Popular legal discourse vs legal media discourse

The author analyzes similarities and differences of the two hybrid types of discourse: popular legal discourse and legal media discourse, which, despite having some common features, construct different legal reality. The comparison of relevant discourses is based on such parameters as: discursive type, communication participants, the purpose of communication, dominant topics and transmitted values. The author proposes various approaches to identifying the types of the hybrid discourses in question, according to their bases and the nature of interaction of intersecting discourses. Much attention is given to the purposes and pragmatic characteristics of the texts of relevant discourses. Thus, texts of legal media discourse aim to inform the population about current legal processes and changes in legal rules along with their explanation and assessment in order to manipulate the mind of the reader. The pragmatic goal of the texts of popular legal discourse is the fixation and popularization of legal knowledge for improving legal awareness of the audience. The values transmitted via the texts of popular legal discourse, and the concepts formed in public consciousness, are universal for many cultures of the world and have long-lasting significance. Concepts of legal media discourse can lose their value if the media topic becomes irrelevant.