This study explores the conflicting factions that have emerged in the ideological debate surrounding the issue of women driving in Saudi Arabia: the pro- and anti-driving campaigns. The pro-driving faction argues for women’s autonomy and societal progress, while the opposition primarily fears social destabilization, health consequences, and religious disapproval. These factions engage in discourse on X (formerly Twitter), a platform chosen for its wide-reaching influence and real-time exchange of ideas. Unlike previous research that primarily examined the debate’s written characteristics, this study includes visual content, using critical discourse analysis to analyze posts’ textual and visual elements. Van Dijk’s (2004) framework for analyzing ideological discourse and Fairclough’s (1992b) concept of intertextuality are applied to examine the images attached to a sample of tweets. The findings reveal that images not only complement the written discourse but also serve as a tool for reinforcing or undermining arguments. The pro-driving faction uses images to mock religious claims against women driving and to memorialize early activists’ struggles, while the opposing faction employs images to emphasize the failure of MBC’s June 15 poll and assert their ideological position. The analysis underscores the importance of considering both textual and visual elements in understanding social and political debates. This study contributes to the growing literature on digital discourse and multimodality, demonstrating how images and text co-construct and challenge societal ideologies. The implications suggest that a comprehensive understanding of discourse requires an awareness of the social and cultural contexts shaping the production and interpretation of visual and written content.
