No description available.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Wyoming, 2008. / Title from PDF title page (viewed on Nov. 19, 2009). Includes bibliographical references (p. 148-154).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2009. / Title from first page of PDF file. Includes vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 302-355).

Thesis (M.S.)--Kutztown University of Pennsylvania, 2006. / Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 45-06, page: 2718. Typescript. Abstract precedes thesis as 2 leaves (iii-iv). Includes bibliographical references (leaves 64-66).

Thesis (M.A.) University of Missouri-Columbia, 2006. / The entire dissertation/thesis text is included in the research.pdf file; the official abstract appears in the short.pdf file (which also appears in the research.pdf); a non-technical general description, or public abstract, appears in the public.pdf file. Title from title screen of research.pdf file viewed on (June 27, 2007) Includes bibliographical references.

<p>Osnovni cilj rada bio je da ustanovim relacije kojima<br />se u medijima razvija empatija prema jednoj od<br />sukobljenih strana u kontekstu ratnih sukoba, a koja<br />postaje deo kolektivnog identiteta publike (MI) i<br />negativno predstavljanje druge, neprijateljske strane u<br />kontekstu radnog sukoba (ONI).<br />Osnovna naučna hipoteza bila je da se empatijski<br />odnos medija prema jednoj od zaraćenih strana u<br />ratnom sukobu veoma često manifestuje pristrasnim<br />izve&scaron;tavanjem, tako da se jezičkim mehanizmima<br />simboličke identifikacije jedna od zaraćenih strana<br />određuje kao prijateljska strana u ratu, a njoj<br />suprotstavljena kao neprijateljska .<br />Korpus empirijskih podataka obuhvata &scaron;est dnevnih<br />listova (ukupno 58 primeraka dnevnih izdanja) i tri<br />televizijske stanice (1197 minuta televizijskog<br />programa) u desetodnevnom periodu. Primenjena<br />analiza diskursa obuhvata veće jedinice od rečenice.<br />Rezultati analize pokazuju sledeće.<br />1. U najvećem broju ratnih izve&scaron;taja iskazan je<br />(negativan ili pozitivan) medijski stav prema jednom<br />od aktera koji odgovaraju oružanim formacijama u<br />sukobu<br />2. Postoji simbolički prostor sa kojim se identifikuje<br />reportersko JA, u sklopu jedinstvene grupe koja<br />povezuje autora sa identitetom medijske publike<br />(grupom MI).<br />3. Medijski stav usmeren ka vojno-političkim<br />predstavnicima zaraćenih strana zavisi od toga da li je<br />određena ličnost od strane medija prepoznata kao<br />nosilac realne vojno-političke moći.<br />4. Na leksičkom nivou medijski stav je iskazan<br />najče&scaron;će: upotrebom ličnih zamenica u funkciji deiksi, ekspresivima, upotrebom termina sa</p><p>istorijskom konotacijom i kvalifikacijama, sve do<br />ironičnih naziva i pejorativa kao karakterističnih<br />obeležja negativnog stava. Dominirajuće diskursne<br />strategije upotrebljene u tom cilju su: predikacija,<br />perspektivizacija, legitimizacija (delegitimizacija) i<br />intenzifikacija, kao i konstruktivne i perpetuacione<br />makrostrategije izgrađivanja nacionalnog identiteta.<br />Zaključujem sledeće.<br />1. Analiza diskursno-jezičkih obeležja za iskazivanje<br />ličnog stava pokazala se kao odgovarajuća naučna<br />osnova za istraživanje jednostranog odnosa medija<br />prema stranama u ratnom sukobu.<br />2.Tokom daljnjeg usavr&scaron;avanja kritičke diskurs<br />analize kao metoda potreban je ujednačeniji i<br />sistematizovaniji pristup određivanju diskursnih<br />obeležja, usvojen i primenjen od strane grupa<br />istraživača koji promovi&scaron;u različite pristupe.<br />3.Vi&scaron;estruka studija slučaja u sklopu metoda kritičke<br />diskurs analize doprinela je da se identifikovane<br />pojave mogu tumačiti u odnosu na vremensku<br />perspektivu, dru&scaron;tvene i medijske uslove njihovog<br />nastanka.<br />Rezultati se mogu primeniti: 1. za pobolj&scaron;anje<br />medijske pismenost građana i građanki tokom procesa<br />razobličavanja mehanizama manipulacije medijskom<br />porukom; 2. za uspostavljanje minimuma standarda<br />objektivnog medijskog izve&scaron;tavanja koji bi bili<br />obezbeđeni i u uslovima vanrednih i ratnih okolnosti;<br />3. za usavr&scaron;avanje kritičke diskurs analize kao metoda<br />u interpretiranju medijskog diskursa.</p> / <p>The main aim of this paper was to ascertain the<br />relations media employ to promote, on the one hand,<br />empathy towards one of the conflicting parties at war,<br />which consequently becomes a part of the collective<br />identity of the audience (US), and on the other,<br />negative imaging of the opposing side or the enemy<br />(THEM).<br />The basic scientific hypothesis was that empathetic<br />attitude of media towards one of the warring sides is<br />often reflected in partial reporting. The linguistic<br />mechanism of symbolic identification helps to<br />determine one of the conflicting sides as friendly and<br />the opposing one as unfriendly.<br />Empirical data corpus includes six daily newspapers<br />(58 copies in total), plus three TV stations (1,197<br />minutes of television broadcasting) over a ten-day<br />period. Discourse analysis applied here focused on<br />linguistic units larger than a sentence.<br />The analysis results are as follows:<br />1. A vast majority of war reports express a certain<br />(positive or negative) media attitude towards<br />one of the participants in an armed<br />conflict.<br />2. There is a symbolic space a reporter&rsquo;s I is<br />identified with as a part of a unique group<br />which connects the author to the identity of<br />the media audience (the` US` group). 3. Media bias towards military and political representatives</p><p>of the warring parties depends on<br />who is considered to wield the real military<br />and political power.<br />4. Lexically speaking, a negative attitude of the<br />media is most frequently expressed by the following<br />means: deictic use of personal pronouns,<br />a use of expressive language, a use of<br />language with historic connotation and quality,<br />as well as a use of irony and derogatory<br />terms. Dominant discourse strategies employed<br />with the same aim are predication,<br />perspectivization, legitimization (delegitimatizon),<br />intensification, as well as the use of<br />macro-strategies of construction and perpetuation<br />in creating national identities.<br />Conclusions:<br />1.The analysis of linguistic discourse features<br />used to express personal attitude proved to be<br />a proper scientific basis for research into a<br />biased approach of media towards warring<br />parties.<br />2. Further improvement of the method of critical<br />discourse analysis requires the adoption<br />of a more balanced and systematic approach<br />to defining discourse features by various research<br />groups promoting different attitudes.<br />3. A multiple case study as part of a critical<br />discourse analysis method helped to interpret<br />the identified phenomena with reference to a<br />temporal, social and media context of their<br />occurrence.<br />The results can be useful in 1.improving media<br />literacy of general public in an attempt to<br />unmask manipulation mechanisms applied in<br />media messages; 2.establishing a basic standard<br />of unbiased media reporting which would<br />apply even in emergency and war conditions;<br />3.improving critical discourse analysis as a<br />method for interpretation of media discourse.</p>

Le conflit afghan (à partir de 2001) peut être considéré comme un nouveau conflit asymétrique reprenant les caractéristiques des conflits asymétriques classiques (rapport de force disproportionné entre les belligérants) à l’exception de la territorialisation, remplacée par l’appartenance à une idéologie commune. En conséquence, le champ de bataille y est devenu secondaire, la guerre est devenue cognitive. La séparation entre la paix et la guerre s’est atténuée à tel point qu’il est devenu impossible de compartimenter le droit de la guerre en fonction de l’intensité du conflit ou de son internationalisation. Faute de s’y être adapté, le droit de la guerre a cessé de faciliter le rétablissement de la paix et a été perçu par les militaires occidentaux comme une entrave aux combats. C’est pourquoi, certains belligérants ont tenté de s’en affranchir en ayant recours à des méthodes de combats illégitimes. Ces effets ont été médiatisés et ont participé à la perte de légitimité des Etats occidentaux allant jusqu’à remettre en question la division du monde en Etats souverains. L’absence de résolution de ces conflits pourrait conduire à une guerre civile globalisée. En réponse, l’harmonisation du droit de la guerre autour de la garantie inconditionnelle des droits inaliénables doit être affirmée par les Etats et les nouveaux acteurs internationaux. Elle pourrait émerger d’un « Parlement mondial », garant du droit international. De plus, l’irréprochabilité morale des belligérants est attendue. Le droit et la place des armées au sein de la société doivent le refléter. / The Afghan war (since 2001) may be seen as a new asymmetric conflict. It has all characteristics of the former asymmetric conflicts except territoriality, which has been replaced by ideology. Therefore, the battlefields have been displaced to the cognitive war. The distinction between war and peace became so small that it is now impossible to distinguish the law of war in regard to its intensity or to the implication of several states. The law of wars, due to its lack of adaptation stopped to ease the peace recovery, becoming a hindrance to combat. In consequence, some warriors have been tempted to use forbidden combat methods. Whose effects have been mediatized and took part of the western states legitimacy crisis (and questionning the World division in sovereign states). The lack of conflicts settlement could lead to a worldwide civil war. Unless, law of wars are harmonized through universal core rights mandatory for states and new international actors; a “World Parliament” could protect them. Furthermore, moral integrity of warriors is expected, it may be reflected into the military laws and their position into the civil society.

Fragments d’Alep est le récit d’une navigation à travers des images de guerre. Celle-ci débute en 2016, année d’intensification et de conclusion de la guerre civile d’Alep. Elle tente de retrouver les moments marquant de la constitution d’un imaginaire de guerre et du monde arabe par son auteur. Imbriquée dans une mémoire technique où l’histoire de la représentation du Moyen-Orient semble déterminée par les transformations liées à l’ère du numérique, cette navigation devient le lieu de digression qui souhaite interroger les images de guerre à travers les textures des écrans qui les ont diffusées. / Fragments of Aleppo draws a navigation through images of war. It begins in 2016, year of the intensification and conclusion of the civil war in Aleppo. It is an attempt from the author to find the key points of the building of the collective imagination as regards war and the Arab world. Embedded in a technical memory where the history of the representation of the Middle East seems determined by the transformations engendered by the digital age, this navigation becomes a site of digression that wants to interrogate images of war through the texture of the screens that broadcast them.