The following study is a comparativ discourse analysis of three swedish newspapers, with different political tendencies, depiction of refugees in the 1990’s and the 2010’s. The study is based on the theory of discourse and discourse analysis and the method is an adapted form of Ulf Mörkenstam’s analysis of the description of the samis in swedish law texts. This method is formed from the conclusion that by identifying what the author mediate as a problem, the cause of the problem, and the solution of the problem, you can form an percetion of the subjects discourse. To help create an estimation of the subjects he uses so called chains of analogy, or as the famous discourse theorists Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe calles them, chains of equivalence. In this case the term ”refugee” is connected to other phrases within the same text and together with the context of the problem – cause – solution it forms the discourse. The subject of the discourse is then compared between two different points in times to see if it has been a change within the last 23 years. The study showed that the discourse have indeed changed. While the characters within the discourse have remained the same and the subject is connected to similair problems in 2015, the fact that the newspapers do not write about the resistance against the countrys refugee intake in an atempt to act as an opposition against the xenophobia, as they did in 1992, the result of this study shows that xenophobia has been more accepted in the swedish media during the last decades. This is also shown through the chains of analogy where the phrase ”refuge” is related to words with more negative association in 2015 than in 1992.

Syftet med denna studie är att ta reda på vilka skillnader det finns mellan Dagens Nyheter och Aftonbladets nyhetsrapportering av de Jugoslaviska krigen. De metoder som används i studien är en retorisk och semiotisk analys på lingvistisk och bilder. Teorier som används är framing och representation. Tre händelser i tre krig mellan åren 1991 och 1995 analyseras: Tiodagarskriget i Slovenien, belägringen av Dubrovnik och Srebrenicamassakern. Resultatet på frågeställningen; alltsaå vilka skillnader som finns mellan DN:s och Aftonbladets rapportering, är att mängden rapportering, textinnehåll och tidningarnas fokus var de största markanta skillnaderna. DN har rapporterat mer än Aftonbladet och har ett större fokus på att skriva och dokumentera det som politiskt eller krigiskt, samt intervjuar ledare och människor med makt. Aftonbladets rapportering innehåller mer vittnesskildringar och strävar efter att beröra folk samtidigt som de informerar. / The purpose of this study is to find out what kind of differences there are between Dagens Nyheter and Aftonbladets news reporting of the Yugoslavian wars. Methods that are used are a rhetorical- and semiotic analysis of both photos and text and the theories that are used are framing and representation. Three events of three wars between the years 1991 and 1995 are being analysed: The ten day war in Slovenia, the besiege of Dubrovnik and the massacre in Srebrenica. The results show that the amount of reporting, the content of the articles and their focus are the biggest differences between DN and Aftonbladet. DN reported more than Aftonbladet and aimed their focus on documenting politically or warlike and interviewed people with authority. Aftonbladets content is more about the point of view of the witnesses and aimed to affect readers as well as inform them.