This study aims to describe and compare the differences and similarities for US mainstream media’s representation of two different coup attempts by using Robert Entman’s Framing theory in terms of legitimacy. The chosen cases are the coup attempt in Turkey (2016) which is an US ally, having a right-wing government and the coup attempt in Venezuela (2002) which has a strained relationship with the US and having left-wing government. The research applies qualitative approach to conduct a small-n case study for comparing and analyzing how the media framed the legitimacy of acts and actors during these two coup attempts. This is an attempt to describe the problematization of theory becoming practice for the US mainstream media regarding the presentation of what is legitimate and what is not. The definition of legitimacy is very clear, but the US mainstream media have issues to reflect this definition to the reality.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:hv-14185 |
| Date | January 2019 |
| Creators | Atik, Attila, Jabbour, Jean |
| Publisher | Högskolan Väst, Avd för juridik, ekonomi, statistik och politik, Högskolan Väst, Avd för juridik, ekonomi, statistik och politik |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0059 seconds