{"title":"Valorizing Erasure: Imperial Knowledge Production in Anglo-American Coverage of Chad's 'Toyota War'.","authors":"Harmata Aboubakar","doi":"10.1111/1468-4446.70163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>How does imperial knowledge production operate when Western media coverage of a Global South subject is predominantly admiring instead of hostile? This article addresses that question through critical discourse analysis of sixty-three Anglo-American news articles covering the Chad-Libya conflict of the 1980s, the 'Toyota War'. Despite Chad's decisive military victory and broadly favourable coverage, systematic coding reveals that Chadian political subjectivity was structurally withheld. Chadian figures appeared as sources in 41.3 per cent of articles but were granted political or strategic interpretive function in only 6.3 per cent: interpretive exclusion despite presence. Western or French officials served as primary interpretive sources in 77.8 per cent of articles, and France was positioned as sovereign arbiter in 82.5 per cent. Three interlocking devices produced this structure: selective valorization, which absorbed political relations into a commodity object; an interpretive hierarchy that routed authority through Western institutional channels; and Orientalist fascination, which made exclusion pleasurable and thereby imperceptible. The article develops a three-tiered model of differential life-worth (Libyan soldiers, Chadian soldiers, and Chadian civilians each constituted through distinct textual genres) and argues that valence, the positive or negative tone of coverage, is an insufficient analytic register: the imperial operation runs through how subjects are constituted, not through valence alone.</p>","PeriodicalId":51368,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Sociology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.70163","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
How does imperial knowledge production operate when Western media coverage of a Global South subject is predominantly admiring instead of hostile? This article addresses that question through critical discourse analysis of sixty-three Anglo-American news articles covering the Chad-Libya conflict of the 1980s, the 'Toyota War'. Despite Chad's decisive military victory and broadly favourable coverage, systematic coding reveals that Chadian political subjectivity was structurally withheld. Chadian figures appeared as sources in 41.3 per cent of articles but were granted political or strategic interpretive function in only 6.3 per cent: interpretive exclusion despite presence. Western or French officials served as primary interpretive sources in 77.8 per cent of articles, and France was positioned as sovereign arbiter in 82.5 per cent. Three interlocking devices produced this structure: selective valorization, which absorbed political relations into a commodity object; an interpretive hierarchy that routed authority through Western institutional channels; and Orientalist fascination, which made exclusion pleasurable and thereby imperceptible. The article develops a three-tiered model of differential life-worth (Libyan soldiers, Chadian soldiers, and Chadian civilians each constituted through distinct textual genres) and argues that valence, the positive or negative tone of coverage, is an insufficient analytic register: the imperial operation runs through how subjects are constituted, not through valence alone.
期刊介绍:
British Journal of Sociology is published on behalf of the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) is unique in the United Kingdom in its concentration on teaching and research across the full range of the social, political and economic sciences. Founded in 1895 by Beatrice and Sidney Webb, the LSE is one of the largest colleges within the University of London and has an outstanding reputation for academic excellence nationally and internationally. Mission Statement: • To be a leading sociology journal in terms of academic substance, scholarly reputation , with relevance to and impact on the social and democratic questions of our times • To publish papers demonstrating the highest standards of scholarship in sociology from authors worldwide; • To carry papers from across the full range of sociological research and knowledge • To lead debate on key methodological and theoretical questions and controversies in contemporary sociology, for example through the annual lecture special issue • To highlight new areas of sociological research, new developments in sociological theory, and new methodological innovations, for example through timely special sections and special issues • To react quickly to major publishing and/or world events by producing special issues and/or sections • To publish the best work from scholars in new and emerging regions where sociology is developing • To encourage new and aspiring sociologists to submit papers to the journal, and to spotlight their work through the early career prize • To engage with the sociological community – academics as well as students – in the UK and abroad, through social media, and a journal blog.