According to Fairclough (2001), language reflected social construction, and critical discourse analysis (CDA) can reveal the hidden relationship between language, ideologies, and power through textual analysis. Thus, CDA has been used to investigate and discover how language and society shape each other and how they interact with each other.

               Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) focused on the use of language as a social practice, the context in which it was used, and the relationship between language and power (Fairclough & Wodak 1997). Van Leeuwen (2015) asserts the same, saying that CDA examines the role of text and language in creating, maintaining, and legitimizing inequality, injustice, and oppression in society. In addition, Wodak (2001: 3) emphasized the importance of the concepts of power, history, and ideology as essential components of any critical discourse analysis. The variable of power was significant because each discourse was created and understood at a particular time and place in history. Fairclough and Kress (1993) emphasized that numerous texts may be interpreted as a form of innovative opposition.

               In the context of CDA, Fairclough’s (1989) three-dimensional framework views language used as a communicative event consisting of three dimensions. Discourse as text, the first dimension, focused on the creation, dissemination, and consumption of text. Discourse as a discursive practice, the second dimension, examined how texts are produced, disseminated, and consumed in society. The third dimension, "discourse as social practice," examined how texts shape sociocultural contexts.