The Syrian civil war has displaced upwards 13 million people and was a major part of what constituted the migration crisis in the European Union in the years leading up to the culmination in 2015. According to researchers, this event marks the decline of European solidarity as the European Union member states continued to pass the reception burden onto each other. However, the recent events in Ukraine have re-sparked the solidarity principle once again, as countries are lining up to receive the Ukrainian refugees. Starting a conversation whether there could be a difference between refugees and refugees. Based on a content analysis, this thesis investigates the differences in media framing of the Syrian refugee stream and the Ukrainian refugee stream within the Swedish context by analysing 30 articles from three of Sweden's biggest news outlets. The study identified four major key differences in framing of the two migrant groups namely, (1) the aspect of gender, since women, children and elderly constitute most of the Ukrainian refugees, they are perceived as less of a threat than the young men who came to Sweden due to the Syrian civil war. (2) A shift in the underlying meaning of the words “solidarity” and “crisis” when referring to the two groups. (3) A shift in media and political discourse from debate to action, and (4) the focus on illegal verses legal refugees due to the difference in legislation, where one group is protected from needing to use illegal routes to enter a European country whilst the other is not.

Following paper examines how conflicting interests inside the UN organisation can be identified in the UN:s policy output regarding conflict-related violence (CRSV) and sexual exploitation and abuse by UN-personnel (SEA). The study applies former criticism against SEA, regarding nuance and an individualistic approach, on UN resolutions from both policy areas in a structured, focused comparisons. The purpose is to analyse if there are any differences regarding the framing of violence, its causes and where responsibility can be placed. Furthermore, the differences that are detected are then analysed and explained through a theoretical framework consisting of theories regarding framing and legitimating strategies. The analysis shows that resolutions regarding CRSV are more nuanced and connected to broader structures such as gender discrimination. Resolutions regarding SEA are more focused on the individual perpetrator. The differences identified in the comparison is then understood through the organisational interest of preserving legitimacy, where “means-end-decoupling” can be detected as a strategy used in SEA resolutions to legitimate the UN organisation.

The project investigate the role of space, architecture and landscape in the rehabilitation process.

No description available.

No description available.

In December of 2019, the outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan, China, marked the beginning of the pandemic and the most extensive global public health crisis of the 21st century. Globally, as of April 2022, there have been 490 million confirmed cases of COVID-19, including 6 million death. The COVID-19 pandemic also impacted every member of the world and changed the world and everyone's way of living. The first stage of the COVID-19 outbreak in China has attracted significant attention from the media worldwide. The western press carried out massive coverage from the beginning. The British media made extensive and detailed reports on China's COVID-19 situation and maintained continuous attention for the next two years. Together, these reports have painted a panorama of lives under the haze of COVID-19 in China and presented it to the readers.  However, no news media organization can fully present a news event to its audience in its original form, which often edits and changes information based on their needs—choosing the events to report with different angles and tones to constitute the news framing. The news frame is constructed by the media's values and political stance, and this choice of news framing may ultimately affect their target audience. The covid-19 outbreak in China later affected the whole world has been a huge news event. This paper will conduct a systematic, comprehensive study and analysis of the news coverage from The Guardian (a famous British left-wing media) and The Daily Telegraph (a famous British right-wing press) in China's Covid-19 situation to understand how they structure news stories.  Based on research on the subject and content of the Guardian/Daily Telegraph coverage, according to the theme and scope of its reports and divided into seven analysis framings: general coverage of COVID-19, pandemic restriction status, economic impact, COVID-19 origin, concealment of early cases, and vaccination. I will conduct qualitative and quantitative research and analysis based on the changes in the report's focuses, changes in the reporting rates, and opinion trends. Please find out how they construct the news framing while reporting COVID-19 in China. Further study the differences in the frames of two major press by analyzing the focus and perspectives of their coverage. Analyze the differences between two press views under the same framing at the same event. What is the reason for the difference in news framing between The Daily Telegraph and The Guardian?

This study critically examined how issues of multiculturalism and Muslim immigration are discursively constructed within the English language European online press. Through the use of a frame analysis as well as a more focused discourse analysis, an examination was undertaken to uncover how “us” versus “them” perspectives were manifest within a public discourse. A total of 132 articles from The Daily Mail, Le Monde Diplomatique, Dutchnews.nl, Spiegel Online and The International Herald Tribune were selected using a systematic sampling method based on the results of a search query for multiculturalism at each news site. The analysis of the data corpus revealed the news media's depiction of multiculturalism and Muslim immigrants as not wholly negative on the surface but under closer scrutiny revealed discursive and linguistic techniques that consistently marginalized and “othered” them. The themes found in the data corpus also illuminated a trend of the subordinated population as lacking proper representation and always being spoken for by the news media.

On April 21, 2001, the United States and China faced their first major incident of the 21st century when a U.S. spy plane accidentally collided with a Chinese fighter plane. The dialogue that followed between the two countries, as well as the tenor of the incident as reported in the international press, provide some interesting and insightful glimpses into how these major powers handled the incident in the days and weeks that followed. Although the mainstream media in both China and the United States reported the key facts and elements of the incident in a similar fashion, the spin that was ultimately placed on the event by the Chinese press was clearly indicative of the Asian state's desire to portray the United States as being at fault; however, because both countries have an enormous stake in ensuring continued friendly relations for trade purposes, the Chinese press eventually adopted an official position that would allow the United States to "save face" while ensuring that the killed Chinese pilot involved was lauded as a fearless hero of the state and a martyr to its cause. To determine how these events played out in the respective mainstream media of China and the United States, as well as the international media, this research provides a review of the relevant literature to identify how the spy plane collision was portrayed, what elements are regarded as important for analysis. This study compares the two accounts from China and the U.S., and to a lesser extent, the international media, by grouping the media accounts into three separate dimensions: 1) visual framing, 2) contextual framing and 3) operational framing, to determine how these factors played out in the spy plane incident. The analysis of the media accounts is followed by a summary of the research in the concluding paragraph.

The freedom of speech, caricatures and satire, bans on veils and burning of the Koran have been reported and portrayed in different ways in several news media. The aim of this study was to analyze how the burnings of the Koran in Sweden are portrayed in Swedish media (Dagens Nyheter) compared to English-language Arabic media (Al Arabiya). With the framing theory and postcolonial theory as a theoretical basis, we asked the following research questions: What themes can be found in the reporting of the Koran burning in Dagens Nyheter and Al Arabyia? How is Sweden represented in the various news media? The analysis method we have used is qualitative thematic analysis. In the analysis, four themes emerged: Sweden's image, freedom of speech and blasphemy, Koran burners and demonstrations. Based on a postcolonial-, orientalist-, and occidentalist approach the results show that there was often an “us and them” feeling from both sides. It may also depend on which media logic is used in the various media newsrooms and which audience the media outlets are targeting.

This study covers how Amber Heard and Johnny Depp were portrayed during their defamation trial in Virginia 2022 by the British newspaper The Sun. The research questions include both how Amber Heard and Johnny Depp were portrayed during the timeframe as well as how they were perceived as a couple. The research questions also cover if there were any differences in how The Sun were framing them during the time period. The method that was used was a thematic analysis of all the articles that The Sun published in the time period that the trial took place, the 11th of April 2022 to the 1st of June 2022. To better help our understanding of the subject we used framing theory and celebrity studies as the theoretical framework. The framing theory also includes a subcategory which is the theory about the ideal victim. Since both Johnny Depp and Amber Heard accused each other of abuse, it was relevant to include if one of them were portrayed as a victim. In the thematic analysis we created three categories based on the research questions. Different themes were found in the articles and were placed as subcategories to the three main categories. The first category was about how the relationship between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard was portrayed. Three themes were found: The relationship as a circus, Difference in fame and The trial. The second category was about how Johnny Depp was portrayed. Three themes were identified: Depp as the perpetrator, Superstar Johnny Depp and Innocent or a bully? The third category depicts how Amber Heard was portrayed. Four themes were identified: Heard accused of lying, Heard as the perpetrator, Heard ridiculed by the public and Heard innocent? The results of the study conclude that both Depp and Heard have been portrayed as perpetrators and victims all though Depp was given more attention in the articles than Heard. Another conclusion is that some of the articles describe the case as Depp suing Heard for lying, in contrast to the articles where the case is described as Depp suing Heard for libel.