Identity manifests itself and is supported in discourse, because a certain idea of himself affects the strategy of the participant in discursive interaction and at the same time certain behavior in interaction prompts partners to attribute to him the identity that supposedly corresponding to this behavior. A separate discursive act does not yet fix the identification in it, however, the systematic identification of certain behavior strengthens the identification of the personality, which affects relations with other people who further expect just such a murder.
The discursive of the existence of identity is associated with another important characteristic: the identity of the face and, accordingly, the group, there is an interaction between how he imagines himself and how others represent it. These two components – so to speak, internal and external identity – do not necessarily coincide, but external recognition of identity is an important resource that helps the medium of support. In addition to recognition from ordinary communication partners, for example, families, friends, colleagues or strangers on the street, an important role is played by the attribution of a certain identity, which is carried out by the carriers of knowledge about the world and a person, primarily the state and its authorized agents: science, education , bureaucracy and t. D.. They not only tell us who we are, but also who we can be, are determined by the horizon of a possible choice of categories and identities for each of them. These institutions show us that people are divided into men and women, citizens of certain recognized states, members of certain seeming nations, faithful certain traditional or at least well -known religions of. p.. In each case, one can make another choice and even achieve its recognition by the state and at least partly (even relative to the floor, the Western powers no longer insist on the inviolability of dichotomy), but making such a choice is more difficult not only because of the external resistance to its recognition, but also Through the idea of the correctness and naturalness of the established set of identities learned in the process of socialization.
The media discourse differs from other, firstly, the massive audience and the intensity of exposure to it. In terms of the number of media consumption time, in modern (at least Western) societies, the second place of all practices, second only to work or training. There is an ordinary person with a book, a newspaper, and especially in front of the TV and on the Internet more time than at rallies, in the church, with friends or even with the family. Together, the audience of the popular novel, the film or the video clip placed on YouTube is much larger than that of the school lesson, sermons or political performances, except that one of these initially non-drug products undertake to spread media. In other words, the media discourse has a much larger audience than other institutional discourses authoritative in the sense of attributing identities – scientific, educational, religious, political, which means that they all reach most of their consumers through media, that is, usually in the form that they choose Media. At least that’s why the media discourse has a huge impact on the ideas of modern people about the world and about themselves.