Communicating Terror: Selecting, Reinforcing and Matching Frames in Connection to the Attacks in Norway on (original) (raw)
Related papers
2015
In essence, terror attacks are communicative events. From the perspective of political leaders, the challenge is to make sense of the event by explaining what has happened, who is behind the attack, what is the most appropriate response, and how to move forward. Adding to the difficulties is the fact that leaders have to communicate in a highly mediated environment. In this article, we explore the Norwegian government’s crisis communication in the terrorist attacks in Oslo and on the island of Utoya on July 22, 2011. We do so by applying a model of crisis framing. According to the model, political leaders have to be able to select appropriate frames that reinforce each other and match the media coverage. The study proved managerial, responsibility and cultural congruence frames to be central. Moreover, the study demonstrated how the crisis produced a certain type of news coverage characterized by high levels of descriptive journalism, which, in combination with issue and episodic fr...
In essence, terror attacks are communicative events. From the perspective of political leaders, the challenge is to make sense of the event by explaining what has happened, who is behind the attack, what is the most appropriate response, and how to move forward. Adding to the difficulties is the fact that leaders have to communicate in a highly mediated environment. In this article, we explore the Norwegian government’s crisis communication in the terrorist attacks in Oslo and on the island of Utöya on July 22, 2011. We do so by applying a model of crisis framing. According to the model, political leaders have to be able to select appropriate frames that reinforce each other and match the media coverage. The study proved managerial, responsibility and cultural congruence frames to be central. Moreover, the study demonstrated how the crisis produced a certain type of news coverage characterized by high levels of descriptive journalism, which, in combination with issue and episodic framing, supported the government’s communication strategy.
Informasi
This article aims to analyze the frame of the government official statement in Mosque Christhurch Attack in New Zealand (March 2019) and Easter Sunday Attack in Sri Lanka (April 2019). The two cases were chosen because they place Muslim in contradictory positions: as victim in New Zealand and as perpetrator in Sri Lanka. This study uses framing analysis method to examine the official statement uploaded in the official websites of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of New Zealand and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Sri Lanka, within seven days after the incident. The data gathered from the text analysis is then followed by data triangulation using expert judgement technique. The result shows that there are differences in information content. The New Zealand government emphasizes their own actions in the country, while the Sri Lankan government focuses on the activities carried out abroad and the supports, they receive from other countries. In doing so, the New Zealand government high...
How did the Swedish media coverage of the terror attacks against the United States and the U.S. attacks in Afghanistan differ when it came to the use of sources, speculations, and anti-American and anti-Muslim reporting? That is the central question in this study.The results show that the Swedish media coverage of the terror attacks and the war in Afghanistan differed in many respects. There are many reasons for this, but one main explanation may be found in the different categories of the two crises with regard to media preparations and media routines. Another important explanation might be the increasing commercialization and reliance on a particular kind of media logic within Swedish media.
Communicating strategically in the face of terrorism
With the re-emergence of insurgency tied to terrorism, governments need to strategically manage their communications. This paper analyzes the effect of the Spanish government’s messaging in the face of the Madrid bombing of March 11 2004: Unlike what happened with the 9/11 bombings in the USA and the 7/07 London attacks, the Spanish media did not support the government’s framing of the events. Taking framing as a strategic action in a discursive form (Pan & Kosicki, 2003), and in the context of the attribution theory of responsibilities, this research uses the “cascading activation” model (Entman 2003, 2004) to explore how a framing contest was generated in the press. Analysis of the coverage shows that the intended government frame triggered a battle among the different major newspapers, leading editorials to shift their frame over the four days prior to the national elections. This research analyzes strategic contests in framing processes and contributes insight into the interactions among the different sides (government, parties, media, and citizens) to help bring about an understanding of the rebuttal effect of the government’s intended frame. It also helps to develop an understanding of the role of the media and the influence of citizens’ frames on media content.
Framing Terrorism in Norwegian News Media
2015
How are acts of terrorism framed in Norwegian newspapers? This thesis seeks to answer this question in a comparative case study on the coverage of two terrorist attacks that took place in 2013. The case study is based on 1121 newspaper articles, eleven of which are closely analysed qualitatively and 150 directly cited and paraphrased. The two attacks studied are the attack on the Westgate shopping mall in Nairobi, Kenya and the attack and hostage situation that took place at the gas facility Tigantourine in In Amenas, Algeria. Both resulted in many deaths, and both had a Norwegian connection; Five Norwegians were killed in In Amenas,
3b 4.Communicating strategically in the face of terrorism
With the re-emergence of insurgency tied to terrorism, governments need to strategically manage their communications. This paper analyzes the effect of the Spanish government's messaging in the face of the Madrid bombing of March 11, 2004: unlike what happened with the 9/11 bombings in the USA and the 7/07 London attacks, the Spanish media did not support the government's framing of the events. Taking framing as a strategic action in a discursive form , and in the context of the attribution theory of responsibilities, this research uses the "cascading activation" model to explore how a framing contest was generated in the press. Analysis of the coverage shows that the intended government frame triggered a battle among the different major newspapers, leading editorials to shift their frame over the four days prior to the national elections. This research analyzes strategic contests in framing processes and contributes insight into the interactions among the different sides (government, parties, media, and citizens) to help bring about an understanding of the rebuttal effect of the government's intended frame. It also helps to develop an understanding of the role of the media and the influence of citizens' frames on media content.
Public Relations Review, 2012
With the re-emergence of insurgency tied to terrorism, governments need to strategically manage their communications. This paper analyzes the effect of the Spanish government's messaging in the face of the Madrid bombing of March 11, 2004: unlike what happened with the 9/11 bombings in the USA and the 7/07 London attacks, the Spanish media did not support the government's framing of the events. Taking framing as a strategic action in a discursive form , and in the context of the attribution theory of responsibilities, this research uses the "cascading activation" model to explore how a framing contest was generated in the press. Analysis of the coverage shows that the intended government frame triggered a battle among the different major newspapers, leading editorials to shift their frame over the four days prior to the national elections. This research analyzes strategic contests in framing processes and contributes insight into the interactions among the different sides (government, parties, media, and citizens) to help bring about an understanding of the rebuttal effect of the government's intended frame. It also helps to develop an understanding of the role of the media and the influence of citizens' frames on media content.
Media Events in the Aftermath of Terrorism: Exploring How Reporting Templates Produce Social Drama
Media Events: A Critical Contemporary Approach, 2016
Studies of the reporting of terrorism have traditionally examined the continuities that exist in the news representations of terrorists and the outcomes of their actions (Altheide, 2006; Freedman and Thussu, 2012). Adopting a ‘media events’ approach (Dayan and Katz, 1992) to explore the same coverage by contrast brings into view the mediation of terrorism as an ‘event’. In particular, it adds to those established insights on coverage (see Chermak, 2003; McDonald and Lawrence, 2004; Montgomery, 2005), a new view of the media’s scripting and choreography of the terrorism incident. Weimann (1987) applies the approach to analyse the news reporting of international terrorism, for example. He notices, in the process, how this coverage magnifies the attributes of ‘high drama’ and ‘personification’ found in Dayan and Katz’s (1992) understanding of pre-planned ‘media events’. As equally significant are his observations on the other features that their approach assumes should also characterize this reporting. Not only are several of these features absent from this news coverage, but also the focus of their approach on the ‘media constructed event’ overlooks, more fundamentally, the process by which the planned efforts of terrorists to attract media attention orchestrate this reporting (Weimann, 1987). Nevertheless, a media events approach remains useful for exploring recent terrorism events, many of which are now perpetrated on ‘home’ national rather than international soil, as it recognizes that journalists will draw on collective ideas to make sense of these incidents. The purpose of this chapter is to explore further this particular aspect of the mediated terrorism event.
Social realities are discursive constructs, so that attitudes and representations are the reflection of an informative approach. In this sense, the cultural and linguistic gaps between different civilizations, together with a discursive construction of a war nature, could be creating the ground for a continuous confrontation between East and West. The present study analyzes the different rhetorical frames of the international news agencies Reuters, Al Arabiya, Al Jazeera and Associated Press about the terrorist attack at the Istanbul (Turkey) airport on July 28, 2016. A quantitative study of the figures speech and the most repeated topics in the headlines of the attack is carried out. The power of the media in public opinion and the construction of reality generate a discussion about how these news are spread and their effects. The objective is to compare the different rhetorical frames in both civilizations and to identify if stereotypes are projected and if this framing contributes to the spectacularization of the conflict. The main result is that there are no significant discursive differences, which leads to the conclusion that east-west rhetorical figures are used to produce a certain effect in the population, among those that highlight the euphemisms, dysphemisms, demonization and discursive polarization, resources that serve to emphasize fear and create even larger gaps of social significance.