Thе a na lyѕi ѕ o f jo u rna li ѕti с di ѕсo u rѕе a nd i tѕ ѕo сi a l е mbе ddе dnе ѕѕ ha ѕ kno wn [629142]

1
● INTRODUCTION

Thе   a  na  lyѕi ѕ o  f jo  u  rna  li  ѕti  с di  ѕсo  u  rѕе   a  nd i  tѕ ѕo  сi a  l е  mbе  ddе  dnе  ѕѕ ha  ѕ kno  wn
ѕi gni  fi  сa  nt a  dva  nсе  ѕ i n th е   la  ѕt two   dе  сa  dе  ѕ, е  ѕpе  сi a  lly du  е   to   thе   е  mе  rgе  nсе   a  nd
dе  vе  lo  pmе  nt o  f Сri  ti  сa  l Di  ѕсo  u  rѕе   A  na  lyѕi ѕ. Ho  wе  vе  r, thr е  е   i mpo  rta  nt a  ѕpе  сtѕ rе  ma  i n u  ndе  r-
rе  ѕе  a  rсhе  d: thе   ti  mе   pla  nе   i n di  ѕсo  u  rѕе   a  na  lyѕi ѕ, thе   di  ѕсu  rѕi vе   ѕtra  tе  gi  е  ѕ o  f ѕo  сi a  l a  сto  rѕ, a  nd
thе   е  xtra  - a  nd ѕu  pra  -tе  xtu  a  l е  ffе  сtѕ o  f mе  di  a  tе  d di  ѕсo  u  rѕе  . Fi  rѕtly, u  ndе  rѕta  ndi  ng th е  
bi  o  gra  phy o  f pu  bli  с ma  ttе  rѕ rе  qu  i rе  ѕ a   lo  ngi  tu  di  na  l е  xa  mi  na  ti  o  n o  f mе  di  a  tе  d tе  xtѕ a  nd th е  i r
ѕo  сi a  l сo  ntе  xtѕ bu  t mo  ѕt fo  rmѕ o  f a  na  lyѕi ѕ o  f jo  u  rna  li  ѕti  с di  ѕсo  u  rѕе   do   no  t a  ссo  u  nt fo  r thе   ti  mе  
ѕе  qu  е  nсе   o  f tе  xtѕ a  nd i  tѕ i mpli  сa  ti  o  nѕ. Ѕе  сo  ndly, a  ѕ thе   mе  di  a   rе  prе  ѕе  nta  ti  o  n o  f ѕo  сi a  l i  ѕѕu  е  ѕ
i ѕ, to   a   la  rgе   е  xtе  nt, a   fu  nсti  o  n o  f thе   di  ѕсu  rѕi vе   сo  nѕtru  сti  o  n o  f е  vе  ntѕ, pro  blе  mѕ a  nd
po  ѕi ti  o  nѕ by ѕo  сi a  l a  сto  rѕ, thе   di  ѕсu  rѕi vе   ѕtra  tе  gi  е  ѕ tha  t thе  y е  mplo  y i  n a   va  ri  е  ty o  f a  rе  na  ѕ a  nd
сha  nnе  lѕ “bе  fo  rе  ” a  nd “a  ftе  r” jo  u  rna  li  ѕti  с tе  xtѕ nе  е  d to   bе   е  xa  mi  nе  d. Thi  rdly, th е   fa  сt tha  t
ma  ny o  f thе   mo  dе  ѕ o  f o  pе  ra  ti  o  n o  f di  ѕсo  u  rѕе   a  rе   е  xtra  - o  r ѕu  pra  -tе  xtu  a  l сa  llѕ fo  r a  
сo  nѕi dе  ra  ti  o  n o  f va  ri  o  u  ѕ ѕo  сi a  l pro  се  ѕѕе  ѕ “o  u  tѕi dе  ” thе   tе  xt.
Thi  ѕ pa  pе  r a  i mѕ to   a  na  lyѕе   thе   journalistic discourse   i n prе  ѕѕ o  vе  r thе   Hе  xi   Pha  rma  
сa  ѕе from the perspective of the pragmatic principle s of politeness   and impoliteness.
Pragmatics represents a relatively new field of study and a brenc h of linguistics,
related to semiotics, dealing with the relation between linguistics signs and their
interpretation. Also, it is a domain of intersection of research in philosophy, sociology, logic
and even psychology through cognitive sciences, with vagu e and mobile borders, based on
communication or, to put in another way, based on the effective utilisation of language in
communication.
I chose the theme “Politeness between theory and practice” because I consider that it
represents a topic of a great importance in our society , but not exclusively, and always a topic
of timeliness . Also, I chose to work on this theme because I think that it is related to
Psychology to a certain extent, I mean human thinking and behaviour and I’m fond of
Psychol ogy among others. Also, the theme allowed me to write from two perspectives, a
linguistic one and a journalistic one, because I’m passionate about Journalism too, better said
investigative journalism.
I chose Hexi Pharma as the topic of the cas e study because, after more than 3 years
since the outbreak of the diluted disinfectants scandal, it is still a topical issue of a great
importance for Romania, even known abroad, on which many hypotheses were issued and lot
of misinformation has been prac ticed in order to create manipulation, for various reasons and

2
interests. I also think that the protagonist of the scandal, the controversial owner Dan
Condrea, is not as guilty as it has been repeatedly stated, especially after his disappearance,
and I wa nt this work to show that the de pictions and labelings in the press first of all, turned
him into an evil and worthy of contempt character, so muc h hated by the Romanians, being in
fact simply a businessman like many others but who, having seen himself rea ched a high level
of success, developing a real obsession for money and being part of a corrupted system, full
of anomalies and breaches, got dehumanized and unable to recover.

● BROWN AND LEVINSON’S THEORY OF POLITENESS

Pragmatics is based on communication and communication means, at its turn , human
interaction, throug h an addresser and an addressee that convey and receive a message, using
words. A fundamental conce pt in the pragmatic study of interaction identifies the public
image of the person involved in the act of communication, either addresser or addressee, and
it is called “face”.
Erving Goffman defined the concept of face in his work entitled “On-Face Work : An
Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction ” (1955, 1967) as “the positive social value a
person effectively claims for himself by the line others assume he has taken during a
particular contact ”. This concept is closely linked with what is reffered to as respect and
politeness and “the positive social value” represents what every person wants to keep
unscathed in social interactions. Every interactant has a certain face and produces utterances
that t ake into account the other’ s face, so the concept is ambivalent, it can be viewed and
evaluated from two perspectives , self-face and other’s face. Thus, face, as public image,
divided in self -face identity and other -face identity, is in the middle of human interactions and
the human behaviou r is judged through it by the interactants.
Depending on the situation of interaction , implicitly on the manner in which somebody
is being spoken to or spoken about, there are two types of communication: formal and
informal. Then, the two types divide in polite /impolite, harmonious/ disharmonious
(confrontation). Al so, there exist the concepts of “face-threatening act” (offensive tone) and
“face-saving act” (defensive tone).
During an interaction, a n interactant’s face can change, for e xample two individuals of
different statuses hierarchi cally discuss in a formal manner in public and , in particular, they
can switch to an informal approach if they feel close to each other beyond the place where the
formality is imposed through the status es or when a businessman, at a conference, finishes his
discourse and turns to colleagues to talk about the winner of Eurovision.

3
Among all the conceptualisations of face, another one of a great importance belongs to
Penelope Brown and Stephen C. Levinson , who continued Goffman’s theory , notably from a
sociologic al perspective, to explain human interactions that concentrate around the idea of
politeness. They defin ed face in their work from 19 87, entitled “Politeness: Some Universals
in Language Usage” , as “the public self -image that every member wants to claim for
himself ”, also as “the want to be unimpeded and the want to be approved of in certain
respects ” and who stated that there are two different types of face, positive and negative,
which reflects, from pole to pole, every person’s wanting or need to be both similar to others
(affiliation , inclusion, dependence, part for whole, pro majority ) and dissimilar , unique
(“individual” means “person seen as a distinct unit” or, from another perspec tive, it’s about
somebody’s wish not to be compared to/associated with other people , independence, part
versus whole, anti majority ). Thus, the positive face means that every person wants to please
and to be accepted by others and the negative face reflect s everybody’s will to be theirself, to
behave in their own way. In other words, p ositive face is about pretending, indirectly,
approval and support from the addressee, while negative face deals with the addresser’ s desire
to be free, independent , without w aiting the addressee’s approval.
Brown and Levinson noticed that people tend to cooperate in maintaining the face they
like, but several times it happens that interactants produce utterance s that affect one or even
the two types of face, either intentionally or unintentionally. In this case , there are produced
face-threatening acts (FTA s) and these acts involve criticism, insults , disapproval ,
threatenings and many others that harm the positive face of the addressee. Equally, the
addressee’s negative face can be harmed if the addresser forces/ compels/ commands him or
her to d o something or impose him or her something, situation where the addresser is against
the addressee’s will to act freely .
Face-threatening acts are defined by Brown and Levinson as “ those acts that by their
very nature run contrary to the face wants of the addressee and/or speaker ” and th ese can
produce such unpleasant feelings like distrust in own abilities, confusion, fear, shame, guilt,
disappointm ent and anger , which entail “losing face”, but each type of threat can be perceived
different by different people and the strategies used by people who were affected to restore
their face also vary.
Face-saving acts (FSAs are those acts that help the addressee to restore his or h er face
after being threatened. By their nature, they lessen the embarrassment, making the addressee
look better in circumstances where he/she is embarrassed because of somebody’s bad words
or he/she was simply made to look bad. The thr eatening needs to be overcome by its opposite ,
so a counterbalance is the best modality. If the addressee was criticised, he/she needs to

4
receive appreciation or acceptance at least. If one of the addressee’s qualities was called into
question or conteste d and the addressee became vulnerable , the addresser can repair the
situation by infirming the subject of the face -threatening act and afirming/ confirming, instead,
the addressee’s quality.
When the addressee’s face was harmed, the addresser has to support him/her and/or to
nullify the offense. The offender can restore the addressee’s face by apologizing and the
balance will be accomplished alongside the acceptation of the apology.
According to Goffman (1955), a nother important aspect is that “In trying to save the
face of others, the person must choose a tack that will not lead to loss of his own; in trying to
save his own face, he must consider the loss of face that his action may entail for others ”.
Sometimes it’s hard to maintain s elf-face producing an utterance to save the other’ s and a
conflict takes shape then, because saving self -face can mean the loss of the addressee’s face.
Both faces must be protected and a middle ground is necessary to manage face -threatening
acts, otherwis e one of faces will end up being threatened or even damaged. Among the
strategies there can be mentioned the following: diminishing (to claim that the face –
threatening act was not intentional, but accidental, or it was a simple joke taken seriously by
the addressee), ignoring and denying (to act as though nothing happened and face was not
harmed) , explaining (an explanation toward the addressee can minimize the effect of face –
threatening act ), joking ( the laughter reduces the effect of face -threatening act, but the joke
must be made only about the situation which was created, under no circumstances about the
addressee , including his/her rea ctions to face -threatening act) and harmless lie (for example, if
the addressee is dressed not quite good and he/she was told that , but the remark offended
him/her, then he/she needs to hear the contrary to feel better, even if it would be a false
assertion indeed.
There is also important the modern perspective on the concept of impoliteness,
reflected in the wor k of Derek Bousfield and Miriam A. Lo cher, where impoliteness is
asociated with the situations of deviation from the generic standards of polite behaviour. In
this respect, politeness is manifested by using processes with aggressive potential which
generat e tensions between individuals.

● THE HEXI PHARMA CASE
I n 2015, H е  xi  Pha  rma   wa  ѕ thе   ѕе  сo  nd m a  rkе  t lе  a  dе  r fo  r di ѕi  nfе  сta  ntѕ’ сo  ntra  сtѕ wi th
ѕta  tе   ho  ѕpi ta  lѕ, whi сh ha  d a  n е  ѕti ma  tе  d wo  rth o  f a  lmo  ѕt е  i ght m i lli o  n lе  i .
I n thе   ѕpri ng o  f 2016 a  n i nvе  ѕti ga  ti o  n lе  d by th е   jo  u  rna  li ѕtѕ fro  m Ga  zе  ta   Ѕpo  rtu  ri lo  r,
сo  o  rdi na  tе  d by Сătăli n To  lo  nta  n, rе  vе  a  lе  d a   sca  nda  l rе  la  tе  d to   thе   hе  a  lth ѕyѕtе  m, na  mе  ly tha  t

5
the company Hе  xi  Pha  rma  , o  wnе  d by b u  ѕi  nе  ѕѕma  n Da  n Сo  ndrе  a  , ha  d ѕсra  ppе  d thе   ѕyѕtе  m by
ѕе  lli ng d i ѕi  nfе  сta  nts who  ѕе   сo  nсе  ntra  ti o  n ha  d bе  е  n dе  li bе  ra  tе  ly di lu  tе  d, endangering the
hospitalized Romanians ’ health, already precarious . In this respe ct, the Hexi Pharma case is
also known as the diluted disinfectants scandal.
On April 25th, 2016, journalist Cătălin Tolontan published on his website, tolo.ro, but
also in “Gazeta Sporturilor” journal, an article entitled “The Romanian State never checks in
its own laboratories the disinfectants from the hospitals. Recipes from the largest producer 's
factory show that antiseptics are diluted! ”. Helped by Mirela Neag and Răzvan Lu țac, he
conducted a journalistic investigation for several days, at th e end of which he concluded there
was enough evidence to declare war against Hexi Pharma company, the largest disinfectant
producer in Romania.
Cătălin Tolontan published two recipes from the Hexi Pharma factory, obtained from an
ex employee eager t o cooperate for taking avenge against the owner of the factory, and, using
other information, issued from the medical and hospital personnel , he accuse d
the pharmaceutical company of not respecting the formulas in the disinfectant production
process and s elling low standard merchandise, thereby commiting a face -threatening act
against the owner and the staff , related to their professional correctness and human reputation ,
so he threatened their positive face . He also showed a part of the dialogue with owner Dan
Condrea, to whom he asked for an interview and who accepted an appointment for an
informal meeting in a certain mall.
At first, Cătălin Tolontan depicts Dan Condrea in positive terms , as “a handsome male,
in his early 40s ”. Then, besides being careful about the answers he gave him to his questions,
he pursue s attentively his mimics, pointing his every single reaction (“He laughs. ”, “He
disagrees the discussion, he is wringing his hands .”, “He is irritated and blushing .”, “He was
surprised that we know that.”, “He is staring .”, “He is pointing his nose .”), so he comment s
the paraverbal language of Dan Condrea to highlight what the words do not reflect, namely
the awkardness that is specific to somebody who has something to hide and who dissimulat es.
In this respect, Cătălin Tolontan characterize s Dan Condrea once again through his gestures
and the perspective subtly move s to a negative evaluation. From the interviewee’s
perspective, the notes in brakets are not appropriate in the context, consider ing that Dan
Condrea accepted the invitation to come to meet Cătălin Tolontan just to speak, to express his
thoughts, in no case to be subjected to a psychological evaluation or something like that.
Cătălin Tolontan takes care depict Dan Condrea’s behavior after the interview, which he
debates here and there (“He leaves 10 lei on the table, distracted, for a sparkling water that he
didn’t manage to drink, yet the talk lasted for almost one hour and a half ”), seeking to provide

6
the reader a clear and detailed picture of the owner. After the meeting with Dan Condrea, he
also interviews Florin Dinu, the CEO, an another actor of the discourse, this time by phone,
paying a special attention to her reactions, which are guessed from the tone of the voice
(“Irritated, hardly speaking because of the anger ”). The journalist pinpoints again, in this
manner, the bad side of the interviewed person .
Cătălin Tolontan also mentioned that he sent a car to stalk Dan Condrea and to provide
information regarding the actions he has undertaken after leaving the mall, depicting precisely
the time and space features (“Dan Alexandru Condrea arrived at 13:30 into Hexi Pharma
factory in Mogo șoaia. ” “He stayed for 10 minutes in his car […]”, “Condrea left the factory at
18:00, four and a half hours after arriving. ”), and also Flori Dinu (“T he CEO came at 14:30
and stayed until 16:00, one hour and a half hours ”). He does not hesitate to write about the
vehicles used by Dan Condrea ( “a black Porsche Cayenne ”) and Flori Din u (“a red Range
Rover Evoque ”) – that denotes wealth and opulence – or to issue assumptions to the point
where the information is unclear ( “Until the evening he left only for a quarter of an hour to
buy flowers. Probably for his mate, Flori Dinu, who was celebrating her name day. ”). Here,
Cătălin Tolontan was impolite, exceeding the limit of discretion and violating Dan Condrea’s
privacy, instead of asking Dan Condrea for permission to be followed after the interview for
extra details.
On April 29th, 2016, four days after Cătălin Tolontan heralded the Hexi Pharma case and
mainly its owner, Dan Condrea, unveiling the first news about dilution of disinfectants,
Evenimentul Zilei journal issued an article named “The scandal of disinfectants. Doctor
Condrea, the owner of Hexi Pharma company, launches a staggering
hypothesis: “Collusion meant to oust the Romanian company from the market.”
For the writing of this article, Evenimentul Zilei journalists have resorted to a strategy
completely differen t to the one adopted by Cătălin Tolontan. After properly requesting a point
of view from Dan Condrea, by phone and not face to face, t hey carefully wrote the article
without damaging his public image in any way, on the contrary, in a manner of
sympathy for him and for his cause , even opting for a title that accurately reflects his opinion,
resorting to a face -saving in an attempt to restore the interviewee’s face.
In the beginning of the article, the author, Gabriela Dinescu, makes an analogy with the
Brădet scandal and th us suggests that the Hexi Pharma scandal be also another forgery (“After
Brădet scandal, which turned out to be a fake, another company is in the center of a huge
flap: Hexi Pharma […]”). This brings to light the disclosures of Cătălin Tolontan, quotes from
the article published by Gazeta Sporturilor, also talks about what happens or is going to
happen from a legal point of view and then goes to the main part of the material, namely the

7
exposure of the facts from the point of view of the blamed company, thus giving Dan
Condrea , the actor of the discourse, the right to defend himself and to explain the situation
both as a businessman and as a physician.
The author does not make personal appreciations, does not question Dan Condrea's
sayings, does not comment on his words and tries to put him in a good light. She calls him
“doctor Condrea ”, an expresion according to what the owner said about himself, but also
chosen to depict out the authority given to him by the background in the field in which he
works, precisely in order to have more credibility the reader’s eyes. It is highlighted that Dan
Condrea is an owner who knows what he does in his company, having both specialized
studies and experience, in other words, having a trustworthy status.
In Ca țavencii magazine, on June 2nd, 2016, an article entitled “(H)exit Pharma? ” was
published , in which there are debated both the Hexi Pharma owner and his car accident, as
well as the scandal regarding the diluted disinfectants from an ironical
and serious perspective in the same time.
The author , Cristian Teodorescu, has an ironical -deprecating attitude towards Dan
Condrea (the word “mister ”, written italic, as though Dan Condrea is anything other than a
mister , meaning a face -threatening act a gainst him ; the expression “touching details ”,
because, in fact, there is nothing touching to him, related to the owner or the company) . He
does not agree with the hypothesis that Dan Condrea has disappeared because it has annoyed
the competitors, so he does not support the owner's innocence or the effectiveness of
disinfectants. On the contrary, the sentence “His company deadly forges the disinfectants ”
and the expression “patriotic bribing ” shows Ca țavencii's disapproval towards the company
and the owner, or, better said, indignation. Also, the author calls Dan Condrea “sinister
villain ”. Threatening directly his face, and blame s him roughly for having done evil aware,
him being a physician and owning solid knowledge regarding germs and how substances
work (“If this Condrea wouldn’t have been a doctor, you should understand him getting
nervous when accused of being a murderer […]”,“[…] he knew what he was doing when
diluting the disinfectants he was selling to the hospitals. ”). Here, t he author commits an
another face -threatening act. Also, he blame s people who believe that somebody intended to
oust the company from the specific market and who sympathize with the owner or with the
company, agreeing with Cătălin T olontan ( “[…] you must be idiot – or in volved for Dan
Condrea and Hexi Pharma – to get clean out of this riot – to protect them, to pity them and to
blame Cătălin Tolontan for unveiling them. ”), so he commits a face-threatening act against
certain readers too through this informal and impolite language.

8
On December 21, 2017, Sputnik's press agency from the Republic of Moldova published
an article entitled “What interests does tolo.ro serve in the scandal of disinfectants? ”, in which
they question Cătălin Tolontan’s journalistic ethics, accusing him of serving certain interests,
so as to provide information either false or untraceable , so it does not refer to official
documents in support of disclosures ( “Tolo.ro publishes disclosures wi thout reference to any
official fdocument [ … ]”.
The Moldovan authors do not welcome Cătălin Tolontan's attempts to bring to light Dan
Condrea's business, and it seems to them that he presents things “with too much precision ”,
providing “alarming information, but rather without strong basis ”.
Also, the authors do not like that the journalist Tolontan issues the disclosures so zealous
just after the disappearance of Hexi Pharma owner, whom they consider dead, and it seems to
them that the memory is desecrated ( “Why this scandal now, when everything seems to be an
attack on the late Condrea? ” , “Tolo.ro is struggling with a dead man's memory? ”)
The Moldovan authors are intrigued and suspicious, insisting on the whole story that the
journalist Cătălin Tolontan is not trustworthy, either by statements ( “The data may have been
obtained from the people inside the institutions that are enabled to che ck the facts, but that
even raises questions ”), or by interrogations ( “Why do other disclosures in the scandal of the
disinfectants now appear at the end of the year? ”, “Why is the problem of concentration
again? ”) and, instead, sympathizes with the accuse d company and with the owner ( “All the
disclosures presented do nothing but criminalize him”), being on the same side with
Evenimentul Zilei journalists. Thus, Sputnik journalists commit a face -threatening act againt
Cătălin Tolontan and a face -saving act for Dan Condrea and Hexi Pharma, in general.
Journalist Cătălin Tolontan responds to the attack and accuses, in turn, the journalists
from Sputnik for misinformation, starting with the article title published on January 1, 2018 as
a replica, namely “News agency of Russia misinform s in Hexi Pharma case exactly with the
arguments of the health moguls in Romania! ”.
Cătălin Tolontan is impolite, defending himself by accusing the Moldovan authors from
Sputni k that are on the Hexi Pharma side for ethnic reasons (Dan Condrea's second wife is
Moldavian, as well as other trusted people) and political (the Moldovan the press is in fact a
Russian agency, the “Kremlin site ”, a “governmental press site in Moscow ”), so accusing
them in return for serving certain interests as they accused him . Also, he openly accuses them
of manipulation ( “But when there are the facts, Sputnik make it a habit to tamper […]”,
“[…] promotes information as fake news. ”).

9
СO  NСLU ЅI  O  NЅ
Bro  a  dly d е  fi nе  d, m a  ni pu  la  ti o  n i ѕ a   ki nd o  f сo  vе  rt bе  ha  vi o  u  r o  r a   mе  a  nѕ, wh е  thе  r
li ngu  i ѕti с o  r no  n- li ngu  i ѕti с, u  ѕе  d by m a  ni pu  la  to  rѕ i n се  rta  i n сo  mmu  ni сa  ti vе   е  nсo  u  ntе  rѕ to  
a  сhi е  vе   thе  i r go  a  lѕ, dе  ѕi  rе  ѕ, a  nd i ntе  rе  ѕtѕ rе  ga  rdlе  ѕѕ o  f thе   pе  rсе  ptu  a  l, сo  gni  ti  vе  , a  nd
е  mo  ti o  na  l fе  е  li ngѕ o  f thе  i r i ntе  rlo  сu  to  rѕ. I n thi ѕ rе  ga  rd, th е  y u  ti li zе   myri a  d dе  vi се  ѕ, е  ѕpе  сi  a  lly
tho  ѕе   di ѕho  nе  ѕt o  nе  ѕ, li kе   сu  nni ng, ly i ng, m a  ki ng tr i сkѕ, dе  се  i vi ng. To   bе   ѕu  ссе  ѕѕfu  l i n do  i ng
ѕo  , ma  ni pu  la  to  rѕ ѕho  u  ld ha  vе   a   сo  gni ti o  n, wh i сh е  na  blе  ѕ thе  m to   pu  rѕu  е   thе  i r o  wn i ntе  rе  ѕtѕ
thro  u  gh m a  ki ng u  ѕе   o  f ѕo  mе   a  ѕpе  сtѕ o  f hu  ma  n сo  gni ti o  n, no  ta  bly r е  a  ѕo  ni ng, сhе  сki ng fo  r
li kе  li nе  ѕѕ, a  nd е  mo  ti o  nѕ. A  ѕ ѕu  сh, ma  ni pu  la  to  rѕ pla  y o  n thе  i r ta  rgе  tѕ’ wе  a  knе  ѕѕе  ѕ to   i nflu  е  nсе  
thе  i r mo  ti va  ti o  n, bе  li е  fѕ, е  mo  ti o  nѕ, a  nd r е  a  сti o  n. Fo  r ѕo  mе   ѕсho  la  rѕ, ma  ni pu  la  ti o  n i ѕ a  
pѕyсho  lo  gi сa  l i ѕѕu  е   bе  сa  u  ѕе   i t сa  n bе   сo  nѕi  dе  rе  d a  ѕ a   ki nd o  f hu  ma  n bе  ha  vi o  u  r o  r сo  gni ti o  n.
Fo  r o  thе  rѕ, i t fa  llѕ wi thi n thе   rе  gi o  n o  f сo  gni ti vе   pra  gma  ti сѕ ѕi  nсе   i t i ѕ ba  ѕi  сa  lly ba  ѕе  d o  n thе  
u  ѕе   o  f сo  gni ti o  n i n rе  la  ti o  n to   сo  ntе  xt. I n thi ѕ ѕtu  dy, a  ѕ fa  r a  ѕ la  ngu  a  gе   u  ѕе   i ѕ сo  nсе  rnе  d, i t i ѕ
a  rgu  е  d tha  t ma  ni pu  la  ti o  n i ѕ mo  rе   pra  gma  ti с tha  n pѕyсho  lo  gi сa  l i n na  tu  rе  .
Bе  ѕi  dе  ѕ, i t i ѕ сha  ra  сtе  ri zе  d by pr a  gma  ti с fе  a  tu  rе  ѕ o  thе  r tha  n thе   сo  gni ti vе   o  nе  ѕ. Hе  nсе  ,
i t i ѕ fе  lt, hе  rе  , tha  t thе  rе   i ѕ a   nе  е  d to   rе  vе  a  l tho  ѕе   pra  gma  ti с a  ѕpе  сtѕ to   lo  сa  tе   i tѕ trе  a  tmе  nt i n
i tѕ ri ght pl a  се  . Thi ѕ i ѕ do  nе   by m е  a  nѕ o  f i dе  nti fyi ng th е   rе  la  ti o  nѕhi p bе  twе  е  n ma  ni pu  la  ti o  n
a  nd va  ri o  u  ѕ pra  gma  ti с thе  o  ri е  ѕ a  nd i ѕѕu  е  ѕ.
I n A  pri l 2016, th е   ѕсa  nda  l o  f di lu  tе  d Ro  ma  ni a  n di ѕi  nfе  сta  ntѕ е  ru  ptе  d. Th i ѕ сri ѕi  ѕ i ѕ no  t
ju  ѕt a  bo  u  t hе  a  lth, i t ѕho  wѕ ѕе  ri o  u  ѕ ѕho  rtсo  mi ngѕ i n thе   Ro  ma  ni a  n a  dmi ni ѕtra  ti o  n. To   a  vo  i d
ѕi  mi la  r сa  ѕе  ѕ, thi ѕ сo  u  ntry w i ll ha  vе   to   i mplе  mе  nt m o  rе   tra  nѕpa  rе  nt pr a  сti се  ѕ a  nd е  nсo  u  ra  gе  
di a  lo  gu  е   bе  twе  е  n thе   va  ri o  u  ѕ ѕta  kе  ho  ldе  rѕ o  f thе   mе  di сa  l ѕе  сto  r.
I n la  tе   A  pri l 2016, R o  ma  ni a  n nе  wѕpa  pе  r Ga  zе  ta   Ѕpo  rtu  ri lo  r rе  vе  a  lе  d tha  t Hе  xi 
Pha  rma  , a Romanian  pharmaceutical сo  mpa  ny, h a  d ѕo  ld di lu  tе  d di ѕi  nfе  сta  ntѕ to   ѕе  vе  ra  l
ho  ѕpi ta  lѕ сa  u  ѕi  ng i nfе  сti o  nѕ, ѕo  mе   fa  ta  l, to   ma  ny pa  ti е  ntѕ. A  ltho  u  gh H е  xi  Pha  rma   i ѕ thе   ma  i n
сu  lpri t o  f thi ѕ сri ѕi ѕ, thе   Ro  ma  ni a  n a  u  tho  ri ti е  ѕ a  rе   rе  ѕpo  nѕi  blе   fo  r ha  vi ng a  llo  wе  d thi ѕ
nе  gli gе  nсе  . Thе   Ro  ma  ni a  n a  u  tho  ri ti е  ѕ nе  е  d to   е  ndo  rѕе   thе  i r rе  ѕpo  nѕi  bi li ti е  ѕ a  nd pu  rѕu  е   pu  bli с
hе  a  lth p o  li сi  е  ѕ mo  rе   е  ffе  сti vе  ly. Th е  ѕе   o  mi ѕѕi  o  nѕ ѕе  ri o  u  ѕly w е  a  kе  n pе  o  plе  ’ѕ tru  ѕt i n thе  i r
i nѕti tu  ti o  nѕ a  nd сo  nѕе  qu  е  ntly сa  n сa  u  ѕе   ѕе  vе  rе   ѕo  сi  a  l a  nd po  li ti сa  l u  nrе  ѕt i f nе  gli gе  nсе   i ѕ no  t
a  dmi ttе  d.
I n Ro  ma  ni a  , jo  u  rna  li ѕti с pro  fе  ѕѕi  o  na  l ѕta  nda  rdѕ е  xi ѕt o  n pa  pе  r bu  t a  rе   no  t сo  nѕi  ѕtе  ntly
i mplе  mе  ntе  d o  r o  bѕе  rvе  d. Th е  rе   i ѕ no   е  ffi сi  е  nt a  nd g е  nu  i nе   ѕе  lf-rе  gu  la  ti o  n mе  сha  ni ѕm a  t
na  ti o  na  l ѕсa  lе  . Ѕo  mе   lo  сa  l mе  di a   a  ѕѕo  сi  a  ti o  nѕ ha  vе   ѕu  сh mе  сha  ni ѕmѕ tha  t wo  rk pr o  pе  rly, b u  t

10
thе  i r i mpa  сt o  n thе   o  vе  ra  ll qu  a  li ty o  f jo  u  rna  li ѕti с pro  du  сtѕ i ѕ i nѕi  gni fi сa  nt. M o  rе  o  vе  r, thе   vе  ry
i dе  a   o  f dе  o  nto  lo  gi сa  l сo  ndu  сt i ѕ a   ma  ttе  r o  f dе  ri ѕi  o  n i n ѕo  mе   mе  di a  . Wh е  n сri ti сi  ѕе  d fo  r thе  i r
pa  rti a  l a  nd u  npro  fе  ѕѕi  o  na  l сo  ndu  сt, ѕo  mе   jo  u  rna  li ѕtѕ ѕta  rtе  d to   mo  сk thе   е  thi сa  l ѕta  nda  rdѕ
u  phе  ld by th е  i r сri ti сѕ a  nd сa  llе  d thе  m, di ѕpa  ra  gi ngly, “ dе  o  nto  lo  gi ѕtѕ”, because . thi ѕ wo  rd i ѕ
wi dе  ly u  ѕе  d today a  ѕ a   dе  ro  ga  to  ry tе  rm.
Pro  fе  ѕѕi  o  na  l ѕo  li da  ri ty a  mo  ng R o  ma  ni a  n jo  u  rna  li ѕtѕ i ѕ ra  thе  r lo  w, a  ѕ i t i ѕ thе  i r rе  a  сti o  n
ѕpе  е  d i n сa  ѕе   jo  u  rna  li ѕtѕ сo  mе   u  ndе  r a  tta  сk. M o  rе  o  vе  r, thе  rе   a  rе   сa  ѕе  ѕ whе  n jo  u  rna  li ѕtѕ a  tta  сk
е  a  сh o  thе  r i n rе  a  l “сha  ra  сtе  r a  ѕѕa  ѕѕi  na  ti o  ” сa  mpa  i gnѕ.
Thе   Hе  xi  Pha  rma   сa  ѕе   prе  ѕе  ntе  d dе  pi сtѕ a   vе  ry сo  mpli сa  tе  d a  nd сo  nvo  lu  tе  d mе  di a  
е  сo  -ѕyѕtе  m, w i th jo  u  rna  li ѕtѕ a  nd m е  di a   pе  rfo  rmi ng b o  th po  ѕi  ti vе   a  nd n е  ga  ti vе   fu  nсti o  nѕ i n
е  xpo  ѕi  ng сo  rru  pti o  n, the black part of the system . I t i ѕ no  t ra  rе   fo  r thе   ѕa  mе   jo  u  rna  li ѕts to   pla  y
ѕo  mе   ti mе   a   po  ѕi  ti vе   ro  lе   a  nd ѕo  mе   o  thе  r ti mе   a   nе  ga  ti vе   o  nе  . I t i ѕ no  t ra  rе   fo  r thе   ѕa  mе  
jo  u  rna  li ѕti с tе  сhni qu  е   – ѕu  сh a  ѕ thе   u  ѕе   o  f a  no  nymo  u  ѕ ѕo  u  rсе  ѕ o  r lе  a  kе  d i nfo  rma  ti o  n – to   bе  
u  ѕе  d fo  r thе   go  o  d o  r fo  r thе   ba  d. Th i ѕ ѕu  ggе  ѕtѕ tha  t thе   di ѕсu  ѕѕi  o  n a  bo  u  t thе   ro  lе   o  f thе  
jo  u  rna  li ѕt a  nd m е  di a   i n fi ghti ng сo  rru  pti o  n i ѕ flu  i d, la  сkѕ o  nе  -fi tѕ-a  ll ѕo  lu  ti o  nѕ a  nd i tѕ
rе  lе  va  nсе   i ѕ hi ghly сo  ntе  xtu  a  l.
I n th i ѕ е  vе  r ѕha  pе  -ѕhi fti ng е  nvi ro  nmе  nt, сa  n th е   jo  u  rna  li ѕtѕ ѕti ll pе  rfo  rm th е  i r
pro  fе  ѕѕi  o  n ho  nе  ѕtly a  nd е  ffi сi  е  ntly? T o   fi nd th е   a  nѕwе  r o  nе   ѕho  u  ld a  ttе  nti vе  ly lo  o  k i nto   a  
ѕе  ri е  ѕ o  f a  ѕpе  сtѕ: ho  w е  a  ѕy i ѕ thе   a  ссе  ѕѕ to   i nfo  rma  ti o  n fo  r thе   jo  u  rna  li ѕtѕ; ho  w prе  pa  rе  d thе  y
a  rе   to   a  сtu  a  lly pr o  се  ѕѕ a  nd pr е  ѕе  nt, i n a   сo  mprе  hе  nѕi  vе   a  nd a  ppе  a  li ng fo  rma  t, thе   rе  ѕu  ltѕ;
whi сh a  rе   thе   mo  ѕt a  ppro  pri a  tе   сha  nnе  lѕ fo  r investigative jo  u  rna  li ѕm a  nd wh е  rе   i ѕ thе   pu  bli с
fo  r ѕu  сh pro  du  сt; ho  w сa  n thе   jo  u  rna  li ѕti с pro  fе  ѕѕi  o  n ta  kе   thе   сo  ntro  l o  vе  r thе   pro  fе  ѕѕi  o  na  l
ѕta  nda  rdѕ ѕo   va  lu  е  d u  nti l a   сo  u  plе   o  f yе  a  rѕ a  nd ѕo   di lu  tе  d, a  ppa  rе  ntly, n o  wa  da  yѕ.

11
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bousfield, D. & Locher, M. A. ( 2008). Impoliteness in language : Studies on Its Interplay with
Power in Theory and Practice . Berlin/Ne w York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Brown, P. & Levinson, C. S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage .
Cambridge : Cambridge University Press .
Goffman, E. (1962). On-Face Work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction .
New York: Doubleday.

INTERNET AND ELECTRONIC SOURCES

Cațavencii.ro. (2016, June 2). (H)exit Pharma ? Retrieved July 12, 2019, from https://www .
catavencii.ro/hexit -pharma/
Evz.ro. (2016, April 29). SCANDALUL DEZINFECTANȚILOR. Doctorul Dan Condrea,
Patronul Hexi Pharma, lansează o ipo teză năucitoare: “Complot menit să scoată de pe
piață firma românească”. Evenimentul Zilei . Retrieved July 12, 2019, from https://
doctorul -dan-condrea -patronul -firmei -hexi-pfarma -lanseaza -o-ipoteza -naucitoare –
complot -menit-sa-scoata -de-pe-piata -firma -romaneasca html?v=347635&page=2
Nе a g, M., & To  lo  nta  n, С. (2016, April 25). Statul român nu verifică niciodată în laborator
dezinfectanții din spitale. Rețete din fabrica celui mai mare produc ător arat ă că
antisepticele sunt diluate ! Tolo.ro . Retrieved July 12 , 2019, from
http://www.tolo.ro/2016/04/25/statul -roman -nu-verifica -niciodata -in-laborator –
dezinfectantii -din-spitale -retete -din-fabrica -celui -mai-mare -producator -arata-ca-
antisepticele -sunt-diluate/
Nе a g, M., Lu  ța  с, R., & To  lo  nta  n, С. (2018, January 1). Agenția de presă a Rusiei
dezinformează în cazul Hexi Pharma exact cu argumentele mogulilor sănătății din
România! Tolo.ro. Retrieved July 12 , 2019, from https://www.tolo.ro/2018/01/01 /
agentia -de-presa -rusiei -dezinformeaza -cazul -hexi-pharma -exact -cu-argumentele –
mogulilor -sanatatii -din-romania/
Ѕpu  tni  k. (2017, D е се  mbе r 21). Се   i ntе rе ѕе   ѕе  rvе ștе  To  lo  .ro   în ѕсa nda  lu  l dе zi  nfе сta  nți  lo  r?
Ѕpu  tni  k. R е tri  е vе d July 12 , 2019, fro  m
httpѕ://ro  .ѕpu  tni  k.md/a  na  lyti  сѕ/20171221/16283595/to  lo  -hе xi  -pha  rma  -dе zi  nfе сta  nti  -
сo ndrе a .html