| This study investigates how Al Jazeera and The Spectator, two international media outlets, frame Donald Trump’s candidacy for the 2024 U.S. presidential election. Employing Van Dijk’s Ideological Square and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) framework, the research explores how linguistic elements and sociocognitive contexts are utilized to emphasize or mitigate Trump’s positives and negatives. The study adopts a qualitative approach, analyzing 20 articles (ten from each outlet) published between July and August 2024. The findings revealed significant differences in portrayals of Donald Trump, influenced by the ideological orientations of Al Jazeera and The Spectator. Al Jazeera, reflecting its Middle Eastern perspective, consistently depicted Trump as a symbol of Western dominance and emphasized his legal and moral shortcomings. For example, phrases like “31 counts of willful retention of national defense information” and “Trump election campaign accuses Iran of hacking attack” illustrate a critical stance. In contrast, The Spectator, catering to a conservative British audience, highlighted Trump’s populist appeal and alignment with British interests, using phrases such as “Trump’s stance on free speech” and “Trump as a ‘badass’ leader”, portraying him in a more favorable light. It can be concluded that Al Jazeera and The Spectator employ contrasting framing strategies, critical and legalistic versus favorable and humorous, shaped by their ideological orientations, which actively influence public perceptions of Donald Trump’s 2024 candidacy. |