| dc.description.abstract | This paper conducts an investigation on the production of meanings, observed through the comparison between the strategies of the communicational actions of Lava Jato's and Vaza Jato's operations in a mediatized environment. To understand this scenario, according to this complexity, we built a mediatized study case, which considers the perusal of materials from the news coverage of Operation Lava Jato, performed by Folha de São Paulo, Veja Magazine and Tv Globo, in the period from 2015 to 2020, as well as the reading of the reports from Vaza Jato, conducted by The Intercept Brasil from 2019 to 2020. Starting from the comparative analysis between the argumentative disputes of these two strategies of communicational actions (Lava Jato and Vaza Jato), we seek to identify the meanings results from the difference of circulation, futhermore aim to understand the communicational manifestations of the interpenetration relations between the systems involved. Through reading the materials of the two journalistic coverages, we noticed relations of interpenetrations between the juridical, journalistic and political systems, in disputes who are carried out through communicational actions. We also noticed different communicational strategies, executed by the vehicles, according to their own grammars, aspects that differs in relation to the practices of hegemonic journalism in contraposition to the practices of counterhegemonic journalism. According to the dynamics of the mediated ambience, through argumentative disputes, bifurcating meanings have emerged, with emphasis on the interpenetration among systems, which has been configured as result of the difference between these interactions, becoming a product of circulation. Mediatization, by affecting all social practices, produced complex feedbacks, and as a consequence, the production of diverse meanings, which could only be perceived in the scenario of social discursivities. Thus, we infer that journalism, the media field, the political and juridical spheres have all become subsystems of society, promoting among themselves disputes and several negotiations, which have triggered transformations in their own systems and in others, as well as in a larger system, which is society as all. | en |
