ABSTRACT
The structural properties of discourses can vary according to the normative assumptions that inform them. In this chapter I discuss one prevalent and argumentative model of communication, which is shaped by an adversarial realism, which appears throughout the spectrum of (mass-mediated) communication and which limits our ability to relate and cooperate. This model evidences a narrow, conflictual or binary framing of issues and a chiefly persuasive approach to rhetoric. A closer look also reveals that identity is formed in oppositional ways and mediation is facilitated to entrench camps and fuel conflict. I demonstrate that while this approach seems ubiquitous in such fields as media, politics, law and academia, alternatives strategies also exist. By referencing case studies from the United States and South Africa, I show how the formal properties of this prevalent model can be deconstructed and reconsidered for the purpose of conceptualizing an alternative model of public discourse.
