manipulation

Every discourse, written or oral, is the conveyer of some hidden agenda of the producer, most importantly in such genres of speech as journalism, politics, propaganda, and advertisements. Given the role of translation in discourse, a difference exists between when the translator carries the ideological values of the elite in contrast with one with patriotic preferences. In this study a comparison was made between translation products resulting from the work of 15 postgraduates of translation studies viewed as freelancers and another published product carrying the elite’s ideology whose works appeared in published in the state media. The results of our comparisons, both qualitative and quantitative showed that there existed two types of difference: the ideology of the elite on the one hand, and the preferred culture related valuesof the freelancers on the other. The differences revealed that both groups translated under the influence of some pre-disposed influence dividable into different categories. Employing strategies of manipulation would be considered as an identity marker showing the social identity of the translator. The effect could be either their cultural preferences or, in contrast, the elite’s favorable set of preferences imposed on both the translator and the product of translation. 

This study provides a comparative analysis of the rhetorical, pragmatic, and semantic strategies used by English-speaking and Arabic-speaking politicians to manipulate their audiences. By examining political speeches from both linguistic contexts, the research reveals distinct cultural patterns in manipulation. English-speaking politicians often employ direct, fact-based appeals (logos), while Arabic-speaking politicians rely more on emotional and collective identity appeals (pathos). These strategies reflect the cultural and linguistic norms of each group. Additionally, the study highlights the evolving impact of digital media on political communication, showing how manipulative strategies have adapted to new technological platforms. The findings have important implications for political communication strategists, media professionals, and educators. They underscore the need for culturally nuanced communication strategies in cross-cultural political discourse, offer insights for enhancing public media literacy to combat manipulation, and provide a framework for further research into the role of digital platforms in shaping political rhetoric. Additionally, the study highlights the evolving impact of digital media on political communication, showing how manipulative strategies have adapted to new technological platforms. The findings have important implications for political communication strategists, media professionals, and educators. They underscore the need for culturally nuanced communication strategies in cross-cultural political discourse, offer insights for enhancing public media literacy to combat manipulation, and provide a framework for further research into the role of digital platforms in shaping political rhetoric.