The culture of production. Manchester/ New York: Manchester University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Harrison, J. (2006). News. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heritage, J. (1985). Analyzing news interviews. Aspects of the production of talk for an overhearing audience. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Handbook of discourse analysis. Band 3: Discourse and dialogue (pp. 95–117). London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jackson, S. (1986). Building a Case for Claims About Discourse Structure. In D. G. Ellis & W. A. Donohue (Eds.), Contemporary Issues in Language and Discourse Processes (pp. 129–147). Hillsdale/ London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jackson, S. (1998). Disputation by Design. Argumentation, 12, 183–198. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jackson, S. (2002). Designing argumentation protocols for the classroom. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Advances in pragma-dialectics (pp. 105–120). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jackson, S., & Jacobs, S. (1980). Structure of conversational argument. Pragmatic bases for the enthymeme. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 66, 251–265. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jackson, S., & Jacobs, S. (1989). Building a model of conversational argument. In B. Dervin, L. Grossberg, E. J. Wartella, & B. OʹKeefe (Eds.), Rethinking Communication (pp. 153–171). Newbury Park: Sage.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jacobs, S. (1986). How to Make an Argument From Example in Discourse Analysis. In A. P. J. Ellis & W. A. Donohue (Eds.), Contemporary Issues in Language and Discourse. Hillsdale/ London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jacobs, S. (2000). Rhetoric and Dialectic from the Standpoint of Normative Pragmatics. Argumentation, 14, 261–286. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jacobs, S., & Aakhus, M. (2002). What mediators do with words. Implementing three models of rational discussion in dispute mediation. Conflict Resolution Quarterly 20(4), 177–204. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jacquette, D. (2007). Two Sides of Any Issue. Argumentation, 21(2), 115–127. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jacquin, J., & Zampa, M. (2016). Do we still need an army like in the First World War? An argumentative analysis of a television debate on abolishing compulsory military service in Switzerland. Discourse & Communication, 10(5), 479–499. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Janssen, D., Van Waes, L., & Van den Bergh, H. (1996). Effects of thinking aloud on writing processes. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing. Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 233–250). Mahwah: Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Josephi, B. (2009). Journalism Education. In K. Wahl-Jorgensen & T. Hanitsch (Eds.), The Handbook of Journalism Studies (pp. 42–56). New York/ London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2004). Introducing polylogue. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(1), 1–24. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kjeldsen, J. E. (2012). Pictorial Argumentation in Advertising: Visual Tropes and Figures as a Way of Creating Visual Argumentation. In F. H. van Eemeren & B. Garssen (Eds.), Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory. Dordrecht: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Klinenberg, E. (2005). Convergence: News Production in a Digital Age. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 597, 48–64. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (1998). Front pages: (The critical) analysis of newspaper layout. In A. Bell & P. Garrett (Eds.), Approaches to media discourse (pp. 186–219). Oxford: Blackwell.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images. The grammar of visual design (2nd ed.). London/New York: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kriesi, H., & Trechsel, A. H. (2008). The Politics of Switzerland. Continuity and Change in a Consensus Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kus, M., Eberwein, T., Porlezza, C., & Splendore, S. (2016). Training or Improvisation? Journalism Practice, 1–18. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Labrie, N. H., & Schulz, P. J. (2015). The Effects of General Practitionersʹ Use of Argumentation to Support Their Treatment Advice: Results of an Experimental Study Using Video-Vignettes. Health Communication, 30(10), 951–961. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Larrain, A., & Haye, A. (2012). The discursive nature of inner speech. Theory & Psychology, 22(1), 3–22. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lester, M. (1980). Generating Newsworthiness: The Interpretive Construction of Public Events. American Sociological Review, 45(6), 984–994. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Levinson, S. C. (1992). Activity type and language. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: concept, method and reality in science; social equilibria and social change. Human Relations, 1, 5–40. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. New York: Harper Row.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lewiński, M. (2010a). Collective argumentative criticism. Argumentation & Advocacy, 47(Fall), 86–105.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lewiński, M. (2010b). Internet Political Discussion Forums as an Argumentative Activity Type. A pragma-dialectical analysis of online forms of strategic manoeuvring in reacting critically. Amsterdam: Sic Sat.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lewiński, M. (2012). Public Deliberation as a Polylogue: Challenges of Argumentation Analysis and Evaluation. In H. J. Ribeiro (Ed.), Inside Arguments: Logic and the Study of Argumentation (pp. 223–245). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lewiński, M. (2016). Shale gas debate in Europe: Pro-and-con dialectics and argumentative polylogues. Discourse & Communication, 10(6), 553–575. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lewiński, M., & Aakhus, M. (2014). Argumentative Polylogues in a Dialectical Framework A Methodological Inquiry. Argumentation, 28, 161–185. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lippmann, W. (1995). Liberty and the News. New Brunswick/ London: Transaction Publishers.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lippmann, W. (2004). Public Opinion. Mineola NY: Dover Publications.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lloyd, J., & Toogood, L. (2015). Journalism and PR – News Media and Public Relations in the Digital Age. London/ New York: I.B. Tauris.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
López Pan, F. (2015). The Newspaper as an Epideictic Meeting Point. Argumentation, 29(3), 285–303. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Luciani, M., Rocci, A., & Zampa, M. (2015). Capturing editorial gatekeeping through the analysis of argumentation in editorial conference discussions. Paper presented at the VALS ASLA conference “Norme linguistiche in contesto“, Lugano.
Lüders, M. (2008). Conceptualizing personal media. New Media & Society, 10(5), 683–702. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lüdi, G., & Werlen, I. (2005). Paesaggio linguistico in Svizzera. Censimento federale della popolazione 2000. Neuchâtel: UFS.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Macnamara, J. (2015). The Continuing Convergence of Journalism and PR: New Insights for Ethical Practice From a Three-Country Study of Senior Practitioners. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 93(1), 118–141. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Markova, I. (2006). On ‘the inner alter’ in dialogue. International Journal for Dialogical Science, 1(1), 125–147.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The Language of Evaluation – Appraisal in English. Basingstoke/ New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McBurney, P., Hitchcock, D., & Parson, S. (2007). The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 22(1), 95–132. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Miecznikowski, J., Rocci, A., & Zlatkova, G. (2012). Lʹargumentation dans la presse économique et financière italienne. In L. Gautier (Ed.), Les discours de la bourse et de la finance (pp. 65–83). Berlin: Frank und Timme.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mohammed, D. (2009). ‘The honourable gentleman should make up his mind’: strategic manoeuvring with accusations of inconsistency in Prime Ministerʹs Question Time. PhD Dissertation, University of Amsterdam.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mohammed, D. (2016). Goals in Argumentation: A Proposal for the Analysis and Evaluation of Public Political Arguments. Argumentation, 30, 221–245. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Molotch, H., & Lester, M. (1974). News as Purposive behavior: On the Strategic Use of Routine Eventes, Accidents, and Scandals. American Sociological Review, 39(1), 101–112. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Montgomery, M. (2007). The discourse of broadcast news: A linguistic approach. London et al.: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Musi, E. (2014). Evidential Modals at the Semantic-Argumentative Interface: Appearance Verbs as Indicators of Defeasible Argumentation. Informal Logic, 34(4), 417–442. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Musi, Elena, Debanjan Ghosh, and Smaranda Muresan. 2017. "Towards Feasible Guidelines for the Annotation of Argument Schemes." 3rd workshop on argument mining (ArgMining2016), 82–93.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nielsen, M. F., Nielsen, S. B., Gravengaard, G., & Due, B. (2012). Interactional functions of invoking procedure in institutional settings. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(11), 1457–1473. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Östgaard, E. (1965). Factors Influencing the Flow of News. Journal of Peace Research, 2(1), 39–63. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Palmieri, R., & Palmieri, C. (2012). Text types, activity types and the genre system of financial communication. In L. Gauthier (Ed.), Les discours de la bourse et de la finance. Berlin: Frank & Timme.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Framing Analysis: An Approach to News Discourse. Political Communication, 10(1), 55–75. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble. What the Internet is Hiding from You. London: Penguin Books.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tytheca, L. (2010). The New Rhetoric. A Treatise on Argumentation. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Perret-Clermont, A. -N. (2000). La construction de l’intelligence dans l’interaction sociale. Bern: Peter Lang.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Perrin, D. (2003). Progression analysis (PA): investigating writing strategies at the workplace. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(6), 907–921. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Perrin, D. (2011). “There are two different stories to tell” – Collaborative text-picture production strategies of TV journalists. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(7), 1865–1875. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Perrin, D. (2012a). „La voie tranquille“. Routine und Emergenz in Formulierungsprozessen als service public. In H. Feilke & K. Lehnen (Eds.), Schreib- und Textroutinen. Theorie, Erwerb und didaktisch-mediale Modellierung (pp. 215–239). Frankfurt am Main et al.: Lang.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Perrin, D. (2012b). Stancing: Strategies of entextualizing stance in newswriting. Discourse, Context & Media, 1(2–3), 135–147. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Perrin, D., Burger, M., Fürer, M., Gnach, A., Schanne, M., & Wyss, V. (2008). Idée Suisse. Final report. Winterthur: Zurich University of Applied Sciences.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Perrin, D., Ehrensberger-Dow, M., & Zampa, M. (2017). Translation in the newsroom: losing voices in multilingual newsflows?. Journal of Applied Journalism & Media Studies, 6(3), 463–483 ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Perrin, D., Whitehouse, M., & Zampa, M. (2017). Vom Ringen um den guten Text. Kommunikatives Potenzial im Energiediskurs. In N. Rosenberger & U. Kleinberger (Eds.), Energiediskurs. Perspektiven auf Sprache und Kommunikation im Kontext der Energiewende, (pp. 79–85)Bern: Peter Lang.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pitts, B. J. (1982). Protocol analysis of the newswriting process. Newspaper Research Journal, 4, 12–21. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Plato. (1921). Theaetetus. Sophist. In H. N. Fowler (Ed.). Cambridge/ London: Harvard University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pounds, G. (2010). Attitude and subjectivity in Italian and British hard-news reporting. The construction of culture-specific “reporter” voice. Discourse & Society, 12(1), 106–137. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Quintilianus, M. F. (1970). M. Fabi Quintiliani Institutionis oratoriae libri duodecim. (M. Winterbottom Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Reese, S. D. (1999). The Progressive Potential of Journalism Education: Recasting the Academic versus Professional Debate. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 4(4), 70–94. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Reese, S. D., & Cohen, J. (2000). Educating for journalism: the professionalism of scholarship. Journalism Studies, 1(2), 213–227. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Reisner, A. E. (1992). The News Conference: How Daily Newspaper Editors Construct The Front Page. Journalism Quarterly, 69(4), 971–986. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Richardson, J. E. (2007). Analysing newspapers. An approach from critical discourse analysis. Houndmills: Palgrave.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rigotti, E. (1999). The Enthymeme as a Rhetorical Device and as a Textual Process. Paper presented at the International Conference on Dialogue, Università della Svizzera italiana (Lugano). ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Rigotti, E. (2005). Congruity theory and argumentation. In M. Dascal, F. H. van Eemeren, E. Rigotti, S. Stati, & A. Rocci (Eds.), Argumentation in Dialogic Interaction (pp. 75–96). Studies in Communication Sciences.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rigotti, E. (2006). Relevance of Context-bound loci to Topical Potential in the Argumentation Stage. Argumentation, 20, 519–540. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rigotti, E. (2008). Locus a causa finali. Lʹanalisi linguistica e letteraria, 2, 559–576.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rigotti, E. (2009). Whether and How Classical Topics can be Revived Within Contemporary Argumentation Theory. In F. H. van Eemeren & B. Garssen (Eds.), Pondering on Problems of Argumentation (pp. 157–178). Dordrecht: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rigotti, E., & Greco Morasso, S. (2009). Argumentation as an object of interest and as a social and cultural resource. In N. Muller Mirza & A. -N. Perret-Clermont (Eds.), Argumentation and Education (pp. 9–66). Dordrecht: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rigotti, E., & Greco Morasso, S. (2010). Comparing the Argumentum Model of Topics to Other Contemporary Approaches to Argument Schemes: The Procedural and Material Components. Argumentation, 24(4), 489–512. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rigotti, E., & Greco Morasso, S. Under review. Inference in argumentation: A topics-based approach to argument schemes. Dordrecht: Springer.
Rigotti, E., & Palmieri, R. (2010). Analyzing and evaluating complex argumentation in an economic-financial context. In C. W. Tindale & C. Reed (Eds.), Dialectics, Dialogue and Argumentation. An examination of Douglas Walton’s Theories of Reasoning and Argument. London: College Publications.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rigotti, E., & Rocci, A. (2006). Towards a definition of communication context. Foundations of an interdisciplinary approach to communication. Studies in Communication Sciences, 6(2), 155–180.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rigotti, E., Rocci, A., & Greco, S. (2006). The semantics of reasonableness. In P. Houtlosser & A. M. van Rees (Eds.), Considering Pragma-Dialectics (pp. 257–274). Mahwah/ London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rocci, A. (2005). Connective predicates in monologic and dialogic argumentation. In M. Dascal, F. H. van Eemeren, E. Rigotti, S. Stati, & A. Rocci (Eds.), Argumentation in Dialogic Interaction (pp. 97–118). Studies in Communication Sciences.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rocci, A. (2006). Pragmatic inference and argumentation in intercultural communication. Intercultural Pragmatics, 3(4). ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rocci, A. (2007). Epistemic modality and questions in dialogue. In L. de Saussure, J. Moeschler, & G. Puskas (Eds.), Tense, Mood and Aspect – Theoretical and Descriptive Issues (Vol. 17, pp. 129–153): Cahiers Chronos.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rocci, A.. 2017. Modality in Argumentation. A Semantic Investigation of the Role of Modalities in the Structure of Arguments with an Application to Italian Modal Expressions. Dordrecht: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ross, S. (1973). The Economic Theory of Agency: The Principalʹs Problem. American Economic Association, 63(2), 134–139.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language(50), 696–735. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: a primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schramm, W. (1963). The challenge to communication research. In R. O. Nafziger & D. M. White (Eds.), Introduction to mass communications research.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schudson, M. (1978). Discovering the news. A social history of American papers. New York: Basic Books.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schudson, M. (1982). The politics of narrative form: The emergence of news conventions in print and television. Daedalus, 4, 97–112.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schudson, M. (1989). The sociology of news production. Media, Culture & Society, 11(3), 263–282. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schudson, M. (2001). The objectivity norm in American journalism. Journalism, 2(2), 149–170. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schudson, M. (2003). The Sociology of News. New York/ London: W. W. Norton & Company.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schudson, M., & Anderson, C. (2009). Professionalism, objectivity, and truth seeking. In K. Wahl-Jorgensen & T. Hanitzsch (Eds.), Handbook of journalism studies (pp. 88–101). New York et al.: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Seawright, J., & Gerring, J. (2008). Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options. Political Research Quarterly 61(2), 294–308. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Severinson-Eklundh, K., & Kollberg, P. (1996). Computer tools for tracing the writing process. From keystroke records to S-notation. In G. Rijlaarsdam, H. Van den Bergh, & M. Couzijn (Eds.), Current research in writing. Theories, models and methodology (pp. 526–541). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Shoemaker, P. J. (1991). Gatekeeping. Newbury Park: Sage.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Shoemaker, P. J., & Reese, S. (1996). Mediating the Message: Theories of Influence on Mass Media Content. New York: Longman.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Shoemaker, P. J., Vos, T. P., & Reese, S. (2009). Journalists as Gatekeepers. In K. Wahl-Jorgensen & T. Hanitsch (Eds.), Handbook of Journalism Studies (pp. 73–87). New York/ London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Skinner, D., Gasher, M. J., & Compton, J. (2001). Putting theory to practice. A critical approach to journalism studies. Journalism, 2(3), 341–360. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Smagorinsky, P. (1994). Potential problems and problematic potentials of using talk about writing as data about writing process. In P. Smagorinsky (Ed.), Speaking about writing. Reflections on research methodology. Thousand Oaks et al.: Sage.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Stalnaker, R. (2002). Common ground. Linguistics and Philosophy 25, 701–721. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Stöckl, H. (2011). Sprache-Bild-Texte lesen: Bausteine zur Methodik einer Grundkompetenz. In H. Diekmannshenke, M. Klemm, & H. Stöckl (Eds.), Bildlinguistik: Theorien – Methoden – Fallbeispiele (pp. 43–70). Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tardini, S. (1997). L’entimema nella struttura logica del linguaggio. Lʹanalisi linguistica e letteraria, 2, 419–440.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tardini, S. (2005). Endoxa and communities: Grounding enthymematic arguments. Studies in Communication Sciences, 279–294.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tardini, S. (2006). Connettivi sequenziali e ‘endoxa’. Strategie argumentative e usi manipolatori della menzione di un ‘endoxon’. In G. Gobber, M. C. Gatti, & S. Cigada (Eds.), Syndesmoi. Connettivi nella realtà dei testi (pp. 83–96). Milan: Vita e Pensiero.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Thurman, N., & Schifferes, S. (2012). The Future of Personalization at News Websites. Journalism Studies, 13(5–6), 775–790. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tuchman, G. (1972). Objectivity as strategic ritual. An examination of newsmen’s notions of objectivity. American Journal of Sociology, 77(4), 660–679. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tuchman, G. (1973). Making News by Doing Work: Routinizing the Unexpected. American Journal of Sociology, 79(1), 110–131. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tuchman, G. (1976). What is news? Telling stories. Journal of Communication, 26(6), 93–97. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. New York: Free Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tunstall, J. (1971). Journalists at work. London: Constable.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tunstall, J. (1974). Journalists at work. Specialist correspondents: their news organizations, news sources, and competitor-colleagues. London/ Beverly Hills: Constable/ SAGE.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van der Weide, T. L., Dignum, F., Meyer, J. -J. C., Prakken, H., & Vreeswijk, G. A. W. (2009). Practical Reasoning Using Values. Giving Meaning to Values.
van Dijk, T. A. (1983). Discourse Analysis: Its Development and Application to the Structure of News. Journal of Communication, 33(2), 20–43. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Dijk, T. A. (1988). News as Discourse. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Eemeren, F. H. (2003). A Glance Behind the Scenes: the State of the Art in the Study of Argumentation. Studies in Communication Sciences, 3(1), 1–23.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Eemeren, F. H. (2011). In Context. Argumentation, 25(2), 141–161. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Eemeren, F. H., & Garssen, B. (2012). Introduction. In F. H. van Eemeren & B. Garssen (Eds.), Exploring Argumentative Contexts. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Eemeren, F. H., & Garssen, B. (2014a). Argumentative patterns in discourse.
10th Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA) Conference
, Windsor.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Eemeren, F. H., & Garssen, B. (2014b). Argumentation by analogy in stereotypical argumentative patterns. In H. J. Ribeiro (Ed.), Systematic approaches to argument by analogy (pp. 41–56). Cham: Springer.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Eemeren, F. H., Garssen, B., Krabbe, E. C. W., Snoeck Henkemans, A. F., Verheij, B., & Wagemans, J. H. M. (2014). Handbook of Argumentation Theory. Dordrecht: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, communication and fallacies. A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2002). Argumentation: Analysis, Evaluation, Presentation. London/ New York: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Hout, T., & Macgilchrist, F. (2010). Framing the news. An ethnographic view of business newswriting. Text & talk, 30(2), 169–191. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Rees, A. M. (2001). The Diagnostic Power of the stages of critical discussion. Argumentation, 15, 457–470. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Rees, A. M. (2003). Pragma-Dialectical Analysis and Evaluation of Problem-Solving Discussion. Argumentation, 17, 465–479. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge/ New York/London: The MIT Press/ Wiley. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Walton, D. (1996). Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Walton, D. (2007a). Media Argumentation. Dialectic, Persuasion and Rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Walton, D. (2007b). How to make and defend a proposal in a deliberation dialogue. Artificial Intelligence & Law, 14(3), 177–239. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Walton, D., & Krabbe, E. C. W. (1995). Commitment in dialogue. Basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning. Albany: State University of New York Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Walton, D., & Reed, C. (2005). Argumentation schemes and enthymemes. Synthese, 145, 339–370. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Walton, D., Reed, C., & Macagno, F. (2008). Argument Schemes. New York: Cambridge Universtiy Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
White, D. M. (1964). The “Gatekeeper”: A Case Study in the Selection of News. In L. A. W. Dexter, David Manning (Ed.), People, society and mass communication (pp. 160–172). London: Collier-Macmillan Ltd.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Williams, B. A., & Delli Carpini, M. X. (2000). Unchained reaction: The collapse of media gatekeeping and the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal. Journalism, 1(1), 61–85. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Woods, J., & Walton, D. (1989). Fallacies. Selected papers 1972–1982. Berlin: De Gruyter/ Foris.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zampa, M. (2014). The editorial meeting as an argumentative activity type. 10th Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA) Conference, Windsor.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zampa, M. (2015). Arguing with oneself in writing for the news. 8th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA) Conference, Amsterdam.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zampa, M. (2016). Objectivity in newsmaking: an argumentative perspective. 11th Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA) Conference, Windsor.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zampa, M., & Perrin, D. (forthcoming). Fragmentary narrative reasoning. On the enthymematic structure of journalistic storytelling. Studies in Communication Sciences.
Zittoun, T. (2006). Transitions. Development Through Symbolic Resources. Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)