The current paper examines the dissimilarities that have occurred in news framing by state-sponsored news outlets in their different language versions. The comparative framing analysis is conducted on the news coverage of the Russian intervention in Syria (2016) in RT and Radio Liberty in Russian and English languages. The certain discrepancies in framing of this event are found in both news outlets. The strongest distinction between Russian and English versions occurred in framing of responsibility and humanitarian crisis in Syria. The study attempts to explain the identified differences in a framework of public diplomacy and propaganda studies. The existing theories explain that political ideology and foreign policy orientation influences principles of state propaganda and state-sponsored international broadcasting. However, the current findings suggest that other influence factors may exist in the field – such as the local news discourse and the journalistic principles. This conclusion is preliminary, as there are not many studies with the comparable research design, which could support the current discussion. The studies of localized strategies of the international media (whether private networks or state-funded channels) can refine the current conclusions and bring a new perspective to global media studies. / <p>This thesis was supported by the Swedish Institute (Svenska Institutet) </p>

In protracted international conflicts, truth is often sacrificed in the name of victory. Political realists see international politics as a competition to win power, retain power, and demonstrate power; misleading the enemy in the name of strategy and misleading the public in the name of security are necessary elements of the game. A less obvious condition is that those caught in the cycle of intergroup conflict also withhold truths from themselves. This denial of truth and reality--to the Other, to the public, and to the self--is especially prevalent in the communicative relationship between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. This study explores the communicative relationship between the United States and Iran via mass media with a particular focus on propaganda as "natural." The literature review explains how conflict-conditioned communication grows and operates within the context of intergroup conflict, including the significance of globalization and information technology. The communicative relationship between the United States and Iran is used as a case study to explore conflict-conditioned communication. A snapshot of the U.S.-Iran communicative relationship was taken from May 1, 2005 - May 1, 2008. Articles from three print and online media sources were combed and analyzed for examples and patterns of conflict-conditioned communication. The method is based on an approach to understanding conflict-conditioned communication that was developed by Dr. Harry Anastasiou, a conflict resolution professional and educator. The method additionally utilizes the work of Dr. William O. Beeman, an expert on misperceptions between the United States and Iran. The conflict-conditioned communicative relationship between the United States and Iran shows how legitimate concerns and human needs are filtered through collective psychology, history, and national identity and absorbed into misperceptions. These misperceptions are perpetuated through propaganda and lead to unyielding political positions. The dual phenomena of globalization and advanced information technology amplify these unyielding political positions by spreading propagandized misperceptions faster and farther than ever before. As the United States and Iran become more entrenched in unyielding political positions, communication reduces to competing systems of propaganda, thus making peaceful conflict resolution less likely.

本文從分析國際環境的變化開始，在資訊傳播科技的進步和國際社會價值觀的變化中，整理出國家管理國家形象的三種方法：國際宣傳、公眾外交和國家品牌。本文將公眾外交和國家品牌作結合，建構出本論文的主題：「國家」行銷。 由於目前並沒有實例可證明「國家」行銷的效用，故只能從美國的失敗案例中，說明「國家」行銷的重要性。接著，本文以中國對美國發動公眾外交的個案為例，測試該模式的「描述」能力，並加以「解釋」中國行動背後的原因，最後「研究」中國公眾外交的發展。 本論文主要的研究成果有四：第一，是從文獻的討論中，指出「國際宣傳」與「公眾外交」的差異。第二，是蒐集1965年至2005年間，學界討論公眾外交的變化。第三，是建構一套「國家」行銷分析架構，試圖描述、解釋並研究一國公眾外交政策的發展。第四，是以中國的公眾外交為例，補足目前學術界在亞洲個案上的空缺。 / This thesis paper drew four conclusions: (1) illustrated the difference between “international propaganda” and “public diplomacy” (2) collected and cataloged different definitions of “public diplomacy” (3) established the analytical model－the marketing of “nation”, trying to describe, explain or predict the whole scenery of “public diplomacy” (4) taking the public diplomacy of People’s Republic of China(PRC) for example, examined the effectiveness of the marketing of “nation”.