TY - JOUR
T1 - Contesting hydrofracking during an inter-governmental hearing
T2 - Accounting by reworking or challenging the question
AU - Buttny, Richard
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015, © The Author(s) 2015.
PY - 2015/8/28
Y1 - 2015/8/28
N2 - An inter-governmental hearing on hydrofracking for natural gas is examined. The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) recently released an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and takes questions from the New York State Assembly. Assembly members pose concerns with the EIS. The DEC’s responses at times appear to not address the question, but rather to challenge or rework the question in a way that can be answered from the DEC perspective. Assembly members assess seeming evasive answers in critical ways. This interactional pattern is examined from a discursive analysis perspective as problem–accounts–assessments sequences. Especially notable are the discursive practices of reported speech and metadiscourse in these accounting sequences. The conflicting assessments are not based on ‘the facts’, but on which facts are relevant. The DEC can be heard as advocating for their draft of the EIS despite the concerns raised by the Assembly. At certain junctures, Assembly members accuse the DEC of being biased or evasive, which does not make for the trust needed to reach consensus. At stake in this hearing is the construction of environmental or public health risk and whether or not to permit hydrofracking.
AB - An inter-governmental hearing on hydrofracking for natural gas is examined. The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) recently released an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and takes questions from the New York State Assembly. Assembly members pose concerns with the EIS. The DEC’s responses at times appear to not address the question, but rather to challenge or rework the question in a way that can be answered from the DEC perspective. Assembly members assess seeming evasive answers in critical ways. This interactional pattern is examined from a discursive analysis perspective as problem–accounts–assessments sequences. Especially notable are the discursive practices of reported speech and metadiscourse in these accounting sequences. The conflicting assessments are not based on ‘the facts’, but on which facts are relevant. The DEC can be heard as advocating for their draft of the EIS despite the concerns raised by the Assembly. At certain junctures, Assembly members accuse the DEC of being biased or evasive, which does not make for the trust needed to reach consensus. At stake in this hearing is the construction of environmental or public health risk and whether or not to permit hydrofracking.
KW - Accounts
KW - assessment
KW - environmental controversy
KW - environmental impact statement
KW - hydrofracking
KW - inter-governmental hearing
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84938253772&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84938253772&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1750481315576842
DO - 10.1177/1750481315576842
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84938253772
SN - 1750-4813
VL - 9
SP - 423
EP - 440
JO - Discourse and Communication
JF - Discourse and Communication
IS - 4
ER -