Headlines as Battlegrounds: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Fake News Denials in Nigeria

Abstract

The persistence of fake news undermines public communication and institutional legitimacy, especially in fragile democracies like Nigeria. While previous studies have explored the production and spread of misinformation, fewer have examined how news outlets construct their denials. This study investigates how Punch newspaper framed its fake news denials in August 2025, focusing on headlines and lead paragraphs as spaces where credibility and authority are negotiated. Using Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) informed by Van Dijk’s socio-cognitive model and Van Leeuwen’s legitimation strategies, the study analyzes eighteen purposively selected denial items across themes of governance, security, and celebrity news. Findings show systematic use of lexical intensifiers, rhetorical appeals (ethos, logos, pathos), and legitimation strategies such as authorization, moral evaluation, and rationalization. Through these discursive resources, Punch delegitimizes falsehoods and reinforces institutional credibility. The study concludes that fake news denials function not only as factual corrections but as strategic discursive acts that restore media legitimacy and shape socio-political narratives. It contributes to broader discussions on misinformation by revealing how denials can operate as tools of power, persuasion, and trust-building in democratic communication.