This research study examines how the image of Kazakhstan was covered by the New York Times during 11 years and analyzed the most common perception of the Central Asian country, using framing as a theoretical framework. Textual-analysis approach was used as a method, exploration produced seven frames. The textual analysis approach demonstrated that negative coverage prevailed in the coverage of Kazakhstan, “in spite of friendly relationships with the USA”. Kazakhstan was framed as “authoritarian” “petro-state”, which got independence, but still followed “soviet-style” politics and was largely influenced by its “hegemon Russia”. The country, which “has a complex about being recognized in the world” (Stern, 2008). Future research needed to promote the image of the country worldwide.

Terrorism and conflict is ongoing, and in today’s world it appears to be increasing, however, numerous people have blamed the swell in violence on specific sources. In regards to September 11 and similar terrorist incidents, for example, it is quite easy for the media, as well as other sources, to place responsibility in the hands of a specific group or religion. In this case, Islam, Arabs or the Middle East region seems to be connected to these violent incidents. The reality of the situation may place responsibility in some sources within this region, however, an overgeneralization in regards to a diverse religion and culture may be occurring due to “overall, ideological judgments” by various entities including the news media. According to numerous perspectives, it has become possible for a few carefully chosen words within the media to trigger racially-driven prejudices and actions by agencies, institutions, and the public. Our language seems to be powerful enough to let a single phrase spin a news story into a national warning against a certain group. In other words, the power of association, in particular here between words and perceptions, allows the public to believe in their mind something that may or may not be true. In this case, various studies have shown the tendency for the public to associate Arabs with violence, particularly terrorism. The combination of negative media framing and common ethnic schemas of Arabs and Muslims have resulted in a long history of socialization and activation in the American and perhaps, wider culture. Therefore, this study will mainly focus on an assumed semantic implication of word associations in the media based on shared ideological and socially shared knowledge, rather than measure any explicit statements of racial and ethnic schemas. / Master of Arts

The purpose of this dissertation was to analyze perceptions of terrorism through the analysis of two newspapers’ news coverage of terrorism after the September 11 attacks, a popular Kentucky newspaper, the Courier-Journal and the New York Times (NYT). The social construction of terrorism was reflected as a problem through moral panics or something that a society believed as wrong that needed to be eradicated. Previous research had found that newspapers have contributed to moral panics by exaggerating the scope of social problems such as school shootings. I used the theoretical framework of moral panics; Goode and Ben-Yehuda’s (2009) two criteria of moral panics, which were (1) concern and (2) volatility; portrayals of heroes, folk devils, and victims in moral panics; and war on terror as sensitizing concepts to find themes. I analyzed 500 the CJ newspaper articles and 500 the NYT articles from September 11, 2001 to August 30, 2018 to find the differences between both newspapers, identify portrayals, and determine how terrorism was socially constructed. Overall, I found differences between the two newspapers on how they depicted terrorism and themes on how both newspapers reported and described terrorism. The reporting on terrorism has implications to the overall handling of terrorism such as the Muslim Travel Ban.

No description available.

Kamala Harris made history on November 7, 2020, when she was elected as the first female Vice President of the United States. In addition to being the first woman, she became the first African-American and Indian-American to attain this position. As a result, the media had to grapple with how to cover her historic campaign from the moment she was announced as the vice-presidential selection. This qualitative thematic analysis examined The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal's coverage of her campaign with significant analysis on important events such as the initial buzz surrounding her selection, the convention speech, and the vice-presidential debate. Specifically, this study examines 70 news articles total from both newspapers from August 11-November 3, 2020 to determine the recurring themes from her coverage. Results indicated that although traditional media frames and themes were not a significant focus, Harris's intersectionality brought about a new set of frames to explore, with subtle differences between the two newspapers. Implications of these results and future considerations for the media are discussed. / Master of Arts / Kamala Harris made history on November 7, 2020, when she was elected as the first female Vice President of the United States. In addition to being the first woman, she became the first African-American and Indian-American to attain this position. Throughout her campaign, the media had to learn how to cover an historic candidate effectively, since this moment had no precedent. This thesis chose to explore The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal's coverage of her campaign because of their influence in shaping the news around the country and they both represent different sides of the political spectrum. Important events that are covered include the initial announcement, the convention speech, and the vice-presidential debate. This study looks to determine if the stereotypical frames that the media places on female candidates are still seen with Harris. Results indicated that although traditional media stereotypes were not a significant focus, Harris's identity brought about a new set of themes to analyze, with each paper focusing on different aspects. Implications of these results and future considerations for the media are discussed.

Public opinion on salient issues and elite's knowledge of the public are both reliant on framed information, as they often depend on the media as a communication tool. Media tone also influences political behavior by affecting the perceptions that the public has on issues and events. In this study I examine the tone and framing of abortion media coverage by three different media outlets each with a different ideology leaning. I test assumptions made by cascade activation model and the economic theory of news making by answering the question how does partisan media report the issue of abortion? I answer this question by analyzing the tone and framing of 45 abortion articles from Politico, a Liberal leaning news outlet, 65 news articles from The Daily Caller, a Conservative news outlet, and 45 news articles from the NY Times, one that is considered independent. Results found that in accordance with what cascading and economic theory of news would predict, the news outlets are likely to prioritize their audience's ideology in their content by keeping it in line with the continually pushed abortion frames that each side identified with.

Este trabalho tem como objetivo estudar o discurso político americano do período inicial da guerra na Síria, visto pela perspectiva do jornal The New York Times. A partir de uma abordagem discursiva baseada principalmente em Foucault (1971), procuramos compreender de que forma a narração da guerra no jornal é constituída por valores culturais americanos que se transformam em uma episteme de compreensão do mundo, dos homens e da realidade. Propomos um olhar para o corpus de análise que permita observar, primeiramente, como o sujeito que tem o direito à fala vai se constituindo e construindo seus objetos: a guerra e o inimigo. Em um segundo momento, baseado nas teorias sobre Império desenvolvidas por Hardt e Negri (2001) e nos estudos de Said (1993, 1999) sobre Orientalismo, observamos como o discurso sobre a guerra da Síria se constitui com base em um projeto ideológico expansionista americano, que se desenvolveu desde a constituição e consolidação da nação e que se encontra para além das fronteiras geográficas. Por fim, concentramos nossa análise no papel da mídia como produtora de um material simbólico, que, ao dar inteligibilidade à guerra, entra em consonância com o espírito americano, fortalecendo-o. Ao transitar entre dois mundos culturais diferentes, o americano e o sírio, a mídia estabelece dois lugares: o do eu e o do outro. Conflitos emergem desse contraste, ora em uma relação de subjugação do outro, colocando-o em posição de inferioridade, ora em uma espécie de ameaça à imagem americana. Concluímos que, ao observar a guerra por uma perspectiva americana, o jornal The New York Times, por refletir um projeto hegemônico em plena expansão, transforma-se, em certa medida, em um agente dessa ação. Acreditamos que reconhecer as estruturas discursivas constituintes desse discurso é posicionar-se criticamente com relação ao que é produzido pela mídia. / This thesis aims at studying the American discourse in the beginning of the Syrian war as seen by the perspective of The New York Times coverage. In a discursive approach, based mainly on Foucaults theories (1971), we focus on analyzing how the newspapers narrative of the war, which comprises American cultural values, builds itself as a kind of episteme that shapes the understanding of the world, men, and reality. We first propose a way of looking into our analytical corpus that allows for an observation of how the subject that is given the right to speak constitutes himself and his objects, namely the war and the enemy. Secondly, in accordance with theories developed by Hardt and Negri (2001) as well as Said (1993,1999), we intend to observe how the discourse about the Syrian war is constructed based on an ideological and expansionist American project, which has been shaped since the onset of colonization and it is far beyond the nations geographical borders. Lastly, we concentrate the analysis on the media as a producer of symbolic material which, in an attempt to give intelligibility to the war, tunes in with ideals that strengthen the American spirit. As the newspaper goes back and forth into the two different cultural worlds of America and Syria, the media establishes two distinct locations: one of the I and one of the other. Conflicts, as a consequence, emerge from this contrast, sometimes in a relation of subjugation of the other by depicting it as inferior, other times as a threat to the American image. We conclude that, by observing the war through an American perspective, the New York Times not only reflects a hegemonic project in full expansion but also functions to a certain extent as an agent of this process. We believe that to recognize the discursive structures present in this discourse is to engage critically in the observation and interpretation of what is produced by the media.

Este trabalho tem como objetivo estudar o discurso político americano do período inicial da guerra na Síria, visto pela perspectiva do jornal The New York Times. A partir de uma abordagem discursiva baseada principalmente em Foucault (1971), procuramos compreender de que forma a narração da guerra no jornal é constituída por valores culturais americanos que se transformam em uma episteme de compreensão do mundo, dos homens e da realidade. Propomos um olhar para o corpus de análise que permita observar, primeiramente, como o sujeito que tem o direito à fala vai se constituindo e construindo seus objetos: a guerra e o inimigo. Em um segundo momento, baseado nas teorias sobre Império desenvolvidas por Hardt e Negri (2001) e nos estudos de Said (1993, 1999) sobre Orientalismo, observamos como o discurso sobre a guerra da Síria se constitui com base em um projeto ideológico expansionista americano, que se desenvolveu desde a constituição e consolidação da nação e que se encontra para além das fronteiras geográficas. Por fim, concentramos nossa análise no papel da mídia como produtora de um material simbólico, que, ao dar inteligibilidade à guerra, entra em consonância com o espírito americano, fortalecendo-o. Ao transitar entre dois mundos culturais diferentes, o americano e o sírio, a mídia estabelece dois lugares: o do eu e o do outro. Conflitos emergem desse contraste, ora em uma relação de subjugação do outro, colocando-o em posição de inferioridade, ora em uma espécie de ameaça à imagem americana. Concluímos que, ao observar a guerra por uma perspectiva americana, o jornal The New York Times, por refletir um projeto hegemônico em plena expansão, transforma-se, em certa medida, em um agente dessa ação. Acreditamos que reconhecer as estruturas discursivas constituintes desse discurso é posicionar-se criticamente com relação ao que é produzido pela mídia. / This thesis aims at studying the American discourse in the beginning of the Syrian war as seen by the perspective of The New York Times coverage. In a discursive approach, based mainly on Foucaults theories (1971), we focus on analyzing how the newspapers narrative of the war, which comprises American cultural values, builds itself as a kind of episteme that shapes the understanding of the world, men, and reality. We first propose a way of looking into our analytical corpus that allows for an observation of how the subject that is given the right to speak constitutes himself and his objects, namely the war and the enemy. Secondly, in accordance with theories developed by Hardt and Negri (2001) as well as Said (1993,1999), we intend to observe how the discourse about the Syrian war is constructed based on an ideological and expansionist American project, which has been shaped since the onset of colonization and it is far beyond the nations geographical borders. Lastly, we concentrate the analysis on the media as a producer of symbolic material which, in an attempt to give intelligibility to the war, tunes in with ideals that strengthen the American spirit. As the newspaper goes back and forth into the two different cultural worlds of America and Syria, the media establishes two distinct locations: one of the I and one of the other. Conflicts, as a consequence, emerge from this contrast, sometimes in a relation of subjugation of the other by depicting it as inferior, other times as a threat to the American image. We conclude that, by observing the war through an American perspective, the New York Times not only reflects a hegemonic project in full expansion but also functions to a certain extent as an agent of this process. We believe that to recognize the discursive structures present in this discourse is to engage critically in the observation and interpretation of what is produced by the media.

This study was designed to determine (a) the extent of the coverage in total wordage; (b) the direction and intensity of the articles; and (c) the impression conveyed by each newspaper toward the two main parties of the war. The findings show that (a) The New York Times devoted nearly twice as many words to the war as The Times of London; (b) the majority of the articles were neutral; (c) The New York Times was more favorable to the leftists and was as favorable to the rightists as The Times of London; and (d) the two newspapers were consistent in direction, and all deviation from neutrality remained within the limits of mild intensity.

Abstract Title: The war in Afghanistan – a necessary evil? (Kriget i Afghanistan – ett nödvändigt ont? En kritisk diskursanalys av New York Times ställningstagande till och framing av kriget i Afghanistan) Number of pages: 41 (41 including enclosures) Authors: Jenny Häggmark, Madeleine Jansson Tutor: Christian Christensen Course: Media and Communication Studies C Period: Fall term 2011 University: Division of Media and Communication, Department of Information Science, Uppsala University Purpose/aim: Our main goal with this paper is to examine and describe how The New York Times have framed the war in Afghanistan in their editorials, and how their position on the war is reflected in the editorials. We are also interested in finding out if their position on the war has changed during the ten years of war. Are the New York Times editorials characterized by peace or war journalism? Material/Method: To fulfill our aim with this paper we are going to use a qualitative method of content analyzes, the critical discourse analysis, when we analyze the editorials selected. The material consists of 40 editorials from The New York Times from four different years – 2001, 2004, 2007 and 2011 – ten from each year. We will analyze these editorials using Johan Galtung’s theory of peace and war journalism, along with the theory of framing, using Robert M. Entman’s definition as a base. Main results: Our main results are that The New York Times has changed their position on the war in Afghanistan since it started in 2001. The first two years that we have analyzed, 2001 and 2004, The New York Times were positive towards the war. However, their position on the war has been negative or neutral in the studied editorials from 2007 and 2011. Our results show that The New York Times framed the war in six salient frames – position, peace, war, nation building/democracy in Afghanistan, “us and them”, and criticism against the Bush administration. The editorials from 2001 are characterized as war journalism while the majority of the editorials from the following years are characterized as peace journalism. Key words: War in Afghanistan, framing, peace journalism, war journalism, New York Times, editorials.