Framing analysis, dramatism and terrorism coveragepolitician and press responses to the Madrid airport bombing.

  1. García Gurrionero, Mario 1
  2. Canel, María José 1
  1. 1 Universidad Complutense de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR 02p0gd045

Revista:
Comunicación y sociedad = Communication & Society

ISSN: 2386-7876

Año de publicación: 2016

Título del ejemplar: Challenges of Regional Television: structure, financing, content and audiences

Volumen: 29

Número: 4

Páginas: 133-149

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Comunicación y sociedad = Communication & Society

Resumen

The media and terrorism is an area that has attracted researchers’ attention in looking at the strategic dimensions of framing. This paper combines both Entman’s framing theory (and his ‘cascading activation’ model for analysis of framing contests) with a dramatistic approach to rhetoric (the Burkean concepts of the pentad and ratios) to see whether connections can be made that help provide a better understanding of the phenomenon of interactions between politicians’ words and media reactions to those words. Speeches given by the Spanish Prime Minister and the official opposition in reaction to a terrorist attack in Madrid are analysed. Our empirical analysis shows a highly fragmented capacity for cultural resonance, and a ‘two sided context’ with two very different interpretations of the situation. Our findings demonstrate that an appreciation of the dramatistic approach to rhetoric enhances our comprehension of people’s motives for adopting or rejecting the different frames used by leaders (politicians and the media) as they seek to frame issues for a range of purposes. They also suggest that combining approaches from the humanities and the social sciences by emphasizing motives as a key variable for the dynamics of framing contests might open up interesting avenues for research on framing as also on the relations between symbols and actions.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Anderson, F.D. & Althouse, M.T. (2010). Five Fingers or Six? Pentad or Hexad? KB Journal, 6(2).
  • Anderson, F.D. & Prelli, L.J. (2001). Pentadic cartography: Mapping the universe of discourse. Quarterly Journal of Speech 87(1), 73-95.
  • Bao-zhu, L. (2011). On Obama's Shanghai speech from perspective of Burkean's drama theory. Journal of Harbin University 5, 24.
  • Birdsell, D.S. (1987). Ronald Reagan on Lebanon and Grenada: Flexibility and interpretation in the application of Kenneth Burke's pentad. Quarterly Journal of Speech 73(3), 267-279.
  • Boje, D.M, Luhman, J.T. & Cunliffe, A.L. (2003). A dialectic perspective on the organization theatre metaphor. American Communication Journal 6(2), 1-16.
  • Bourgonjon, J., Rutten, K., Soetaert, R. & Valcke, M. (2011). From Counter-Strike to Counter Statement: using Burke's pentad as a tool for analyzing video games. Digital Creativity 22(2): 91-102.
  • Burke, K. (1966). Dramatic Form-And: Tracking Down Implications. Tulane Drama Review 10, 54-63.
  • Burke, K. (1969). A grammar of motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Burke, K. (1989). On Symbols and Society. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Canel, M.J. & Sanders, K. (2010). Crisis communication and terrorist attacks: framing a response to the 2004 Madrid bombings and 2005 London bombings. In T. Cook & S.J. Holladay (eds.) Handbook of Crisis Communication (pp. 449-466). Hobboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Canel, M.J. (2012). Communicating strategically in the face of terrorism: The Spanish government's response to the 2004 Madrid bombing attacks. Public Relations Review 38(2), 214-222.
  • Collins, R. (1986). The passing of intellectual generations: Reflections on the death of Erving Goffman. Sociological Theory 4(1), 106-113.
  • Cragan, F. & Shields, D. (1995). Symbolic theories in applied communication research. Bormann, Burke and Fisher. New Jersey: Hampton Press.
  • De Vreese, C.H., & Lecheler, S. (2012). News framing research: An overview and new developments. In H. Semetko & M. Scammel (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Political Communication (pp. 282-307). London: Sage.
  • Entman, R. (2003). Cascading Activation: contestation the White House’s frame after 9/11. Political Communication 20, 415-432.
  • Entman, R. (2004). Projections of power. Framing news, public opinion, and US foreign policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Entman, R.M. (2012). Scandal and silence: Media responses to presidential misconduct. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • García Gurrionero, M. (2013). El papel del terror en la sociedad. Madrid: Maia Ediciones.
  • Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday.
  • Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
  • Hallahan, K. (2011). Political public relations and strategic framing. In J. Stromback & S. Kiousis (Eds.), Political Public Relations: Principles and Applications (pp. 177-213). New York: Taylor & Francis.
  • Heath, R. (2001). A rhetorical enactment rationale for public relations: the good organization communicating well. In R. Heath (Ed.), Handbook of Public Relations (pp. 31-50). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
  • Heath, R (2009). The rhetorical tradition: wrangle in the marketplace. In R. Heath, E. Toth, & D. Waymer (Eds.) Rhetorical and critical approaches to public relations II (pp. 17-47). New York: Routledge.
  • Heath, R. & Waymer, D. (2009). Activist public relations and the paradox of the positive: a case study of Frederick Douglas’ fourth of July address. In R. Heath, E. Toth, & D. Waymer (Eds.) Rhetorical and critical approaches to public relations II (pp. 195-215). New York: Routledge.
  • Hoffman, M. & Ford, D. (2010). Organizational rhetoric. Situations and strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Johnson-Cartee, K.S. & Copeland, G.A. (2005). Constructing political reality. News narratives and news framing. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefied.
  • Matusitz, J. (2012). Terrorism and communication: A critical introduction. New York: Sage Publications.
  • McClure, K. & Skwar, J. (2015). Toward a dramatistic ethics. The Journal of Kenneth Burke Society 11(1).
  • Mitchell, J.N. (1978). Social Exchange, Dramaturgy and Ethnomethodology: Toward a Paradigmatic Synthesis. New York: Elsevier.
  • Nacos, B. (2002). Mass-Mediated Terrorism: The central role of the media in terrorism and counterterrorism. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
  • Norris, P., Kern, M. & Just, M. (2003). Framing Terrorism: The News Media, the Government, and the Public. New York: Routledge.
  • Pan, Z. & Kosicki, G. (2003). Framing as a strategic action in public deliberation. In S. Reese, O. Ghandi (jr.) & A. Grant (Eds.) Framing public life. Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 35-65.
  • Papacharissi, Z. & Oliveira, M. (2008). News frames terrorism: A comparative analysis of frames employed in terrorism coverage in US and UK newspapers. The International Journal of Press/Politics 13(1), 52-74.
  • Rajoy, M. (2006). Address. Last retrieve 6th June 2016, available at: http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2007/06/05/espana/1181047461.html
  • Rane, H. & Ewart, J. (2012). The framing of Islam and Muslims in the tenth anniversary coverage of 9/11: Implications for reconciliation and moving on. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 32(3), 310-322.
  • Reese, S.D. (2007). The framing project: A bridging model for media research revisited. Journal of communication 57(1), 148-154.
  • Rodríguez-Zapatero, J.L. (2006a). Address. Last retrieve 6th June 2016, available at: http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2006/12/29/espana/1167368963.html
  • Rodríguez-Zapatero, J.L. (2006b). Last retrieve 6th June 2016, available at: http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2007/06/05/espana/1181036148.html
  • Slothuus, R. & De Vreese, C.H. (2010). Political parties, motivated reasoning, and issue framing effects. The Journal of Politics 72(03): 630-645.
  • Taylor, M. (2009). Civil society as a rhetorical public relations process. In R. Heath, E. Toth, & D. Waymer (Eds.), Rhetorical and critical approaches to public relations (pp. 76-91). New York: Routledge.
  • Tod, E. (2009). The case for pluralistic studies of public relations: Rhetorical, critical and excellence perspectives. In R. Heath, E. Toth & D. Waymer (Eds.) Rhetorical and critical approaches to public relations (pp. 48-60). New York: Routledge.
  • Tompkins, Ph. (1987). Translating organizational theory: symbolism over substance. In F. Jablin, L.L. Putnam, K. Roberts, & L. Porter (Eds.) Handbook of organizational communication. An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 70-96). Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage.
  • Tsui, C.K. (2015). Framing the threat of catastrophic terrorism: Genealogy, discourse and President Clinton’s counterterrorism approach. International Politics 52(1): 66-88.
  • Van Gorp, B. & Vercruysse, T. (2012). Frames and counter-frames giving meaning to dementia: A framing analysis of media content. Social Science & Medicine 74(8), 12741281.
  • Vucetic, S., Malo, J. & Ouellette, V. (2015). Terrorism made simpler: A framing analysis of three Canadian newspapers, 2006-2013. Canadian Political Science Review 8(2), 59-73.
  • Woods, J. (2011). Framing terror: An experimental framing effects study of the perceived threat of terrorism. Critical Studies on Terrorism 4(2), 199-217.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet