1 Introduction

TikTok, as the international short video software of ByteDance, has become popular worldwide since its launch in 2017, with more than 1.582 billion monthly active users. However, since 2020, the US government has tried to ban TikTok. In 2024, Biden signed a bill requiring ByteDance to divest TikTok's US business. Previous studies have explored the reasons and impacts of the TikTok ban from legal, political, international relations, and economic management perspectives. This article will analyze the discourse and behavior of Chinese and American media from the perspective of discourse behavior, using the method of discourse analysis to compare the relevant reports of China Daily and The New York Times. It will analyze the discourse schemes and debate strategies of Chinese and American media in the TikTok ban incident, reveal the ideological differences and socio-cultural motivations behind it, deepen the understanding of international trade disputes, and enhance China's international communication and reasoning abilities.

2-point analysis method

Discourse analysis originated from Aristotle and was pioneered by Mas based on Foucault's research, viewing discourse as a shared collective knowledge. Risiger and Wodak defined it as a necessary premise in argumentation, used to connect arguments and conclusions. This method is incorporated into the framework of discourse history analysis for analyzing argumentative strategies in media discourse. Media discourse can shape public opinion and influence political decision-making. The discourse analysis method is suitable for analyzing discourse schemes and debate strategies in Chinese and American media discourse.

3 Corpus and Analysis Framework

Introduced the source of the research corpus and analysis framework. The research focuses on the TikTok ban bill and uses the Factiva news database to search for relevant reports from China Daily and The New York Times, forming the research corpus. The research question involves the differences in discourse patterns, attitudes, and debate strategies used by Chinese and American media, as well as the communicative intentions and social, historical, and cultural motivations behind discourse patterns. To answer these questions, the author constructed an analytical framework of "identification description interpretation" based on Hampden's discourse analysis method. Using NVivo 14 software to perform three-level encoding on the corpus, statistical analysis of discourse categories and attitudes in Chinese and American media discourse, comparative analysis of differences and similarities in argumentation strategies, and elucidation of the underlying communicative intentions and social, historical, and cultural motivations.

4 Data Results and Analysis

By encoding and analyzing the discourse of Chinese and American media on whether TikTok should be banned, 12 types of discourse used by both sides' media were revealed, among which threat discourse, authority discourse, legal discourse, benefit discourse, and reality discourse were the most frequently used. Both Chinese and American media tend to oppose the ban on TikTok, with Chinese media mainly expressing opposition through threatening, legal, and realistic arguments, while the US expresses opposition through threatening, beneficial, and legal arguments. The authoritative and legal discourse of Chinese media often serves as background groundwork, while cultural and historical discourse serve as reasons for explanation. The threat theory has become the focus of analysis due to its frequent use in both parties' discourse and its correspondence with overall attitude tendencies.

5 Discussion and Conclusion

We discussed the discourse strategies of Chinese and American media on the TikTok ban issue and found that both sides have adopted a politicized and securitized debate strategy. American media is conflicted between political tendencies and economic interests, with a higher degree of securitization. It is suggested that Chinese media learn from the perspective of the United States to refine and expand their consequences strategies, and enhance their international communication capabilities. At the same time, it points out the shortcomings of the research in corpus collection and discourse encoding, and proposes improvement suggestions.